James Forsyth

The Andrew Mitchell story has always been about class. If all Mitchell was alleged to have said was ‘you supposed to f’ing help us’ there would have been some clucking and some mockery but no serious calls for his resignation. But the word ‘pleb’ and the phrase ‘know your place’ made the charge toxic. This was also what made some in Number 10 so queasy about any kind of robust defence of Mitchell; the Cameroons believe that whenever the conservation is about class the Tories are losing. This class angle is also what enabled the Labour Party to make political hay out of the issue.

Following the passing of his budget, Mario Monti has quit as Italian Prime Minister. At the moment, it remains unclear whether he’ll continue to lead the government until elections next year. Many in the Italian establishment—and, I understand, several European leaders—would dearly love Monti to emerge as the leader of a centrist coalition ahead of the election, though as a Senator for Life he can’t run in the election himself. They view the popular endorsement of Monti’s reforms as the best possible result for the stability of the Eurozone. What seems certain, though, is that the Italian elections will be highly unpredictable. The presence of both a comic and Silvio Berlusconi in the race guarantees that it will not be a conventional contest.

If the Tories are to win a working majority at the next election, they are going to have to take seats off Labour. Even if the Tories won every single Liberal Democrat seat they are targeting — something that is highly unlikely to happen, they would still only have a majority of one. Doing this after five years of austerity government is going to be extremely difficult. The Tory strategy for it, involves boosting the party’s vote among groups that the party traditionally underperforms with. Tellingly, Grant Shapps is launching the Tory target seats campaign today in a Hindu temple in Harrow West, a seat where the Tories underperformed last time; the Labour majority there actually went up in 2010.

The plot is rapidly thickening around the whole Andrew Mitchell and police incident. By the end of this matter, I suspect several reputations will have been severely damaged. The email allegedly sent by a police officer, who was posing as a member of the public and an eyewitness to the incident, to his local MP John Randall is a quite remarkable document. It is well worth reading in full just to see the level of detail involved. Those close to Mitchell stress that he is more interested in clearing his name rather than returning to the Cabinet or seeking legal redress. But I understand that this whole scandal might well reach a denouement quicker than anyone currently expects.

The latest twist in the Andrew Mitchell story is particularly intriguing. The Guardian is reporting that news of the confrontation between the police and the chief whip was passed onto Downing Street by the deputy chief whip John Randall. Now, Randall and Mitchell were known not to get on and Randall played a key part in forcing Mitchell out by indicating that he was not comfortable working under him. This latest news threatens to inject yet more poison into the Tory bloodstream. If brother whips can treat each other like this, what hope party discipline? But one longstanding Conservative MP made the case to me just now that Randall’s behaviour is not as odd as it might seem.

If logistics had allowed, David Cameron would have given his long-awaited speech on Europe tomorrow. Instead, it’s been postponed until January and we had to make do with a statement on the European Council in the Commons today It’s quite clear that Cameron is thoroughly bored of these meetings: he complained that it was the seventh he’s attended this year and that he ‘wouldn’t describe it as a landmark council’. When Ed Miliband mocked the Eurozone countries for coming up with a timetable for having a timetable, Cameron chuckled and nodded. But Cameron does think that something big came out of this summit. As he put it, ‘the principle has been established that changes in the Eurozone, requires safeguards for those outside.

There’s long been a sense on the Tory side that the party’s campaigning isn’t as sharp as it should be, that CCHQ isn’t up to the job. The Ashcroft target seats campaign was so valued not just because of the money but because of the organisational and management muscle behind it. The new Tory Chairman Grant Shapps was sent to CCHQ in the reshuffle with instructions to address the place’s institutionalised incompetence. The early signs are encouraging. When Labour announced that it was launching a campaign in the 60 seats where the number of people on working tax credits, which are only going up by 1%, was larger than the Tory majority, Shapps had a Tory response in place in each of those seats by the time Labour’s campaign actually launched.

Today’s PMQs was visceral stuff. Ed Miliband accused the Prime Minister and the Chancellor of being Bullingdons Boy who were taking decisions about ‘people they’ll never meet, people, people whose lives they’ll never understand.’ Cameron gave as good as he got, attacking Labour as the ‘party of unlimited benefits’ and said that Miliband ‘only stands up for those who claim.’ These exchanges over the decision to limit the increase in working age benefits to 1% in the autumn statement cheered up both side of the House, the Lib Dem benches looked a bit glum though. Labour and the Tories are both comfortable with these battles lines—convinced that the public is with them.

It was striking that at today’s liaison committee session the Treasury Select Committee chairman chose not to ask the Prime Minister about the economy but the secret courts bill. In what were the tensest exchanges of the 90 minutes, Tyrie questioned whether secret courts were necessary while Cameron asked Tyrie to think what he would do in his position. Cameron kept stressing that the government was not making any existing proceedings secret but trying to find a way to have cases heard that can’t be at the moment. Tyrie’s vocal opposition, though, is further evidence that this bill isn’t out of the woods yet. Given that the terms of it were essentially thrashed out between Cameron and Clegg, I’d be surprised if Lib Dem MPs turned against it.

A showdown between the government and the European Court of Human Rights over prisoner votes drew that bit closer today. The government hoped that having parliament vote to uphold a blanket ban on prisoners voting would buy it some time, as the European Court of Human Rights would then have to start examining the issue all over again. But that hope was dashed today when the Council of Europe declared that a blanket ban 'cannot be considered compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights'. It also said that it expected to return to this case in September 2013. I expect parliament will still vote for the blanket ban, if it is given the option, meaning that parliament—which is sovereign in this country—and the court will be in conflict.