Labour party

Wednesday

Peter Hoskin

Another five-point ‘pledge card’ from Labour

There is no PMQs today, so Ed Miliband is filling the time as gainfully as he can with a speech bashing the Tories. Unsurprisingly, he’s making rather a lot of last week’s Budget — particularly the 50p tax cut and the frozen personal allowance for pensioners — as well as of Peter Cruddas’s recent indiscretions. And so David Cameron will be described as ‘out of touch’ and all that. But there is something else with today’s speech: a prop, in the form of a five-point ‘pledge card’. I don’t think we’ve had one of these from Labour for a couple of years now, although they do tend to reserve them

Tuesday

Richard Marsh

Lansley has won, in a way

At two thirty this afternoon, the Deputy Speaker announced to the House of Commons that the Queen had granted Royal Assent to the Health and Social Care Act. It seemed fitting that the House was debating assisted suicide at the time. The agonies of watching this cursed legislation twitch and stumble its way onto the statute book were enough to make anyone with half a concern for well-ordered public policy start Googling the names of Swiss exit clinics. Albeit there would have been the risk that Number 10 had already paid for Andrew Lansley’s ticket to join you there. Suddenly, though, the politics of health are very different. Mr Lansley,

Jonathan Jones

The government’s keen to avoid the petrol chaos of 2000

So, once again, we face the prospect of disruption at the pumps, as tanker drivers have voted for strike action over their terms of employment. According to the union Unite, their demands are ‘industry minimum standards and industry wide bargaining on pensions, terms and conditions, training and health and safety’. In all, around 2,000 drivers at seven fuel distribution companies voted, with 61 per cent of them in favour. A majority approved strike action at five of the seven firms, while at DHL and Suckling drivers rejected it. The government is, naturally, keen to avoid such a disruptive strike and has been quick to condemn it. Energy Secretary Ed Davey

Peter Hoskin

The Tories’ perception problem

Introducing Ed Miliband, Labour’s best hope since Tony Blair. Oh, I’m kidding, of course — but it’s still striking that, this morning, Labour have their biggest lead in a ComRes poll for seven years. And the size of the lead? Ten points, but it could be even bigger. The Peter Cruddas revelations fell right in the middle of ComRes’s polling. Apparently, those interviews conducted after Sunday had Labour with a 17-point lead. Of course, you can slap every caveat across this that you like: we’re still ages away from the election; one poll does not make a trend; the 17-point figure is based on a subset of a subset of

Monday

Alex Massie

Osborne, the Master Strategist

According to John Rentoul, the combination of the budget and Cam Dine With Me* has shunted Labour into a ten point lead in the opinion polls. Tuesday’s Independent/ComRes poll puts Labour on 43% (+3) and the Tories – as you may have worked out by now – on 33% (-4). How to spin this? 1. It’s only one poll. 2. The poll that counts is the general election. 3. Better to take the hit on 50p and Granny-raiding now, not later. 4. This is a verdict on the coalition, not Labour. Voters will change their views when they must think about Ed Miliband. 5. Who cares? Each of these points

Matt Cavanagh

Replacing control orders: an unsatisfactory compromise 

A small silver lining for David Cameron in the ‘cash for access scandal’: on a quieter day, today’s report on the coalition’s replacement of control orders with ‘Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures’ (TPIMs) might have got more attention. The report, published by the Independent Reviewer of counter-terrorism legislation, David Anderson QC, makes for difficult reading for ministers. Before looking at the detail of the report, it is worth remembering that control orders were always a second-best policy. Their origin lies in the dilemma, which no government looks likely to solve any time soon, of what to do with someone whom the authorities suspect of involvement in terrorism, but who cannot

James Forsyth

Labour’s baggage stops it from gaining the upper hand

It now seems as if Downing Street is moving towards releasing a list of Chequers guests. This is belated recognition of the fact that their best hope of getting beyond this story is to get everything out there. But as Francis Maude’s feisty performance in the Commons demonstrated, the Tories are not short of mud to throw at Labour. The combination of Labour’s reliance on the Unions and the Ecclestone affair means that it is hard for Labour to get on the front foot. Indeed, Tory sources are claiming that when they approached Labour to see if they would support changes to the Sunday Trading laws for the Olympics, Labour

James Forsyth

How will the Lib Dems respond?

The key thing to watch for during Francis Maude’s statement is the Lib Dem reaction. At the moment, the Tories can rebut Labour’s criticisms of them by pointing to both union funding and the Ecclestone affair. But if their coalition partners start turning up the volume on this story, then the Tories are in a far more difficult position. What will drive the Lib Dems is their desire to get a deal on party funding. The Lib Dems are very keen to reduce the advantages that the Torties and Labour have on this front and this scandal presents the perfect opportunity to press for a restrictive cap on donations and

Peter Hoskin

Cameron u-turns on donor secrecy — but what now?

One distinct feature of the ‘cash for access’ row is that we’ve seen it all before. And not just the glutinous mix of politics and money, but also the debate over what should be done to fix it. Last November, Sir Christopher Kelly, chair of the Committee on Standards in Public Life, released a report into the funding of political parties that featured many of the options we’re hearing today. It landed on 24 recommendations, of which one stood out: ‘the only safe way to remove big money from party funding is to put a cap on donations, set at £10,000’. But to prevent a subsequent shortfall in parties’ funds,

Peter Hoskin

The problem for Cameron is his proximity to the problem

The happiest news for David Cameron this morning is that the ‘cash for access’ story hasn’t quite made it onto every front page. But that’s it, really, so far as the glad tidings are concerned. All the rest is poison for No.10. The Prime Minister is now fighting off calls — including from his own MPs — to release the names of those donors who enjoyed dinner at his Downing Street flat. Labour are, of course, pressing for him to go further than an internal party inquiry, and launch an independent investigation instead. Today’s furore is not going to simmer down after a few days, or even after a few

Saturday

James Forsyth

Ken’s identity crisis

Jonathan Freedland’s column in The Guardian today, explaining why he can’t vote for Ken Livingstone, is a remarkably direct piece of journalism. Freedland states that he ‘can no longer do what I and others did in 2008, putting to one side the statements, insults and gestures that had offended me, my fellow Jews and — one hopes — every Londoner who abhors prejudice’. Now, as Paul Goodman argues, we shouldn’t overstate the importance of a traditionally Labour supporting Guardian columnist coming out against Ken Livingstone. But Freedland’s reasons for doing so are ones that, I suspect, will resonate with a significant section of opinion. The issue with Livingstone is that

Peter Hoskin

Spending will become more significant as 2015 approaches

Four days after George Osborne signed its death warrant, there is still life in the 50p rate yet. The two main political interviews in today’s papers — Ed Miliband in the Telegraph, Danny Alexander in the Times (£) — both focus heavily on the top rate’s impending demise. The Labour leader, of course, is continuing to ask whether David Cameron and George Osborne will themselves benefit from the move to 45p, without actually managing to commit his party to a policy. The Chief Secretary to the Treasury is left defending a 45p rate, and does so by borrowing a recent Lib Dem slogan for the coalition as a whole: ‘This

Wednesday

James Forsyth

Balls goes on the attack against 45p

Ed Balls committed Labour to voting against the reduction in the 50p rate at his post-Budget briefing. But he wouldn’t say whether or not Labour would pledge to restore it in their manifesto; sticking to the classic opposition line that all decisions on tax will be made in the manifesto and not before. Balls, though, was on typically pugilistic form; few politicians relish a scrap as much as he does. The Labour leadership clearly view the abolition of the 50p rate as a major political opening for them. Balls went out of his way to attack the HMRC report that Osborne used to justify the move. He mockingly declared that

Lloyd Evans

A quiet PMQs, ahead of today’s main event

It started like a bit of good old political knockabout. PMQs opened with a planted question from Mark Menzies (Con, Fylde) asking the PM about Britain’s sick-note culture. Cameron, looking suitably grave, declared that the fake-sniffle problem afflicts even senior management. Ed Miliband, he told us, had recently claimed he was too ill to attend a rally called by health workers. Three hours later he was seen heartily cheering at a football match having been driven to the ground in a Rolls Royce. ‘What was it,’ asked Cameron, ‘that first attracted the Labour leader to the multimillionaire owner of Hull football club?’ This prompted howls and jeers from every part

Tuesday

The Spectator

Another voice: Tax transparency is a good idea, but not a game-changer

George Osborne’s plans for more tax transparency have been widely interpreted as a political masterstroke. People will be horrified to learn the cost of servicing Britain’s national debt, or paying our welfare bill, goes the argument. The move will create downward pressure on public spending, driven by the public itself — a classic example of aligning policy with politics. But what if none of this is true? The logic fits, but the evidence suggests something different altogether. Experiments with tax receipts in the United States, where the Third Way Institute has been making the running on this, have show that more transparency tends to reinforce people’s beliefs rather than challenge

Peter Hoskin

Why Labour’s 50p tax wobble is dangerous for Ed Miliband

Why did Gordon Brown wait until the last few weeks of Labour’s thirteen-year reign to implement a 50p tax rate? Easy. Because it wasn’t so much a fiscal policy as a fiendish trap, designed to cut into a Tory government’s flesh. But now, it seems, the trap has snared another victim: Labour itself. The Telegraph’s Daniel Knowles has already neatly summarised the politics arising from Sam Coates’ report (£) that Labour will neither back the scrapping of the 50p rate nor promise to reinstate it either. But the basic point is worth repeating: if that’s the approach that Labour chooses, then they’ll be left in a complete mess. They can

Sebastian Payne

Ken launches his negative campaign

A dark, damp and freezing cellar beneath Waterloo station isn’t an obvious choice for launching a political campaign — but that’s where Team Ken officially kicked off their Mayoral bid last night. Various prominent lefties were brought into the Old Vic Tunnels to warm up for the man himself. Eddie Izzard was also present to fill in the gaps and keep everyone engaged until the bar opened. Most of the policies discussed have already been made public, but there were a few new, colourful additions. Ken pointed out that Transport for London purchases energy at half the normal price, so why don’t they buy more and sell it back to ordinary

Saturday

Peter Hoskin

Balls lays into Brown — but why?

Normally, pre-Budget interviews with shadow chancellors are dry and methodical. But the Times’s interview with Ed Balls (£) today is the opposite: frenetic, relatively non-fiscal and utterly, utterly strange. Given that CoffeeHousers are probably waking up to brunch, I thought it might be a bit much for you to wade through his thoughts on food and on crying (‘OK. Crying. What do you want to know about crying?’). So I’ve pulled out some of the main political points from the interview here: 1) Laying into Brown. The quotation that gives the interview its headline is an eye-opener, coming as it does from Ed Balls. ‘Nobody is going to look back

Friday

James Forsyth

Labour miss out the details

Labour’s launch of its new youth jobs policy has been rather overshadowed by Harriet Harman’s inability to explain the costing behind the policy on the Daily Politics earlier: not a good look for a party trying to show that it is fiscally credible. But more interesting than the number behind the policy is how it marks an attempt by Labour to toughen up its position on welfare. Those young workers who have been out of work for a year will have to take one of these minimum wage jobs or have their benefits docked.



 On the Labour front, the interview with Ed Miliband in the Times today is also worthy