Isabel Hardman

Isabel Hardman

Isabel Hardman is assistant editor of The Spectator and author of Why We Get the Wrong Politicians. She also presents Radio 4’s Week in Westminster.

New figures show Cameron’s net migration target in tatters

Today’s news that lots of people want to come and work in a free, welcoming country with many opportunities and a growing economy is actually very bad news. Not for the economy, or those people, or probably the country, but for the politicians who thought it would be sensible to pledge that by the 2015 election, net migration would be in the ‘tens of thousands’. Today the Office for National Statistics reveals that net long-term migration to the UK was estimated to be 298,000 in the year to September 2014, up from 210,000 in the previous 12 months. Overall 624,000 people immigrated to the UK in the year ending September 2014. Net migration of 298,000 is not squeaking close to the target of tens of thousands.

Labour unsure about health policy its own councils support

The announcement today that Greater Manchester will receive full control of health spending - worth £6bn - has left Labour in a rather interesting position. On the one hand, it is easy for Andy Burnham to say that this sounds ‘like yet another NHS reorganisation’. But on the other, Greater Manchester includes a number of Labour councils who appear pretty happy to sign up to the provisional deal. Indeed, one of those councils is Wigan, which covers Burnham’s own constituency. Now one of the reasons that spending has been devolved to this area is that councils in Greater Manchester are keen, forward-looking and ambitious.

You can tell a lot from watching how MPs act

One thing worth noting from today's PMQs - and indeed from all the sessions since the start if the year - was how many MPs left early. They are now not taking the sessions seriously enough to stay to the bitter end because they tend to involve the two party leaders talking at one another about their pet issues rather than actively debating. Even those who remained in the Chamber weren't really paying attention, striking up conversations that rattled on over serious questions such as the one on organ donation from Glyn Davies. As their leaders debated MPs having second part-time jobs, backbenchers were clearly preparing for the end of their part-time stint in Parliament before returning to their constituencies to campaign.

As ‘long-term economic plan’ goes global, will Cameron have an easy PMQs?

How will Prime Minister’s Questions go today? Both party leaders have had to deal with troublesome MPs this week, with Jack Straw and Sir Malcolm Rifkind both falling prey to the Dispatches/Telegraph sting. But Ed Miliband may feel that he can continue his theme of cracking down on paid directorships and consultancies, which Labour is running an Opposition Day debate on later today. Rifkind’s response to the sting also dug him into a deeper hole than Straw, who decided rather wisely to talk about what a fool he’d been not to take the advice he had so kindly doled out to colleagues who’d been caught by the same sorts of operations in the past.

Do we now know what the Tory strategy for defence is?

For a while the Tories had hoped they could get away with dodging questions on defence spending until after the election. Even as the pressure within their own party for a commitment to the 2 per cent of GDP set by Nato, ministers were either saying they didn't want to 'pre-judge' the Strategic Defence and Security Review, or trying to turn the question round and ask whether Labour was going to match the current level of spending by this government. Neither was a satisfactory answer, but ministers rather have the impression that with just weeks until Parliament dissolves, they needn't worry too much.

Why Natalie Bennett doesn’t need to do the sums on policy

To be fair to Natalie Bennett, she took the rather admirable step of apologising on the Daily Politics for being so woeful in her disastrous interview with Nick Ferrari this morning. But the whole episode tells us a lot about how the Green party views its appeal to voters. Yes, yes, it’s embarrassing that a party leader boasting about a flagship housing policy ended up sitting in the most painful silence imaginable while she tried to think of how that policy would actually, you know, work. But clearly if she thought that knowing the details of the policy would be important, she might have checked the details before walking into the LBC studio with Nick Ferrari. Clearly she did not.

Ed Balls struggles to land punches in tax showdown with George Osborne

Naturally, when George Osborne and Ed Balls squared up in the Commons this afternoon for a showdown on the HSBC tax row, it wasn’t a particularly pretty affair. There was shouting, heckling, yowling - and the backbenchers were pretty aerated, too. Indeed, the Tories had turned up intending to throw the Shadow Chancellor off pace before he’d even started, shouting ‘ANSWER’ at him every time he tried to say a single word. Balls had clearly turned up thinking that dragging the Chancellor to the Commons to answer his urgent question was victory enough. But an urgent question is only a victory if the minister responding leaves the Chamber thinking that he or she needs to get onto their officials for a more detailed briefing because the row has got bigger.

Labour demands David Cameron commit to TV debate with Ed Miliband

Will any of the General Election TV debates take place? Labour hopes they will, and today Douglas Alexander has written to Grant Shapps demanding that the Tories commit to doing the head-to-head debate with Ed Miliband, even if all the smaller parties are tying themselves up into fights over he seven-way debate. Alexander writes: ‘In the light of the previous comments from yourself and Mr Cameron, I am sure you will agree this is a “credible debate” and an excellent opportunity for the British people to watch the two leaders who stand a realistic chance of being Prime Minister after May 7. ‘I am happy to confirm on Mr Miliband’s behalf that he will turn up to debate Mr Cameron on April 30. Can you today confirm that Mr Cameron will be there too?

Conservative party suspends whip from Sir Malcolm Rifkind

Even if the two MPs caught up in today's sting, Jack Straw and Sir Malcolm Rifkind, are found to have done nothing wrong, their parties cannot be seen to be protecting them. Straw was suspended from the Parliamentary Labour Party last night and this morning Sir Malcolm Rifkind has had the Tory whip removed. Rifkind says he will not stand down as chair of the Intelligence and Security Committee unless the Committee calls for him to stand aside. It's difficult to see how he can stay in the role while the investigation into his behaviour takes place. There will also be an immediate investigation carried out by the Tory party, given Rifkind is standing again at the election.

The ‘anti-politics’ bunch will benefit most from the ‘cash for access’ allegations

Naturally, the parties set to benefit the most from any allegations of impropriety against MPs are the 'anti-politics' bunch: Ukip, the Greens and the SNP. You can always when the Greens think there are some votes to be snaffled from Labour by how quickly they issue a press release condemning the latest policy or revelations that concern the party. Today Natalie Bennett said: 'The influence of big business in politics is corrosive, and seems to run through the veins of the entire political establishment. That's why we need real change now.' Jack Straw was rather swiftly suspended from the Labour Party following the publication of the joint Telegraph/Channel 4 sting.

Tories and Labour to make pledges knowing they are bad policy

This week, the two main parties plan to make iconic pledges that they hope will appeal to their core vote, but that are pretty poor policy. David Cameron will today pledge to keep ‘pensioner perks’ - universal benefits for older voters such as the free bus pass and the winter fuel payment - while Labour expects to announce its new tuition fees policy. The only thing that gives the Tories any sense of moral high ground in this is that they have at least worked out how to fund their pledge, while Labour is still scrapping over the money for and detail of its plan to cut tuition fees. Why are these bad policies?

Politicians needn’t be so afraid of saying what they think

Politicians know they need to be more natural, less spun, and more honest about what they think. But most of them carry on sounding unnatural, spin-doctored and cagey because they’re worried about the media will do to them if they speak their minds. They fear being pounced upon by journalists keen to write up their latest ‘gaffe’. But this week we’ve seen two politicians saying what they think without any major repercussions. Example one comes from Boris Johnson in his interview with Tim Shipman. The Mayor was asked whether he watched Coronation Street or Eastenders: ‘Um. What a world we live in where you are felt to be out of touch if you don’t watch these things. Why should I? It’s ridiculous, totally ridiculous. Dirty Den, that was EastEnders.

Labour’s tuition fees moment

Could Labour’s tuition fees policy be its own tuition fees moment, of the same order as the moment it endlessly needles the Lib Dems about? Well, the decision, when it’s made, won’t have the same dramatic effect as the Lib Dem about turn in 2010, because Labour candidates haven’t been posing with signed pledges and smiling students promising that they’ll do one thing while their party slowly realises that it really should do another. In any case, it does look as though the party will, in one way or another, maintain its promise to cap the fees at a lower level than the £9,000 that the Coalition raised them to, even if this is only for technical degrees or, as I reported recently, ‘useful’ subjects. The talks are still going on.

Policymakers must address high male suicide rates

It’s pretty tough to find good news in suicide statistics, but today’s figures for 2013 are particularly grim reading. The number of suicides increased from 2012, and the male suicide rate is now at its highest since 2001. The male rate of suicide has increased significantly since 2007, where it stood at 16.6 deaths per 100,000 population, to 19.0 deaths per 100,000 as the graph below shows: [datawrapper chart="http://static.spectator.co.uk/yGG0M/index.html"] It used to be the case that young men were the most likely to kill themselves, but the highest suicide rate in the UK is now for men aged 45 to 59, at 25.1 deaths per 100,000. This is the highest for that group since 1981.

Ed Miliband to Cameron: show us your EU renegotiation policy

Ed Miliband has sent an angry letter to David Cameron this afternoon, demanding that he ‘set out in detail a reform agenda for the EU and a strategy for building the alliances needed to deliver it’. Now, David Cameron is quite used to receiving angry letters about Europe, but mostly they come from members of his own party rather than the leader of the Opposition. But because Ed Miliband has decided that his party’s best business policy is actually the responsibility of his Shadow Foreign Office team, he wants to get in on the angry letter-writing act too. This letter is supposed to highlight that pro-business policy, which is Labour’s opposition to an EU referendum, as well as needling Cameron a bit about whether he really holds enough influence in Europe.

Michael Fallon worries about Putin’s next step: this is what the Russian President plans to do

Michael Fallon is worried about Vladimir Putin repeating his tactics in Ukraine with other countries. The Defence Secretary told newspapers that he was ‘worried about his pressure on the Baltics, the way he is testing Nato’. This morning Nick Clegg said that while there was ‘no evidence right now’ that the Russian President was seeking to do the same in the Baltic states, ‘we should be vigilant when a leader of a nation like Russia starts throwing his weight around in the way that he does, in such an arbitrary and acceptable way, of course we need to be vigilant’. So what is Putin’s strategy? Well, in this week’s Spectator, Anne Applebaum examines the Russian President’s plan to draw a new Iron Curtain across Europe.

Will Cameron’s new benefits policy ever take off?

Will the Tories really dock benefits from obese people and those with drug or alcohol addictions if they refuse treatment? Even though David Cameron reaffirmed his commitment to the policy in his speech in Hove yesterday, anyone who is getting rather over-excited about it could probably expend their energy on something else as this looks suspiciously like one of those policy kites that gets flown from time to time. In the Times today, I point out that the idea cropped up several times under Labour as well as the Tories. The reason that this latest incarnation of the ‘sick people, get treatment or lose benefits’ policy might not ever become a proper policy is that it’s just one of the proposals in the review that Dame Carol Black is conducting.

Tories try to derail plain packaging vote

Opponents of plain packaging for cigarettes are trying to work out how to derail the vote in the Commons introducing the law, Coffee House has learned. There is considerable frustration in the party that plain packaging is being introduced so close to the election, as MPs feel it is a distraction from the campaign. Other Tories still think it betrays their values as a party. I understand that MPs are considering tabling a motion that calls for the packaging policy to be extended to anything that is vaguely bad for health, including alcohol and sugar-rich food such as Frosties. This is of course to make a point rather than because the MPs have suddenly decided that Andy Burnham is right.

Tories and the Church: the 30-year war continues

Here are some observations from the ‘incendiary’ letter from the House of Bishops that has upset the Tories so much. ‘Our electoral system often means that the outcomes turn on a very small group of people within the overall electorate. Greater social mobility and the erosion of old loyalties to place or class mean that all the parties struggle to maintain their loyal core of voters whilst reaching out to those who might yet be swayed their way. The result is that any capacious political vision is stifled.’ ‘Instead, parties generate policies targeted at specific demographic groupings, fashioned by expediency rather than vision or even consistency.