Uk politics

It’s time to find out which parties are in the money, thanks to the latest Electoral Commission information on party donations. According to the figures for Q1 2014, the Tories have received £6.7 million in donations (up from £3.7 million in Q1 2013) and Labour £4.4 million (compared with £3.7 million last year). It’s not surprising that donations are up because we've entered an important election season. Most of the donors are not new, so here are the top five donations to the Conservative party in 2014 so far, compared with last year: [datawrapper chart="http://static.spectator.co.uk/ETr2q/index.html"] Michael Hintze: £1.

Oh Lord Howell, you’ve done it again. Offending the North of England once wasn’t enough, so he’s had a second go — warning today that the Conservative party will lose votes in their heartlands if fracking goes ahead. In an online article for the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security, George Osborne’s father-in-law lambasts the government’s fracking plans: ‘Trying to start in southern England, and in the home counties, or in rural and countryside areas anywhere, north or south, is a guarantee of longer delays, higher costs and increased hostility from both green left and countryside right.

'Utter fucking bollocks'. In case that's not clear enough for you, the suggestion that Alistair Darling is being replaced as the head of the Better Together campaign is, as one insider puts it, 'absolute horseshit'. Douglas Alexander, the man replacing Darling according to the Daily Mail, was at the Better Together HQ in Glasgow earlier today and, I understand, mildly surprised to learn of his elevation. Then again, the Mail only reports that there will be 'no formal announcement of a change' merely a 'secret agreement' that Alexander should effectively supplant Darling. So secret, however, that no-one involved appears to have heard of it.

What will become of the other big coalition row that's burning away alongside free schools? David Cameron was asked today about the plans to introduce mandatory sentences for repeat knife offences, and made some very supportive noises again, which the Tories signed up to Nick de Bois' amendment to the Criminal Justice and Courts Bill think is a sign that they've made the right decision. He suggested that Nick Clegg could change his mind about it - and some have taken this as a sign that there's a compromise on the cards. The Conservatives tell me they are 'looking carefully' at de Bois' amendments, but the Lib Dems say they haven't heard of any compromise being offered and they will only accept a deal that has evidence behind it that it would cut knife crime.

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.

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 better trains.

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 offering from Labour on Wednesday, I said it was an example of class war with wit and panache.

[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 better under the Conservatives.