Uk politics

Tuesday

James Forsyth

Darling sells himself as a cost-cutter

Alistair Darling’s speech today gives one a good idea of what Labour’s pitch is going to be this autumn. He stresses the importance of a strong, active government and argues that Labour will cut costs but not services. As he puts it, ‘Some seem in a hurry to cut services. We are focussing on cutting costs.’ He also takes a pop at the Tory position on inheritance tax: “I cannot accept that cutting inheritance tax for the few is a greater priority than getting people into work or investing in public services.” The inheritance tax pledge is fairly small beer in revenue terms but it is a big issue in terms of perception.

Peter Hoskin

One giant leap for David Cameron?

It's a busy day here at Spectator Towers, so we'll have more on Cameron's speech on "cutting the cost of politics" later.  For now, here's Sky's edited footage, and you can find a great summary over at ConservativeHome.

Peter Hoskin

Will Polly Toynbee have to eat a rack of hats?

In today's Guardian, Polly Toynbee sets out a shopping list of policies by which Labour could "set national politics alight"; everything from personal carbon trading to bringing back media ownership rules.  But she adds that she'll "happily eat a rack of hats if any of this happens". In which case, part of me thinks that Toynbee may have to start investing in some hats and some ketchup, as I wouldn't be massively surprised if Labour did put its name to one of her proposals.  Namely, this one: "Spread the pain of the recession: make the coming 50% top tax rate start at £100,000, as those in good jobs are doing well with lower prices and mortgages." Why so?

Peter Hoskin

Labour’s cutting confusion

Yesterday, the Guardian told us that the health and overseas aid budgets wouldn't be spared from Labour cuts.  But, today, Steve Richards suggests that may not be the case: "The preliminary manoeuvring begins today when the Chancellor delivers a lecture on the principles that will guide the Government's approach, in effect arguing that while the Tories 'wallow' in the prospect of spending cuts he will take a more expedient approach, in terms of timing, pace, depth and in his view that the Government can still play a creative role as an enabler in the delivery of public services. But even this early message is hazy.

Monday

Peter Hoskin

Alan Duncan demoted from shadow cabinet

So was the "rations" video a gaffe too far?  The news has just come in that Alan Duncan has been demoted from the shadow cabinet, going from shadow leader of the Commons to shadow prisons minister.  Having spoken to various Tory sources, I understand that the decision was made in an "amicable" meeting between Duncan and Cameron – where the former acknowledged he has become a "lightning conductor" for public anger over expenses – and that, apparently, Duncan is "relaxed and relieved" to be working under Dominic Grieve. Some people might be surprised at the timing: many expected Cameron to hold off until next year, so as not to rile any backbenchers who broadly agreed with Duncan on expenses.

James Forsyth

New Com Res poll has the Tories 16 points ahead

Andrew Grice has just blogged about a new poll in the Indy tomorrow which has the Tories 16 points ahead. The poll also shows that the majority of the population favour scrapping Trident. However, the public wants real term increases in health and education spending every year.

James Forsyth

The dangers of the government’s “mic-strike”

Jackie Ashley complains in her column today about Labour misters going on ‘mic-strike’ saying that it will lead to Labour being beaten so badly that it might not be able to come back. Ashley is speaking for a lot of people in the Labour party, one hears frequent complaints these days about Minister who are prepared to pick up the cheque each month but not to put in the hard yards. The consequences of ‘mic-strike’ were evident this morning. William Hague was on the Today Programme talking about the latest revelations concerning the government’s relations with the Gaddafi regime but no Foreign Office minister was prepared to do a response. So, Ed Balls—who was on to do an interview about academies—had to answer the questions on Libya.

Peter Hoskin

Are the Tories actually doing ok in the North?

Over at the indispensable UK Polling Report, Anthony Wells runs the rule over the latest Telegraph/YouGov poll: "The Telegraph today has looked at their Yougov poll and decided it shows the Conservatives doing badly in the North. For what it’s worth, it doesn’t even do that - it shows the Conservatives 2 points behind in the North, an aggregate of government regions in which they trailed the Labour party by 19 points in 2005 - so it actually shows a swing to the Conservatives of 8.5 points in the North, marginally better than this poll suggests they are doing in the country as a whole. That, however, is beside the point, since even if the Telegraph had correctly interpreted what the figure meant, it would still be meaningless.

Harry Weskin

An apology for Alan Turing

In early August this year, John Graham-Cumming, a computer programmer, presented a petition to the government asking to give the war time hero and scientific genius, Alan Turing, a posthumous apology for his prosecution in 1952. So far it has gained over 29,000 signatories (it only needed 500 to gain a response). Another petition was set up allowing people resident outside the UK to show their support, and there’s another 10,000 signatories on that one. I couldn’t urge you more strongly to add your own name to the list. Turing was one of the most important and innovative scientists of the 20th century- a genius and a national hero.

Peter Hoskin

Meekly does it

You wait days to see the word "meekly" in print, and then it crops up twice at once.  Today's Sun reports on a Jon Cruddas speech tomorrow, in which he claims that: "[Labour] seem to be meekly accepting defeat, unable to show what we believe in... ...We have only months to get this right, otherwise we will go down to catastrophic defeat." While Jackie Ashley develops the same theme in a piece for the Guardian, highlighting the same Cruddas quote along the way. The Cruddas intervention is significant mainly because of its timing.  The MP for Dagenham has clarified his views on Labour's plight before now (including in the latest New Statesman), but with only a few weeks to go until the Labour party conference, this is bound to ruffle a few feathers.

James Forsyth

The government contradicts itself on Megrahi

David Miliband on the Today Programme on September 2nd: “We did not want him [Megrahi] to die in prison.” Ed Balls on the Today Programme on September 7th: “None of us wanted to see the release of al-Megrahi” Considering that Megrahi was sentenced to life imprison for his role in the Lockerbie bombing, I cannot see how both of these statements of the government’s view can be correct. If the government did not want him to die in prison, it wanted him to be released.

Peter Hoskin

Labour may outflank the Tories on health and overseas aid spending – but will struggle to do so on reform

If you want some insights into where Labour are going next, then do read this story in today's Guardian.  The main points are that Brown and Darling have agreed not to spare the health and international development budgets from cuts; that Labour's public spending cuts will be set out over the next couple of months, beginning with a couple of speeches this week; and that Labour wants to frame its cuts as a return to the public service reform agenda.  As one "cabinet source" tells the paper: "The new economic context is a challenge for us, but New Labour in its original form never saw spending more money as the only solution. We need to revisit the original New Labour approach of public service reform.

Sunday

James Forsyth

Unite not united about its support for Labour

To my mind the most interesting political story of the weekend is tucked away inside The Sunday Times. Jonathan Oliver reports that Unite, a trade union which donates huge sums of money to Labour, might be taken over by those who believe that the union should stop funding Labour.  (The new leadership would not be in place this side of the election, though. Labour will still be able to rely on Unite’s help during the campaign). Unite provides 15 percent of Labour’s funding and the loss of this money after an election defeat would be painful for Labour financially.

David Blackburn

Gadaffi was the magnet that sent the government’s moral compass awry

The al-Megrahi story has rolled on for two weeks, and CoffeeHousers have probably had more than their fill; but every morning brings new revelations that undermine the government’s position further. Today, the Sunday Times reports that Gordon Brown, having been in favour of such a deal initially, vetoed the proposal that Libya pay compensation to IRA victims who were killed with arms supplied by Gadaffi. In a letter to the victims’ lawyer, dated 7 October 2008 (around the time Alex Salmond urged Jack Straw to take advantage of the fact that the PTA had stalled by renegotiating the agreement to exclude the Lockerbie bomber), Brown wrote: “The UK government does not consider it appropriate to enter into bilateral discussion with Libya on this matter.

Peter Hoskin

Another smear plot story to damage Gordon Brown

After the abortive plot to smear Richard Dannatt, you'd have thought Labour would have learnt their lesson: that it's often politically foolish, not to mention indecent, to pick petty fights with the military top brass.  But - what's this? - today's Mail on Sunday reports that certain Labour figures may have been priming another smear campaign against Dannatt's successor, General Sir David Richards: "The threat to target the General, who took up his new job just nine days ago, was one of the real reasons that Labour MP Eric Joyce resigned as an aide to Defence Secretary Bob Ainsworth last week.

Peter Hoskin

Question time for the BNP

The Beeb's admission that they have invited Nick Griffin onto a future episode of Question Time is causing quite a stir.  Two main questions are emerging from it all.  First, should the BBC give a platform to the BNP?  And, second, should other politicians appear on a show with BNP figures?  The Tories have already said they're "very happy" to put forward a shadow cabinet member to debate Griffin, while Labour are wrestling with their "custom" not to share a platform with the BNP. My take on each question is that, first, the Beeb aren't wrong to give the BNP a platform.  Personally, I find the party's views and its politics repellent, but the fact remains that British voters have given them two seats in the European Parliament.

Peter Hoskin

Another Darling vs Brown battle

Well done, Alistair.  After taking on Brown over the crude "Labour investment vs Tory cuts" dividing line - and winning - it sounds as though the Chancellor is challenging another of the PM's lies: that the government's "stimulus" measures have "saved 500,000 jobs" during the recession.  According to the Mail on Sunday, Darling has told the PM to stop repeating this claim because it can't be substantiated, and he's resisting having it put in the Budget, too. As soon as the government started mentioning "500,000 jobs", Westminster's lie detectors started sounding; especially as it gradually morphed from "up to 500,000" to "at least 500,000".

Saturday

James Campbell

Blair the chameleon?

A new book on John Howard's government, by the veteran Australian politcal journalist Paul Kelly, has a nice account of the Australian PM's first encounter with Tony Blair: "At one point John Howard, trying to be clever, asked Tony Blair: 'What are you going to do with the Thatcher legacy?' Blair paused, he sat up straight, extended his arms and broke into a huge grin. 'I'm going to take the lot,[ he chortled. Blair laughed but Howard seemed stunned. It wasn't the answer he expected. On his return to the hotel Howard was fuming. 'That man's a bloody chameleon. He doesn't stand for anything,' Howard declared.

David Blackburn

Straw: Megrahi included in PTA because of trade concerns 

One question that arises from the publication the Lockerbie documents is why Jack Straw suddenly decided against excluding al-Megrahi from the PTA? Straw justified his change of heart on the grounds of "overwhelming national interests", though trade and commercial interests were not a contributing factor in that calculation, a point he reiterated last weekend. But, in an interview with the Telegraph today, Straw contradicts himself: '"Yes, it (trade deals with Libya) was a very big part of that (including al-Megrahi in the PTA). I'm unapologetic about that. Libya was a rogue state. We wanted to bring it back into the fold and trade is an essential part of it - and subsequently there was the BP deal.

James Forsyth

Number 10’s flawed plan

Andrew Grice has an interesting column in the Independent today laying out Number 10's plans for an autumn fightback. The six-step strategy is as follows: "1. Labour will focus on the policy choice between the two main parties because the Tories are more vulnerable on policy than their current opinion poll lead suggests. The Tories are perceived by the public not to have any policies. 2. The focus on Labour's record and future plans will allow it to close the poll gap. 3. As an economic recovery begins, the Government's approach will be seen to have stopped recession turning into depression. 4.