The Sun sets for Gordon Brown
From our UK edition
The Sun comes out heavily against the Government's handling of the Afghanistan conflict in their leader column today.
Uk politics
Friday
Brown faces another backbench revolt
From our UK edition
Despite protesting to the contrary, it turns out the government have been cutting all along. The Times reports that, buried in the small print of the budget, there is a commitment to abolish the £780 per year surplus housing benefit allowance, which encourages families to pay their rent and trade quality of accommodation for cash. These changes come into force on April 1, probably a month before the election. Labour backbenchers condemn the saving, worth £160 million per year, and plan to table amendments. Frank Field, who draws a comparison between this cut and the 10p rate revolt, tells the Times: “At one stroke, they get rid of a reform aimed at getting flexibility into a fairly inflexible market by giving people incentives to shop around.
Thursday
Delicately poised in Scotland
From our UK edition
Despite a week of international codemnation, a YouGov poll shows that 42 per cent of Scottish voters still agree with Kenny MacAskill’s decision to release al-Megrahi, whereas 51 per cent oppose it. Channel Four’s Gary Gibbon notes that this undermines Labour’s arguments that the SNP’s decision is not backed by the Scottish working class, and that Labour will find the Glasgow North East by-election hard going. I’m not so sure. Clearly it’s going to be tight, but Labour will take heart from this poll, which also reveals voting intentions. The SNP is down 6 points to 33 per cent and Labour is up 5 to 33 per cent. It was expected that the al-Megrahi decision could end up doing the SNP more harm than good.
Public scepticism about Labour’s record on education
From our UK edition
Isn't it funny how things work out? I imagine the government once thought they'd get credit for the ever-improving GCSE and A-level pass rates, but now results day just rekindles the debate about slipping standards - and rightly so. Ed Balls may have tried to divert attention on to the Tories this morning, but he can't really escape the verdict of this ComRes poll commissioned by Newsnight. Here are the main results: 67 percent of respondents said Labour hasn't lived up to Tony Blair's "education, education, education" vow. 52 percent said Labour hasn't improved the overall quality of education. 41 percent said they have. 47 percent said the standard of state education has deteriorated since 1997. 43 percent said it hasn't.
Is Theresa May priming a second Freud Review?
From our UK edition
In some respects, Theresa May has delivered an effective speech on unemployment and the benefits system today. It touches on all the tragic indicators - the 6 million people on out-of-work benefits, the high levels of youth worklessness, the shocking consequences of welfare ghettoes etc. - and re-states, in no uncertain terms, the Tories' commitment to welfare reform. She even partially responds to those critics who thought she'd been drafted into the shadow welfare role to be "softer" on single mums than Labour, by instead attacking the state for encouraging lone parents "not to bother trying to work until their youngest child was sixteen".
Dan Hannan and Enoch Powell: make your own mind up
From our UK edition
Here's footage of Dan Hannan's month-old US interview in which he cites Enoch Powell as an influence, and which has received quite a bit of news attention today: To my mind, there's little more to add to this than the points made by Spectator's very own Alex Massie and those made in two excellent posts (here and here) by Guido. To wit: Hannan has always been clear that he doesn't endorse Powell's views on immigration, but has instead been influenced by his views on the size, scope and role of the state. Whatever you may think of those views, they are hardly controversial. Indeed, as Guido points out (via Mark Reckons), Tony Blair himself praised Powell as "one of the great figures of 20th-century British politics". But, predictably, Mandelson & Co.
The case for naval investment
From our UK edition
Over at ConHome, Tim Montgomerie debates Will Inboden’s review of the main themes of the Tories foreign policy. I urge CoffeeHousers to read both articles, but the section on the relationship between energy and defence struck me particularly, recalling Liam Fox’s 2006 Chatham House speech on the subject. Here’s the premise of Fox’s argument: “We are all competing for the same natural resources to feed the economic system. The potential for terrorists or even nation states to interrupt this supply to cause widespread – rather than just local – disruption increases enormously.” Fox pointed out that global energy competition requirements had evolved beyond Britain’s defence strategies and capabilities.
Exam result shock: Balls fails
From our UK edition
You know how it is. You start reading an article by Ed Balls - in this case, in today's Guardian - and, before long, you've come across so many deceptions, half-truths and tribal slurs that you decide to fisk the whole thing. So here is Balls's article, with my supplementary comments in bold: The first group of young people to have been entirely educated under Labour pick up their GCSE results today. No doubt this will provoke some commentators into even greater efforts to do down their achievements – claiming more young people succeeding must mean exams are getting easier. In the early years of David Cameron's leadership, the Tories didn't join in this annual "dumbing down" chorus.
Wednesday
Nobody’s special
From our UK edition
In The Times today, Danny Finkelstein defended the most hated profession in contemporary politics – the Special Advisers, or SpAds. Booo, hissss. The case against was (again) laid out by a number of former senior officials, with ex-Cabinet Secretary Andrew Turnbull telling a Lords committee recently that he did not like SpAds rising to become Cabinet ministers by the time they were 38 “without touching the sides of real life”. Booo. Hisssss. Boooo. But how many of the current Shadow Cabinet do you think have been SpAds in the past? Come on, what do you think? Half? A third? Out of the 28 members of the Shadow Cabinet, including David Cameron (who worked for Norman Lamont and Michael Howard) there are only four ex-SpAds. The others: Osborne, Clark and Willets.
Libyagate has its roots in Labour’s devolution
From our UK edition
One of the oddest parts of Libyagate is what it says about Gordon Brown’s notions of devolution. The Prime Minister does not want to comment on the affair because, we are told, he sees it as a matter for the Scottish government, not the British government. So, if the actions of a devolved but subordinate level of government go against the state’s interests, the leaders of that state should stay mum? That's certainly not the view taken by successive US administrations; they have often condemned state-level actions, even when the federal government has been legally powerless to do anything in practice. The UK has no written constitution as in the US, but a clear constitutional settlement nonetheless.
On August opinion polls…
From our UK edition
Do check out Mike Smithson's latest post over at Political Betting, in which he relays an email he received from Nick Sparrow of ICM. Sparrow highlights the close fit between August ICM polls in the years before elections and the actual election results themselves: "August 1996 poll suggested that Labour were ahead by 12%. The result - Labour won by 13% August 2000 poll suggested that Labour were ahead by 10% The result - Labour won by 9% August 2004 poll suggested that Labour were ahead by 3% The result - Labour won by 3% August 2009 poll suggests that the Tories are ahead by 16% The result - ?????????" Of course, this isn't watertight: as Smithson points out, events could always intervene between now and the next election.
Tuesday
Brown breaks his silence
From our UK edition
At last, Gordon Brown has something to say about the Lockerbie bomber’s release. He said he was “angry and repulsed” by the welcome the Lockerbie bomber receive in Libya. And he also added: “I made it clear to Gadaffi in July that we could have no role in the release of al-Megrahi”. This doesn't draw a line under the controversy. As William Hague has argued, the story is now about why it took Brown so long to say those few words and still managed to say nothing. And he hasn't answered any of the serious questions being asked of the government.
The language of political debate
From our UK edition
A great spot by Tim Montgomerie over at ConservativeHome, who highlights this Wall Street Journal graphic on the words that both sides of the US healthcare debate should be using to score a rhetorical advantage. For instance, it suggests that the pro-Obama team should say "rules" rather than "regulations", while the President's opponents should attack the system for being "too profit-driven" and "too bureaucratic": As Tim says, words have power.
Man on wire
From our UK edition
It's a fairly quiet day in Westminster, so Chris Grayling's comparison between Britain and the gangland ghettos portrayed in The Wire is probably getting more attention than it would normally - after all, it's not like the Tories haven't majored on the "Broken Britain" theme before now. But, even so, I think he may have erred in mentioning the acclaimed US TV series. While superb, it is, don't forget, the show that the chattering classes love to chatter about. So, now, much of the coverage is about the TV programme rather than the problems Grayling is highlighting.
A very risky strategy
From our UK edition
Labour’s attempt to create a new dividing line on cuts is intriguing because it suggests that the government reckons we are pulling out of recession – a message Alistair Darling has been stressing recently. Central to Labour’s argument is that their initial interventions, opposed by the Tories, preserved public services through the recession. By claiming that now is the time to make extensive cuts, beyond mere efficiency savings, suggests that they think the economy is robust enough to survive sweeping public spending cuts. If an economic boom couldn’t save John Major, I doubt a modest recovery will save Brown from defeat.
Twilight Zone Tuesday: Brown to announce spending cuts
From our UK edition
Now this is a turn up. According to the Independent, Gordon Brown is going to "issue a list of specific [spending] cuts" as part of his Autumn "fightback". Here's how the strategy goes: "Initially, Mr Brown will seek to establish in voters' minds the key differences between Labour and the Tories – on policy, government intervention to limit the impact of the recession and preserving frontline services. Then he will acknowledge that the Government needs to go beyond the £35bn of efficiency savings it has already promised. The aim will be to show Labour is serious about reducing the deficit, which is set to rocket to £175bn in the current financial year and to £173bn next year.
Monday
Would Cameron govern differently?
From our UK edition
In an episode of Yes Prime Minister, a tobacco mogul asks Sir Humphrey: “Does he carry any clout in Whitehall?” The Mandarin replies: “None at all, he’s only a minister.” The context has changed but the essential truth remains – most Cabinet ministers have no clout in government whatsoever. That at least is the view of four former Sir Humphreys. Lords Turnbull, Wilson, Butler, and Armstrong are quoted in the Guardian saying that New Labour has centralised government around a clique of special advisers. The result? The marginalisation of the cabinet and the breakdown of what they term ‘the efficient and proper conduct of government’.
There’s no one like Macavity
From our UK edition
Paul Waugh’s spot on: Brown has been reluctant to congratulate England for their Ashes victory because he is so desperate to avoid being dragged into the international furore surrounding al-Megrahi's release. A Number.10 spokesman described Kenny MacAskill’s release order as a “uniquely sensitive and difficult decision" and one that (surprise, surprise) was taken completely independently of the British government. But, as yet, Macavity's not here. I suppose I could be doing the PM a disservice. Braying about our Ashes victory would, of course, be uniquely insensitive to our Australian brothers. And besides, giving congratulations is probably someone else’s job.
Confidence returns
From our UK edition
One of the most significant news stories of the day comes courtesy of the Institute of Chartered Accountants: "Confidence among business professionals has surged, suggesting the recession is at an end, a survey has said. The Institute of Chartered Accountants' index of business confidence rose to 4.8 at the end of June, from -28.2 in March, the biggest rise for two years." Economically speaking, this is encouraging stuff – it's the view from the frontline of the real economy, after all. And these types of surveys always tend to have a self-fulfilling quality, as more confident companies adopt the measures – spending, hiring etc. – which are likely to drive us out of recession.
Cameron must set out health plans
From our UK edition
For some time now at Coffee House, we’ve questioned the sense of Cameron’s pledge to increase NHS spending in real terms. And in today’s Independent, a ComRes poll suggests that 62 percent of Tory MPs do not think the NHS should receive guaranteed spending increases. Indeed, their opposition to Mr Cameron’s plans runs deeper: only 33 percent believe the current model of care free at the point of delivery is sustainable. Additionally, the Independent quotes an anonymous Tory MP saying: "The hope is that we would be more radical on health in office than we say now, that he [Mr Cameron] is anxious not to frighten the horses. But there are concerns about cutting other areas and allowing the health budget to carry on rising regardless.
