Uk politics

That David Cameron is reportedly considering committing to minority government above coalition is a strong message to his backbenchers that he's not preparing to hop back into bed with Nick Clegg and co in 2015. They have been growing a little feverish about the idea, and ministers have made it known in the party that they would vote against a coalition in any secret ballot on a new deal (provided, of course, that there is a secret ballot). This is good for party relations in the straightforward sense that Cameron is signalling to his backbenchers that he doesn't like the Lib Dems as much as they suspect he does, but also because he is to a certain extent signalling that he is prepared to do business with his own MPs, even though that will not be a walk in the park.

David Cameron says he wants the case that he makes for the Union and against Scottish independence to be 'unremittingly positive'. Is it? In an interview with BBC News, the Prime Minister said: 'That’s my whole argument, which is go back to the big picture, and I think this family of nations is better off together. Not just is better off in the United Kingdom, but we in the rest of the United Kingdom think we’re better off with Scotland that we want you to stay. That argument is one that is unremittingly positive about the success of this family of nations and how we should keep this family together.

The government's legislative programme is pretty light at present. But the Bill that is going to spark the most interest this week is destined to go nowhere at all. It's a Ten Minute Rule Bill, introduced by Tory MP Ben Gummer this Tuesday, and calls for National Insurance to be renamed the 'Earnings Tax'. What's in a name? Well, there are two good reasons why this Bill which won't go anywhere (Ten Minute Rule motions are simply used as a way of making a point and drawing attention to an issue) has, as I understand it, already gained a great deal of attention and sympathy at the highest levels of government. The first is the reason that Gummer cites for introducing the motion in the first place: transparency.

I understand that Nick Clegg is to challenge Nigel Farage to a debate on Britain’s EU membership ahead of the European Elections this May. The Liberal Democrat leader will issue this challenge imminently. Clegg’s decision to challenge Farage to a debate is all part of his party’s effort to try and turn the European Elections into a contest between the Liberal Democrats, championing In, and Ukip, who are for out. Those close to Clegg hope that a head to head debate between these two will highlight this contrast. They alos expect that it will put pressure on the Tories and Labour to be clearer about where they stand on the European Question. Nigel Farage has little choice but to accept Clegg’s challenge.

Before the European Elections in May, don’t expect either David Cameron or Ed MIliband to engage with Nigel Farage. Both the Tory and Labour leaders think that the best strategy for dealing with Ukip and its leader is to deny them the oxygen of publicity. Nick Clegg, by contrast, is desperate for a scrap with the Ukip leader. Clegg’s rationale is that the more fights he can pick with Farage, the more he can turn the European Elections into a fight between In—led by Clegg and the Liberal Democrats—and Out, championed by Farage and his party. Clegg hopes that this polarised contest will prevent a total wipeout of Lib Dem MEPs. Being pro-European might, to put it mildly, not be the most popular cause in Britain but it is a lot more popular than the Liberal Democrats.