Liberal democrats

Thursday

Daniel Korski

Coffee House interview: Julian Astle

Open any mass-circulation newspaper and you will find plenty of insider’s information about the Tory party. But precious little is known about their coalition partners, the Liberal Democrats. After decades in the political wilderness, most editors reasoned that it wasn’t really worth their while finding out what the party thought. After all, what difference did it make?   Well, times have changed. What the party thinks, what it does, and, crucially, what it won’t do, really does matter. So to help us here at Coffee House, Julian Astle, a friend of the Lib Dem leadership and director of CentreForum, the liberal think tank, has agreed to answer a few questions.

Alex Massie

The Looming Liberal Democrat Paradox

You know, when you see that Neil Clark has written a piece for the Guardian arguing that, from his perspective, this government is even worse than Margaret Thatcher’s you might expect to be entertained but you don’t anticipate him making sense. But, lo, here he is: […] Clegg, and his fellow Orange Book Liberals, are actually more keen on market forces and globalised capitalism than the so-called Tory wets were. In last year’s election, the free market fundamentalism of the Liberal Democrats was ignored by many commentators and voters who saw their opposition to Labour’s security measures, and their advocacy of electoral reform, as evidence that the party was progressive.

Wednesday

James Forsyth

Coulson's replacement

Downing Street have announced that the BBC’s Craig Oliver will be Andy Coulson’s replacement. Oliver, who has been editor of both the Six and Ten o’clock news, will bring a broadcasting perspective to Downing Street. Former BBC colleagues stress that he knows how to tell a story in pictures and, in contrast, to Coulson is unlikely to ever become the story. Oliver, who is in his 40s, was never obviously political. He won’t provide the kind of counterweight to Steve Hilton that Andy Coulson did. But he will run an efficient ship. Some people are saying that the appointment shows that newspapers are less powerful politically than they used to

Peter Hoskin

PMQs live blog | 2 February 2011

VERDICT: What a refreshing change that was. After several weeks of Punch ‘n’ Judy rivalry, the two party leaders finally put down their batons and stumbled upon a new way to do it. Much of the credit must go to Ed Miliband, for asking pacific questions about Egypt and Afghanistan in the first place. But credit, also, to Cameron, for answering them in a straightforward and statesmanlike manner. The rest of the House, for its part, was stunned into silence by this peculiar scene. Some of the blood rushed back into proceedings with the backbench questions, and as Cameron directed attacks at Ed Balls, but this must still go down

Tuesday

Peter Hoskin

All across the political spectrum

Yesterday’s polls may seem like yesterday’s news – but it’s actually worth returning to YouGov’s effort from, erm, yesterday. It contained some distinctive questions, and results, all set around the left-right spectrum. How left wing is the Labour party? How right wing is David Cameron? That sort of thing. Of course, as Anthony Wells has already pointed out, the old labels of “left” and “right” are of decreasing relevance nowadays. But they do still tell us something about popular perceptions of the parties and their leaders. So here are the top line YouGov results in graph form:   From which, a few points stand out: Ed Miliband is regarded as

Peter Hoskin

Osborne's tax headache

No doubt about it, George Osborne is being pulled in two directions ahead of the Budget. There are those, such as the Lib Dems, who would have him reduce taxes for the least well-off. There are those, such as Boris, who would have him reduce taxes for higher earners. As I suggested yesterday, this debate pivots around two particular measures: raising the personal allowance and cutting the 50p rate. Rachel Sylvester develops the story in a typically insightful column (£) for the Times today. It quotes an “ally of the Chancellor” to the effect that Osborne is minded more to raise the personal allowance than to cut 50p. “Not many

Monday

James Forsyth

Wheeling and dealing over the AV bill

If the AV referendum is to take place on the 5th of May, the legislation paving the way for it needs to have passed by the 16th of February. But this bill is currently being held up in the Lords where Labour peers are objecting to the ‘Tory part’ of the bill which reduces the number of MPs and equalises constituency sizes. The coalition does not have a majority in the Lords, so all the talk of simply ramming the bill through was always slightly unrealistic. But the coalition’s concession that there can be public inquiries into the boundary review has created an expectation that Labour might now drop its

Peter Hoskin

What are Osborne's options?

One of the most eyecatching political reports of the weekend was squirrelled away on page 16 (£) of the Sunday Times. It’s worth clipping out for the scrapbook, even now. In it, Marie Woolf reveals some of the fiscal sweeteners that Osborne might sprinkle into the Budget. There are two particularly noteworthy passages: i) Raising the personal allowance. “The income tax threshold is already set to increase by £1,000 to £7,457 from April 1. However, Osborne is expected to raise it by about a further £500. Details of the additional concession are still being worked on, but it marks a victory for the Liberal Democrats, who have been arguing within

Wednesday

Peter Hoskin

The Lib Dems reject Ed Miliband's overtures (again)

What a joy it is to watch Ed Miliband contort and twist so that he can offer a hand of friendship to the Lib Dems. It has been a three-act show, so far. First, during the Labour leadership contest, he described the Lib Dems as a “disgrace to the traditions of liberalism,” adding that, “I can see the death of the Liberal party to be honest”. Then, he said that he would actually work with those dying Liberals, but only if they ditched Nick Clegg first. And then today, in an interview with the Independent, he suggests that Clegg might be able to stay on, after all. As turnarounds go,

Peter Hoskin

PMQs live blog | 26 January 2011

VERDICT: Ed Miliband had it all, going into today’s PMQs: weak growth figures, the uncertain demise of control orders, rising youth unemployment, and more. And yet, somehow, he let most of it go to waste. Barely any of his attacks stuck – or, for that matter, stick in the mind – and Cameron rebuffed them with surprising ease. It helped that the Prime Minister seemed more comprehensively briefed than usual, with a decent compliment of statistics, and one or two sharp lines, at his disposal. (Although, measuring by the Labour cheers, I doubt he will thank Jacob Rees-Mogg for invoking Thatcher immediately after his exchange with the Labour leader.) In

David Blackburn

From control to surveillance

Like husband, like wife. Yvette Cooper has begun shadowing Theresa May where Ed Balls stopped: by lacerating Nick Clegg’s naïveté in believing that control orders should be abolished. There is a faint note of animus in her politicking too. ‘National security,’ she said, ‘should not be about keeping Nick Clegg safe in his job.’ The government invited Cooper’s charge with its own crass political calculation. Spinning the new measures as a Liberal Democrat victory could only elicit that response from an opposition that is intent on exploiting the government’s broad weakness on law and order. In fact, as Lord West has remarked, the government has not even come close to

Saturday

Peter Hoskin

Why Coulson's departure matters

Courtesy of the ConHome tag team of Paul Goodman and Tim Montgomerie, two articles that are worth adding to your Saturday reading list. Both capture why Andy Coulson’s resignation matters, if not to the general swell of British politics, at least to internal operations in Coalitionville. The wider argument of Paul’s article for the Guardian is captured by its headline: “Andy Couslon had a nose for the view of the aspirational voter.” But it also homes in on the point that Coulson’s departure tilts No.10 in favour of Steve Hilton – something that, rightly or wrongly, will bother the Tory right far more than it does Lib Dems of any

Peter Hoskin

And what about the Lib Dems?

After the gales of recent weeks, the past few days must have been relatively blissful for the Lib Dems. No fake constituents with hidden dictaphones. No massive student protests. No especial focus on their opinion poll ratings. But, instead, a mephitic heap of problems, or at least embarrassments, for Labour and the Tories. Warsi, Johnson, Coulson, even EMAs – Clegg & Co. have been spared the worst of it. Which isn’t to say that the Lib Dems will be unaffected by recent events. For instance, as Paul Goodman suggests, Andy Coulson’s departure unsettles the delicate balance of the coalition – and that will always have ramifications, however minute, for the

Wednesday

James Forsyth

Gove raises the spectre of an electoral pact

Michael Gove has reignited talk of a Tory Lib Dem pact by urging people in Hull to vote Lib Dem to keep Labour out at the local elections. Gove’s intervention was not planned but it does reveal how he thinks. Gove’s department is the most coalitionised. Not only is there a Lib Dem minister there in Sarah Teather, tellingly the only Lib Dem minister not to moan to the Telegraph’s undercover reporters about her colleagues. But there is also David Laws, who is acting as an unofficial adviser to Gove. Anthony Wells’ thorough analysis of an electoral pact suggests that it could do well in the seats where it matters. 

Mark Littlewood

How truly liberal is the coalition government?

Mark Littlewood is Director General of the Institute of Economic Affairs and contributed an article to the recent collection Big Brother Watch: The state of civil liberties in Britain. He summarises his argument here. It’s not fanciful to argue that the formation of a Liberal-Conservative coalition government last May was helped by the fact that Lib Dem and Tory parliamentarians had worked closely together in the previous Parliament to thwart or temper some of the Labour administration’s more aggressive assaults on civil liberties. The two parties – then in opposition, now in government – seemed to find common ground in defending the rights of the individual against the increasingly shrill

Alex Massie

Nick Clegg is Right (About Local Government)

An interesting story on local government reform in the Daily Mail: Nick Clegg is demanding councils be given the power to impose a massive range of new local taxes. Among the levies he suggests are for fuel, alcohol, office parking, landfill and even speeding. But the Liberal Democrat Deputy Prime Minister is being blocked by Eric Pickles, the Tory minister who is in charge of local government. Hard-pressed taxpayers – who have witnessed enormous council tax rises over the past decade, and are now struggling to cope with the effect of the recession – will be angry at any sign the Government is planning to impose additional local charges. Local

Peter Hoskin

PMQs live blog | 19 January 2011

VERDICT: No winners, and no real losers, from this week’s PMQs. Miliband’s questions were insistent and straightforward. Cameron’s answers were forceful and, in themselves, fairly persuasive. A no-score draw, then, if you want to look at it like that. There were one or two worrying leitmotifs for the coalition, though. First, the PM’s tendency towards grouchiness under fire; far less pronounced than it was last week, but still present. And then the continuing absence of any clear explanation of the NHS reforms, beyond “well, we had to change what was there previously.” The PM has a point about cancer survival rates and the like, but he’s not yet setting out

Tuesday

David Blackburn

The return of Chilcot

The Chilcot Inquiry is back, and with bang not a whimper. In his opening statement, Sir John said: ‘There is one area where, I am sorry to say, it has not been possible to reach agreement with the government. The papers we hold include the notes which Prime Minister Blair sent to President Bush and the records of their discussions. The Inquiry recognises the privileged nature of those exchanges but, exceptionally, we sought disclosure of key extracts which illuminate Prime Minister Blair’s positions at critical points. The Cabinet Office did not agree this disclosure. On 10 December last year, in accordance with the Protocol, I asked the Cabinet Secretary to

James Forsyth

Laws: the 50 percent rate should be abolished asap

David Laws has penned a robust defence of the coalition’s economic policies for The Guardian. He points out that the big dividing lines in politics are on the economy and then goes onto say: ‘Ed Miliband is betting that economic recovery will be derailed, and while trying to reconcile many divergent views in his party, he has generally taken the position that cuts should be delayed and that high tax rates (including the 50% tax rate) should be retained. Ed is getting all the big economic decisions wrong, and leading his party into an economic policy cul-de-sac.’ What is striking about this passage is Laws’ mention of the 50p rate

Sunday

Gavin Kelly

Breaking the curious silence on upcoming tax changes

This week, Nick Clegg added his name to the fast-growing list of politicians addressing the critical question of living standards. His phrase of choice was ‘alarm clock Britain’, in effect his version of Ed Miliband’s ‘squeezed middle’. It is, of course, a clunking label for what is a serious topic (hardly the first time a politician has achieved such a feat). But quibbles over terminology aside – and as Miliband’s article on Friday confirmed – these are the first serious shots in the political battle to frame the coalition’s crucial March Budget. It is now increasingly clear that at the heart of that struggle will be attempts by party leaders