Parliament

This weekend saw a host of EU drama unfold, as a number of Cabinet Ministers rebelled against David Cameron on Saturday -- declaring that they would campaign for Brexit. Then came another blow to Number 10 on Sunday as Boris Johnson announced that he, too, would be supporting Out. So, did it all get a bit too much for one Parliamentary worker? Word reaches Steerpike that Moncrieff's -- the Parliamentary press bar -- was subject to a break-in last night. It's thought that someone broke-in in the search for a drink... or five. Police have cordoned off the area: The word in the corridors of power is that wine was the thief's tipple of choice.

Labour is a very poor opposition at the moment, and no amount of money could fix that. But the government is currently pursuing a policy that seems intended to weaken even decent oppositions. In the Autumn Statement, George Osborne announced a 19 per cent cut to Short money, which is the state funding for political parties to be able to do their job of representing the millions of voters who want them in parliament. The 19 per cent cut is in line the reductions made to unprotected spending departments in the spending review, and is quite easy for ministers to defend, because they can talk about reducing the cost of politics, and voters like that idea. Naturally, the opposition parties involved don’t like the idea, and have been complaining about it.

Jeremy Corbyn is a rarity among politicians. All his enemies are on his own side. For the Tories, Ukip and the SNP, Corbyn is a dream made real. They could not love him more. As the riotous scenes at the shadow cabinet and parliamentary Labour party meetings this week showed, his colleagues see Corbyn and John McDonnell as modern Leninists who are mobilising their cadres to purge all dissidents from the party. Conversations with Corbyn’s aides show a gentler side to the new regime, however. They suggest the Corbynistas are unlikely to be able to control Labour MPs when they can barely control themselves. ‘Chaos’ was the word that came up most often, followed by ‘panic’ and ‘unforced errors’. Corbyn’s staffers were working 12-hour days.

Shortly after MPs return from the conference recess, they will debate a petition that orders the government to ‘close all borders and prevent more immigrants from entering Britain’ because ‘foreign citizens are taking all our benefits’ and ‘many of them are trying to change UK into a Muslim country’. It then adds that ‘there is footage of foreigners destroying British soldiers [sic] graves, which is a huge disrespect to us’. The petition has sailed past the 100,000 signature threshold and has over 185,000 names on it, which means it must be considered for debate in Parliament. MPs on the Petitions Committee have given it a Westminster Hall debate on 19 October.

When the Labour party began, its purpose was the representation of labour (i.e. workers) in the House of Commons. Indeed, its name was the Labour Representation Committee. Its goal was gradually achieved, and then, from the 1980s, gradually annihilated. With the victory of Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour leader is supported by only 10 per cent of the party’s MPs, and yet it is imagined, at least by his backers, that he will eventually be able to get into government with them. It is an impossible situation. What is needed today is the opposite of how it all started — a Parliamentary Representation Committee in the Labour party. When the history of Corbynism comes to be written, many will assume that his form of leftism arose as a protest against the Thatcher era. This is not so.

Jezza! What a genius. The master plan is clear at last. You spend four days plumbing new depths of political incompetence with bungled cabinet appointments, surly refusals to talk to reporters, tedious waffly platform-speeches and grumpy scowls during a service at St Pauls. And then, when your reputation can dwindle no lower, you spring forth and dazzle everyone with a political revolution. Cameron was grinning sheepishly before the Labour leader rose to the despatch box. He smirked sideways at his new opponent, through half-closed eyes, like a shy girl about to enter a forced marriage. Corbs looked relaxed and far sprucer than before. He might have been a civics teacher arriving for Day One at the new comp. Shiny grey tunic, off-white striped shirt, green splotchy tie.

[audioplayer src="http://rss.acast.com/viewfrom22/jeremycorbynsbritain/media.mp3" title="Dan Hodges, James Forsyth and Ellie Mae O'Hagan discuss the impact of a Corbyn victory" startat=40] Listen [/audioplayer]How long does it take to rebuild a political machine? Twelve months? Two years? Three years? Maybe it can’t be done at all. Jeremy Corbyn has won. Everyone within Labour’s ranks acknowledges that now. The issue concentrating minds is how long it will take to remove him, how bloody the process of removing him will be and how much effort it will take to repair the damage once he has been removed — assuming the damage is reparable. This is why Labour MPs are thinking about the machine.

What should be the response of politicians to mass emailings and Twitter storms? The question is an urgent one, especially for Conservative MPs, given the general truth that mass petitions, in which complex issues are simplified to ‘for or against’ and emotion given a head start over reasoned argument, tend to come from the left. I was astonished to learn that a Tory MP decided his vote on the proposed Hunting Bill would depend on opinion polls in his local newspaper. In the event the Bill was withdrawn, largely, if Nicola Sturgeon is to be believed, as a result of online petitioning. Progressive causes such as the campaign against hunting have a familiar profile: the powerless against the powerful, victims against oppressors, the clean utopia against the murky reality.

The shaming of Lord Sewel was a classic tabloid exposé. The fact that a peer of the realm (albeit one appointed by Tony Blair) was caught on camera apparently ingesting Class A drugs in the company of prostitutes is a good enough story in itself. The fact that the peer in question was chairman of the Lords privileges and conduct committee while he was doing so makes it very near to red-top nirvana. Since the publication of the story — and scores of lavish accompanying photographs — the peer’s Pimlico flat has been raided by police (who battered down a door to gain access), and Lord Sewel has resigned from the House of Lords, expressing the correct and noble sentiment that he can ‘best serve the House by leaving it’.

Jeremy Corbyn just can't help making friends wherever he goes. He previously described Hamas operatives as 'friends' and now he has found time out of his Labour leadership campaign to meet up with his old 'comrade' Gerry Adams in Portcullis House. The Sinn Féin president has tweeted a picture of their meet up, which Martin McGuinness also attended: https://twitter.com/GerryAdamsSF/status/623530633055313920 Of course the pair go way back. Corbyn, who supported ending British status for Northern Ireland, was heavily crtiticised after he invited Adams -- along with other Sinn Féin members -- to the House of Commons shortly after the Brighton bombing in 1984.

The Houses of Parliament are falling down. According to the Independent Options Appraisal of the Palace of Westminster Restoration and Renewal Programme - a group of engineers and project managers commissioned to have a butcher’s - the Palace of Westminster is 'partly sinking, contains asbestos and has outdated cabling', is 'infested with rats and mice and in an advanced state of disrepair' and will take £5.7 billion and 32 years to put right, unless MPs and Lords shuffle off somewhere else for a bit, in which case it’ll be £3.5 billion over six years. Without such repairs, 'major, irreversible damage' looms.

A great test of political leadership is how well you deal with vested interests on your own side. In his first speech as Lord Chancellor this week, Michael Gove has shown himself willing to tackle a profession which has long been comfortable with Conservative governments and whose reform, as a consequence, is long overdue. A legal system designed from scratch would not resemble what we have now. The only thing wrong with Michael Gove’s observation that Britain has a ‘two-nation’ justice system is that he should really have said three nations. Like the central London property market, the courts have become the preserve of the very rich and the very poor. The middle is excluded. The rich can afford to revel in the pantomime.