James Forsyth

James Forsyth

James Forsyth is former political editor of The Spectator.

This referendum could change the Tory party forever

Quietly, David Cameron is warming to Nick Clegg’s proposed plans for voting reform — even though it could bind the two parties together for a decade or more. James Forsyth on a Tory gamble that dares not speak its name On the Monday after the election, David Cameron summoned his front bench for not one but two meetings as he frantically tried to put together a government. In the second one, he asked them for their support in offering the Liberal Democrats a referendum on electoral reform. The Tory party has long stood against this. It believed that any move away from first-past-the-post would be bad for the country and for the party; that it would lead to a string of mushy centrist governments and backroom deals between politicians that shut out the electorate.

Who will follow Cameron?

Matthew d’Ancona’s piece in the new GQ on who’ll succeed David Cameron as Tory leader has been much discussed today. Matt says that Jeremy Hunt ‘is the man to watch’. But I think Hunt’s problem is that he is too like the current leader—telegenic, personable and pragmatic—and parties tend to opt for a successor who is a bit different from what they’ve just had. Boris Johnson would, of course, be very different from Cameron. But as Matt notes, if Boris returns to Parliament early it will be regarded as a declaration of intent. Boris’s greatest weakness is that he’s seen as great fun but not a man of substance.

A sensible policy change

Tucked away in Nick Clegg’s statement confirming that the referendum on AV was going to be on the 5th of May next year, was the abandonment of the controversial 55 percent rule for a dissolution of parliament. This has been replaced by a far more sensible arrangement. If the government cannot win a confidence vote, there’ll then be 14 days for one that can command the confidence of the House to be formed. If that does not happen, then there’ll be an election. However, if a government wants to dissolve parliament then it’ll require a two thirds majority. But it is still unclear how this rule could be made to bind any parliament as no parliament can bind its successor.

The spirit of 1776

Today is, of course, Independence Day. To mark it the New York Times have, as usual, commissioned some historical op-eds. The one by Adrian Tiniswood is particularly worth reading. Here’s a taste: “It is a fact rarely discussed on either side of the Atlantic that American colonists played a crucial role in the English Civil War, the bitter struggle between King Charles I and Parliament that tore England apart in the 1640s.

No 10 moves to place trusted Cameron supporter at the top of the No campaign

Imagine that we find out on May 6th next year that the Liberal Democrats have taken a pasting in the Scottish Parliament elections, done badly in the Welsh Assembly ones, lost seats in English local government and AV has been defeated. In these circumstances, Nick Clegg would face loud and sustained calls from within his own party to quit the government. Charlie Kennedy’s warning would have come true.  It would be situation critical for the Coalition. For this reason, I suspect that David Cameron wouldn’t shed any tears if the AV referendum passed. As I write in the Mail on Sunday, Number 10 has moved to install Rodney Leach, of Business for Sterling and No campaign fame, at the top of the save first past the post campaign.

The Ashcroft report

One thing that the AV referendum might do is revive the debate in Conservative circles about why the party did not win a majority in the general election. As the most striking example so far of the price of Coalition, it is likely to start off some grumbling about why the party is in position where it has to govern with the Lib Dems. Interestingly, on this front, Francis Elliott reports in The Times today that Lord Ashcroft has nearly finished his review of the campaign and that an ‘early draft is said to be unsparing in its criticism of Mr Cameron and his inner circle.’ But Ashcroft has yet to decide whether or not to publish his review. If Ashcroft were to publish a critical report of the campaign, then I suspect the gloves would come off.

Will Duncan Smith make work — not welfare — the logical choice?

James Forsyth reviews the week in politics For one night only, the band was back together. On Monday night, Tony Blair — looking toned and tanned — addressed the Institute for Government, the think-tank set up by his ally Lord Sainsbury. Cherie was in the front row, resplendent in a white salwar kameez. Blair’s two loyalist Cabinet allies, Tessa Jowell and Andrew Adonis, were also in attendance. There was even a question to the former prime minister from a fellow member of Ugly Rumours, Blair’s university band, to add to the reunion feel. This former rocker is now a civil servant at the Department for Work and Pensions. Most of what Blair said was technocratic not political; he talked about the ‘process lessons’ he had learned in government.

The leaked Treasury slide was wrongly labeled

Nicholas Macpherson, the permanent secretary at the Treasury, has sent an interesting letter to Michael Fallon about the leaked figures on public sector job losses that created such a political storm when The Guardian printed them on Wednesday. Macpherson states that the slide was incorrectly labeled; it was meant to represent job losses to 2014-15 not annually. One lesson of this row is the power of the Office of Budget Responsibility. Now that Labour have accepted it, it is very hard for it to quibble with its forecasts. So when on Wednesday, it announced—in response to the Guardian leak—that while there would be job losses in the public sector there would be 1.3 million more people in work by the end of the parliament, it blunted Labour’s line of attack.

A decision fraught with risk

The Coalition’s decision to hold the referendum on AV so early is fraught with risk. If AV is defeated at the ballot box, then Nick Clegg will face huge pressure from elements of his party to quit the Coalition. The argument would go that all the Lib Dems were getting out of staying was providing cover to the Tories on cuts. But if AV passes, then there’ll be some Lib Dems who’ll say that they’ve got the best thing they can out of the Coalition and so they might as well head back into opposition to try and restore the distinctiveness of their brand. On the No side, I expect there’ll be a ferocious campaign against AV.

Afghan manoeuvres

Ming Campbell’s comments today show that some Liberal Democrats do believe in Fox hunting. Responding to Fox’s speech in Washington yesterday and his remark that Britain would be among the last to leave Afghanistan, Campbell told the Daily Politics that the “intervention was unhelpful, indeed the government thought it was unhelpful.” “It would have been better if these remarks had not been made.” Dr Fox’s allies are less than pleased by Ming’s grandstanding. They take the not unreasonable view that the Secretary of State for Defence has every right to express his views on a war that this country is fighting without being second guessed by a backbencher from the junior Coalition partner.

The plan’s afoot

In the midst of this ongoing row about employment numbers, it is worth noting that the OBR figures released today show that there’ll be 610 thousand fewer public sector jobs at the end of parliament than there are now. But the overall number of jobs in the economy will increase by 1.34 million. This means there’ll be 1.95 million more private sector workers at the time of the next election. As I wrote in the magazine last week, one of the aims of the Budget was to shift employment from the public sector to the private sector. The OBR’s numbers show that the Budget should do this. There are, at least, two reasons why Osborne wants to do this.

Are you serious Mr Miliband?

Just before the voting on the Budget started, all Tory and Lib Dem MPs received a letter from David Miliband calling on them to vote against it. Attached to the letter were more than 1500 other signatories who Miliband had got to sign on to his letter online. It was a gimmick, but not a bad one.

Abbott ducks the challenge

Guido reports that Diane Abbott has ducked out of doing the Daily Politics following her disastrous appearance with Andrew Neil on This Week when she couldn’t answer questions about her taxi claims or her justification for sending her son to private school. The rumour is that Abbott was unprepared to face yet more questioning from Andrew Neil on these points. One would have thought that she might have come up with some answers in the intervening days. Realistically, Abbott isn’t going to win the leadership so she’s standing to enhance her profile in the media and the party. But her refusal to accept scrutiny is not doing her reputation any favours.

Waiting on AV

Every conversation I have about the durability of the Coalition comes back to the AV referendum. The conventional wisdom is that if AV is defeated then it will be very hard for Clegg to keep his party in. For this reason, people pay extremely close attention to the Tory leadership’s attitude to AV. We are waiting to see if there is even a hint that Cameron is prepared to soften his position on the issue to strengthen the Coalition.   So Danny Finkelstein’s blog this morning suggesting that ‘AV might provide the answer to the otherwise impossible question - if the parties stay together, how can they fight the election apart?’ has caused quite a stir.

First Commons rebellion against the Coalition a small affair

In the last few days, there’s been much speculation about how many Lib Dem MPs would vote against the VAT rise. In the end, only two did—Bob Russell and Mike Hancock. I suspect that the Lib Dem whips will be quite happy that the rebellion was so small. Other Lib Dems with misgivings about the policy are clearly not yet prepared to cross the Rubicon of rebellion. One thing we know is that once an MP has defied the whip in government once, they find it much easier to do it again. Few in Westminster would be surprised if Russell and Hancock began regular rebels. But it will be a relief to Nick Clegg that others are not yet prepared to join them.     Another poll, ComRes for the Indy, has Lib Dem support falling post-Budget.

Harman the hawk

Harriet Harman’s response to David Cameron’s statement on the G8 and G20 was noticeable for her attacking the Prime Minister for talking about bringing British troops home from Afghanistan within five years. Her criticism was that talking about withdrawal undermined the troops in the field, she sounded more like John McCain than I ever expected Harriet Harman to. She chose to reinforce her point by using quotes from Liam Fox about the effect that timelines have on military morale. Her use of the Fox quotes suggests that Labour see the Cameron Fox relationship as a weak point in the government.

Sign of the times | 28 June 2010

This week’s New Yorker has a little piece about Cherie Blair’s efforts to get an International Widows’ day recognised. Most of it is about Blair doing the diplomatic rounds, she compares the process to the one for trying to win the Olympics for London. But there is an interesting anecdote about what happened when the Blairs were both looking for chambers to join: “When Tony and I were looking for jobs, they said they had a boy and a girl and they couldn’t possibly take another girl, so I went to another chambers, and Tony was taken on.” It is easy sometimes to forget just how much things have changed in the past thirty odd years.

Robert Byrd, 1917-2010

Robert Byrd, the longest serving Senator in American history, has died aged 92. Byrd will be remembered not only for the length of his service but also for the fierceness with which he guarded the prerogatives of the Senate. Byrd used his position and seniority in the Senate to funnel huge amounts of money back to the state he represented, West Virginia one of the poorest states in the Union. Travel through West Virginia and you rarely go more than a few miles without passing the Robert C. Byrd something or other. As the Washington joke had it, Byrd didn’t bring home the bacon, he brought back the whole damn hog.

The Lib Dems’ toughest week so far

This, in the admittedly short life of the Coalition, has been the most difficult week so far for the Lib Dems. The Coalition agreement had the Lib Dems winning huge concessions from the Tories. Afterwards, all the talk was of Lib Dem negotiating skills, what a good deal that they had won for themselves. But after the Budget, the mood was very different. It is now clear that this is, first and foremost, a fiscally conservative government. One of the problems as Andrew Rawnsley notes in his column is that the Lib Dems are now being depicted as dupes by large sections of the media and the Labour party. However unfair this caricature may be it is going to prey on Lib Dem minds.

Post-Budget polls show drop in Lib Dem support

ICM’s post Budget poll for the Sunday Telegraph confirms YouGov’s finding that the Lib Dems have dropped after the Budget. It has them down five to 16. By contrast, the Tories are up two to 41. Labour have also risen four to 35. YouGov has the Lib Dems on 16, the Tories 43 and Labour 36. These polls matter because they will add to the jitteriness that some left-leaning Lib Dem feel about such a fiscally conservative Budget. There is a feeling in Lib Dem circles that they could do with some things to please and reassure their base in the coming weeks. The Coalition is planning a policy push before the Commons breaks for the summer and I’d be surprised if there aren’t some things announced soon that are ‘Lib Dem wins’.