Labour party

Is scorched earth politics now a thing of the past?

Is the new government marching across scorched earth?  They certainly claim so, and now they seem to have the civil service backing them up.  Speaking to the Beeb this afternoon, Jonathan Baume, the leader of a civil service union, said that senior civil servants had written “letters of direction” to Labour ministers in concern at the spending decisions they took in the final months of their government.  As Baume put it: “It’s not a decision that is taken very often to ask for such a letter of direction, which is why it is regarded something of a nuclear option. So when it happens it tends to be a big spending

Bercow remains Speaker, as Parliament reconvenes

David Cameron sat alongside Nick Clegg on the government benches, with Harriet Harman two sword-lengths away as leader of the Opposition.  Even though the coalition has been around for a week now, it took the images from the Commons this afternoon to bring home just how extraordinary recent politics has been.  I mean, even the SNP’s Angus Robertson got to make a speech now that the Lib Dems aren’t a party of opposition.  This, plainly, is going to take some getting used to. They were all witness, today, to the re-election of John Bercow as Speaker.  In the end, it was easy for the Buckingham MP, as the “ayes” heavily

We should judge Bercow at the end of this Parliament

Well, the news that Sir Menzies Campbell is lobbying to be made Speaker – as revealed by Iain Dale last night – certainly adds a dash of spice to proceedings.  But I’d still expect John Bercow to comfortably survive any re-election vote today.  On paper, all the arithmetic works in his favour.  And there’s a sense that many Tory backbenchers are holding their fire for bigger battles with the party leadership ahead. But does Bercow deserve to stay?  I must admit, I’m rather ambivalent about the issue: I didn’t really want him as Speaker, but I didn’t really not want him as Speaker either.  And after his solid enough first

If Ed Miliband is the Answer, What is the Question?

Election post-mortems are always interesting and often fun. Take the speech Ed Miliband made to launch his campaign for the Labour leadership. While paying due attention* to Labour’s achievements in government, it still reads as an indictment of the party’s record in office. Consider these snippets: We must start by understanding the country we seek to lead again. …[T]he truth is that as government wore on we lost that sense of progressive mission and of being in touch with people’s concerns. As time wore on we came to seem more caretakers than idealists—more technocratic than transformative. And when political parties lose that sense of idealism and mission they become much

The Labour leadership battle: tribalism vs anti-tribalism

While we’re on the subject of the Labour leadership, it’s worth reading James Purnell’s article in the Times today.  I know, I know – he’s left Parliament now.  But Purnell is close to Team Miliband (the Elder), so I imagine some of his thinking might show up in the campaign.  In which case… One thing that jumped out at me was Purnell’s attitude to the coalition government.  Sure, he attacks it as “only symbolically progressive,” but he doesn’t dismiss it out of hand.  Indeed, he even suggests that coalition might be a good thing: “Gently, too — we should give credit to Mr Cameron and Mr Clegg for the way

David Miliband sets out the fraternal dividing lines

David Miliband is one of those politicians who speeches improve when you read them on paper, his delivery still distracts more than it adds. If the Labour party is going to pick the Miliband who is the more natural platform speaker then David hasn’t got much of a chance. But if they want the Miliband who is more prepared to think about why Labour really lost then David might well be their man. On Saturday, Ed Miliband talked about how Iraq, a ‘casualness’ about civil liberties and a failure to regulate the banks properly had cost Labour the election. This might be Ed Miliband’s genuine analysis but it is also

Why Labour is still within striking distance

Things are looking good for Cameron – his coalition has 60 percent approval rating, he has managed to persuade the Lib Dems to support what always was a liberal Tory agenda. There is plenty for Conservatives to celebrate, especially on welfare reform and education. But, still, things could be a lot worse for the Labour Party than they are now. I say in my News of the World column today that, rather than being “out for a generation” as Tory strategists were hoping only a month ago, Labour remains (amazingly) in striking distance of winning the next election. And there is no telling when that election will be. Clegg and

A lesson for all new MPs

Ed Miliband has given a surprisingly good speech this morning: free from all the junk language that his older brother has a weakness for. But he raises an interesting question: Why did Gisela Stuart win in Birmingham Edgbaston? Why did Karen Buck win Westminster North? Why did Andy Slaughter win in Hammersmith? Might it have been because all three of these politicians were, at one point, thorns in the flesh of their government? That they all at times campaigned, on principle, against the Labour government? As I said in The Times yesterday, the German-born Ms Stuart was a committed foe of the EU Constitution – who denounced it, and the

Ed Balls follows Ed Miliband’s lead

So fraternal rivalry it is, then, as Ed Miliband prepares to announce his leadership bid at a Fabian Society conference today. And, reading his interview with the Guardian, it’s clear that Ed Balls is soon going to follow suit. Two Eds, two leadership bids, and much shared rhetoric about “listening” to voters. But the similarities don’t end there. The passage where Ed Balls argues in favour of “progressive universalism” – a welfare system which stretches to the middle classes – echoes an interview that Ed Miliband gave to the Guardian in March. Both claim that it’s important to make sure tax credits and other benefits reach those higher up the

Who will be Labour’s cuts candidate?

As Guido and Jim Pickard have pointed out, Liam Byrne’s article in the Guardian today reads like the launch of a leadership bid.  But if it is, then it’s not a well-judged one.  Amid some sensible points about Labour’s demise, there’s too much “if we’d have done what I said” bravado which, I imagine, won’t go down well with the party faithful right now.  A bit like pouring vinegar on an open wound. But it’s worth considering another angle to a Byrne leadership bid.  A couple of weeks ago, I wondered whether Brown’s departure would also take Labour away from the “investment vs cuts” dividing line of the past decade,

Why fraternal rivalry will be good for Labour

With the Sun reporting that Ed Miliband is going to stand for the Labour leadership, it’s probably a good time to dig out Anne McElvoy’s profile of the Miliband brothers for the Sunday Times last month. To my mind, its opening neatly encapsulates the choice between the wonkish one and the slighty-less-wonkish one that Labour may have to make: “When David and Ed Miliband were teenagers, their north London household rang to the chatter of some of the most prominent left-wing names of the era: Tony Benn, Tariq Ali, the ANC leader Joe Slovo and the late Michael Foot. David, one regular guest recalls, would sit ‘absorbing it all’ and

Labour must recognise the scale of its defeat

Will Straw was on the news this afternoon, arguing that Labour had lost only a small “doughnut” of seats around London and in the south. As John Rentoul notes, some doughnut: Labour was annihilated in England. David Cameron’s swift reform of the Conservative party was built on recognising the scale of defeat. Few on the Labour side have yet done so, including David Miliband, who clings to the spurious consolation that it could have been worse. In a piece for the Guardian, John Denham is candid about a share of the vote that was markedly lower than John Major’s in 1997: ‘Most obvious is just how catastrophic our defeat was.

Miliband storms ahead. Whither Ed Balls?

Amazingly, given his penchant to procrastinate, David Miliband’s leadership bid is flying. High profile endorsements fly-in – former defence secretary and arch-Blairite John Hutton is the latest. Miliband is out on the stump, canvassing the opinions of former voters. Ed Balls, by contrast, looks tentative and there is no doubt he’s losing ground.   Iain Martin has an excellent post on the Labour leadership contenders and concludes that Miliband is not yet the complete package. I agree. Bananas aside, Miliband’s chief problem is that he expresses himself in meaningless abstractions. Think Tanks and cosmopolitans adore the terminology, voters don’t – The Big Society was A Big Flop. Miliband’s success will

David Miliband kicks off his “unity” leadership campaign

Surprise, surprise – David Miliband has just announced his candidacy for the Labour leadership, and there wasn’t a banana in sight.  His address only lasted a few minutes, but it contained a number of hints about how, I suspect, he will look to run his campaign.  The emphasis was on newness, natch – “a new era, new dangers, new possibilities, new opportunities” – but also on unity.  He praised the leadership of Gordon Brown; claimed he was looking forward to a “warm, generous and comradely” contest; and said that he would go on a tour of non-Labour constituencies to “listen” to the public.  All of which was meant to reinforce

Game on for the Labour leadership

The Coalition Cabinet remains unformed as yet – it’s rumoured that Chris Huhne is going to environment and Michael Gove and David Laws are out doing one another in the ‘I’ve no idea where I’ll be’ stakes. All the sounds are very positive but the contents of would-be ministers’ statements are careful, as doubtless final decisions are being made. The Labour leadership has its own spot on Westminster’s backdrop of delicate intrigue. Yesterday, Andy Burnham positioned himself as the candidate of sense, opposing Lib-Lab talks and acknowledging that Labour needed to reorganise itself in the aftermath of defeat. The preferred path to renewal is clearer this morning. Alan Johnson has

Clegg Gets Labour to Drive His Party to the Tories

There’s one thing that may be said of Nick Clegg’s willingness to talk to Labour: it allowed Labour to show Liberal Democrat MPs that a deal with the Tories is the only show in town worth buying a ticket for. Once Labour MPs vowed to derail any plan to force through voting reform without a referendum and once John Reid, David Blunkett and Andy Burnham pointed out the absurdity of a “Loser’s Alliance” that, however constitutionally permissable, would mock the actual, you know, result of the election then even the most sawdust-brained Liberal Democrat MP could appreciate that this bird wouldn’t fly. That leaves a proper deal with the Tories

The Labour Party Must Accept Defeat and Move On

As I write, the Liberal Democrats and Tories are meeting in the Cabinet Office. The Labour Party should accept this is the end of any hope of a Rainbow Coalition. This election was lost and well lost. The Conservative achievement is substantial. There are now over a hundred extra Tory MPs in parliament and David Cameron has taken his party from being an unelectable basket case to the dominant political force in Westminster. It would be gracious at this stage to admit defeat.  The unwholesome sight of Labour grandees scrabbling around in search of  deal with the Lib Dems is an affront to democracy. The suggestion that Labour has the

Burnham strikes a blow to the Lib-Lab coalition

As James suggested, the mood is shifting against a Lib-Lab coalition this afternoon. And now the idea has been dealt its biggest blow so far: Andy Burnham has spoken out against it public. Taking the kind of deliberate step that suggests he may be up for the Labour leadership after all, the Health Secretary said: “I think we have got to respect the results of the general election and we can’t get away from the fact that Labour didn’t win.” And there’s more. According to the irrepressible Paul Waugh, Burnham first made his discontent known in Labour’s Cabinet meeting last night – where, according to Channel 4’s Gary Gibbon, he