Uk politics

Sunday

Fraser Nelson

Even Cable can’t defend the Lib Dems’ misleading poster

This poster by the LibDems is perhaps the most dishonest one of the campaign so far - and Vince Cable has pretty well admitted it to Jon Sopel on the Politics Show. Here's the exchange. Jon Sopel:  I mean let’s leave aside whether or whether not there is a black hole in the Tory’s finances. Leave that to one side. You don’t know factually, that they are going to raise VAT. That is your conjecture. St Vince Cable: It is a conjecture and it’s a reasonable assumption and I wouldn’t claim anymore than that. JS: And that £389 is a rough figure plucked... VC: "It’s a ball park estimate of what it would require in order to fill that gap, and it seems a reasonable way of expressing that argument.

Peter Hoskin

Spectator readers and professional pollsters predict a Tory majority

Underneath the IoS poll which David mentioned earlier there's a set of election predictions from professional pollsters.  Differing margins of victory aside, seven-out-of-eight of them foresee a Tory majority in a few weeks time. I mention this not just because it's worth, erm, mentioning – but because a poll of readers over at our new Spectator Live election site produced a similar result.  85 percent of you predict that the election will produce a Tory majority.  That's very almost seven-out-of-eight. I promise I won't ram Spectator Live down your collective throat every minute, but do check out the full results on this page here.

David Blackburn

Does it pay to be mendacious?

Lying is a politician's occupational hazard. The Independent on Sunday has published a Com Res poll confirming that truism. The majority of voters do not believe that David Cameron and Gordon Brown are being honest about how they will tackle the deficit. We voters resent being taken for fools. If Brown and Cameron are being disingenuous about the economy, the honest Sage of Twickenham benefits - the Liberals are storming the marginals, a hung parliament is odds-on according to some pollsters. Is Vince Cable honest about reducing the deficit? Emphatically not. One minute he’s against a VAT rise, but refuses to rule it out the next. He’s in favour of unilateral charges on banks, but not if they fund a tax break for some married couples.

Peter Hoskin

Dirtier tactics

I think we all expected this election campaign to be fought a few inches below the belt.  But, as Iain Dale and Dizzy say, Labour's tactic of mailing scaremongering leaflets to cancer sufferers is some new kind of low.  I mean, just imagine how it would feel to receive, as a cancer patient or an immediate family member, a leaflet which politicises the problem to the point of suggesting that your care would be jeapordised by voting for another party.  And then imagine how it would feel if you have been specifically targeted because of your connections with the illness, as seems to have been the case here.  Well, it defies belief that this is how the party of government is going about "restoring trust in our broken politics," or whatever they say.

Saturday

Fraser Nelson

An ICM marginals poll points to a hung parliament

The News of the World has its expensive and much-awaited ICM poll of the marginals tomorrow. There is some good news for Cameron, and some not-so-good news. First: 66 percent of voters in the marginals agree with the message "it's time for change". Bad news: a surprisingly large number think that Nick Clegg represents that change. A Lib Dem surge means that Tory swing is just 6 percent in the marginals, versus 5 percent nationally. Where is the Lord Ashcroft magic? In James's political column this week, he says the Tories had been so confident about the marginals that they reckon they need a 5-point lead nationally to win, rather than the 8-point lead previously assumed. The News of the World/ICM poll challenges that narrative.

Fraser Nelson

The Times is wrong about the Tories’ marriage tax break

Since The Times moved its leaders on to page two, they've also taken on a new vitality. For years, they were the voice of solid good sense. It was pretty difficult to disagree with them. Now, they are more polemical, more risk-taking - and more wrong. But I'm not complaining: I far prefer reading a fiesty opinion with which I disagree, than boring opinion that I nod quietly along with. And I could not disagree more with the leader today denouncing Cameron's marriage tax break. Let's kick off: "This is surely no time to be giving money away so that people can just carry on doing what they are already doing, namely being married. In a long philosophical journey in Opposition, the Tories appear to have alighted on moral authoritarianism advanced by economic interventionism.

David Blackburn

A good time to bury bad news

Sunday, Bloody Sunday. Someday the Bloody Sunday Inquiry will be published. It has taken 12 years to conduct and it has cost £200 million (about the going rate for state sponsored marriage, or Aston Villa). £2.50p per head is extortionate, so I’d quite like to see Lord Savile’s findings. I don’t expect to enjoy the experience. The report is said to confirm what was already known: confronted by an angry and possibly violent mob, heavily outnumbered British soldiers panicked and opened fire. It will be an expensive impertinence, like reading an idiot child's private school report. Anyway, the government will not publish the report until well after the election. I hate to disappoint you reader but this is not a 2010 Labour efficiency saving.

Fraser Nelson

The case for voting Conservative

Why vote for Cameron? The reasons for voting against Gordon Brown are so numerous that the positive pro-Tory reasons for voting are often lost. This week's Spectator gives you all the ammo you need to win around wavering friends, colleagues and family. We have restricted ourselves to the ten most compelling points. I summarise them below: 1. School reform. In itself, it's enough reason to vote Tory. Gove has specifically promise that within four years of a Tory government everyone will have an independent school offering to educate their kid for free. This should have been a 1981 Tory proposal, but Keith Joseph lost a battle with the civil service (after he recruited a young Cambridge graduate named Oliver Letwin to help him fight it). 2.

Peter Hoskin

How Labour and the Lib Dems are attacking the Tories’ marriage tax break

This morning, we've already seen the two primary attacks which will be used against the marriage tax break outlined by George Osborne in the Times today.  The first came courtesy of Vince Cable, who said it represents a "derisory" sum of £3 a week for those who benefit from it.  And the second was from Ed Balls – who else? – who labelled the policy as "discriminatory," because it doesn't cover every married person, and nor does it account for couples who split.  Or as he rather suggestively put it: "if your husband beats you up and leaves you you get no support." One thing worth noting is how the Tories' opponents aren't majoring on a fiscal irresponsibility angle, as they've been trying to with the national insurance cut.

Friday

Peter Hoskin

Tories remain on the front foot over national insurance

A copy of a letter that George Osborne sent to Alistair Darling today: Alistair Darling The Labour Party 39 Victoria Street London   SW1H 0HA 9 April 2010 Dear Alistair, In the course of today, the Labour Party’s economic policy has collapsed in a heap of contradictions. In the morning, you attacked our efficiency plans on the grounds that they would reduce public sector headcount – but by lunchtime your own Treasury Minister, Stephen Timms, admitted that your own spending plans meant that “there will be some job losses” (The Daily Politics, BBC 2, 9 April 2010).

Fraser Nelson

Three lessons for the Tories on immigration

The witterings of Phil Woolas about immigration yesterday - where he accused The Spectator of contorting immigration figures and double-counting immigrants - have landed him in plenty trouble. Stephen Timms was on the Daily Politics today and conceded that Woolas was talking out of his hat. They weren't our figures, they were from the ONS - and compiled under orders from Eurostat with its Labour Force Survey (LFS) scheme. Andrew Neil has written it up in a blog here. The government is at sea because even ministers in charge of the relevant departments have no idea about the scale of immigration in Britain. This wee farrago brings three lessons for the Conservatives. 1. Honesty about immigration is crucial.

Daniel Korski

Are the Tories ready for joined-up government?

The Civil Service is readying itself for a new government. The BBC has already reported a discussion of efficiency savings among senior officials. In another part of Whitehall, work is a foot on how to set up a National Security Council should the Tories win. I have in the last few weeks been interviewing ex-ministers and senior officials as research for a RUSI paper, due out soon after the election, on how to improve the government's security set-up. Traipsing around various departments, a number of interesting conclusions have come to light: - Conservative ideas for an NSC are not the same as the government's NSID committee, however much ministers say it is, but there is yet no clarity on the Tory detail of what one official called "the second layer" of reforms.

David Blackburn

Darling admits defeat …?

Curious exchange of the BBC, Alistair Darling admitted that the Tories were winning the opening stages of the campaign: "They might have got their political tactics right for the first day or so but their overall judgment is just plain wrong." Ben Brogan has more details. This looks remarkably like an admission of defeat on the politics of the National Insurance, which, considering it took Labour 10 to respond, seems an accurate assessment. Not good politics, Darling.

David Blackburn

Darling in cloud cuckoo land

Labour can’t lay a finger on the Tories over national insurance. And desperation has morphed into hysteria. Alistair Darling has just told Sky News that David Cameron contradicted George Osborne and that the Tory plan is “unravelling”. "He is going to have to find deeper cuts, some experts are saying tens of thousands of jobs will go," he said. "He's had to go on to say that he's going to have to cut which will mean job losses." Now, Cameron said: "Even after our plans for public sector pay and pensions, benefits, ID cards - yes, it's still not enough. I accept that.” But that does not contradict George Osborne, who is clear that pay freezes and low level efficiencies will make only a small impression on Brown and Darling’s mess.

Peter Hoskin

Cameron is Mr Reasonable on Today

Another day, another party leader on the Today Programme.  This time it was David Cameron, and his interrogator was Evan Davis.  My quick capsule review would be that the Tory leader did quite well, sounding measured and reasonable for most of the twenty minutes - which is certainly better than Brown managed yesterday.  But for more, read on... Unsurprisingly, Davis led on this morning's FT interview with Peter Gershon, the Tories' efficiency advisor, who has fleshed out some of the party's spending plans.  This was the most aggressive segment of the interview, with Davis asking how many job losses would be incurred by a "£2 billion saving on public sector pay rolls.

Thursday

James Forsyth

Labour’s high risk, high reward strategy on national insurance

Labour today has tried to shift the National Insurance debate from whether you should cut waste to prevent a tax rise, to whether the Tories’ sums add up. When the Tories announced their plan to avoid the worst of Labour’s NICs rise by cutting waste they made a conscious decision not to offer details on how they would make these efficiency savings. As one shadow Cabinet minister explained to me, they had no desire to repeat the experience of the James Review when they were going on Newsnight to argue the toss over individual savings. The Tories think that the argument that government can save one pound in every hundred that it spends is credible and that combined with the endorsement of two men who have advised the government on efficiency so recently is enough.

Peter Hoskin

The VAT dividing line is growing deeper

Is this a pledge we can count on?  After the Lib Dems suggested they wouldn't increase VAT earlier, the Labour Chief Whip has told ITV's Lucy Manning that his party won't either.  If so, it's quite a turnaround from when both Darling and Cable refused to rule out VAT hikes during last week's Chancellor's debate. I wouldn't be surprised if we see a LibLab pincer movement against the Tories now: the two parties who seem to have ruled out VAT hikes against the one which is being being slightly more equivocal about it.  As I said earlier, it would hardly be edifying politics.  But the real worry is if it dissuades politicians from talking sensibly about how to fill our country's fiscal black hole.

Daniel Korski

Win one for the Gipper

A Cameron government has the potential to change Britain - but not much else beside.  A Tory loss, however, could change much more. The Cameron Tories are a bellwether for Conservative movements in a number of countries, including the US. If they succeed, they will prove a powerful model for many moderate Republicans who believe their party is in an earlier post-Major phase - angry, divided and negative. If David Cameron fails to defeat Gordon Brown, few Republicans will look across to their British cousins for inspiration. The party will eschew any modernising project for a while longer and stick to their equivalent of IDS. In this scenario, the Republicans will pick up some congressional seats and governorships.

Peter Hoskin

Your guide to Labour’s latest attack

So much for the positive vision.  Labour have spent most of the day attacking the Tories and their national insurance cut.  You'd have heard Brown trying to wheel out statistics about it during his Today Programme interview. And then the PM's press conference, alongside Peter Mandelson and Alistair Darling, reduced to a How The Tories' Sums Don't Add Up session. One thing that's striking about the latest attacks is how Labour are slipping, with calculated ease, between different figures to represent the efficiency savings that the Tories hope will fund their NI policy.  Here's a quick guide to the numbers, so you know what's what: £6 billion: This is roughly how much the Tories think the Exchequer will lose from their national insurance plan.

James Forsyth

Hope springs eternal

The Tory press conference this morning, launching their plan for National Citizen Service, shows how they hope to run a two track campaign. On the one hand, they want to be hammering Labour over their plans to increase National Insurance — Cameron called it a ‘a recovery killer, an economy killer, a job killer’ and said that Labour wanted people to pay ‘taxes for government waste’. On the other, they want to be presenting hopeful, optimistic ideas like a National Citizen Service. This fusion campaigning enables the Tories both to be attacking Labour and presenting themselves as the party that is offering a positive alternative. National Citizen Service is very Cameron. He’s been toying with the idea since 2005.