Labour party

In the Daily Politics education debate just now on the BBC, Tristram Hunt declared that it was acceptable for an Education Secretary to send their own child to private school. Under questioning from Andrew Neil, Hunt said that it was fine in ‘certain circumstances.’ The other members of the panel—including Nicky Morgan and David Laws—then agreed with Hunt’s statement. Is it acceptable for an education secretary to send their child to a private school @afneil asks his #bbcdp panel? https://t.co/A5VI9mnHlz — DailySunday Politics (@daily_politics) April 23, 2015 Hunt’s remarks are politically brave.

Senior Labour figures have looked uncomfortable during this campaign when speaking of their own party’s policy on balancing the books – the day-to-day spending books, that is. But this afternoon Chris Leslie gave an endorsement of the pledge that is as clear and enthusiastic as voters are likely to get. Challenged by Andrew Neil on today’s Daily Politics debate on the economy, the Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury said he made ‘no apologies’ for his party’s focus on clearing the current budget deficit, rather than the overall deficit. Leslie said: ‘The distinction is this…having a balance on the current budget is not the limit of our ambitions.

Complain all you like about the way the Tories are campaigning at the moment, but it's getting the message across. The party has hit on the SNP, which is fascinating the media anyway, as the best line of attack to undermine Labour. Tory candidates report being pleasantly surprised by how much cut-through the Labour-SNP message is getting, while pollsters now say members of their focus groups are raising the issue unprompted. Focusing on the SNP may well have a number of serious side effects for the Tory party. It may reinforce the perception that they are a nasty, negative party. It may mean they do not give voters sufficient reason to back them, even if they succeed in putting them off Labour.

Labour is proposing to balance the current not the overall budget. This is presumably because they think that borrowing to spend money on capital projects is a sensible policy. But you wouldn’t have known that from watching Ed Miliband on BBC1 just now. In response to questions from Evan Davis, Miliband was determined not to say that Labour would borrow to invest. In a highly disciplined performance, Miliband would also not engage with Davis’ questions about inequality and whether it was a good thing if everyone got richer even if the gap between rich and poor widened. Indeed, Miliband was so cautious that you began to wonder if he’s started to think that this is now his election to lose.

David Cameron’s inner circle are always keen to talk up the parallels between this campaign and 1992. This week, the winner of that election will enter the fray on their behalf. As I report in the Mail on Sunday, John Major will give a speech warning of the dangers to the Union itself if the United Kingdom ends up with a Labour government propped up by the SNP. The Tories hope that Major’s intervention will elevate this point above the usual party political knockabout. They also believe that a former Prime Minister speaking out will make voters pay attention; they were much struck by how much coverage Tony Blair’s speech on the dangers of an EU referendum received a few weeks back. That the Tories have asked Major to get involved is telling.

Jonathan Freedland has written a compelling column on the challenge that Ed Miliband will face to establish his legitimacy if he becomes Prime Minister despite Labour not having won the most seats or votes. But I suspect that whoever becomes the government after May the 8th will have difficulty in persuading everyone that they have a right to govern. The Tory-Liberal Democrat coalition could claim that 59 per cent of voters had backed its constituent parts. It also had a comfortable majority in the House of Commons with 364 out of 650 seats. Now, unless something dramatic happens, no governing combination is likely to have anything like that kind of support this time round.

Nicola Sturgeon's style transformation over the past decade has been well-documented. The Mail on Sunday journalist Liz Jones went so far as to suggest that she had gone from being a woman with a 'Krankies haircut and orthopaedic shoes' to a 'golden halo of Princess Diana-like loveliness'. However, Mr S suspects that such naysayers may think differently about Sturgeon in her formative years if they take a glance at a portrait of her dating back six years. Speaking to Sky's Kay Burley, the First Minister of Scotland revealed that she has a saucy painting of herself hanging in her home. The oil painting of Sturgeon is by the French artist Laetitia Guilbaud, and went up for sale in 2009 at Glasgow's ArtDeCaf Gallery.