Peter Hoskin

The Lib Dems prepare their strategy for future coalitions

Contain your excitement, CoffeeHousers: the Lib Dems are debating whether to change their ‘constitution’ so that their members have a greater say over future coalition negotiations. The amendment has been put forward Tim Farron and Norman Lamb, and proposes that, in the event of coalition talks, the party's ‘negotiating team’ should have to consult with a ‘reference group consisting of not more than nine people appointed equally by…’ blah, blah, blah. In fact, you can just read the whole thing on page 41 of this document. The Lib Dems will be voting on it at their Spring Conference next month.

At least it won’t go to penalties…

Who's winning in the latest match between Vince Cable and the Conservatives? The Business Secretary did take an early lead, with the news that No.10 had grudgingly yielded to his demand to appoint Professor Les Ebdon to the role of ‘university admissions tsar’ — a man who has hardly been kind about the coalition's universities policy in the past, and whose appointment had been blocked by the business select committee. But, according to the Telegraph this morning, the Tory leadership appear to have scored a goal of their own: Cable's proposal for imposing penalties on graduates who pay off their student loans early is to be dropped. We can, and should, cheer the wheezing demise of that policy.

Post-Moody’s, King backs Osborne

Moody's doubts might not be making much difference to the actual economy, but they could make a good deal of difference to the political battle being waged over it. George Osborne, of course, is citing this as further proof of the need for fiscal consolidation. Ed Balls, meanwhile, is redoubling his call for a ‘change of course’ — and somewhat misleadingly too. But what does Mervyn King think? Thanks to his comments in a press conference this morning, we don't have to guess.

Minimum pricing, maximum controversy

Just because there's no PMQs today, it doesn't mean you won't hear from David Cameron. The Prime Minister is readying his anti-booze cruise once again, and taking it on tour to a hospital in the North East. Once there, he will rail against ‘alcohol abuse’ and its consequences, which include, he will say, a £2.7 billion a year bill for the NHS. And he will preview some of the solutions that may make it into the government's ‘alcohol strategy’ next month: ‘drunk tank’ cells where binge drinkers can be dumped overnight; ‘booze buses’ to deliver people to these cells; police heavies in A&E wards; and, possibly, minimum pricing for alcohol. Confusion abounds on the last of these.

Labour’s plan would have cost us our AAA rating

For Ed Balls this morning, there is only one conclusion to be drawn from the news about our credit rating: ‘A change of course is needed.’ But to what? Balls no doubt means a shallower course of deficit reduction — less far, less fast. But Moody's are clear that we have been placed on a negative outlook because of doubts that our fiscal consolidation will continue strongly enough. Specifically, they say that, ‘Any further abrupt economic or fiscal deterioration would put into question the government's ability to place the debt burden on a downward trajectory by fiscal year 2015-16.’ So how would Labour have fared? We already know that they didn't propose to put debt on a downwards trajectory back then (see my post here).

Moody’s puts UK’s AAA rating on negative outlook

‘It's now clear that Britain's economic reputation is on the line at the next general election, another reason for bringing the date forward and having that election now ... For the first time since these ratings began in 1978, the outlook for British debt has been downgraded from stable to negative.’ So said George Osborne when S&P placed Britain's AAA credit rating on a negative outlook in May 2009, when Labour were in power. But guess what? Another credit-rating agency — Moody's — has just done the same to our rating this evening. Given how much Osborne made of Britain being a ‘safe haven’, it's rather a tricky one for him.

Nick Clegg’s NHS squeeze

Andrew Lansley's career prospects were boosted yesterday — when Simon Hughes said that he should ‘move on’ after the NHS reforms have been implemented. Since then, Downing Street has redoubled its defence of the Health Secretary; with a spokesman explaining tersely this morning that, ‘Simon Hughes speaks for himself ’. And Nick Clegg himself has added that, ‘Andrew Lansley is the architect of the NHS bill. He cares passionately about the NHS. He's the right man for the job and he must see it through.’ Clegg's general support for the Bill — and Danny Alexander's — is worth noting because it's one of the factors helping David Cameron hang on to both it and his Health Secretary.

Project Merlin may not wield a magic wand

Are Project Merlin's lending targets just a myth? On the basis of today's figures it's still rather hard to tell. The arrangement between the government and the banks did yield £214.9 billion of gross lending to businesses in 2011 — against a target of £190 billion, and a 20 per cent increase on 2010. But net lending also declined in every quarter of the year. And the target for lending to small businesses of £76 billion was missed by £1.1 billion.  The banks have put this shortfall down to fewer small businesses coming forward for credit — and there's actually some truth in that. This survey suggests that small businesses did indeed withdraw their begging bowls as the year progressed.

Lansley’s holding on — for now

After originally deploying Sayeeda Warsi against ConservativeHome's anti-Health Bill sentiment, David Cameron is now doing his fighting for himself. He has an article in today's Sunday Times (£) that says, with no equivocation, ‘I am at one with Andrew Lansley, the reform programme and the legislation going through parliament’. And, aside from that, it's also an unusually spirited explanation of just what the government plans to achieve by these reforms. Much better than Cameron's wavering performance in PMQs on Wednesday. For all its spirit, though, this article doesn't come across as angry.

The battle over Downhills takes another turn

Remember Downhills Primary School? This was the underperforming school in Haringey that became a political battleground towards the end of last year. On one side was Michael Gove and the coalition, proposing that Downhills — and schools like it — become academies, as that's how to boost academic performance. On the other was the local MP, Labour's David Lammy, as well as the school hierarchy and various union types, all apoplectic at having academy status ‘imposed’ from above. Harsh words were traded, meetings were convened, and little was resolved by it all.

The 50p tax debate won’t be settled this year — but it might be escalated

More evidence this morning that the government won't be dropping the 50p rate any time soon, in the form of an interview with Danny Alexander. ‘This is not the time to be looking to reduce the tax burden on the wealthy,’ he says to the Daily Telegraph's James Kirkup and Robert Winnett. This is a line that other ministers have deployed recently, and not just Lib Dems. And it suggests that the coalition is confident that HMRC's forthcoming review of the rate will say that it does indeed raise revenue. But the matter won't end there. The IFS recently said of the HMRC review that, ‘tax records for just one year after the introduction of the 50p rate are unlikely to provide a robust estimate of how much revenue the 50p rate will raise’.

Lansley’s health problems are starting to look terminal

The discontent with Andrew Lansley's health reforms has been rising since the New Year. But, one or two threatening quotations aside, most of this has come from the government's natural opponents: Labour and the unions. That changes today. Over at ConservativeHome, Tim Montgomerie has written a post calling for the Health Bill to be dropped. It is, Tim says, ‘not just a distraction... but potentially fatal to the Conservative Party's electoral prospects.’ And he finishes: ‘It must be stopped before it's too late.’ This would be striking enough by itself, but its impact is doubled by a single sentence: ‘Speaking to ConservativeHome, three Tory Cabinet ministers have now also rung the alarm bell.

Cameron’s quotas: a policy or a threat?

We've heard enough about David Cameron's woman troubles to regard anything he says about the fairer sex as a naked pitch for votes. But I reckon his comments today, about getting more women into boardrooms, are just as much motivated by concerns about the economy. ‘The drive for more women in business is not simply about equal opportunity, it's about effectiveness,’ is how he put it earlier, ‘It's about quality, not just equality.’ It's a claim that reflects both the thinking of Masters of Nothing — a book by two highly-regarded members of the 2010 intake, Matthew Hancock and Nadhim Zahawi — and its continuing influence in Cameroonian circles.

A feast of Quantitative Easing

Fire up the printing presses, once again. The Bank of England has just announced another £50 billion of Quantitative Easing, bringing the total monetary expansion up to £325 billion. And it probably won't end there: Citi, among other analysts, forecast that it could go as high as £600 billion next year.  So what are we getting for all this free money? The Bank would tell you that its supporting the economy: keeping interest rates down and encouraging investors to flush money into growth-inducing schemes and mechanisms. And there's obviously truth in that. But we, and the suits of Threadneedle St, shouldn't pretend that QE doesn't create victims too — and it is those victims that we highlight in the latest issue of The Spectator.

Santorum shakes it up

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6nT6txc8bBs Consult the soothsayers again, and rewrite the forecasts: the race for the Republican nomination has taken yet another turn. No-one much talked about Rick Santorum after he was retroactively awarded victory in January's Iowa caucus, as most pundits' attention had already moved on to Romney and Gingrich. But last night this disregarded politician triumphed in all three votes: the caucuses in Colorado and Minnesota, and a primary in Missouri. The Colorado victory was a particular shock, given how easily Romney won there in 2008.

Huhne resigns

We've just had a short statement from Chris Huhne — and, unsurprisingly, he's resigning as Energy Secretary. His words and demeanour, though, were strikingly defiant. He described the CPS's decision as ‘deeply regrettable,’ adding that, ‘I'm innocent of these charges, and I intend to fight this in the courts, and I'm confident that a jury will agree.’ In terms of a reshuffle, the likeliest outcome is that Ed Davey will glide into Huhne's former job, and Norman Lamb will in turn take Davey's place as a junior business minister. But there may be a pause before that's confirmed, as Nick Clegg is currently travelling back to London from the Lib Dem jolly in Eastbourne. Easy on the accelerator, Mr Deputy Prime Minister.

Keir Starmer’s statement on Huhne

And here's the full text: ‘This statement is made by the Crown Prosecution Service in the interests of transparency and accountability to explain the decisions reached in the cases of Mr Christopher Huhne and Ms Vasiliki Pryce and to explain the time taken in arriving at these decisions. A criminal complaint was made to Essex Police in May 2011, alleging that Ms Pryce had accepted responsibility for a speeding offence committed by Mr Huhne in 2003. That complaint was investigated by Essex Police and a file was passed to the CPS in late July 2011. The CPS advised that further investigations should be made, including obtaining certain material from a national newspaper.

Chris Huhne charged by the CPS

The CPS was building up to a bang, not a whimper, after all: the Director of Public Prosecutions has just announced that Chris Huhne and Vicky Pryce will have criminal charges brought against them for 'perverting the course of justice'. Both will appear in court on 16 February. We have not yet heard from the minister himself, although there are reports that he will resign to ‘clear his name’, etc. And even if he didn't volunteer to leave, all signs are that Cameron and Clegg will act on the advice of the cabinet secretary and shunt him out anyway. And his replacement? As it stands, the Lib Dems' Ed Davey is the favourite to take over at DECC in a limited reshuffle. UPDATE: You can watch and read Keir Starmer's statement here.