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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
From our UK edition
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.
From our UK edition
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.
From our UK edition
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.
From our UK edition
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.
From our UK edition
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".
From our UK edition
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.
From our UK edition
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.
From our UK edition
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.
From our UK edition
This quote from a retired aide to General Petraeus about the British performance in Basra is, as Alex Massie says, devastating: "The British failure in Basra was not due to the conduct of British troops, which was exemplary. It was, rather, a failure by senior British civilian and military leaders to understand the political dynamics ... in Iraq, compounded by arrogance that led to an unwillingness to learn and adapt, along with increasing reluctance to risk blood and treasure to conduct effective counter-insurgency warfare... ...British commanders attempted to cut deals with local Shia leaders to maintain the peace in southern Iraq, an accommodation that was doomed to failure since the British negotiated from a position of weakness.
From our UK edition
So here it is. After rumblings that Brown is prepared to set out spending cuts - rather than hiding them away in he small print of the Budget - Alastair Darling confirms the new strategy in an interview with the Times. He doesn't actually use the word "cuts", but it amounts to that: "'As there is less uncertainty you can decide what your priorities are,' he said. 'This doesn’t mean you are going into some sort of Dark Age but we will have to decide, given what’s happened to the economy, how much we think we can afford to spend on services, how much we should be devoting to making sure we recover our fiscal position. That’s a judgment that I’m going to have to make at the Pre-Budget Report in the autumn.' ...
From our UK edition
Brown’s delivery may have been beyond sepulchral, but the content was encouraging. He laid out how Afghan stability is being bolstered by the increased activity and competence of Afghan security forces, the replacement of the heroin crop with wheat, an intensification of government in rural hinterlands and by arresting urban corruption. At least there now seems to be a degree of co-ordination between coalition and Afghan security operations, civic reconstruction and the administration of government. These are welcome changes but there is still no overarching sense of what the ‘Afghan mission’ hopes to achieve, beyond the dubious contention that it will make the West safer. As a result, a number of the initiatives Brown articulated are ill-focussed or counter-productive.
From our UK edition
Nick Clegg’s statement today on Afghanistan strongly suggests to me that by the time of the next election the Lib Dems will be for withdrawal from Afghanistan. Clegg told the BBC that: “I think there’s a tipping point where we have to ask ourselves whether we can do this job properly, and if we can’t do it properly we shouldn’t do it at all. I don’t think we are there yet,” he said. Clegg’s use of the word yet seems to be a definite hint that he is moving towards advocating withdrawal. In crude political terms, this would make a lot of sense for the Lib Dems. It would give them a distinctive policy and allow them to tap into public unease about the war.
From our UK edition
Tim Montgomerie reports that a senior source at CCHQ has said that John Bercow will not stand as an official Conservative candidate at the general election, and therefore party members will not be required to vote for him. So, will they be for or against Bercow? Councillor Netta Glover, the Buckingham Association’s deputy chairman and political officer, told me that the executive committee were “standing firm behind Mr Bercow”, and that Tory party rules stated that “anyone seeking an official nomination against the speaker would be barred by the returning officer” – so de-selection can be discounted.