James Forsyth

Referendums are a very un-British device. Referendums are a very un-British device. They are, as Clement Attlee said, ‘alien to all our traditions’ of parliamentary democracy. Yet in 12 weeks’ time, we are to have the second nationwide plebiscite in our history. Unlike the 1975 vote on whether Britain should stay in the European Economic Community, this one will not exercise the nation. This year’s referendum will be on the alternative vote, a subject that only excites politics lecturers. But the AV vote could have just as profound an effect on our politics as the EEC referendum. If the people chose alternative voting, Britain will be heading for an era of lowest-common-denominator politics. Parties will shy away from bold leaders who divide opinion.

Michael Gove has won on the substance in the judicial reviews of his decisions on Building Schools for the Future. The judge has rejected the claim that Gove acted irrationally and found that he has the authority to make the decisions he did. There will have to be reviews of six of the decisions because of a failure to consult fully and a full equalities assessment will have to be done - yet another example of one of the traps that Labour has left behind and that the coalition needs to scrap as soon as possible. But this is hardly the victory that it is being portrayed as by some. Crucially, the judge has ruled that “the final decision on any given school or project still rests with him [Gove].  He may save all, some, a few, or none.

The Davis Straw motion on keeping the ban on prisoner votes has just passed by 234 votes to 22. It is a crushing victory on what was a very good turnout given that both front benches were not voting. The 22 against the motion were a bunch of Liberal Democrats plus the Ulster MP Lady Hermon, the Plaid MPs Jonathan Edwards, Elfyn Llwyd and Hywel Williams, the Green Caroline Lucas,   Labour MPs Barry Gardiner, Kate Green, Glenda Jackson, Andy Love, Kerry McCarthy, John McDonnell, Yasmin Quereshi  and  one Tory Peter Bottomely, David Cameron now finds himself between a rock and a hard place. His MPs hate the idea of giving prisoners the vote and if he tries to force them to do it, he’ll end up in a very messy fight.

One of the more depressing sights in politics at the moment is how Andy Burnham is leading the Labour party back to its comfort zone on education. Burnham, who The Spectator once named minister to watch, seems to have jettisoned all of his Blairite reforming instincts. He now wants to draw as many dividing lines as possible and side with the vested interests and the status quo at every turn. In last night’s education debate, Barry Sheerman, who chaired the education select committee during the Labour years, pointed out that Gove’s education plans are building on the last government’s incomplete reforms. As Sheerman put it, “I am going to be honest: much of the Bill could have come from the previous Labour Administration.

Cambridge University’s decision, leaked to The Guardian’s Nick Watt, to start charging fees of £9,000 a year from 2012 is an irritation for the Liberal Democrats who did not want any university to move to charging the highest fee possible straight away. It also threatens to overshadow Nick Clegg’s efforts to increase the social mix at Britain’s best universities. But the news has also reminded me of how tricky the question of university fees will be for Labour in 2015. If Labour says it is going to reduce the fees universities can charge, it will have to accompany this with a promise to increase state funding to make up the difference. If it doesn’t, I suspect that top universities might threaten to go private.

Tomorrow is the first Osborne Balls Treasury Questions clash. It should be a fiery encounter. There’s little love lost between the two men, they are both aggressive despatch box performers  and the two of them know that their clash over the economy is likely to be the major factor in determining the next election result. Balls has a fair amount of material to work with: the disappointing growth—or, more accurately, non-growth—figures for the final quarter of last year, the limited success of the national insurance holiday for new small companies and the failure to publish a growth plan.

David Cameron’s speech yesterday was one of the most important he has given as Prime Minister. I’d urge you to read the whole text just to see how absurd some of the opportunistic, party political attacks on it have been. As I say in The Mail on Sunday, they’ll be a huge amount of resistance in Whitehall to the course that the PM is charting. But he is surely right that state money and recognition should not be going to any group that does not promote integration and believe in the liberal values on which this country is based. To do anything else would be fundamentally illiberal. A lot of the criticism of the speech seems to come down to the idea that this is an issue best not discussed. This idea is toxic.

Last summer I was showing some 17 year olds around the House of Commons. They were bright and engaged and all wanted to go to university. But as they told me what they were doing for A-Levels my heart sank. They were all doing subjects that were going to put them at a massive disadvantage in applying to a top-rank university. The most worrying thing was that they were completely unaware of this. So it is welcome news that the Russell Group, made up of the 20 best universities in the country, has now published a guide advising students on which A-Level subjects are held in the highest regard by universities. This is the kind of information that schools that regularly send children to top universities pass on almost automatically to their pupils.

I wish I could tell you that the main topic of conversation in Westminster today is Egypt and the future of the Middle East. But it isn’t. It is those Sally Bercow photos.  But if it wasn’t the picture of the Speaker’s wife naked but for a sheet that MPs were talking about it would be IPSA, the expenses body, following the publication of their claims for September and October. MPs detest IPSA. They believe, with good reason, it to be arrogant and inefficient. So strong is MPs’ opinion on this front, that David Cameron told Tory MPs late last year that if IPSA hadn’t sorted itself out by April, he’d sort it.

If the AV referendum is to take place on the 5th of May, the legislation paving the way for it needs to have passed by the 16th of February. But this bill is currently being held up in the Lords where Labour peers are objecting to the ‘Tory part’ of the bill which reduces the number of MPs and equalises constituency sizes. The coalition does not have a majority in the Lords, so all the talk of simply ramming the bill through was always slightly unrealistic. But the coalition’s concession that there can be public inquiries into the boundary review has created an expectation that Labour might now drop its opposition. The cross benches, the swing group in the Lords, have been impressed by this concession.