Nick Clegg has announced a review into male primogeniture, but subscribers to The Spectator will – as so often – be already well-briefed on the subject. We ran a piece on this in Thursday’s magazine by Rachel Ward, the firstborn of the younger brother of an earl. This in itself will be enough to earn her a ribbing from some commentators on this blog, I imagine, but her thoughts on the subject are fascinating.
For weeks now, the genteel coalition has been getting grubbier. Today the Deputy Prime Minister cut loose and went into campaign mode as the leader of the Liberal Democrats. With both eyes on preserving his party’s loosening roots in local government, he assaulted (£) Conservative and Labour councils for cutting services. Clegg was not assisted by the more prominent Lib Dems in local government: the ubiquitous councillor Richard Kemp, the Lib Dems’ chief at the Local Government Association, asserted, almost with a note of relish, that the party is going to get a ‘kicking’. It probably will. But, as James argues, Clegg’s immediate concern after 5 May will be to ensure that the coalition returns to something approaching normality.
I wrote earlier that the immigration debate can bite back — and it's already done just that. Speaking this morning, Vince Cable has labeled the Prime Minister's speech as "very unwise," and at risk of "inflaming extremism." That, lest it need saying, is the same Vince Cable who's a member of Cameron's government. In theoretical terms, what this clarifies is the parameters of the Coalition Agreement. While almost every policy that Cameron highlights in his speech is part of that document, it seems that the Lib Dems don't have to agree with the way he sells them. The point is being made, this morning, that the idea of reducing net migration to its 1980s levels is very much, and very specifically, a Tory ambition.
There's a new equation in British politics, and it's one that Nick Clegg came up against this morning: Politician + Rochdale = Gillian Duffy. The Deputy Prime Minister was quizzed by Gordon Brown's unassuming nemesis during his visit to the town earlier — and the results are in the video above. For what it's worth, he did fairly well, emphasising the pressing need to tackle Labour's poisonous fiscal legacy.
We'll try to get the video later, but, for now, a transcript of Norman Lamb's appearance on the Politics Show will have to do (UPDATE: video added above). Here we had a very unusual political moment: an assistant whip, and adviser to Nick Clegg, not only calling for changes to government policy, but also threatening to resign should they not happen. His main argument was that the NHS reforms should be dealt with more slowly: "I think it would be a crying shame if that really important principle [giving GPs more power and responsibility] was lost because we rushed the reform process and got it wrong. My real concern is the financial risk of doing it too quickly because then you lose services, patient care suffers...
Nick Clegg’s interview with Jemima Khan (née Goldsmith), in which he admits to crying regularly to music, is already coming in for predictable mockery. But the point that Clegg makes about how his job is affecting his kids is worth dwelling on. Clegg is not the only coalition minister to fret about this. Sarah Vine, Michael Gove’s wife, wrote earlier this year about how she worried about the psychological effect on her children of people verbally assaulting her husband in front of them. During the Labour leadership contest, Ed Balls, for all his faults, spoke movingly about his concern over how he would protect his kids from what was said about him and Yvette Cooper.
Reassurance — that's what the happy trio of David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Andrew Lansley sought to emit during their NHS event earlier. And reassurance not just about where the coalition is taking the health service (although there was plenty of that), but also about the "listening exercise" they are engaging in now. Although all three men suggested that the broad scope of the NHS reforms would remain — decentralisation, greater responsibilities for GPs, and all that — they also hinted that "substantive" changes will be made to the Bill as it stands. As for what those changes will look like, there were few specifics. Yet it did sound as though the coalition is dwelling on the recommendations made by the health select committee yesterday.
Ahead of this morning’s Cameron, Clegg, Lansley event on the NHS, it is worth reminding ourselves of what Nick Clegg was saying about these reforms back at the start of the year. On January 23rd, he went on the Andrew Marr show and had this exchange: 'ANDREW MARR: Huge change to the NHS just coming down the line. Was that in the Liberal Democrat manifesto? NICK CLEGG: Actually funnily enough it was. Indeed it was. We were one of the primary critics in opposition of what we felt was a top … ANDREW MARR: (over) I don't remember you saying you were going to get rid of Primary Care Trusts and pass it down to GPs. NICK CLEGG: We certainly said we were going to get rid of Primary Care Trusts.
Get your guide to body language out for tomorrow morning Cameron, Clegg and Lansley will be doing a joint event on NHS reforms. The three men all have subtly different messages to get across and there are concerns in Tory circle that Clegg will use the occasion to present himself as the defender of the NHS against these Tory reforms. Cameron will be walking a tightrope at tomorrow’s event. He will have to show that he is listening, that this whole exercise is not a sham, but without abandoning the principles on which the reforms are based. Expect Cameron, who will only have arrived back in the country hours before the event, to emphasise his personal connections to the NHS as he tries to build support for the policy.
The government's new report into social mobility is, it tells us, all about "opening doors" and "breaking barriers" — but it's probably taxing attention spans too. 89 pages of text and graphs, offset by the same pea soup shade of green that's used for all these coalition documents. To save you from wading through it all, here's our quick five-point summary: 1) The same story… Much of the report, as James suggested earlier, is familiar territory. After all, the coalition's two most developed policy areas — welfare and education — are precisely designed to improve opportunities for the least well-off; so here they are again, restated and slightly reframed.
Ed Miliband's hand of friendship has to be one of the shakiest body parts in British politics. Sometimes it's extended to the Lib Dems, sometimes it's not. Sometimes it's extended to Nick Clegg, sometimes it's not. Sure, the Labour leader does appear to have finally settled on a position: that he will only shake the hands of a Cleggless Liberal party. But that has come after constant wavering on his part, and could well be subject to change. I mention this now because of a claim in Rachel Sylvester's column (£) today. I'm not sure whether it has been made before — but it neatly encapsulates how Miliband has lurched one way and then t'other, and deserves pasting into the scrapbook.
Grenades are seldom expected – yet Andrew Lansley knew that one was going to fall into his lap this morning. The Health Select Committee has today released its much trumpeted report on the government's plans for NHS commissioning. In normal circumstances its dry take on an even drier subject would evade public notice. As it is, with the coalition rocking and reeling as they are, this is fissile stuff. It is yet another voice in the chorus of opposition to Lansley's reforms.
The fate of Andrew Lansley's NHS reforms is attracting apocalyptic headlines. A report in the Times (£) declares that a ‘last-ditch’ salvage is underway; the FT carries an editorial in similar tone, and the Guardian devotes its front page to David Cameron’s attempt to save face. Over at Conservative Home, Jonathan Isaby relates how the strategy will unfold. The principles of the bill will remain intact, but it will be delayed using the ‘natural pause’ in parliamentary procedure. During this time, the details of the bill be scrutinised and the government will also use this time to reiterate its view that these reforms are necessary for the NHS to manage an ageing population and rising costs.
It’s supposed to be the day of rest, but there’s no rest for the wicked. The two sides of the alternative vote referendum have been exchanging blows all day. It seems the pro-AV camp have purged black poet Benjamin Zephaniah from some of their leaflets. Apparently, Zephaniah is all present and correct on leaflets sent to London addresses; but he has been apparently replaced by Tony Robinson in those sent to Sussex and Cornwall. The No campaign has described its opponents as “ashamed” of Mr Zephaniah’s colour, and the Yes campaign said the allegation was a “new low”. It’s six of one and half of dozen of the other, and we’re still no better informed about either system.
The NHS is, as Nigel Lawson once remarked, the new national religion of this country. This makes it difficult to discuss the subject in a rational matter and any attempt to reform it is likely to run into its own Pilgrimage of Grace as Andrew Lansley and the coalition are discovering. The government’s problem is that it can’t do a simple u-turn. As I say in the Mail on Sunday, Cameron can’t shelve this scheme without bringing his own judgement into question. Once Cameron and Clegg signed the introduction to the white paper setting out these reforms, they crossed the Rubicon. So instead the coalition is left trying to tinker and slow down the reforms to make them more politically palatable. But this brings with it its own risk.
How can Nick Clegg recover from defeat in the AV referendum? Andrew Grice considers the question in his column and reveals that Clegg is not too bothered about AV: his sight is trained on a bigger prize. ‘A U-turn in the controversial NHS reforms to hand 80 per cent of the budget to GPs and scrap primary care trusts (PCTs). Mr Clegg is convinced that there must be big symbolic changes to the NHS and Social Care Bill. That would not be good news for Andrew Lansley…He knows that Mr Cameron will demand some changes and is prepared to see a few technical amendments to the Bill during its passage through Parliament…Mr Clegg's worry is that the public would not notice fine-tuning.
Nick Clegg is campaigning in Leicester today, ahead of the local election. The Labour party has just confirmed that Sir Peter Soulsby has stood down as MP for Leicester South today to seek election as the town’s Mayor. A happy coincidence? Probably not. Labour are already running a coherent campaign in Leicester. Michael Crick points out that the by-election will fall on 5 May, together with the local council elections, the Mayoral election and the referendum on the alternative vote.
A delegation from Durham University flew to Kuwait in February to build what it termed ‘academic partnerships’. They succeeded. On Monday afternoon, Durham University announced the formation of the ‘Al-Sabah Programme in International Relations, Regional Politics and Security.’ In an internal document sent to academic staff, the Vice-Chancellor, Professor Chris Higgins, revealed that that this seat had been ‘funded personally by Sheikh Nasser Al-Sabah of Kuwait’, the Kuwati Prime Minister, and that the ‘£2.5million endowment will support the Al-Sabah Chair, associated research and two PhD studentships in perpetuity’. Al-Sabah has made what is politely termed a singular contribution to democratic traditions.
Relations between the coalition partners are fraught at present, more of which in the column tomorrow. The main cause of this tension is the AV referendum which is pitting the two sides against each other in an increasingly bitter fight. But even by recent standards, Chris Huhne’s response to the Tory chairman Sayeeda Warsi’s claim that AV would help the BNP is dramatic. As Patrick Wintour reports, Huhne has accussed Warsi and the No campaign of indulging in an ‘increasingly Goebbels-like campaign.’ This latest riposte follows Huhne’s letter at the weekend which made clear that the No campaign’s tactics were threatening the existence of the coalition. The next nine months will be the period of maximum danger for the coalition.
Remember when Nick Clegg said that the coalition was shuffling into a new phase? One where his party would would make their presence, and their differences with the Tories, more acutely felt? Turns out the Lib Dem leader wasn't kidding. Judging by this report of a press briefing he has given in Mexico, the brave new phase is very much in effect. For starters, Clegg luxuriates in the anti-nuclear hysteria that has arrived in the wake of Fukushima — emphasising not just that our planned nuclear power stations will be more costly and difficult to build now, but also his party's policy that no public money should be used to fund their construction.