Uk politics

Wednesday

James Forsyth

How the Tories will repeal the hunting ban

From our UK edition

The Guardian has a story today about how field sports enthusiasts are donating heavily to Nick Herbert, the shadow DEFRA secretary. The paper links the donations to the fact that the Tories are committed to holding a vote on the repeal of the hunting ban. As the Norwich North by-election showed, Labour will have a go at turning this into an election issue—hoping that it will aid their attempt to paint Cameron and Osborne as people most interested in looking after their wealthy friends. Norwich North suggests this attack won’t have that much cut through. But once elected, the politics of repealing the hunting act will be tricky.

Peter Hoskin

Checking up on the UK’s debt crisis

From our UK edition

Now this is engrossing in a grim kind of way.  It's the Economist's brand new Global Debt Comparison feature, and charts public debt for the entire world ($39.1 trillion dollars, at the moment), while also providing details for individual countries.  If you want a sense of the debt crisis facing this country, then just click on the info for the UK across a few years.  In 2009, it's bad enough: the Economist has us in the highest debt group, with public debt at 79.6 percent of GDP. For what it's worth, that's slightly better ratio than, say, France (83.7 percent) or Germany (87.9 percent).  But by 2011, our public debt-GDP ratio has shot up to 112.5 percent, outstripping France (102.3 percent) and almost equal with Germany (115.8 percent).

Henry Featherstone

Introducing GP charges won’t solve the primary care dilemma

From our UK edition

A common response to the impending age of austerity in the NHS is to suggest that charges are introduced for visits to the GP.  The line of reasoning adopted by MEPs and think-tanks alike is that a means-tested £20 charge will "encourage healthy, wealthier people to use the NHS only when absolutely necessary." Leaving aside the fact that such a system would cost more to administer than it would generate in revenue, a more interesting question is whether the converse holds true?  That is, whether unhealthy and poor people aren't using GP services when they should be.  The consequence of this is more profound because poor and unhealthy people tend to cost the NHS much more than few unnecessary appointments booked by the worried well.

James Forsyth

Playing the war game

From our UK edition

Over at ConservativeHome, Tim Montgomerie has written about a ‘war game’ that Portland PR held yesterday. The idea was to explore the various challenges that would face the next government. Portland had gathered together an impressive group including key Tory advisors, a senior figure from the Blair government, a former US government official, a senior military bod and a fair few hacks including yours truly. The thing that struck me once the exercise was done was just how buffeted by events the Cameron government is going to be. It will inherit a global situation that is as bad as the economic situation, if not worse, and a slew of other underappreciated problems such as the risk of an energy crunch.

Peter Hoskin

On second thoughts, maybe Labour should keep Brown in place…

From our UK edition

Over at his essential blog, Benedict Brogan says that Dave 'n' George deserve some praise for Moody's decision to retain the UK's AAA credit-rating.  His thinking: that because Messrs Cameron and Osborne have been going on about debt and the need to cut spending, investors - anticipating a Tory government - are more confident about Things to Come. A similar point is made by Edmund Conway in a comment piece for the Telegraph today: "Part of the reason the debt markets have remained relatively sanguine in the face of a staggering collapse in tax revenues and increase in the deficit is that they are assuming a Conservative victory: when the prospect of an Alan Johnson leadership challenge briefly made a hung parliament more likely, they panicked.

Peter Hoskin

Will Brown accept the TV debate challenge, after all?

From our UK edition

Kevin Maguire, who is keyed into Team Brown more than most journalists, writes that it's looking more and more likely the PM will participate in a televised party leader debate: "Talking to people in and around Downing Street I reckon the odds are shortening (if you can get odds) on Brown agreeing to a TV election debate. It's a no-brainer for a Prime Minister well behind in the polls. There's a touch of the stunt about the Sky News empty chair threat but the channel deserves credit for helping focus minds. Brown's view, I'm told, is now isn't the moment to decide or announce what he'll do in the campaign and, from where he sits, he's probably right. To say Yes would risk triggering another dose of election fever while to say No would look chicken.

Peter Hoskin

Mission accomplished for Cameron’s cost-cutting speech

From our UK edition

So what has David Cameron achieved with his speech on "cutting the cost of politics" yesterday?  Quite a lot, judging by this morning's papers.  The coverage it receives ranges from wholehearted scepticism in the Guardian to front-page celebration in the Daily Mail, but - more importantly, from a Tory perspective - it steals the thunder from Alistair Darling's public spending speech.  The Chancellor's innuendo about "nasty Tory cuts" is much less resonant when juxtaposed against the Tory leader calling for cuts in MPs' perks, whether those cuts are regarded as populist or not. What's more, Cameron has drawn quotes from Labour and the Lib Dems that may look a little silly in time.

Tuesday

James Forsyth

Cruddas’s intervention

From our UK edition

Jon Cruddas’s speech tonight poses a question that cuts right to the heart of Gordon Brown’s leadership, ‘what does Labour stand for any more?’ There is no clear answer to this question, which explains why Labour has no clear domestic policy message. The retreat into ‘the philosophical framework of the right’, Cruddas argues, means that Labour has lost its language, empathy and generosity. Considering Cruddas’s decision to stay on sidelines during the most recent leadership plot played a key part in saving Brown, this is a pretty devastating assessment (it also suggests that Cruddas made the wrong call in not intervening then).

James Forsyth

Darling sells himself as a cost-cutter

From our UK edition

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?

From our UK edition

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?

From our UK edition

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

From our UK edition

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

From our UK edition

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

From our UK edition

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”

From our UK edition

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?

From our UK edition

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

From our UK edition

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

From our UK edition

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

From our UK edition

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

From our UK edition

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.