Parliament

On 19 June 1815, after the battle of Waterloo, the Duke of Wellington declared that ‘nothing except a battle lost can be half so melancholy as a battle won’. Two hundred years later, David Cameron or Ed Miliband might feel the same way as they sit in Downing Street. Any elation over victory will be quickly overshadowed by the thought of troubles to come — in all likelihood insurmountable troubles for either man. Everyone has known for years when this election will take place, with the result that the campaign starting gun has been fired even earlier than usual. Cameron is busy prophesying economic chaos if Labour wins; Miliband is warning that the NHS won’t survive in its current form if the Tories get back in.

Coming in from the pouring rain, I make my way to the office on the eighth floor of City Hall. With its curving windows, many books and bust of Pericles tucked away in a corner, it reminds me both of a classroom and the cockpit of a spacecraft. Its occupant is waiting for me, looking a little crumpled but less dishevelled than I had expected. He greets me very pleasantly but this is what I’m thinking. Here is the most famous person I have ever interviewed. In his own way, he is almost as iconic as the Queen or Churchill, the nodding dog in those insurance commercials. He is Boris, one of a tiny handful of politicians/celebrities instantly known by their first name.

Jesse Norman was permitted three minutes for his speech to the Commons in last Friday’s debate. But the contribution from the Conservative MP for Hereford & South Herefordshire was one of the more important backbench interventions — and no less important for being wide of the debate’s focus. The House was being invited to support British intervention against the Islamic State. Mr Norman’s speech was about whether the invitation was even appropriate. As he put it, ‘A convention has started to develop that, except in an emergency, major foreign policy interventions must be pre-approved by a vote in Parliament.’ The MP thought this unwise. I disagree. Or half-disagree. But ­Norman’s case was powerful, and I shall give you the gist.

Cynics have long suspected that Britain's foreign policy is as independent as its nuclear deterrent. Cynics have a point. Perhaps, as some suggest, it's time to concede the game's a bogey and cease even pretending to pretend this remains a country of at least some modest importance and influence. Except, if we choose to, we do retain some influence, even some importance. Nevertheless, we certainly do not have an Iraq policy at present. Nor do we really have an ISIS policy. The Foreign Secretary is long on what we're not doing and very short on what we are. Of course this reflects past misadventures. Not just those pertaining to Iraq but others too, including last year's parliamentary determination to avoid having a Syria policy too. So, yes, Prudence runs foreign policy these days.

Now that David Cameron has returned from his Portuguese fish-shopping exploits, the game of recall tennis that Westminster has been playing for the past few days has stepped up a few notches. Now it's not just Philip Hammond, Michael Fallon and other Cabinet members leaving COBR meetings who can be asked whether or not they think Parliament should return from recess to debate the situation in Iraq, but the Prime Minister himself. It's running like this: another Tory MP writes to the Prime Minister to say there should be a recall, or a senior party figure from the Lib Dems or Labour says there should be one.

Downing Street remains resolute that there will not be a recall of Parliament over the situation in Iraq. But Conor Burns, a Tory backbencher who resigned as a ministerial aide over Lords reform, has just joined calls for a recall by writing to David Cameron warning that helping to evacuate the religious minorities at risk is not enough. His letter, seen first by Coffee House, is pretty strong stuff. Burns tells Cameron that 'these people want a holocaust of everyone who does not share their brutal ideology. It simply cannot be enough to try and evacuate those [ISIS] want to kill and then leave them, as the Pentagon admitted last night, undiminished to continue their terror' and that 'there is more that we could be exploring to deal with the problem's source'.

It was news to me that there exists an All Party Commons Committee on Alcohol Misuse, but when you think about it, the notion makes complete sense; for evidence, all they need do is nip down the nearest corridor to talk to colleagues hanging out in any of the several bars in parliament. The members of the committee have now suggested that bottles of alcohol should carry health warnings. It’s all a bit American, isn’t it? Over there, they treat alcohol as part of the substance abuse spectrum, with crack cocaine a bit of the way down from gin. I suppose it does no harm to point out that drinking to excess can play havoc with your liver, and the existing exhortations on spirits — Please Enjoy This Bottle Responsibly — are, I’d say, next to useless.