David cameron

David Cameron is playing down the effect the Royal Wedding will have on the 5th May elections, especially the AV referendum. Fleet Street’s having none of it however. On the one hand, Benedict Brogan can already hear the pops of champagne corks in the No to AV campaign offices. He reasons: ‘One consequence of the Royal wedding will be to make it even more difficult for AV supporters to get their campaign motoring in time for the referendum.’ On the other, Alex Barker makes the case for the Lib Dems’ Yes to AV campaign. He has a three point-plan, centring on low turnout following reduced campaign time. This, he thinks, will benefit those concerned about the injustice of the current system, rather than its die-hard defenders.

Ed Miliband has come roaring back from his paternity leave, keen to silence the growing chorus of criticism that he is not in control of his party and has let the Coalition determine the agenda.     To do so, he has come out in favour of a permanent top rate of income tax at 50 percent, but is otherwise taking a leaf out of the Cameron playbook - by establishing a number of policy reviews. But he might want to take another look at Cameron's experience. Reviews are a great tactical ploy - they show a willingness to "think big", allow a leader to reach out to a range party factions, aid front bench spokesmen to understand their portfolios and, perhaps most importantly, punts any serious policy discussions into the future.

Patronage remains a strong statement of leadership, and an indication of a leader's competence. As James noted yesterday, Ed Miliband chose the occasion to play one of his few picture cards: Maurice Glassman’s accession into red ermine is a major PR coup for Labour in the battle to be ‘progressive’ and community-focused. But Miliband’s list is also noteworthy for those it excluded. The Times has the details (£): ‘He decided against handing seats in the House of Lords to Nigel Doughty and Sir Ronald Cohen — who have given more than £6 million to the party since 2005 — as well as Jon Mendelsohn, Labour’s fundraising chief.

Oh dear. On Wednesday night, we at The Spectator saw David Cameron handing Lord Young his Spectator/Threadneedle Parliamentarian of the Year in the category of Peer of the Year. “Over the decades,” said yours truly, “Prime Ministers have come to value his advice. As Thatcher put it: ‘other people bring me problems, David brings me solutions.'” Not any more - David has brought him a problem, followed by a resignation. Less than 48 hours after picking-up our award, his political career appears to be at an end.   It is true that there are some people who have had a “good recession”. That is: faced no danger of losing their job and saw the cost of their mortgage collapse as part of the monetary stimulus.

In my last post I did Cameron a disservice by suggesting he had to research his remarks about The Spectator. Like many well-read people, with an interest in life in the round, he's been a reader for years - Steve Hilton buys him a copy for his birthday, I'm told - and we backed him not just when he first entered the leadership contest (the only publication so to do) but with a now-famous article by Bruce Anderson hailing him as the next messiah as early as 2003. Anyway, for the record, this is what Cameron had to say about The Spectator: "In all seriousness, The Spectator is one of this country¹s greatest and most iconic magazines. It has been around for 180 years and I think its great genius lies quite simply in its writing.

Today is a very good day to bury bad news. Prince William and Kate Midddleton’s engagement is going to dominate the news and the front pages for at least the next 24 hours. Almost any other story can be slipped out unnoticed in the current circumstances. So it was a convenient time for Downing Street to announce that the photographer and the videographer would be moved off the public payroll and back onto the Tory one. This means that their work will not be able to appear on any government websites. Downing Street’s correction is welcome. But in reality, the damage has already been done by this story. It will be like the car following the bike, a story constantly advanced by those sceptical of the PM.

A minor landmark for David Cameron tonight, as he delivers his first Mansion House speech as Prime Minister. Like occupants of No.10 before him, he will use the occasion to talk about foreign affairs – although the result may be rather more like the Chancellor's annual speech at the same venue. Judging by the extracts that have been released so far, Cameron's overall emphasis will be on the economy, and on Britain's fiscal standing. As he will say, "we need to sort out the economy if we are to carry weight in the world." Cameron develops this point by claiming that, "whenever I meet foreign leaders, they do not see a Britain shuffling apologetically off the world stage.

Over at the FT's Westminster blog, Alex Barker asks why it is that David Cameron's expensive personal pledge on pensioner benefits has survived the spending review while Nick Clegg's personal pledge to scrap tuition fees, which would have cost roughly the same amount, has been spectacularly ditched. As Alex argues, one reason is that Clegg himself was not particularly attached to his pledge on fees. Indeed, he had tried to change the policy several times in opposition. The other is that George Osborne, who is the Tories' chief election strategist as well as the Chancellor, is determined to protect the Cameron brand.