Uk politics

Thursday

David Blackburn

Farage to stand against Bercow

From our UK edition

The Telegraph’s Andrew Porter reports that UKIP leader Nigel Farage will stand against Speaker Bercow in Buckingham at the next election. Farage explained his decisision: “This man represents all that is wrong with British politics today. He was embroiled in the expenses saga and he presides over a Parliament that virtually does nothing.” Farage has more than an outside chance of winning this very safe Tory seat. It’s fair to say that Bercow’s expense claims and his election as Speaker, facilitated almost exclusively by Mr Brown’s MPs, have not endeared him to the party faithful – even Tim Montgomerie confides he’d be tempted to vote UKIP if he were registered in Buckingham.

Wednesday

David Blackburn

Why did the SNP do it?

From our UK edition

Looking through correspondence published yesterday, it is clear that Alex Salmond and Kenny MacAskill understood immediately that they would be “left to deal with the consequences” of releasing a convicted mass-murderer. But, after Mr Megrahi had dropped his appeal, and therefore became eligible under the PTA, I can’t comprehend why the Scottish government took it upon itself to release al-Megrahi on compassionate grounds, especially given the identity of the beneficiary of this decision. The 1998 Scotland Act binds Scotland to all UK treaties. Honouring the UK Libya PTA commitment would not have impinged upon the due processes and jurisdiction of Scots law, and would have shifted the public’s ire onto Mr Salmond’s political enemies: the Labour government.

James Forsyth

The government’s handling of the al-Megrahi affair has been colossally incompetent

From our UK edition

Once one gets beyond one’s revulsion at the British government using the prospect of the release of a convicted mass murderer to grease the diplomatic skids, one is struck by the government’s incompetence during the Megrahi affair. Megrahi is the only man convicted of a bombing that killed 180 Americans—how did Whitehall think that Washington was going to react to his release? The United States is this county’s most important strategic ally and it seems bizarre to strain relations with it in the hope of improving relations with Libya. The correspondence between the Scottish Executive and the British government strongly suggests that if London had been prepared to offer this advice to Edinburgh, Megrahi would not have been freed.

Peter Hoskin

Brown’s fightback is hampered by the negative stories that hover over him

From our UK edition

So Brown has said more about the al-Megrahi case, although he hasn't said anything particularly new.  Speaking at an event to mark the government's new "Backing Young Britain" project, the PM claimed that, "There was no conspiracy, no cover up, no double-dealing, no deal on oil, no attempt to instruct Scottish ministers, no private assurances to Colonel Gaddafi".  Which is exactly the message we've heard from a string of ministers, and which has been thrown into doubt by all those published letters.  No word yet on whether Brown agreed or disagreed with Megrahi's release, when it finally came. All this exemplifies the problem that Labour have had for months now, and will continue to have for months to come.

Daniel Korski

Can Cameron learn from Wilson?

From our UK edition

Few Tories will enjoy looking back on 1974, but they may find it useful to study the second Wilson government and its successor, the Callaghan government, when it comes to the question of Europe.  Back then, we had a government coming to power in the midst of a severe economic climate, and which sought to change the pro-European course that its predecessor had set, including by re-negotiating Britain’s relationship with the EU and by appealing to fraternal parties in France and Britain. However, it ultimately ran into blades of domestic discontent and international indifference. The question is: could this end up being the story of a Conservative government from the middle of next year? Sure, there are key differences between then and now.

James Forsyth

The Sky debate could be a lifeline for Brown

From our UK edition

As the Megrahi case grows more serious by the day, one thing should be cheering up those in the Brown bunker: Sky’s plan to host a debate among the party leaders. Now, Brown might be the only party leader yet to have agreed to the debate but he is the one with the most to gain from it. If Brown is to have any hope of stopping David Cameron from winning the next election outright, he needs a game changing moment—and a debate might just produce one. The first televised leaders’ debate will be a hugely hyped event. One has to imagine that it would draw a huge TV audience and a ton of media coverage. It would provide the clunking fist with the perfect platform to land a blow on David Cameron.

David Blackburn

The Lockerbie papers

From our UK edition

Bill Rammell’s admission that the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary told the Libyans that they ‘did not want al-Megrahi to pass away in prison’ is the bombshell the government hoped to avoid. And, together with Jack Straw’s sudden decision not to exclude al-Magrahi from the PTA to protect ‘wider negotiations with the Libyans”, this disclosure requires answers from the government. David Miliband heightened the chaos the government now finds itself in on the Today programme when he very foolishly remarked: “We did not want him to die in prison”.

Tuesday

Daniel Korski

Sarkozy revs up Franco-German motor, leaving Britain behind

From our UK edition

Last week, French President Sarkozy spoke to the annual gathering of his country’s ambassadors. Since he came to power, the French leader has used the annual event to welcome his countrymen back from their holidays and garner a few headlines. This year proved no different with an attack on the Iranian regime receiving the most attention. In a powerful line, the French president pointed out: "It is the same leaders in Iran who say that the nuclear programme is peaceful and that the elections were honest. Who can believe them?" He went on to say that he thought tougher sanctions would have to be discussed if Tehran does not change its position. But the speech was boilerplate Sarkozy – expansive, energetic, and ambitious.

James Forsyth

Brown’s new dividing lines are merely muddled hypotheticals

From our UK edition

Reading the transcript of Gordon Brown’s interview with the FT one is struck by how little of a domestic policy message Brown has. Say what you like about Labour’s mantra in 2001 and 2005 of Labour investment versus Tory cuts but it was clear. By contrast, Brown’s attempt to explain his new dividing lines to the FT is distinctly muddled. Brown’s main line is that things could have been a lot worse without the government’s action. But that is, of course, a hypothetical. It also seems doubtful that the public will share this view or forget who was Chancellor in the decade before the crisis. Brown then moves on to what he thinks will be the battleground for the next election.

David Blackburn

Cameron should be wary of taking the moral high ground in opposition

From our UK edition

I’ve just re-read Cameron’s article in the Times and it contains one section that might come back to haunt him, should he become Prime Minister. He writes: ‘Many will be disgusted by the suggestion that ministers in Whitehall encouraged al-Megrahi’s release — and did so for commercial reasons. Diplomacy often involves hard-nosed backroom deals. It would be naive to think otherwise. But there need to be lines you are not prepared to cross; values you will not compromise, whatever deal you broker. I believe even to hint that a convicted terrorist could be used as makeweight for trade is a betrayal of everything that Britain stands for.’  I agree with Cameron.

David Blackburn

Cameron is the winner of the al-Megrahi scandal 

From our UK edition

It is clear that the al-Megrahi release has damaged Labour, not least because their collective refusal to condemn, or at least have an opinion on, the release of the Lockerbie bomber has confirmed that the government is totally out of touch with public opinion. On the other hand, David Cameron has played a blinder. In stark contrast to the Prime Minister’s Trappist monk act, Cameron has led this issue, voicing considered condemnations of Kenny MacAskill’s decision, the government’s reticence and the its supposedly ethical foreign policy. Cameron writes a piece in today’s Times branding the entire affair a ‘fiasco’ and a ‘failure of judgement by the Scottish government...the British government...and the Prime Minister’.

Monday

David Blackburn

But he did for the both of them with his plan of attack

From our UK edition

The tension between defence ministers and senior officers has been a running story throughout the summer, perhaps at the expense of the opinions of troops on the ground. The Times’ war correspondent, Anthony Loyd, wrote a piece today describing soldiers’ views in the wake of the Prime Minister’s visit: ‘One can only hope that if Mr Brown had braved the journey northwards from Bastion to Sangin (he didn’t), where British infantrymen are getting killed or wounded at a rate directly comparable to that of their predecessors in Western Europe in 1944, his media men would have first whitewashed the graffiti in the latrine third from the left on the northern wall. '“I dropped a Gordon” a rifleman has scrawled beside the seat.

David Blackburn

Labour’s new dividing line is a gamble

From our UK edition

Alistair Darling has long suggested that the original dividing line between the Tories and Labour concerned Labour spending, which will stimulate growth, versus Tory inaction. And last week, Darling was quoted in the Mail on Sunday setting out a new dividing line between the parties by framing the “debate in terms of our cuts being better than their cuts”. It is a stance that presupposes Britain is returning to growth thanks to the government’s strategy. And that is the message of an opinion piece, titled ‘The cure is working’, penned by Darling in this morning’s Guardian. Here’s the key section: ‘The Tories have opposed our measures every inch of the way, but I make no apology.

Sunday

David Blackburn

Labour’s tactical blunder

From our UK edition

Mike Smithson has an interesting post with how the fallout from the al-Megrahi affair is damaging Labour. He writes: ‘Where I think that Labour is going wrong here is in trying to cover up what has happened and by hiding behind the Scottish dimension. Why not come out and say that the paramount objective was energy and the need to open up new areas? A reference to Russia’s aggressive energy strategy would underline the point. What’s becoming clear is that the truth will out - why not get in with their explanation first?’ He’s right that Labour have made an enormous tactical blunder by not coming clean over this piece of realpolitik.

Peter Hoskin

The Libya plot thickens

From our UK edition

So the Sunday Times has got its hands on letters which suggest the al-Megrahi release was tied up with a BP-Libya oil deal, and overseen by the Government with an eye on "the overwhelming interests for the United Kingdom".  The ST article deserves quoting at some length: "Two letters dated five months apart show that [Jack] Straw initially intended to exclude Megrahi from a prisoner transfer agreement with Colonel Muammar Gadaffi, under which British and Libyan prisoners could serve out their sentences in their home country. In a letter dated July 26, 2007, Straw said he favoured an option to leave out Megrahi by stipulating that any prisoners convicted before a specified date would not be considered for transfer.

Saturday

Daniel Korski

Lisbon treaty moves closer, but Tories stay mum

From our UK edition

Sometimes if you fear something intensely or hate something very strongly, it can cloud your otherwise excellent judgement and analytical foresight. That seems to be happening to many euro-sceptics when they talk or think about the Lisbon Treaty and the forthcoming second Irish referendum. They do not like the treaty and so will find it almost unthinkable that the Irish will vote yes. But a 'yes' vote looks like the most likely scenario.  That will mean that the British Conservatives have to be less mealy-mouthed about their post-referendum strategy; if the treaty is ratified will they try to re-open the document if they win power or let sleeping dogs lie?

David Blackburn

Libyagate: first denial, then silence now contradictions

From our UK edition

The Times has obtained confidential correspondence suggesting that, in 1999, Robin Cook assured Madeleine Albright that those found guilty of involvement in the Lockerbie bombing would serve their sentences in Scotland. A senior US official told the Times: “There was a clear understanding at the time of the trial that al-Megrahi would serve his sentence in Scotland. In the 1990s the UK had the same view. It is up to them to explain what changed.” So how do they explain it? Kenny MacAskill claims that US officials urged him against releasing the Lockerbie bomber because Britain had pledged he would serve his serve sentence in Scotland. Seeking clarification, MacAskill wrote to Foreign Office minister Ivan Lewis on 22nd July.

Peter Hoskin

The Tories’ tax question

From our UK edition

So should the Tories announce tax rises ahead of the next election?  According to Andrew Grice in today's Independent, they're certainly thinking about it: "There is a growing recognition among shadow Cabinet ministers that, if they win power, spending cuts could only be half the picture, as they would also need significant tax rises to fill the black hole in the public finances. That is why Mr Cameron and George Osborne won't rule out tax increases. The big debate among the Tory high command now is whether to announce some tax increases before the general election. Mr Cameron is reluctant to unveil a detailed 'shadow Budget'.

Friday

Peter Hoskin

Brown’s hypocrisy over Lockerbie?

From our UK edition

So far, Gordon Brown has refused to specifically comment on the Scottish Government's decision to release Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi to Libya.  Yes, we've heard that he was "angry and repulsed" by al-Megrahi's reception in Libya, and that our government had "no role" in the decision.  But there's been nothing on whether he actually agrees or disagrees with the Scottish government's actions. The official excuse has been that Brown has to respect the devolution settlement and can't comment on devolved matters.  But - what's this? - it seems he hasn't had a problem with commenting on another devolved matter before now: the level of health spending set by the Scottish Government.

David Blackburn

No way to lead a nation

From our UK edition

It's been terrible a morning for Gordon Brown in the editorials and on the front pages. And David Cameron, scenting blood, has condemned Gordon Brown’s leadership over the al-Megrahi affair. These pieces share the same basic analysis: Brown’s calculated caution is the cause of his problems. John Rentoul, admittedly no fan of the PM, writes in today’s Independent: ‘This has everything to do with a pattern of behaviour, an inbuilt caution that served Brown well enough on the road to No 10, but which is disastrous in anyone actually holding the top job.