Uk politics

What are we supposed to make of Boris Johnson? I mean, are we supposed to pay attention to what Boris actually says? Or is he permitted to play the game of politics by different rules? That is, the sort of stuff that applies to other politicians does not apply to Boris because the Mayor of London is a great entertainer and thus granted some kind of relief from the usual rules of responsibility. Just asking, you know. Consider his recent remarks about Tony Blair and the Iraq War. During an appearance on LBC last week, the Mayor appeared to endorse the fashionable daft idea that Mr Blair should be tried

Why is David Cameron so confident that he’ll get what he wants from his renegotiation of Britain’s relationship with Europe? Today on the Andrew Marr Show he managed to advocate Britain voting ‘yes’ in the 2017 referendum before he’s even started changing the terms of the membership voters would be backing. His reasoning for this was firstly that ‘I’m someone who has a very positive, optimistic plan for this country’ (a convenient contrast with Ukip), and secondly because he has a good track record of getting what he wants in Europe. listen to ‘David Cameron on the Andrew Marr Show’ on Audioboo

Miliband has also been busy ‘looking at options’ for renationalising Britain’s railways at the end of current franchise contracts. This is yet another of what I have called Labour’s ‘targeted tweets’ designed to please trade unions and pick off loose voters — in this case disgruntled south–eastern commuters. What it’s not is a credible, costed policy. Even Ed Balls is said to be distancing himself from such a retrograde idea, while Martin Griffiths, chief executive of the Stagecoach transport group, rightly called it ‘a one-way ticket to higher taxes’ and others in the industry point out that there could be no quicker way to kill existing plans for investment in

What a funny, contradictory week it has been for Labour’s campaign machine. First Ed Miliband told the Evening Standard that he had greater intellectual self-confidence than the Prime Minister – and won praise in the Spectator’s leading article for being someone who does indeed have the courage of their political convictions these days. Then he seemed so confident of his policies that he chose to needle David Cameron with one of them at Prime Minister’s Questions. But then he seemed to have a crisis of confidence and decided to produce a party-political broadcast that, er, didn’t mention anything Labour is up to at all. When I blogged about this latest

[audioplayer src=”http://traffic.libsyn.com/spectator/TheViewFrom22_8_May_2014_v4.mp3″ title=”James Forsyth and Isabel Hardman look forward to the general election next year” startat=766] Listen [/audioplayer]In almost a decade as Conservative leader, David Cameron has tended to avoid talking about his political philosophy. He has presented himself as a pragmatist, suspicious of anything ending in ‘-ism’ — and the very opposite of a swivel-eyed ideologue. There is something to be said for this, but it raises the great question: what is a Conservative government for? There was no clear answer at the last election and so no clear result from that election. Voters had turned away from Labour, but were not quite sure how their lives would be

One of the striking things about the next election is how what is going on at the macro level looks so different from what is happening at a micro level. On the macro front, things seem to be moving the Tories’ way. The economy is growing at a good clip and that is set to continue until polling day and David Cameron has a considerable advantage on the question of who would make the best Prime Minister. But to return to the micro, it is easier to see seats where Labour might gain from the Tories rather than the other way round. Ask even the most optimistic Tories what constituencies