James Forsyth

Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband are locked in a political duel, and only one of them can survive. Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband are locked in a political duel, and only one of them can survive. In the new politics, what helps Clegg hurts Miliband and vice versa. This unusual dynamic makes next week’s by-election in Oldham East and Saddleworth especially important: it is, in effect, the first electoral clash between the two men. The result will determine which leader spends the first part of the year fending off questions about their future. It is coalition politics that has created this clash between Miliband and Clegg.

As Tim Montgomerie notes, tonight’s Angus Reid poll asks an interesting question about who voters would support if asked to choose between Labour and a Coalition party. This questions pushes up support for Labour with Labour scoring 45 percent on it compared to 40 percent on a normal voting intention question. The increase in Labour support comes from the fact that 46 percent of Lib Dem voters from the 2010 election would in these circumstances vote Labour compared to the 32 percent who’d go coalition. Polling on a hypothetical should, obviously, be treated with caution. But the fact that the coalition together polls worse than the coalition apart is interesting.

The Oldham East and Saddleworth by-election is fast shaping up to be the event that will set the tone for the first quarter of the political year. The unique circumstances in which the vote was called makes it particularly hard to predict, no one is quite sure whether there’ll be a backlash against Woolas or one against the Lib Dems for going to court to overturn the result. As I say in the magazine tomorrow, if the Lib Dems were to win, it would give Clegg the breathing space he so needs at the moment. Lib Dem worries about what the coalition is doing to them politically would subside, temporarily at least, and Ed Miliband would find himself under pressure.

If you talk to Tory MPs privately and ask them which of the coalition’s budgetary decisions they are most uncomfortable with, they’ll generally indentify the VAT rise and the police cuts (the reductions in the defence and prisons budget are also often mentioned). So it is clever politics for Ed MIliband to be emphasising the VAT rise and the police cuts so heavily in Oldham East and Saddleworth. It enables him to oppose key bits of the deficit reduction programme without sounding like an out of touch left-winger. If Labour do hold the seat, it will be a boost to Ed Miliband. It will add to the sense that he is establishing himself as Labour leader.

Today’s papers are full of the Tory right asserting itself. In the Mail On Sunday, Mark Pritchard—secretary of the 1922 committee—demands that the Prime Minister and his allies come clean about any plans to create a long-term political alliance between the Tories and the Lib Dems. In The Sunday Telegraph, there’s a report that Tory rebels will vote with Labour to try and defeat the coalition’s European Union Bill. I suspect that these stories presage one of the major themes of the year, an increasingly assertive right of the Tory parliamentary party. For too long, Cameron has neglected his own MPs both politically and personally. The result is a willingness to cause trouble for the government.

If you want to know why party managers don’t like open primaries look at page 26 of today’s Guardian. There Sarah Wollaston, the GP who won the Tory open primary in Totnes, warns that Andrew Lansley needs to watch out if his NHS reforms are not to turn into privatisation by the back door. The piece is, to put it mildly, unhelpful from a Tory perspective. For a Tory MP, and one who was a GP, to suggest that Tory health policy could lead to a privatisation of the NHS is a gift to Labour. It is also the last thing that Andrew Lansley needs given the u-turn he has been forced into over a public awareness campaign about the flu and the mounting concerns over his reform plans.

The Lib Dem manifesto committed the party to a fully elected House of Lords. The Tory manifesto talked about a ‘mainly-elected’ second chamber and in 2007 David Cameron voted for ‘the other place’ to be 80 percent elected (interestingly, George Osborne voted for a fully elected Lords). The coalition agreement committed the government to a ‘wholly or mainly elected upper chamber’. So it is hard to see how a Lords that retained a twenty percent appointed element could be portrayed as a major Lib Dem triumph as, according to today’s Guardian, the coalition wants. There has been talk in Westminster that Clegg’s consolation prize if the AV referendum is defeated will be a fully elected Lords, a long-standing Liberal aim.

The coalition’s attempt to talk to two audiences at once is on full display today. The Times reports on the appointment of the Tory Lord Heseltine as a growth czar and his warning against bashing the bankers. Meanwhile, The Guardian reveals that Simon Hughes, the deputy Lib Dem leader, is to be the coalition’s access advocate. Hughes’ appointment is intriguing. On one level, the appointment of Hughes—who abstained in the fees’ vote—is a way of trying to draw a line under the matter within the Liberal Democrats. Clegg clearly hopes that having abstained Hughes will be better able to sell the package to sceptical party activists.

A few weeks ago Ed Miliband was the leader under pressure. There was, absurdly, talk of leadership challenges if things did not improve. But now all the pressure is on Nick Clegg, he’s the one facing stories about whether he can cope. Whether the unforgiving media spotlight stays on Clegg or not will be determined by the re-run of the election in Oldham East and Saddleworth. The result of this contest will frame the first quarter of the political year. If the Lib Dems take the seat from Labour, then Miliband will again be the leader under pressure. Clegg will have won the time and the space that he needs. The nerves of his party will be calmed and Clegg’s authority within it enhanced.

Today’s Lib Dem revelations are of the embarrassing, but not explosive, variety. David Heath, the deputy leader of the House, and Norman Baker, the transport minister, hypocritically say they are against tuition fees, despite having voted to let universities charge fees of up to £9,000. Baker also, crassly, compares himself to Helen Suzman, the anti-apartheid campaigner, working from within to change the system. But, beyond that, the remarks are what you’d expect a Lib Dem MP to say to a party supporter complaining about various Tory members of the government. I suspect Nick Clegg will be slightly more worried about Adrian Sanders, the MP for Torbay, issuing a broadside against the Lib Dem leadership. Sanders accuses Clegg & Co.

To understand why Vince Cable survived today one has to understand the dynamics of the coalition. The Liberal Democrat rank and file have had to swallow a lot recently, but the idea that one of their Cabinet ministers was going to be moved for being rude about Rupert Murdoch would have been too much to bear. The backlash to shunting Cable sideways would have destabilised the coalition, so he stayed in place. But Cable tonight is a much diminished figure. He has been shown to be eager to be indiscrete, to be overly keen to air the coalition’s dirty laundry in public.

Even out of office, David Laws remains one of the most important figures in the coalition. He was one of only two Lib Dem MPs — the other being Danny Alexander — to attend Nick Clegg’s strategy session at Chevening on Friday morning. He’s also played a crucial role in rolling out the pupil premium, effectively working out of Michael Gove's department.   So it is pretty much certain that he’ll return to government once the Standards’ Commissioner has delivered his verdict. Where Laws will be slotted in is far less certain. Today, the well-sourced James Chapman reports that he’s been lined up for a Minister of State job at the Justice Department.