Peter Hoskin

Lansley’s headache becomes a migraine

Now that the three party leaders have each pronounced on capitalism, domestic politics is returning to its familiar battlegrounds. And there are few more familiar battlegrounds, for this government, than the NHS. Earlier this week a couple of unions came out completely against Andrew Lansley's health reforms, despite his previous efforts to accommodate their concerns. And now we learn that the Commons health select committee, chaired by the former Tory Health Secretary Stephen Dorrell, is set to criticise those reforms as well. According to the Observer, a report that they're publishing this week will raise a common complaint: that it's tricky for the NHS to both reorganise and find efficiencies at the same time.

From the archives: Brown, the opera

Perfect for Friday evening is this: the Gordon Brown-themed version of Ko-Ko's ‘little list’ from The Mikado that Jeff Randall wrote for us back in 2007. The chorus should be sung, according to Jeff, by three people who have been quite prominent this week: Ed Miliband, Ed Balls and Yvette Cooper... The clunking fist, Jeff Randall, The Spectator, 3 March 2007 Britain doesn’t do Lord High Executioners, but if it did, Gordon Brown would probably be the best in the world. The prospect of the Chancellor in this role occurred to me while listening again to Gilbert & Sullivan’s masterful satire, The Mikado. Ko-Ko makes his entrance with ‘a little list’ of those who are for the chop. Among the joys of W.S.

Will Huhne survive this?

What odds, this morning, on Chris Huhne retaining his ‘Survivor of the Year’ crown at this year's Spectator Parliamentarian Awards? I only ask because The Sunday Times has dropped its challenge to hang on to its emails with his former wife, Vicky Pryce, about those speeding points. They'll now be handed over to the police, and shuffled into their evidence folders for this case. The Prime Minister's spokesman has said that Cameron still ‘has confidence’ in Huhne — but all this does at least raise the prospect of a reshuffle. If the Energy Secretary is found guilty, and had to depart his ministership, then he's likely to be replaced by another Lib Dem. The Evening Standard mentioned Ed Davey, Jeremy Browne and David Laws earlier this week.

Off with their Eds! Yvette’s in town

This week's Spectator cover has achieved a rare distinction: it's going to be hung up on the wall chez Ed Balls and Yvette Cooper. Or at least that's what the shadow chancellor told Sky's Jon Craig when quizzed about it earlier. You can see the cover image itself, by Stephen Collins, to the left. And below are a few extracts from the article by Melissa Kite that it illustrates. ‘Can Cooper save the Labour party?’ it asks. ‘Is she Labour's Iron Lady?’ And the answer… well, you'll have to read the full thing for that. In the meantime, here are those extracts to whet your appetite: 1) Office space. ‘In Yvette Cooper’s home, an entire room is given over to memorabilia of her husband’s life in politics.

Miliband’s proximity problem

Ed Miliband is on unusually assertive form this morning. His observation in the FT that ‘my speech to Labour’s annual conference was not — I think it is fair to say — universally well-received’ is not, I think, intended self-deprecatingly, but rather self-congratulatory, as though he were the only politician calling for a ‘responsible capitalism’ at the time. And he's repeated that suggestion elsewhere: in a short statement for Which?, and in a Labour briefing document — entitled Who is he trying to kid? — that has been filtered around the crowd at David Cameron's speech. Ed is trying to crash Dave's party, and bring it crashing down. Like I say, he's being unusually assertive.

Lansley’s health problems return

Another day, another exercise in obstructionism from the unions. Only this time it's not Ed Miliband that they're complaining about. It's Andrew Lansley and the government's health reforms. The Royal College of Nursing and the Royal College of Midwives have said that the entire Health Bill should be dropped. They have shifted, as they put it rather dramatically, to ‘outright opposition’. Which must be annoying for Lansley, given how he took time to ‘pause, listen and engage’ last summer, and adjusted his Bill accordingly. That whole process was meant to anaethetise this sort of disagreement, but the tensions clearly persist and could indeed get worse from here.

What Boris Island tells us about Cameron

He already has his bikes and his buses, but might Boris get his island too? Today's Telegraph reports that David Cameron is going to announce a consultation into building a new airport in the Thames estuary, as was first proposed by the London Mayor. The PM will wait until that consultation is over before making a final decision, but he's said to be 'provisionally supportive' of the plan at the moment. Nick Clegg, by the sounds of it, is more provisionally negative. Even the very prospect of Boris Island is a triumph for the Mayor, and not least because Cameron and George Osborne were previously opposed to it. It also says much about the more general shift in attitude of those Tories in government.

The new politics of leaning on business

Ed Miliband the consumer champion, the saviour of the squeezed classes. That, more or less, is how the Labour leader has always sought to sell himself — but this morning the sales pitch goes into overdrive. He has an interview with the Daily Telegraph in which he attacks 'Rip-off Britain'. Not the TV show, mind, but those companies that hammer their customers with extra costs and hidden charges. Excessive savings fees, car-parking charges, airline levies, bank charges, consumer helpline costs and energy bills; all these should come to an end, says Miliband. And he has a few measures for achieving that. What strikes me, when reading the interview, is how this fits into a trend of politicians leaning on businesses to make them curb certain excesses.

The Lib Dems’ differentiation strategy, pictured

As revealed in Rachel Sylvester's Times column (£) today: “Richard Reeves, Mr Clegg’s political adviser, draws a graph that plots ‘Government unity and strength’ against ‘Lib Dem identity’ as two lines, one going down and the other up, between 2010 and 2015. The lines cross in 2012. ‘Every minute of every day between now and the election we will turn up the dial on differentiation,’ says a strategist.” So I've pasted my own version of the Reeves graph above to, erm, get it on paper, as it were. Of course, it's not surprising that the Lib Dems — or, indeed, the Tories — would do more to distinguish themselves as the election approaches.

Labour disunited

Labour MPs didn't pick Ed Miliband as Labour leader; they preferred his brother. Labour members didn't pick Ed Miliband as Labour leader; they preferred his brother too. It was the union bloc that delivered the crown unto Ed — spearheaded by the votes, support and influence of the country's largest trade union, Unite. Which is what makes Len McCluskey's article for the Guardian today so dangerous for the Labour leader. McCluskey, you'll remember, is the head of Unite — and he's not happy with how things are going now that Miliband has closed the ground, rhetorically at least, between his party's fiscal stance and the coalition's.

Scottish independence by numbers

It's far from the first poll on Scottish independence in recent years, or even in recent days, but YouGov's effort for Channel4 this evening contains some noteworthy findings nonetheless. What is does is replicate the conditions that — for the reasons that Peter Kellner explains in a very useful blog post here — Alex Salmond would like in 2014. Which means two questions, one after the other. First, status quo or ‘devo-max’? Second, status quo or full independence? And the results? By YouGov's count, 58 per cent of people are in favour of ‘devo-max’ for the first question, with 42 per cent against. And, for the second question, 39 per cent back full independence, with 61 per cent against.

A joke too far?

Tom Harris lost his job as Labour's ‘Twitter tsar’ today after uploading this Salmond-themed Downfall video onto YouTube.

Clegg versus vested interests (and the Tories)

‘Another week, another speech about the evils of capitalism.’ So joked Nick Clegg at the start of his speech to Mansion House earlier, and there was some truth in this particular jest. All three parties are jostling to be seen as the harbingers of a new economy at the moment — one that doesn't reward failure; that benefits everyone ‘fairly’; that won't seize up as the old one did; that etc, etc. Ed Miliband sketched out his rather insipid vision for this economy last week; David Cameron will hope to do a better job later this week. Today, though, was the Deputy Prime Minister's turn. So what did Clegg say?

Osborne visits China, but can’t escape Europe

Yet another day here in Westminster that's all about the economy. Nick Clegg has just delivered a speech on the subject to Mansion House, focusing on ‘responsible capitalism’, which we'll blog shortly. And two prominent forecasting groups, the Ernst & Young ITEM Club and the Centre for Economic and Business Research, have suggested that we're effectively back in recession. They both reckon that the economy shrank in the final quarter of last year, and is wilting even further in this current quarter. But, like the OECD, they also predict that this ‘double dip’ will be relatively short-lived and relatively mild. Against that backdrop, enter George Osborne.

Where will the Welfare Reform Bill go from here?

Yep, it's that battle over ‘fairness’ again. Labour peers, along with a decent scattering of Lib Dems and independents, believe that some of the government's money-saving welfare measures are unfair – which is why they voted them down in the Lords last night. Whereas the government, of course, thinks quite the opposite. Their proposed limits to Employment and Support Allowance are designed, they say, to affect those who either can work or who have a relatively good level of income already, while keeping the ‘safety net’ in place for everyone. And that's fair not just to benefit claimants, but also to other taxpayers who are contributing towards the system.

Why Ed Miliband’s PMQs slip-up matters

The exchange about rail fares in PMQs earlier was, it's true, not one for the photo album. But the way it's resolved itself this afternoon has been considerably more diverting. You see, it turns out that David Cameron was right: Labour did arrange for these fare increases when in government. And, what's more, Ed Miliband was wrong: the coalition didn't ‘reverse’ the cap on fares that Labour then conveniently introduced in the run up to the general election. That cap was limited to one year by the Labour government itself. It was always intended that it would expire on 1 January 2011, at which point — barring a new cap — the train companies could go back to the hyper-inflated fares they'd imposed previously. And that's what happened.

The coalition finds its balance over Scotland

As much as I dislike the phrase ‘the third way’, it sums up what the coalition has done today. Given the choice between hobbling or accommodating Alex Salmond and his referendum on Scottish independence, it has decided to do neither and both. In the words of the Scottish Secretary Michael Moore, speaking in the House just now, the referendum will be ‘made in Scotland, by the people of Scotland’ — just so long as Westminster okays it first. Maybe that'll make more sense if we look at what, specifically, was announced today. Moore's main point was that any referendum held by the Scottish government, without the approval of the UK government, would be ‘unconstitutional’.

Miliband’s speech fails to excite

Was Ed's Big Speech worth the extended wait? Not really. It wasn't a stone-cold terrible speech, but neither was it the rambunctious, attention-grabbing number that his leadership could do with. In fact, we could have saved ourselves the effort by simply reading his New Year's message again. That was considerably shorter, and covered almost all of the same ground. Squeezed middle? Check. Tackling vested interests? Check. An admission that Labour will need to cut? Ch… oh, you get the point. The best that could be said about today's speech is that it presented some of these arguments more clearly than in the past. Indeed, the attack on George Osborne's fiscal agenda was, by Miliband's usual standards, particularly punchy.