Theresa may

You can judge a minister by their special advisers. Ambitious ministers surround themselves with aides who view their primary loyalty as being to the minister rather than the Prime Minister or the government as a whole. But those who are just happy to be in Cabinet accept the advisers they are sent by Downing Street and CCHQ. Theresa May was, without a doubt, in the former category. Her aides are ferocious defenders and promoters of her. Indeed, May is, in many ways, the Gordon Brown of this government. Anyone who her team thought was interfering in her domain got their head bitten off. Even on relatively minor issues like visas for Chinese tourists, they fought like tigers. No quarter is given to those who disagreed with the Home Office line, no matter how minor the subject.

Modern Conservatives seem to be allergic to success. Every time things are going right, the party spasms. Sir John Major’s government nurtured a remarkable economic recovery, yet was beaten after its infighting appalled voters. In opposition, David Cameron acquired a habit of blowing opinion poll leads — a habit he did not, alas, shake off in time for the general election. And now, just as a Conservative victory at the next election looks likely, war has broken out again. What should have been a day of success for Michael Gove has ended in his being forced to apologise for briefing against officials in Theresa May’s department. And the Home Secretary, for her part, has lost a valued and highly effective special adviser: Fiona Cunningham.

[audioplayer src="http://traffic.libsyn.com/spectator/TheViewFrom22_5_June_2014_v4.mp3" title="Zac Goldsmith, Chris Skidmore and Fraser Nelson discuss the latest Tory wars" startat=40] Listen [/audioplayer]Modern Conservatives seem to be allergic to success. Every time things are going right, the party spasms. Sir John Major’s government nurtured a remarkable economic recovery, yet was beaten after its infighting appalled voters. In opposition, David Cameron acquired a habit of blowing opinion poll leads — a habit he did not, alas, shake off in time for the general election. And now, just as a Conservative victory at the next election looks likely, the party has decided to lose its head again.

Downing Street must be hopping mad with Theresa May and Michael Gove for pursuing their own row on the day of a Queen's Speech that was carefully crafted so as not to rock the boat. This morning, a 'spokesperson for Michael Gove and Theresa May' - a role which hitherto has never existed - issued a statement saying 'the Department for Education and the Home Office take the problems in Birmingham schools and all issues relating to extremism very seriously. Michael Gove and Theresa May are working together to ensure we get to the bottom of what has happened in Birmingham and take the necessary steps to fix it.

If you are a lobbyist looking to access a government minister but want to circumvent the tedious checks enforced by civil servants, then Newark-on-Trent is the town for you. This corner of Nottinghamshire is packed with reshuffle hopefuls and Tory big-wigs ‘doing their bit’ for the by-election bid. Education minister Liz Truss had taken her mum and kids along. George Osborne was milling about while wearing his favourite high-viz jacket. And Theresa May brought her characteristic sparkle to the stump: the Home Secretary told assembled arm-chewing hacks that the Tories’ “excellent candidate” would secure the future for the hardworking people of Newark, you will be glad to hear.

Theresa May's speech to the Police Federation yesterday will go down as one of the most significant moments in this parliament (writes Fraser Nelson). Below is the best account I've seen of it, from the RSA's Anthony Painter. He has kindly agreed for us to cross-post it here.  The Police Federation's conference yesterday didn’t go according to plan. The Independent Review, represented by Sir David Normington and myself, was due to address the Police Federation conference in Bournemouth. A big concern was that the Conference would pick and choose between the 36 recommendations of the Review’s final report and pass one or two amendments that would alter the substance of the recommendations.

Sarah Vine is famed for using her column in the Daily Mail to share embarrassing personal anecdotes about Michael Gove (often involving his underpants) and to offer deeply unhelpful advice to the Tory government. Today’s article is a case in point; it says that David Cameron's women problem is 'the biggest hurdle the Tories face'. The wife of the Education Secretary adds: 'as my husband is fond of saying, "Happy wife, happy life". And Mrs Electorate isn’t happy.' And Vine laid it on thick for Theresa May; suggesting that the Home Secretary 'looks more and more like the true heir to Margaret Thatcher.... whose tractor beam glare makes Anna Wintour’s seem positively Bambi-esque'.

So Theresa May has won her battle with Number 10 on stop-and-search reform, sort of. She announced a number of changes this afternoon to the power for police - but they're all voluntary. That the Home Secretary has managed to get any of these changes into a state where she can announce them is a victory - but the initial voluntary nature of the reforms was the compromise necessary to make this announcement happen. The changes are as follows: The Police and Criminal Evidence Act Code of Practice A will clarify what constitutes the 'reasonably grounds for suspicion' on which the police carry out the vast majority of stop-and-searches. If officers do not use their powers properly, they will be disciplined.

Remember that rather curious change to the Immigration Bill that would render foreign-born terror suspects 'stateless' that ministers managed to sneak through while most MPs were in a tizz about Dominic Raab? Well, it's facing its first major battle in the House of Lords soon, with a group of peers tabling an amendment which would in effect neuter it or spark a row in the Commons. The new clause, tabled by crossbenchers Lord Pannick and Lord Brown, Lib Dem former Director of Public Prosecutions Lord Macdonald and Labour's Baroness Smith, proposes setting up a committee of MPs and peers to consider whether the stateless policy should go ahead.

With a mere whimper, the government has released its controversial report (pdf) on the effects of immigration on ‘native UK employment’. Following Newsnight’s revelations that the report was being ‘held back’, Labour demanded its release. 24 hours later, it was put online while Theresa May was informing MPs of an inquiry into undercover policing after revelations about the treatment of Stephen Lawrence's family. Here are the top five things you need to know from the paper: 1. There’s minimal evidence of migrants taking British jobs The Home Office report titled ‘Impacts of migration on UK native employment' reveals there is ‘relatively little evidence’ of British workers being displaced — i.e.

In his Oscars acceptance speech Steve McQueen declared he was dedicating the award for his film 12 Years A Slave to 'all the people who have endured slavery. And to the millions of people who still suffer slavery today'. His words will no doubt cause shock and surprise; to many it will seem scarcely credible that slavery can exist in our modern age. Modern slavery is an evil which is happening around the world today – including here in Britain. Across this country in restaurants, shops, brothels, nail bars and on illegal drugs farms are women, men and children, being held against their will, and forced into a life of slavery and abuse. This Government is determined to stamp out this appalling crime.

David Cameron and his political aides are reportedly stalling over reform of stop-and-search powers because they fear it will dilute the Tories' tough-on-crime message. But this means that Labour, circling like vultures for any waft of political roadkill, have swooped. Yvette Cooper has written to Theresa May offering Labour's support in getting reform of the powers. Cooper says: 'I hope that you will not give in to the Prime Minister’s opposition to change. Everyone agrees that the police need to have powers to stop and search individuals suspected of crime or to prevent a serious threat. Intelligence-led targeting of suspected criminals helps to cut knife crime and youth killings. This is the problem with dithering.

One of the risks for Theresa May in her battle with Number 10 over reform of stop-and-search powers is that the Home Secretary loses some of the capital she has built up with BME voters over the plans. Last summer, black newspaper The Voice ran an edition suggesting that Labour could be losing the black vote and specifically pinpointed May's work on stop-and-search as a sign that the Tories were starting to appeal to groups they'd previously alienated. But this week May is back in The Voice with an op-ed on deaths in custody. You can click on the image to view the article in full. It is significant, though, that the Home Secretary is unable to mention her work on stop-and-search reforms.