James Forsyth

The unemployment numbers are expected to be grim by the end of this year. But Bagehot notes in this column this week that the Brown circle believes that rising unemployment might not be as big a political deal as it has been in past recessions: “But, in private, some of his associates argue that redundancies may prove less politically toxic for the government than was the case in past recessions—because they will not be concentrated, as they previously were, among low-skilled industrial workers ill-equipped to find alternative employment. These days, the argument runs, few workers expect to spend their careers in a single job, and the labour market is flexible enough for most to find new ones.

There are few more sickening sights than people wandering around with banners stating things like “We are all Hezbollah” or “We are all Hamas”. These people are using the freedoms entrusted to them by a liberal democracy to endorse terrorist groups with genocidal ambitions. Over at the Telegraph, Shiraz Maher has written a powerful denunciation of these useful idiots: “Such vociferous support from the streets of London will have come as great relief to Hamas leaders at a time when even Arab governments such as Syria, Egypt and Saudi Arabia have blamed them for this latest outbreak of violence. These self-righteous "friends of Palestine" obsess about Israel and the Jews, but turn a Nelsonian blind eye to everything Hamas does.

Obama gave a big-speech today promoting his stimulus plan. It was short on detail—there’s much Congressional horse-trading to come—but there were two passages that stood out. The first was Obama’s diagnosis of what has caused this economic collapse: “This crisis did not happen solely by some accident of history or normal turn of the business cycle, and we won't get out of it by simply waiting for a better day to come, or relying on the worn-out dogmas of the past.  We arrived at this point due to an era of profound irresponsibility that stretched from corporate boardrooms to the halls of power in Washington, DC.

So, it has all ended in tears. Kevin Pietersen’s resignation came even sooner than his worst enemies would have predicted when he took the job five months ago. A lot of people are already blaming Pietersen, saying that you can’t have the captain forcing the management’s hand as publicly as he tried to do when he let it be know that they would have to choose between him and the coach Peter Moores. But this strikes me as the wrong way to look at things. When the ECB appointed Pietersen they knew what they getting; it was blinding obvious that he was going to want things done his way. Once they’d made that decision, they should have been prepared to give him what he believed the team needed to succeed.

Michael Crick has taken to his blog to reveal the contents of leaked Minutes from a Tory meeting: “"Care needs to be taken over the candidates that have the potential to embarrass the Party - there will now be a fortnightly meeting to assess the watch-list of candidates, and the reasons they are on the list needs to be taken into consideration." And the document shows that a Conservative Central Office official has even been appointed to keep a close eye on what these potential trouble-makers get up to: "The public output e.g. blogs, websites, press releases of candidates will [sic] now to be monitored by a new member of the CRD team," the minutes read. "Let JM or Stephen Gilbert know if there are any problems with candidates - de-selection should be the last option.

One habit the Tory party should aim to cure itself of in 2009 is its over-reliance on David Cameron to gets its message across. Some Tories defend the heavy use of Cameron by arguing that he is both the party’s most attractive face and the only way they can guarantee getting their message reported in the media. But using Cameron for nearly all high-profile announcements prevents other members of the shadow Cabinet from developing national recognition. For instance, I fail to see why George Osborne shouldn’t have made today’s announcements on tax. Also, as Tim Montgomerie has noted, if there are too many speeches by a party leader they become devalued, less of an event.