Labour party

Dave and Ed strike each other

It was a real blood and thunder PMQs today. This was the politics of the viscera; whose side are you on stuff.   Ed Miliband chose to start on the strikes. David Cameron ripped into him from the off, calling him ‘irresponsible, left-wing and weak.’ Miliband came back with an attack about how he wasn’t going to demonise dinner ladies who earn less in a year than George Osborne’s annual skiing holiday costs, though he flubbed the line slightly.   The Tory benches were in full cry, and throughout the session Cameron kept coming back for another swing at Miliband and the union link.

A day of disruption

Another testing day for the government, as we shift from the autumn statement to a national strike. It will certainly be more noticeable than the industrial action in June. Some 2 million public sector workers will be involved. According to the schools minister Nick Gibb, around 75 per cent of state schools will be closed. And on top of that, airport queues will lengthen; non-emergency operations will be cancelled; and today's parliamentary proceedings will go untranscribed. The government's attitude towards the unions — or, rather, union bosses — appears to have been hardening. The brothers will not have liked yesterday's forecast that 710,000 jobs will be shed from the public sector by 2017. And they will not have liked George Osborne's rhetoric either.

Osborne plays a tough hand well

Today was always going to be a difficult day for the Chancellor. The figures from the OBR were always going to dominate the headlines and the restrictions of coalition meant that there couldn’t be as much as the Tories would have liked on the supply side. It was striking that the loudest Tory cheer of Osborne’s statement came when he reiterated his opposition to an EU-imposed financial transactions tax. But the silver lining for Osborne and co is that Labour still lack economic credibility. It is hard for Labour to savage Osborne for borrowing more than he said he would — which he is to the tune of £158 billion — and then say that they would borrow even more than that.

The shape of the Budget battleground

There are still two days and a couple of hours to go until George Osborne's Pre-Budget Report — but, already, we have a good idea of what will be said. The emphasis, beyond just plain ol' jobs and growth, will be on combatting youth unemployment; helping smaller businesses; and relaxing the squeeze on middle-income folk. Most of the measures either announced or suggested so far — from the Youth Contract to the credit easing scheme to the suspension of January's fuel duty rise — fall into one of those compartments. Whether they'll work or not is a different matter entirely.      As for Labour's response, they're already making it — and I doubt anything in the actual Budget document, or the growth review, will change it much.

Wrestling over cuts

Britain's economic debate has been reduced to WWE-style wrestling, where two figures adopt semi-comic personas and have at each other for the entertainment of the crowd — while not doing any real fighting at all. So it is with Osborne and Balls. Rhetorically, they are poles apart; one championing cuts, the other spending. But you'll notice that neither quantifies the cuts. That's because Osborne is simply enacting an only-slightly-souped-up version of Darling's plan and the real difference between the two parties is tiny. This was the point of last night's Newsnight, where David Grossman filed a report (in which yours truly was interviewed) about the great pretend fight between two parties whose plans only differ by less than 1 per cent a year.

We cannot forget the riots, nor ignore their causes

If I’d said that an MP had accused the Church of England of being too obsessed with gay marriage and women priests — and not worried enough about how God can keep young boys out of harm’s way — you’d probably imagine that a Tory had gone nuts. But this is the David Lammy, Labour MP for Tottenham, who has gave an interview to our Books Blog. In it, he elaborates on the theme of his new book: that his colleagues are so keen to help single mothers that they’ve lost sight of what really helps working class boys. Amongst the contributing factors, he mentions two things that may cast him out as a heretic in Labour’s secular religion: fathers, and God.   Lammy’s book, Out of the Ashes, was released yesterday. On Monday.

An Endorsement Tom Harris MP Does Not Need

As the cousins celebrate the most genial holiday of them all, there are many things one for which one should be thankful. Not having a vote in the leadership contest currently gripping the Scottish Labour party comes pretty near the top of the list. Nevertheless and unlike Ed Miliband I can at least name each of the three candidates for this miserable prize. And like Kate Higgins, were I burdened with a vote in this contest, I should vote for Tom Harris. Granted, he will have to find himself a seat at Holyrood at some point but that's a technical detail which need not concern the rest of us. Granted too, I suspect he needs more than an anti-Salmond agenda to really prosper.

Miliband’s opportunity in the economic debate

Political debate is going to be dominated by the economy between now and the autumn statement. Ed Miliband is trying to use this moment to persuade the public that the Coalition's economic policies have failed. By contrast, the Tories want to highlight how much deeper trouble the country would be in if it did not have the confidence of the bond markets. The Tories hope that this 'stay close to nurse for fear of something worse' approach will eventually deliver an election victory for them in 2015, given how hard Labour is finding it to regain credibility on the economy. As Ben Brogan wrote the other day, this strategy worked for them in 1992 — the campaign on which both Cameron and Hilton cut their political teeth.

In PMQs, a preview of next week’s battles

Today's PMQs was a preview of the debate we'll be having after next week's autumn statement. Miliband, struggling with a bit of a cold, tried to pin the economy's problems on Cameron. The Prime Minister's retort was 'who would want to put the people responsible for the current mess back in charge'. It was a simple message and one that carried him through the session. The other feature of today's joust was also a preview of next week: a tussle over the strikes. Cameron said strikes were the 'height of irresponsibility'. He also made sympathetic noises when Tory MPs asked about imposing minimum thresholds for strike ballots.

Party funding reforms won’t happen

The recommendations of the Committee on Standards in Public Life's review into party funding are not going to happen. Both the Labour and Tory members of the review have issued notes of dissent to it. Nick Clegg has, on behalf of the government, issued a statement gently rolling the report into the long grass. Interestingly, the Tory party - which was for a while attracted to additional state funding - has now ruled it out completely. Unlike Clegg's statement saying it shouldn't be done while economic times are so tough, the Tory rejection of it is not time limited. One other thing worth noting is that Labour, via Margaret Beckett's dissent, has not set itself against trade union members having to opt in to pay the political levy.

Are the Lib Dems pro-EU?

This might seem a very odd question. A pro-EU position is part of the party's internationalist DNA. Listen to any EU-related speech by the likes of Nick Clegg or Paddy Ashdown and heartfelt support for the European project is apparent. The Liberal Democrats have also made a virtue of reining in Tory euroscepticism, for example rejecting a call for repatriation of powers in the Coalition Agreement. The Deputy Prime Minister remains, in private and public, pro-EU. And to many activists and MPs, the party's European stance is what makes it different to the Tories – and is the reason why they are Lib Dems. They see in Tory euroscepticism a boorish Little Englanderness they abhor and find out of synch with the way of the modern world.

Miliband’s ‘responsible capitalism’ requires deregulation

Despite yesterday’s gloomy unemployment figures there is, it turns out, good news for the government buried in current labour patterns: the total number of hours worked in the last three months has risen by three million. The bad news is that employers are currently filling this demand by getting current employees to work longer hours (average weekly hours over this time period rose by 0.3 to 31.5), rather than taking on new workers. Presumably this is because it is so much cheaper, and less risky, to do so.   This should come as an encouragement to the government, as they search for ways to bring about growth.

Miliband finds his niche

I spent this morning with Ed Miliband on a trip to a factory in Sunderland. Miliband was visiting the Liebherr plant there, which manufactures cranes. The centerpiece of the visit was a Q&A with the workforce. Now, a factory in the North East is not the toughest venue for a Labour leader to play. But Miliband appeared far more comfortable in this setting than he does when giving a traditional speech from behind a podium.   Unlike Miliband’s Q&A at Labour conference, the questions were not softballs or traditional left-wing fare. One set of three questions were: why don’t we close the borders, bring back national service and do more to clamp down on benefit cheats.

Why are the SNP Talking Scotland Down?

These days "Talking Scotland down" is both the gravest sin imaginable and the standard SNP response to any suggestion there might be even the occasional or minor drawback to independence. Thus when Philip Hammond makes the obvious point that Rump Britannia might not build warships on the Clyde he's being "anti-Scottish". Thus too when George Osborne suggests some firms might want the constitutional questions - including EU-access - clarified to assist their long-term planning he too is guilty of "talking Scotland down". It is true, as Joan McAlpine says, that we have been here before and the sky did not fall.

Halfon seeks to cool the inflationary fires

Don't whip out the cava just yet, CoffeeHousers. Inflation, in both its CPI and RPI incarnations, may be down on last month's figures, but the latest numbers are hardly cause for jubilation. At 5.0 per cent in October, CPI is still over double the Bank of England's target figure, and it's far outpacing the average growth in people's wages. The truth is that living costs remain constrictive, and at a time when the economy could teeter back into cataclysm at any moment.      Hence Robert Halfon's motion on fuel prices, which will be debated in the Commons today. It's another one of those motions triggered by an e-petition (112,189 signatures and rising), and it makes a simple plea: people are struggling, so how about doing more to cut the cost of fuel?

Alexander drags Labour closer towards the Tories on Europe

You know, having read through Douglas Alexander's Guardian article a couple of times now, and listened to his appearance on the Today programme earlier, I'm still not sure how Labour's new stance towards Europe is particularly different from the official Tory one. The shadow foreign secretary tries to suggest that Dave and George's position is reckless — ‘they seem worryingly complacent about the prospect of a two-speed Europe’ — but he goes on to echo much of it himself. And so, he suggests, ‘We should engage now with the fact that Germany is seeking treaty change and seize this opportunity to safeguard the rights of non-euro members.

Son of Brownies

How generous of Ed Balls to publish a transcript of his interview on the Politics Show earlier, so that we can amble through it on a Sunday evening. It contains, as you'd expect, more disagreeable parts than agreeable, and nothing more so than his comments about the national debt, deficit and all that. Two of his arguments, in particular, are worth alighting on because they're Brownies in the classic mould, and will probably be served up again and again: 1) ‘After the Second World War we took a number of years to repay our much higher level of debt. The government and Vince Cable have tried to get this done in one Parliament and it is backfiring.

Labour start attacking the NHS reforms – but did they need to?

So, the Labour Party has finally woken up to the idea that there might be some mileage in opposing the Government's health reforms. Throughout much of this year a predictable alliance of the perennially opposed – doctors, health unions, Liberal Democrats, among others – has maintained a barrage of malice and misinformation against the Health and Social Care Bill. Nothing in their tactics, from their arrogant assumption of a monopoly of concern for 'patients' to their endless whining about 'privatisation', has come as much surprise.  The only remotely unusual thing about their campaign has been Labour's near-total absence from it. Andy Burnham, who was made shadow health secretary last month, clearly wants to change this.

Miliband’s immigration attack no threat to Cameron

Ed Miliband broke with his post-conference policy of always asking about the economy at PMQs to devote all six questions to the whole Brodie Clark/Theresa May border dispute. Miliband, though, had no new killer fact or question. Instead, he stuck to general criticisms of the government’s approach. This gave Cameron an easy ride. He simpy backed the Home Secretary unequivocally before turning on Labour's immigration record. By the end, Cameron was at his most disdainful towards Miliband. Indeed, the most interesting element of the exchange was how the Liberal Democrats looked at their feet as Cameron rattled off the coalition's greatest hits on immigration. The rest of the session was relatively quiet.