Peter Hoskin

Monday

Peter Hoskin

Labour and Tories level in marginals poll (but look to the swing)<br />

I know, I know – there are only so many polls a reader can take.  So I'll spare you the details from tonight's YouGov poll, or the Opinium poll in the Daily Express.  But this Populus poll in the Times is worth highlighting, if only because it seems to be attracting the most buzz.  It has Labour and the Tories both on 38 percent across 100 marginal seats.  Neck and neck – or so it seems. But as Anthony Wells points out over at UK Polling Report, what really matters is which marginals this poll covers, and what the swing is.  In this case, the marginals are those numbered 51 to 150 on the Tories' list of target seats – so it excludes the 50 Labour seats with smaller majorities.  And, even so, the numbers suggest a swing of about 6.

Peter Hoskin

Voter turnout is still higher in Iraq than in the UK

Ok, so it's down on the 75 percent achieved in 2005, but it's still striking – encouraging, even – that voter turnout was at 62 percent for the recent Iraqi general elections.  That's higher than the 61.4 percent for the last UK general election, and, lest it need saying, we didn't have to deal with deadly bomb and mortar attacks. With the "chasm" between voters and the political class as it is, in this country, you suspect that our turnout figures will be even smaller this time around.

Peter Hoskin

How much does the public need to know about Jon Venables?

There are many arguments, and many perspectives, when it comes to how much we need to know about Jon Venables' return to prison.  Yes, too much information – and too much publicity – could forfeit his anonymity.  But too little, and there's the risk that some serious questions about the probation service could remain unanswered.  The boundaries of transparency need to be set and maintained – if only so similar mistakes and tragedies cannot happen in future.   To be honest, I'm not sure where those boundaries should be set.  But, then again, it seems that the government isn't either.

Peter Hoskin

Guess what Miliband and Mandelson are going on about…

Fourteen years on from "education, education, education," Labour seems to have hit upon three new priorities for government: "Ashcroft, Ashcroft, Ashcroft".  Sure, we all knew that they would push this story as hard and as fast as it could go.  But it still says a lot about how they will go about their election campaign, when two senior ministers are still going heavy on the Tory Lord this morning.   In interview with the Guardian, Peter Mandelson says that Ashcroft has got Cameron "by the balls".  And, in the Telegraph, David Miliband claims that William Hague "can’t be an effective Foreign Secretary," after his role in the affair.

Sunday

Peter Hoskin

Have the Lib Dems just saved Labour from a post-election Brown leadership?

To be honest, the leg-flashing that the Lib Dems are doing in front of the Tories and Labour just doesn't really grab my attention.  Their overtures and innuendo may, or may not, turn out to be significant in a few weeks time – but we need a general election before we can judge either way.  In the meantime, they'd be best off keeping their positioning to themselves, and getting on with an election campaign for which they actually have some fairly attractive policies. This story, though, is worth noting down.  Apparently, in the event of a hung Parliament, Nick Clegg just couldn't bring himself to work with Gordon Brown.  Labour, perhaps (as both Clegg and Vince Cable suggested on air earlier).  Brown, no.

Saturday

Peter Hoskin

Cameron gets his message spot-on

Just a quick post to encourage CoffeeHousers to read David Cameron's speech to his party's Welsh conference today. It's not just the clearest, and most sensible, exposition of the Tories' economic message that I've come across so far – it's also the finest overall speech that I can remember Cameron giving for some time.  Plenty of hard-hitting passages, both attacking Labour's record and – crucially – setting out a positive alternative. What really makes it so impressive is the simplicity of its central message: that you can achieve better government, and better services, for less money.

Peter Hoskin

Brown seems to have blustered his way through yet another potential crisis

Yesterday, Gordon Brown argued that he curbed defence spending to prevent the public finances from spiralling out of control – but added that he had still given the MoD everything they had asked for.  So, when it's anything but defence spending, he boasts of all that extra "investment".  But when it comes to defence, he suddenly grows a fiscal conscience, of sorts.  If we weren't talking about our country's ability to fight two wars, there'd be something crudely hilarious about it all. Today, various defence figures have rounded on Brown; arguing, rightly, that his tractor statistics avoided the fundamental point – that, despite increases in the defence budget, the military was consistently underfunded from 1997 on, and especially during Iraq and Afghanistan.

Friday

Peter Hoskin

Avoiding the Burnham Disincentive

One story which has been rumbling along in the background of Ashcroft and Chilcot – and, indeed, over the past few months – is the fallout from Andy Burnham's claim that NHS bodies are now the state's "preferred provider" of healthcare in this country. With those two words, in a speech last September, the Health Secretary appears to have pulled the process of reform back a few years – as private and voluntary sector providers have tried desperately to back out of a process which they now feel is weighted, impossibly, against then. Anyway, I'd recommend that you check out Nick Timmins' excellent coverage of the latest develoments over at the FT.

Peter Hoskin

All quiet on the Chilcot front

I just took a quick stroll around the block from Old Queen St, to check out the situation on the ground outside the Chilcot Inquiry.  The most striking thing is how few protestors there are – about ten at most, I'd say, and a fraction of the number that marched out against Blair a few weeks ago.  Brown doesn't even make one placard's list of – and I quote – "Lying R. Soles," which includes Blair, Campbell, Straw and Goldsmith. It's all rather suggestive of how Brown has managed, over the years, to separate himself from those who made the political and moral case for war.  But there lies the problem.  In distancing himself from Blair et al, Brown has emphasised how he – as Chancellor – did little more than control the purse strings.

Peter Hoskin

Brown faces his interrogators

Tick, tick, tick ... there's only an hour or so to go before Brown's appearance in front of the Chilcot Inquiry.  And, athough I generally feel that this whole process is a waste of time, effort and newsprint, there's still something grimly fascinating about today's proceedings. Brown has, after all, always tended to keep a low profile when it comes to Iraq.  Let's see whether Chilcot & Co. can trudge their way through the murk of tractor statistics and other obfuscations. We all know, broadly, what they'll be asking.  How did Brown feel about the Iraq War?  And did he, as Chancellor, provide enough money for it?  In which case, there's a sense that Brown has set himself up for a fall today.

Thursday

Peter Hoskin

Tory lead cut to 2 percent in 60 key marginals

One of the refrains made in response to the recent spate of opinion polls is that they don't really capture what's going on in the marginals – the real battlgrounds where the election will be fought.  Well, now we have a YouGov/Channel 4 poll which specifically covers 60 key marginal sets, and it provides more evidence that Labour are closing ground on the Tories.  Here are the headline figures, compared to the last marginals poll for Channel 4, a year ago: Conservatives --- 39 (down 4) Labour --- 37 (up 1) Lib Dems --- 35 (up 2) And YouGov's Peter Kellner provides a useful explanation of what they mean: "The swing is down to 6.5 per cent. That is higher than the national swing – 4.

Peter Hoskin

Any fallout that the Tories face over Ashcroft is of their own making<br />

Although the heat seems to be coming off Lord Ashcroft himself, attention is now rapidly focussing on the Tory leadership.  I mean, it was one thing when William Hague admitted that he didn't know about Ashcroft's tax status until a few months ago – but quite another when it emerges that David Cameron only found out "within the last month".  As I said in my last post, there seems to have been, at the very best, astonishing naivety on the part of the Cameron & Co.  They should have seen these problems coming months ago, and tried to defuse them then – rather than being forced on to the defensive, only weeks before an election. They may yet get off lightly.

Peter Hoskin

Ashcroft in the clear?<br />

The Beeb were reporting it an hour or so ago, but now it's been confirmed: the Electoral Commission has cleared the Tories and Lord Ashcroft of any wrongdoing over £5.1 million worth of donations from his company, Bearwood Corporate Services Limited.  Sure, there are still questions surrounding this whole affair – most of them to do with the Tories' naivety in their handling of it.  But you suspect that this announcement will draw some of the political poison out of proceedings.  Not that that will stop Harriet Harman or her colleagues in the Labour party... UPDATE: Channel 4's Cathy Newman is reporting that David Cameron only knew about Ashcroft's non-dom status "within the last month".

Peter Hoskin

Available from all good bookshops…

... this September: Tony Blair's memoirs, entititled The Journey.  Question is, what does this say about his hopes for a Labour victory?  Or will all the juicy Blarite-Brownite stuff be cut out?  Either way, the cover will be what you see on the left.

Wednesday

Peter Hoskin

Michael Foot, 1913 – 2010

The former Labour leader Michael Foot died today, aged 96.  A man whose politics I doubt many CoffeeHousers will share, and whose period in charge of the Labour party might not be remembered with much fondness by those who do.  But his commitment, integrity and intelligence still stand as a bright, clear example to politicians today.  I'd recommend you read the warm and thoughful tributes from Tom Harris, Jon Snow, Dan Hannan, Sunder Katwala and Alastair Campbell, among others.

Peter Hoskin

PMQs live blog | 3 March 2010

Stay tuned for live coverage from 1200. 1201: And here we go.  Obviously, with Brown meeting Zuma, it's the deputies today. Harman starts with condolences for the fallen. 1202: Incidentally, Cameron is being interviewed on TalkSport radio, if you want to listen to that. 1203: First question: why manufacturing has fallen under Labour. Harman says that this is the Tories "talking the country down". Hm. Easier than actually answering the question, I suppose... 1204: This PMQs is already getting noisily partisan.  A second question brings some "do nothing Tories" innuendo from Harman.  Jeers and cheers all round. 1206: Hague now.  His first question is whether Brown was wrong to cut the helicopter budget.

Tuesday

Peter Hoskin

How the televised leaders’ debates will work

The various parties involved in the televised leaders' debate have finally come to an agreement on how they will work.  You can read full details here, courtesy of Sky.  But the main points are: i) Topics and locations. The first debate will be hosted by ITV's Alastair Stewart, in Manchester, and will cover domestic affairs.  The second will be Sky's Adam Boulton, in Bristol, and will cover foreign policy.  And the third will be the Beeb's David Dimbleby, in Birmingham, on the economy. ii) Structure. The rather rigid structure of each programme will be as follows: "Each leader will make an opening statement on the theme of the debate lasting for 1 minute. After the three opening statements the moderator will take the first question on the agreed theme.

Peter Hoskin

Is this the closest that Brown’s government has come to a <em>mea culpa</em>?

A striking passage from Peter Mandelson's speech at Mansion House last night: "Starting in the 1980s we allowed the diversity of the British economy – or lack of it - to approach the limits of what was prudent. Sometimes there was an economic fatalism about manufacturing decline and falling British goods exports, rather than seeing them as something that policy and private enterprise should address. Our economy, and certainly our corporate tax base, became too dependent on the City. We were also carrying a huge hidden insurance liability for a sector that was taking badly understood and inadequately policed risks.

Peter Hoskin

Labour’s pursuit of Ashcroft could backfire

I wrote yesterday that Lord Ashcroft's statement about his tax status should have drawn a "rather neat line under the issue".  Sure, it's hardly ideal that someone with such influence in our politics hasn't been paying UK taxes on much of his wealth (something which could equally be said of Labour donors like Lord Paul and Lakshmi Mittal), and was keeping mysterious about it.  But at least, now, most of the uncertainty surrounding Ashcroft's position has been removed.  And we have his indication that he will become a full UK taxpayer in due course.   But I hadn't counted on the tenacity of Labour, who are trying to spin this story as far as it will go.