Uk politics

Let's be honest, just for a moment. The Rochester and Strood by-election has been a disgrace. It has been a sewer race during which the two leading protagonists have done their best to demonstrate their lack of fitness for office. In this, if nothing else, they have been successful. I wouldn't expect anything better from Mark Reckless and Ukip. We know who they are; the type of people they are. So it's no great surprise that Reckless is happy to allow people to think Ukip's revolution will lead to the repatriation of immigrants. As usual, Ukip are living down to expectations. But so, alas, are the Conservatives. Their own candidate, Kelly Tolhurst, is just as repellent as Mr Reckless.

Who is tougher on immigration? Neither the Tories nor Labour want to be left behind by Ukip, and have descended into an arms race over who can best crack down on EU migration. Today Ed Miliband's party launched a two-pronged attack on the subject, with Yvette Cooper speaking in the morning about her plans to hire 1,000 additional border guards by imposing a charge on visitors from certain countries including the US, and Rachel Reeves announcing plans for a clampdown on EU migrants claiming out-of-work benefits. Amusingly, Reeves gave her policy to the MailOnline as an exclusive, just a few days after Ed Miliband spoke about dark forces out to get the Labour party.

A week after uproar in the Commons over the vote on the European Arrest Warrant that was or wasn't a vote, depending on what you fancied believing, Theresa May faced MPs at Home Office questions where she was rather quickly pulled up on that debacle. Shadow Home Office minister David Hanson asked why the House of Lords did get a vote on the European Arrest Warrant when MPs were denied the opportunity last week.

Mainstream politicians still aren't sure how to talk about Ukip. There's the question of whether the party's European election and by-election successes will power them to a good result at the 2015 election, or whether this protest movement will fade a little by the time voters start thinking about the sort of government they like. There's the question of whether Ukip is borrowing members of each mainstream party's 'core vote', or whether neither the Tories nor Labour should consider voters 'theirs' any more anyway. And then there's the question of how to talk about Ukip. Most senior politicians are agreed that you can't call people who vote for Ukip fruitcakes or closet racists. But the question still lingers of how to approach the Ukip leadership.

Philip Hammond’s interview in The Telegraph this morning is striking for several reasons. First, Hammond admits that Britain isn’t going to regain full control of its borders in the renegotiation. As he puts it, ‘“If your ambition is that we have total unfettered control of our own borders to do what we like, that isn’t compatible with membership of the European Union, it’s as simple as that. And people who advocate that know jolly well it is not compatible with membership of the European Union. So if that’s what you want, you’re essentially talking about leaving the European Union.”   But he does seem to think that agreement on something that delivers similar results to a quota system is possible.

The Conservatives have released a rather silly leaflet for the Rochester by-election contrasting Mark Reckless with their candidate Kelly Tolhurst. As if to highlight that it might be a silly leaflet, it features the phrase 'the straight choice', which some thought had gone out of fashion in 1983. Then it goes through Tolhurst's local credentials, followed by Reckless's Establishment background. You can see what they're trying to do here, which is to undermine Ukip's anti-Establishment pitch. That's why the Conservatives held a postal primary to select their new candidate once Reckless had defected.

This is the text of a speech delivered by Sir John Major in Berlin. Thank you for your kind invitation.  I feel privileged to be here to talk about the future relationship of the UK and her European partners. Often, on these occasions, speakers deliver their messages delphically;  almost in code.  But this evening I wish my message to be clear.  I do not wish to be misunderstood or misinterpreted.  The issue at stake is too important. And the timing is ironic. Twenty-five years ago this week, the Berlin Wall came down.  German was reunited with German – and an arbitrary and brutal division of Europe was, at last, at an end. It was a great moment in European history – a triumph of freedom over repression.