Uk politics

Saturday

Peter Hoskin

A ceasefire in the VAT war?

From our UK edition

Has another dividing line faded into the sand?  It sure looks like it, going off this Times report on how both Labour and the Tories are considering hiking VAT to 20 percent.  If you recall, it was thought that Brown blocked Alistair Darling's plan to introduce the rise in last year's Pre-Budget Report - and all so he could attack the Tories over reports that they would do similar.  The PM will find it a lot harder to stage that attack after this morning. A few weeks ago, the rumour was that Labour would make keeping VAT at 17.5 percent a "main election pledge".  Whether that pledge now appears, or not, will say a lot about the shifting balance of power between Brown and his Chancellor.

Friday

Peter Hoskin

Darling enters election mode

From our UK edition

There must be something about stepping back onto Scottish soil that invigorates Alistair Darling, because his Edinburgh speech is one of the most political and confrontational he has delivered for some time.  Sure, Darling is a Labour man, so it's part of his job to oppose the Tories.  But, compared to his Cabinet colleagues, he's normally so restrained about it.  Here, though, the gloves are well and truly off. The Chancellor calls Cameron a "real risk to Scotland's future," and throws in a dash of Thatcher-baiting ("The Tories ... are as out of touch now as they were 30 years ago").  But, really, there are two passages worth dwelling on, for what they might tell us about Labour's election campaign.

Fraser Nelson

The social, moral, and economic case for smaller government

From our UK edition

Ten days on and Danny Finkelstein still seems to be upset with me for my Keith Joseph lecture, where I said the Tories risked being ensnared by Brown's 'investment v cuts' rhetoric. For reasons that I'm still not quite sure of, Danny hates the idea of cuts. He may have (and I hope he didn't) take it personally when I said it was precisely this attitude amongst the Conservatives that created the climate for the fiscal crisis Britain is now facing. Over the last decade, Brown increased spending by 16 percent of GDP (see graph below)- not only faster than any developed country, but faster than any major country of the postwar period. Why? What was the rush? Germany and Japan in the 30s jacked up their state spending to a similar degree, but they had their reasons.

David Blackburn

The hunt for Hoon’s successor

From our UK edition

Not the most arresting headline I grant you, but bear with me. Geoff Hoon’s political corpse is still warm (well, lukewarm as it’s Hoon), but the search for his successor is underway. The indefatigable Paul Waugh has the runners and riders: John Knight (the leader of Ashfield District Council), James Connell (Hoon’s former SpAd) and Michael Dugher (another former Hoon SpAd who is now Brown’s Chief Political Spokesman). Mischievously, Waugh asks: ‘Will Labour insist on all-women shortlist? And if not, why not?’ Why not indeed? Perhaps Joanne Cash could complete her volte face and stand for Labour. What strikes me most about Waugh’s list is that all of the candidates are ‘career politicians’.

David Blackburn

The Tories’ meddling is undermining the Unionist cause in Northern Ireland

From our UK edition

The Times reports that Owen Paterson, the Tories’ Northern Ireland spokesman, will review the process by which the Northern Ireland First Minister is appointed – by creating a Northern Irish executive and official opposition. The prospect of what Paterson describes as a “voluntary coalition”, presumably between the Unionist parties, has the potential to keep Sinn Fein permanently in opposition. Such a coalition jeopardises Cameron’s neutrality if he becomes Prime Minister, a point that Sinn Fein will exploit. The Conservatives seek to move Ulster’s politics away from sectarianism and into the mainstream, concentrating on public services. That is a welcome aim but their means are ill-conceived, stemming from a misunderstanding of Northern Irish politics.

Thursday

Peter Hoskin

Quote of the day | 11 February 2010

From our UK edition

Is it just me, or is there something grimly hilarious about The Man Who Claimed To Have Abolished Boom-And-Bust describing our recent economic turmoil as a "one-off"?  Yep, here's Brown in today's FT: "We are paying a one-off cost for globalisation." More seriously, this is the technocratic side of Brown which Downing St will hope to contain during the election campaign.  Calling the recession and its rocky aftermath a "one-off cost" is unlikely to play well with people who have lost their jobs and businesses.

Peter Hoskin

The Cameroons are fleshing out the agenda which may come to define them

From our UK edition

If you were going to craft The Most Exciting Speech Ever, then there's a good chance it wouldn't contain the phrase "Post-Bureaucratic Age," and wouldn't be delivered at the Technology-Entertainment-Design conference.  But – as James Crabtree points out in an great post over at Prospect – there are quite a few reasons to take David Cameron's speech on post-bureacracy to the, erm, Technology-Entertainment-Design conference, last night, very seriously indeed.  Not least of which is this announcement: "A Conservative government will publish all government contracts worth over £25,000 for goods and services in full, including all performance indicators, break clauses and penalty measures.

James Forsyth

Mandelson: Public sector will face cuts this year

From our UK edition

Peter Mandelson gave the Dearing memorial lecture last night and in a section responding to the criticisms of the budget cuts for higher education said:   "Much of the rest of the public sector will receive similar constraints in the course of this year or soon after." Mandleson has implied this before, most notably on Newsnight the day of the Hoon Hewitt plot. But it is a very different from the message Brown is putting out. We in the press should demand details from Mandelson about what these cuts in financial year 2010-11 might be with the same intensity that we did when the Tories said they would make in year cuts if elected. Who knows Mandelson's plans might be more ambitious than the £1.5 billion that the Tories have been able to find.

David Blackburn

Lance Price: Brown became PM when his skills were declining

From our UK edition

Gordon Brown is a creature of habit. Every morning at 7:30 he holds a telephone conference with his cabal of Shakespearean fools, who review the papers for him. I imagine a scene of domesticity, of coffee and muffins, an adoring wife and child milling about offering tactile affection – a hand on the shoulder, a kiss on the head. But then again Brown is a latter day John Knox and this morning he must have sat in pale fury as an aide summarised the extract from Lance Price’s latest book, published in the Independent. Price, Andrew Rawnsley and Peter Watt share the same lexicon. ‘Unforgivable’, ‘not a nice place for people to work’, ‘psychologically flawed?

David Blackburn

The White House is bluffing

From our UK edition

The Atlantic reports that the White House is considering altering intelligence sharing agreements with Britain in the light of the Binyam Mohamed case. White House spokesman Ben LaBolt briefed: "The United States government made its strongly held views known throughout this process. We appreciate that the UK Government stood by the principle of protecting foreign government intelligence in its court filings. We're deeply disappointed with the court's judgment today, because we shared this information in confidence and with certain expectations." I detect a bluff. Britain and the US share information on an hourly basis, providing an essential understanding in the combined operation against al Qaeda.

Wednesday

James Forsyth

The separation of powers

From our UK edition

If you want to understand what the Cameroon's are thinking, Danny Finkelstein is essential reading. He used to work with them and he thinks like them, there is almost a mind meld between him and them.  His column today is all about why it would make more sense to actually separate out parliament and the executive and elect the head of state. I'm rather sympathetic to this point of view, but I don't think the Tories will do anything this radical even if they talk about it in private.   One thing they might well do, though, is have ministers who aren't members of either the Commons or the Lords. The argument goes that the current arrangements aren't good for either the executive or the legislature.

James Forsyth

The death tax ads are the sort of hardball politics the Tories should play

From our UK edition

I must admit to rather liking the Tory death tax ads. They are the kind of hardball aggressive politics that the Tories need to master if they are going to win this election. Are they dishonest? Well, I think in the grand political scheme of things they qualify as fair: Brown won't rule this out and it is definitely an option Labour is considering so it is fair game. If this attack is out of bounds, then so is most of the dossier Labour produced on Tory spending plans at the beginning of the year. The other thing that really infuriates me about this whole debate is the idea that the responsible thing to have done would have been for the three main parties to hammer out some compromise deal and then just present it to the public.

James Forsyth

A comic tale with serious undertones

From our UK edition

The Joanne Cash affair is the kind of story you couldn't make up. But once you get beyond the comic details there are a few things worth taking seriously. First, CCHQ has not covered itself in glory during this episode. It was aware of the problem but rather than dealing with it, it attempted to massage the situation. If CCHQ had acted decisively, this problem could have been resolved a fortnight ago without all this publicity and damage to the party. CCHQ's performance hardly fills one with confidence about whether or not it has done the appropriate due diligence on its candidates all around the country.   Second, it is striking how much resentment there is to the Cameron circle even in an association so close to Westminster and Notting Hill.

Peter Hoskin

Best served cold

From our UK edition

Good spot by the FT's Jim Pickard, who has picked up on these informal minutes from the last meeting of Labour's National Executive Committee.  He's aleady rooted out some of the juiciest sections (including stuff about voting reform and the election date), so I'd suggest you head over to the FT Westminster blog for that.  But this deliciously sinister reference to the Hoon and Hewitt plot deserves repeating: "Two weeks earlier, members of the organisation committee had forcefully expressed grassroots anger at continuing outbreaks of indiscipline at senior levels and agreed that all members should be equally subject to party rules, but the NEC ended up adopting Dennis Skinner's advice to deny the troublemakers the oxygen of publicity. We may return to them after the election.

Lloyd Evans

A perky PMQs<br />

From our UK edition

The Tory graveyard poster – brilliant and shocking – cast a long shadow over PMQs today. The debate itself came down to fine judgements about the validity of the leaders’ arguments. Cameron demanded to know if Brown planned to introduce this grim levy or not. He quoted acidic comments from senior Labour figures who’ve called the tax ‘a cruel deception’, ‘badly costed’ and ‘poorly constructed.’ Brown’s response, which seems reasonable, is that the Conservatives ‘voted for this in the House and now they’re refusing to help us to give local authorities the resources they need.

David Blackburn

The Tories’ dirty tactics are dispiriting but effective

From our UK edition

This death tax levy is gutter politics at its most visceral and it’s thrilling drama. Brown's and Cameron's loathing for each other is pure soap opera, and they’re having a right old slanging match. I agree with Pete, it is dispiriting to see the Tories stoop to misrepresenting policies, the show-stopper in Brown’s repertoire. Together with Cameron’s personal attacks, the Tories have surrendered the high ground, but as Iain Martin notes is anyone really surprised? The Tories have been expecting, righty, Labour to fight a grubby election campaign and have decided to fight Brown’s mob with fire. Personal attacks appeal largely to those whose minds are settled, so I see little electoral advantage in delivering them.

Peter Hoskin

PMQs live blog | 10 February 2010

From our UK edition

Stay tuned for live coverage from 1200. 1200: And we're off, bang on time.  First question on Labour's elderly care plans.  Brown delivers a load of platitudes about how the government is committed to better care.  Even adds that he hopes for cross-party backing. 1201: Cameron now.  He leads on elderly care plans too - and how they will be funded.  With a nod to a letter in today's Times, he adds that people who will have to implement it thinks its disastrous. 1202: Brown's on fiesty, if typically disingenous, form.  He says that he "knows how [Cameron] likes personality politics".  His substantial point, though, is that the Tories supported the Bill in the Commons. 1205: Cameron effectively repeats the point with his second question.

Peter Hoskin

Has that Tory poster made Brown’s job easier in PMQs?

From our UK edition

Yesterday's Guardian story about a potential death tax would have been perfect material for Cameron in PMQs. Even after Andy Burnham's denials, there are still legitimate questions to be asked about it. For instance, would the government say that they will never propose the tax? And, if not, how will they pay for their social care guarantees otherwise? Fired across the dispatch box, these enquiries could have put Brown on the back foot. But now that the Tories have jumped the gun, and released that poster attacking a Labour policy which isn't actually a Labour policy, they've rather limited that line of questioning. If the death tax comes up, all Brown need do is point to the poster and cry foul play. He can even throw in a few words like   "misleading," for good measure.

David Blackburn

Kraft’s betrayal is Mandelson’s failure

From our UK edition

I don’t usually agree with the sage of Twickenham but he is right that Mandelson’s promise on Cadbury “melted away”. Kraft is a notoriously feckless corporation, loathed the world over. Reneging on promises is its modus operandi and the remaining 4,000 Cadbury workers are understandably concerned that the closure of Somerdale is just the trailer. Of course, government should not manage private enterprise in circumstances other than the extraordinary, but neither should it be submissive when jobs are at stake. Mandelson’s reputation as a demagogic strategist is deserved, when it comes to smooth tongued fixers he is unsurpassed. But that is his tragedy: his achievements are contained within partisan precincts.