David Blackburn

The plan to keep Karzai in power

From our UK edition

Kabul based journalist Jerome Starkey has a story in the Independent about a deal to keep President Karzai in office. No other news service is reporting this, and its veracity might be questionable, but it reveals how difficult it is to establish stability in Afghanistan. Here’s the key section: ‘Mr Karzai and his main challenger, Abdullah Abdullah, hail from different ethnic groups and different regions. If neither wins outright in round one on 20 August, officials fear Afghanistan could be engulfed by violence reminiscent of the civil war of the 1990s. "The whole country is armed. Everybody has weapons. You have to keep everyone happy," an Afghan analyst said.

Leaked slides connected to Gray’s defence procurement report are very damning 

From our UK edition

Further to the Gray report’s suppression, the BBC have been given what they are told are slides from a presentation made by Bernard Gray summarising his investigation into defence procurement. It is only a glimpse, but these slides, if they are genuine, illustrate quite how damning this report would have been, and could still be. Gray concludes that the "Ministry of Defence does not really know the price of any kit, and project management does not exist in the Department”. Other slides assert that the "top 40 programmes annually expect an 80% overrun on time, and 40% on cost" because the Ministry of Defence can’t afford to pay for these projects on schedule. Generally, the MoD is “in denial” about its “funding profile”.

Why Sugar is wrong

From our UK edition

This letter appears in today’s issue of the Spectator: 'Sir: We the undersigned wish to condemn Baron Sugar of Clapton’s threatened legal action against our colleague Quentin Letts for calling him a ‘telly peer’ who ‘doesn’t seem to have an enormous intellect’ on LBC on 20 July. According to a letter Mr Letts received from Herbert Smith, Lord Sugar will issue a writ against Mr Letts for libel unless he pays his legal costs to date, donates an undisclosed sum to a charity and gives a written undertaking never to criticise him again.

Putin the Action Man

From our UK edition

I thought Harriet Harman’s posturing could not be bettered, but Vladimir Putin’s annual Alexander Nevsky tribute act takes the biscuit. Each year he varies his macho stock in trade of hunting, shooting and fishing in the buff. Last year he invaded Georgia. And this year he played 20,000 leagues under the sea’s Captain Nemo, by manning a midget submarine and diving to the bottom of the world’s deepest lake. That it was a stunt is in no doubt: he gave some luckless Russian journalists a running commentary throughout his two hour descent into darkness. For those looking for an arresting image, the Telegraph’s report has this photograph:     Doesn’t he look petrified?

Labour’s blindness to a broad agenda will condemn them to failure even after Brown

From our UK edition

John Kampfner launches a scathing attack on New Labour in today’s Guardian. He characterises New Labour as a movement obsessed with micro-politics that ignores broad political context, leaving a legacy of missed opportunities of which the government are oblivious. He sees Harman’s and Mandelson’s leadership posturing in the same light: ‘Harman has set out her stall as a radical, but her record is unconvincing. Where was she all these years? I don't remember her previously railing against Blairite subservience towards the wealthy. Indeed, when I last interviewed her, during Labour's deputy leadership contest in 2007, she struck me as quite comfortable with the status quo.

Oops she did it again.

From our UK edition

Following yesterday’s ‘men can’t be left to govern’ comments, John Prescott urged Harman to stop posturing and “get on with the job”. But, lo and behold, she’s at it again the very next day. This time it’s bankers: “Somebody did say... that if it had been Lehman sisters rather than Lehman Brothers then there may not have been as much (financial turmoil).” Again, you’ve got to call her political judgement into question. After yesterday’s outburst and the mini-controversy it engendered, she should have looked to calm the situation. Instead, she exacerbated it. Not wise for someone who’s nominally supposed to be running the country, and who’s trying to build some kind of leadership platform.

Brown’s critics change their tactics 

From our UK edition

Lord Falconer has an opinion piece in this morning’s Independent, calling for Labour to renew its progressive agenda to avoid a rout at the next general election. The policies prioritised in the article are clear, but the politics is ambiguous – restating the rumours that Lord Mandelson seeks to return to the Commons and is less than complimentary about Mr Brown. Here are the key sections: ‘We must show that we remain committed to our core supporters and to the middle-class voters. And to do this, we must change. And this is not just about a change of leader.

Here but for the Grace of God comes god

From our UK edition

Oh dear Lord. According to yesterday’s Londoner’s Diary, Tony Blair is bringing his religious lecture ‘Faith and Globalisation’ to Britain. The former PM ‘does God’ unashamedly these days. His talks have been a huge hit in America and now he will address British universities, starting at Durham. In what appears to be a re-enactment of the Pilgrimage of Grace, recent Catholic convert Blair will progress south, spreading his word. Who knows, perhaps he will proselytise all the way to Brussels in time for the Lisbon treaty’s ratification? I image he will talk in halls largely empty of students.

The Extradition Act must be reviewed.

From our UK edition

Like the Natwest Three, the rejection of the computer hacker Gary McKinnon’s appeal against extradition to the US raises serious questions about the balance of Anglo-American extradition arrangements. It is hard not to sympathise with McKinnon, who suffers from Asperger’s Syndrome and now faces a bleak future, but if he is accused of hacking into US military files he should, under the terms of the current treaty, stand trial in the US. The objection is with the Extradition Act’s fundamental imbalance. The US does not need to provide prima facie evidence to extradite UK residents; but the reverse does not apply. When on trial in the US, UK residents cannot claim legal aid and have to fund their own defence.

Labour is no longer the party of social mobility

From our UK edition

Social mobility is emotive and I imagine that Alan Milburn is livid that his report was ignored by its commissioners, the government. That it was swept under the carpet is unsurprising, for Milburn’s conclusion confirms Labour’s failure: ‘Social mobility has slowed down in our country. Birth, not worth, has become more and more a determinant of people's life chances.’ Rather than renew Labour’s commitment to the poor, Milburn, who grew up on a council estate and attended a comprehensive, has had to watch Lord Mandelson, the grandson of a Foreign Secretary and educated at a grammar school and Oxford, confer responsibility for Labour’s failure to universities.

The House of Lords’ judgement in the Purdy case could lead to a change in the law on assisted suicide.

From our UK edition

Debbie Purdy has won her appeal to have the law on assisted suicide clarified. The House of Lords judged that the Director of Public Prosceutions (DPP) must detail an "offence-specific policy" defining the facts and circumstances under which a prosecution would be made in cases like Debbie Purdy's. She also won on the point that article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights gives her the right to choose how she dies.    Though no prosecutions have been made, the current law says that those assisting could face up to 14 years in prison. Purdy wants an assurance that her husband would not prosecuted if he assists in her suicide in Switzerland.

The Chilcot inquiry

From our UK edition

The general opinion is that Sir John Chilcot’s terms of reference imply that his Iraq inquiry will be more open than its predecessors and that this is bad news for Brown. Former Defence committee chairman Michael Mates said that, unlike the two inquiries he sat on, Chilcot’s will have “much more independence than the Prime Minister or the government wanted him to have”, estimating that  “70% to 80% (of hearings) will be (held) in public.

No Bob, the public don’t trust your commitment.

From our UK edition

Public disgust with the MoD’s mean-spirited and grossly ill-judged compensation appeal has forced ‘Battlin’ Bob’ to bring forward the review of the scheme. The Telegraph has details: Mr Ainsworth said public debate had demonstrated that the scheme was not fully equipped to deal with "anomalies, legal complexities and wider issues" relating to compensating wounded troops. "The purpose of the current appeal process was to ensure that our Armed Forces Compensation Scheme remains fair and compensates most those more seriously injured. As Defence Secretary I cannot allow the situation to continue that leaves the public in any doubt over my or the Government's commitment to our servicemen and women.

Brown should have agreed to TV debates

From our UK edition

Bizarre though it seems, Brown has missed a trick by not agreeing to TV debates. YouGov polling figures from 17th July revealed that Brown has a 71% disapproval rating; by contrast, Cameron’s approval rating stands at 57%. Yesterday’s ComRes poll gave the Tories an 18 point lead. Labour’s best hope of reversing those dire figures is for Cameron to slip-up publicly or make a pig’s ear of a live debate, as he did against David Davis during the leadership contest, although that wasn’t enough to stop him winning that contest. Obviously, putting Brown on TV is a very risky strategy - Sir Humphrey Appleby would have described it as ‘courageous’.

Cuts will not save money fast enough 

From our UK edition

It is plain that the public purse needs a swift injection of cash. The question is where it will come from. Daniel Finkelstein’s column in this morning’s Times argues that the proposed Tory cuts and public service reform will save money in the long-term, but not immediately. He cites Peter Lilley’s 1995 pension reforms – the benefits of which the spendthrift Brown government is about to enjoy: 'The Tories decided to equalise the state pension age at 65. This meant raising the female pension age from 60. But such a policy threatened to be very unpopular, disappointing the legitimate expectations of women approaching the existing retirement age.   Lilley ensured that no woman born before April 1950 would be affected by it.

Mandelson’s flawed tuition fee proposals

From our UK edition

Lord Mandelson’s suggestion that tuition fees will be raised only if universities extend opportunity was uncompromising: “I'm not prepared and the government is not prepared to see an increase in fees and funding for the universities without the link being made to wider participation and access.” The government intends to widen access by make well-off students pay increased fees, said to be around £7,000, and offer no-fee degrees to students who live at home. Broadening access is essential and Mandelson is correct to aspire to a ‘higher education system that widens access and increases social mobility even as it fosters excellence’. However, the proposed initiatives are monumentally flawed.

A gross betrayal of British servicemen

From our UK edition

Nothing could be lower, more pathetic and cowardly than this. The Defence Secretary and his team of jobsworths are appearing before the Court of Appeal, pleading that ‘secondary complications’ arising from wounds troops received on service should not be compensated by the MoD. The High Court judged this inventive argument “absurd” when the government first made it, but that hasn’t deterred Ainsworth from getting the important job of penny pinching done. As David Hughes notes, what message does this send our over-stretched, ill-equipped forces? Not only is there not enough cash for helicopters but the nation’s so broke it can’t afford to compensate wounded heroes adequately.

He who would valiant be

From our UK edition

If you are about to jet-off on your holidays, beware. This summer, determined missionaries are being sent out across Europe. They will hound you on your sun bed, collar you at the airport, harass you in the tavernas, and lecture you at places of local interest. And this is no ordinary evangelical movement. The proselytisers preach a new creed. They do not want your soul or your money; it’s your vote they’re after. The Standard’s Londoner’s Diary reports that members of an organisation called Conservatives Abroad received an email to stoke their fervour. It goes thus: “As the summer recess approaches you may be preparing for a holiday abroad,” the missive reads.

The latest from Norwich North

From our UK edition

Counting is under way in Norwich North and the results are due in at lunchtime. In the meantime, here’s a selection of rumours, stories and predictions from the blogosphere. Danny Finkelstein's live blog at Comment Central predicts that, based on the turnout, the Tories will secure around 12,000 votes to Labour's 5,500, though he urges caution. The invaluable Andrew Sparrow confirms that turnout was 45%. He reports also that, whilst they expect to win, the Tories are downplaying expectations. By contrast, ConservativeHome readers predict a Tory majority of 3,301. Political Betting report that UKIP may have "done very well" and have potentially finished second. Sky News claims that Labour have conceded defeat and are "fighting for second place with the Lib Dems".