Tories

I suspect that there’ll be a few MPs and peers nervously waiting for 9pm on Thursday night. For this is when the Panorama special on parliament and lobbying, which has already caused Patrick Mercer to resign the Tory whip, will be broadcast. Today’s Telegraph contains details of the accusations surrounding Mercer. The paper alleges that the MP has been paid £4,000 by a fake lobbying company set up by the Telegraph and the production company making Panorama. Mercer appears not to have declared this money. But he has asked a string of questions on Fiji; the paper claims that the company had told him that ending Fiji’s suspension from the Commonwealth was a priority for its clients. The paper says that Mercer declined to answer a series of questions on the matter.

Hardly a day goes by these days without a story about Boris Johnson and the Tory leadership. Yesterday, it was Andy Coulson’s revelation that David Cameron believed Boris Johnson would be after his job once he’d been London Mayor. Today, it is The Economist talking about ‘Generation Boris’, the more libertarian inclined voters who the magazine suggests will sweep him to Downing Street in 2020. Now, for Cameron having as his main leadership rival someone who isn’t an MP is not actually that bad, however infuriating some in his circle might find the press and the party’s love affair with the London Mayor.

Yesterday's Survation poll reported that UKIP (22%) are, for the moment, just two points behind the Tories (24%) and therefore and given the margin of error in these things possibly tied or even ahead of the senior governing party. Blimey!  It is understandable, therefore, that the idea we are on the brink of a Great Realignment in British (or rather English) politics is popular today. See Iain Martin's Telegraph column for an excellent example of this. He says it feels as though the right has split irrevocably. He may be right! British politics has been extraordinarily stable since the Labour party supplanted the Liberals. Nothing, really, has changed. At least, nothing of real importance and at least not in England. That can't continue forever.

Parliament is a "brothel". The state is an enterprise of "thieves" engaged in a conspiracy against "the good little people" and the "humble housewife". Time, then, for a party that will stand up for "the little man, the downtrodden, the trashed, the ripped off, the humiliated". Not, as you might suspect, the most recent UKIP manifesto but, rather, the sentiments expressed by Pierre Poujade during the run-in to the 1954 elections to the French National Assembly. Poujade's party, the Union to Defend Shopkeepers and Artisans,  shocked France's political elite by winning 2.5 million votes and sending 55 deputies to Paris.

Clearly it is not a good idea for the Prime Minister's chums to call members of the Conservative party "swivel-eyed loons". No, not even at a "private dinner party". I suspect that the identity of the "senior Conservative" who is "socially close" to David Cameron will be out by close of play Sunday and that he - it seems most unlikely it is a she - will, as James says, be removed from whatever position of responsibility he currently enjoys. I also suspect most voters will have no idea who this man is even once his name is revealed. That doesn't matter. Adrian Hilton wrote a good piece at ConservativeHome last year detailing his experiences with falling Tory membership in Beaconsfield.

I shall be on hiatus for the next week as I'm getting married on Saturday and I have an inkling that this is no time to be concerned that people are wrong on the internet. I leave you with my latest  Think Scotland column in which I consider some of the topics raised by Douglas Alexander in the Judith Hart Memorial Lecture he delivered last week. Douglas Alexander, probably the most thoughtful Scottish Labour MP (though I accept you may consider that only a minor accomplishment), delivered a typically interesting lecture last week. In it he suggested Scotland needs “a politics of opponents. Not enemies. We need a discourse of political difference, not a politics that descends into personal destruction.” Indeed.

The dust is settling from the County Council elections and, crucially, the Tory party seems to have stayed steady. Yes, David Davis has had a pop at the number of Old Etonians surrounding the PM and 20 MPs have called for a mandate referendum. But there is no sense of mass panic or revolt. Partly this is because David Cameron had already started doing the things he was going to be told to do after this result. As one Downing Street source remarks, ‘the shift is already well under way.’ He points to the tougher measures on immigration and welfare coming up in the Queen’s Speech and Number 10’s new efforts to involve Tory MPs in policy-making. Another thing steadying the Tory party’s nerves is that Labour did not do that well on Thursday.

To the relief of Conservative Campaign Headquarters, relatively few Tory MPs have taken the opportunity of the County Council election results to sound off. The most prominent exception to this rule is David Davis. Now, a DD intervention doesn’t have quite the same purchase as it used to—he’s made rather too many of them in recent years. But his comments are revealing of the huge amounts of class tension inside the Tory parliamentary party. He complains that the rebellions of Jesse Norman and Nadine Dorries have been treated differently because one went to Eton and one to state school. I suspect, though, that the actual explanation is that Dorries crafted hers to cause as much personal and political damage to the Prime Minister as possible.

The result is now in from South Shields. As expected, Labour have held the seat. Ukip have come second, with the Tories third and the Liberal Democrats a spectacularly bad seventh. Ukip’s second is more impressive when you consider that they didn’t even stand in the constituency in 2010. It is a sign that they are fast becoming the default protest party across England. Only a handful of county councils are counting overnight, and they are all Tory controlled. But John Curtice, the elections expert, has already told the BBC that Ukip looks like doing as well as the polls suggested. At 12.15am, Ukip is averaging 26% in the BBC’s key wards.

UKIP are buoyant and, all of a sudden, everyone's favourite protest-group. In a curious way, the confirmation that many of their candidates really are boggle-minded, eyes-popped extremists of one stamp or another almost helps UKIP. It confirms that they're not like the other political parties and encourages people to adopt them as the Sod it, I'm just mad as hell and I'm not going to take it any more party. (These people tend not to be attracted to libertarian parties; just as well UKIP is not a libertarian party.) But UKIP should enjoy this moment while they can. They will remain a presence on the political scene and they will fare splendidly at the next elections to the european parliament. Nevertheless, Farage-Mania seems likely to have a pretty short half-life.

Politics is at least partially a matter of perspective. The same object can look very different depending upon the angle from which it is viewed. Which brings me to Brother Forsyth's latest column. I bow to no-one in my admiration for James's reporting and astute analysis. Nor do I dispute much of what he says in his analysis of David Cameron's legacy. No, what's interesting is what isn't there. The Union. I know. Scots go on and on and on about this stuff. It is true that the Caledonian gene is strong on self-absorption.

Alea iacta est. And not before time. More than a year ago and at the outbreak of this independence referendum virus I wrote an article for this magazine arguing that, crikey, there was just a hint that the Conservative and Unionist party might become relevant in Scotland again. Or, at any rate, there was an opportunity for them to do so. You see, the referendum offered Tories a chance to press the case for something they should have embraced long ago: proper fiscal autonomy within the Union. This might satisfy Scots' evident thirst for real Home Rule without needing to go to all the trouble of winding up the Union after 300 years. And - let joy be allowed to gambol briefly in the winter sunshine - Ruth Davidson today has moved towards embracing this logic.

I’ve just watched the Boris interview with Eddie Mair and I have to say, these dogs won’t hunt. Mair threw three accusations at Johnson and I think all three of them are dealable with. The first was an allegation that Boris had made up a quote, something that he lost his job at The Times for. Now, I suspect that anything in which Boris can claim the defence that he had only moved something from ‘before Piers Gaveston’s death’ to after it isn’t going to end a political career. Also considering that Boris rose to journalistic prominence after this incident, it is hard to claim that it is disqualifying. The second was about his affair with Petronella Wyatt. Again, I don’t think this is career ending stuff.

So we have our date with destiny. Scotland will march to the polls nine days after the 501st anniversary of the Battle of Flodden. September, 18th 2014. There are fewer than 600 days to go. And already the spin is starting. Stephen Noon, that smart nationalist strategist, is first out the blocks with a post asking who would stand to benefit from a No vote? His answer should not surprise you. Noon thinks David Cameron's own re-election campaign will be boosted if Scotland says no to independence: Labour and Tories may share a platform and campaign together before the vote, but as soon as the votes are counted there would be only one person in the No victory spotlight. Peer into that future and what do you see? It's David Cameron, UK PM, alone on the winner’s podium.

Today's papers make dreadful reading for anyone with an interest in modern, reformed conservatism. They are a reminder - if it were needed - that the Tory press is estranged from the Prime Minister. Mr Cameron has played his part in the breakdown of relations (his behaviour over press-regulation has hardly helped) but he is hardly the only guilty party. Today is one of those days you look at the headlines and just wonder what decade it is. An Insult To Stay At Home Mothers screams the Mail. The Telegraph is only modestly more restrained: PM's 'slur' on stay-at-home mothers. Good lord, you may think and wonder, what on earth Mr Cameron has done now? Perhaps he has branded stay-at-home mothers a collection of selfish, workshy misfits?

Reading the Hacked Off memo on how to lobby Tory MPs is to be inducted into a wholly cynical world view. It declares, ‘These people are likely to be people you instinctively distrust, dislike and despair of. If they are what we need to win, however, we must understand their value and not confuse our values with their intentions’. The memo, leaked to the Mail on Sunday, reveals that Hacked Off think that the Tory MPs who support them are likely to be ‘social authoritarians’, those ‘who have suffered at the hands of the press themselves’ or those who ‘simply want to bring David Cameron down’. This memo is also explicit that Hacked Off’s aim is ‘an independent statutory regulator with punitive powers’.

Lynton Crosby spoke to Tory MPs this evening about the imporance of party discipline. With the Chief Whip in the chair, meetings of the Tory parliamentary party are normally fairly loyalist events. Tonight’s was no exception and with David Cameron and Lynton Crosby in attendance there was an even greater incentive to good behaviour. I’m told that James Morris, who sits for a West Midlands marginal, earned cheers when he implored colleagues to remember that when they sound off, they hurt those like him who are trying to cling on to their majorities. Kris Hopkins, the no nonsense leader of the 301 Group, complained about ‘self indulgent buffoons’ who keep popping up to tout themselves as alternative leaders.