From David Cameron’s Radio 2 appearance this week:
If I was running a Conservative-only government I think we would be making further steps on things like immigration control or making sure that our welfare reforms were absolutely making sure that if you’re not prepared to work you can’t go on welfare.
That’s a very broad hint as to the extent of Liberal Democrat success in altering what he would like to do to the immigration and welfare systems.
In my PMQs review for May 18th, I paraphrased this answer from David Cameron as recorded here in Hansard as follows:
I am very grateful to the hon. Gentleman for allowing me to clear this up. When I read about Mr Britnell being my adviser, I was slightly puzzled, because I have never heard of this person in my life, and he is not my adviser. However, I did a little research, and it turned out that he was an adviser to the previous Government. Oh, don’t worry, there is plenty more. He helped to develop Labour’s
Someone must have told Ed Miliband that he shouldn’t flit around, butterfly-like, between subjects at Prime Minister’s Questions. He did that last week and got a caning for it. So this week he was doggedly persistent – monomaniac even – on just one subject. Indeed, just one question. He repeated the same words over and over and over and over again. The impression was that he had gone from the sublime to the ridiculous, but it worked and he ostensibly wrong-footed David Cameron.
Ed Miliband said that the government’s welfare reform plans would make 7,000 cancer sufferers worse off by up …
Over at Total Politics Iain Dale interviews former Lib Dem Chief Executive Lord Rennard about his views on the local elections, The AV referendum and Coalition government.
Here’s a flavour:
Bernard Jenkin said you could imagine a Lib Dem enclave within the Conservative Party at some point. It’s happened before, hasn’t it? Do you think that that’s at all possible or likely?
I think that’s just trouble-making by someone who is very anti-coalition. I don’t think in the 21st century things will go back to the way they were in the 1920s or 1930s.
With the new version of the government’s health plans due out on Monday or Tuesday, expect tomorrow’s papers to be full of pre-briefing from the different camps – the pro-Lansley Tories, the rest of the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats.
The first of that trio are likely to have by far the toughest, verging on implausible, task given the major changes coming to the original NHS plans. The bigger media battle is between Conservatives and Liberal Democrats (or Cameron and Clegg if you prefer your politics in distilled personalised format) over the relative credit for those changes.
Pity poor old Ken Clarke. When your own side are saying you are too old for the job, then you know things are bad. Phillip Hollobone (Con) asked at Prime Ministers’ Questions why magistrates have to retire at 70 years old while the man who appoints them, the Justice Secretary – Clarke, is 71 years old. With friends like that….
David Cameron’s “re-launch” of the Big Society last week didn’t generate the revival of enthusiasm for the scheme that some had hoped for. Many people still claim not to understand the term “Big Society”, with critics continuing to suggest it’s little more than PR spin for budget cuts.
With the rise of faith-based organisations taking ownership of community services, and in light of Evan Harris’ warning about “proselytising on the public purse”, it’s clear that non-discriminatory, non-partisan, non-denominational and fair services are needed, both to support the more vulnerable members of the community, and to compensate for local council spending …
The coalition is working well, but the Lib Dems could do better, is the overall message from the Constitution Unit’s first report on how the coalition works in Whitehall and Westminster. We are conducting a 12 month study, funded by the Nuffield Foundation, with a research team of five, including two former senior civil servants, and one senior broadcaster. David Cameron and Nick Clegg have authorised access to all the key figures in Whitehall, and so far we have interviewed 90 ministers, special advisers, officials, parliamentarians, and external interest groups.
Yesterday Chris Nicholson looked at what is worrying Labour. Today he turns to the Conservatives.
What’s worrying the Tories?
The consensus view after the local elections was that the Tories had done amazingly well and so had the least to worry about. But amongst strategists there are some very real concerns. The General Election had shown that Cameron’s attempts to de-toxify the Tory brand was still work in progress. Despite all of David Cameron’s efforts enough people were still unsure about the Tories to deny them a majority. Michael Ashcroft’s recent polling shows that there is still considerable work to do …
Over the last two weeks, as the crisis he faces steadily deepened, he has been the driving force behind two of the most momentous decisions any administration has taken, ones that could shape Britain’s economic development for the rest of the century, and beyond.
Last week the government adopted the world-beating goal of cutting carbon emissions to half 1990 levels by 2025. No other
There has been much talk in recent weeks about how Liberal Democrats show our distinctiveness and make the party’s voice heard more loudly in government.
A key part of this is the role of the Lib Dem parliamentary committees, one of which I co-chair.
These committees are not simply talking shops. They perform two important functions: making our influence felt within government and preparing the ground for party policy in the future.
Increasingly, the fruits of these committees are being seen.
The Coalition Agreement is the contract that underwrites this government. It sets out the policy agenda agreed between ourselves and our Coalition …
On the day the coalition announces its proposals for reforming the House of Lords to make it more efficient and accountable, it’s worth highlighting the support for such reforms expressed by the Prime Minister in last year’s first debate between the three party leaders.
It’s often said that David Cameron is at best ambivalent about House of Lords reform, but he is quite clear in his view in this video clip:
The environmental credibility of the Liberal Democrats is under threat.
Its general election manifesto was easily the most ambitious of all the main parties, with the environment firmly at the heart of every policy area.
So our hopes were high when the party joined forces with Cameron’s Conservatives last year – and higher still when one of the new Prime Minister’s first acts was a promise to lead the greenest Government ever.
Twelve months on the picture looks much bleaker.
Friends of the Earth asked the former chair of the Sustainable Development Commission, Jonathon Porritt, to review the Coalition’s first year in office. His assessment was pretty damning.
Channel 4 News has conducted an interesting YouGov poll surveying former and current Lib Dem members about their views on the Coalition. Their political editor Gary Gibbon gives the skinny on his blog:
We have a YouGov poll, taken from 396 Lib Dem members and 118 former members, on the programme tonight. It found that 52% of (396) members sampled thought the coalition wouldn’t run the full five years, though 63% thought it should. The poll suggests 35% think Nick Clegg shouldn’t lead the party into the next election (against 45% saying he should) – worth remembering he only won
Liberal Democrats have long known that grassroots campaigns can win a ward, a council or a constituency – but they don’t win national election campaigns. It’s the knowledge that you need both the grassroots campaign and an effective national media and/or advertising campaign that explains why when Chris Rennard was the party’s Chief Executive not only did the Campaigns Department grow hugely in size – but so too did the national press team.
Yet at the heart of the Yes campaign in last week’s AV referendum seems to have been a big mistake: trying to run a grassroots campaign to win …
When LibDem MPs return to Westminster this week they could be forgiven for having a collective panic attack. In their 22 year history they have never had such an onslaught of the political heebie-jeebies as they experienced at the hands of 12 million grumpy voters this week.
Cleggmania has turned into Cleggophobia. Every policy Nick Clegg touches now is seen to be toxic.
Westminster pundits are already writing him off as a political busted flush. But then again, these are the very same commentators who didn’t see the SNP landslide coming in Scotland. They are the same people who predicted the Tories …
The House Magazine has a new feature out looking at the likely political fallout from Thursday’s elections and referendum. It looks at both a Yes or a No vote, including this from me on future Lib Dem / Labour relations:
At the launch of the Yes2AV campaign, a tantalising glimpse into the future was offered for those who dream of a unification of the progressive left. On the stage at Methodist Central Hall sat Labour leader Ed Miliband, Green leader Caroline Lucas, and Liberal Democrat stalwarts Charles Kennedy and Shirley Williams. And Tim Farron, Lib Dem party president and a likely future leadership contender, was there too. However, Mark Pack, co-editor of Lib Dem Voice, warns against reading too much into the apparent bonhomie. “Coalitions are driven by parliamentary arithmetic far more than by politicians’ own preferences,” Pack says. “So the answer really depends on the public rather than how relations between politicians are affected by the referendum.
It also quotes Olly Grender on the possible policy implications of a No vote:
If the referendum is lost, then disgruntled Lib Dem backbenchers will be keen to contribute to a ‘shopping list’ for Nick Clegg to take to David Cameron. Insiders say the plans to reform the NHS will become a priority, while proposals for reform of the Upper House will be published at the end of the month. Olly Grender, former communications chief for the Lib Dems, sets out the desired gains from the NHS and Social Care Bill:
“There should be clear safeguards regarding the issue of competition and the private sector, and funding should be secured on the understanding that reform and reduction are impossible to achieve together,” Grender argues. “There should also be a change of pace regarding the introduction of GP consortia.” Further goals, says Grender, should include “a faster drive towards the increased threshold of £10,000 helping people on lowest incomes during the toughest times”, while greater safeguards of critical public services – “whilst continuing to try to pay down the deficit” – should, she says, be put in place. On top of House of Lords reform, Grender argues, climate change and social mobility need greater emphasis.
I’ve talked in more detail about what to watch out for in Thursday’s results in this YouTube clip:
As I’ve said before, I’ve mixed feeling about celebs speaking out on their political views – they should certainly be free to do so, but unless they’ve got some particular expertise there’s no reason to give their views extra weight over anyone else.
One person who does know a lot about how politics works is Armando Iannucci, courtesy of the detailed research he has done for his famous satirical shows. He’s taken to the Evening Standard this week to put his case for a Yes vote on Thursday:
In the end, I knew I’d make my decision based on which side had the least headbangingly annoying argument, so I’ve come down on the side of voting Yes. This is mostly as a result of David Cameron’s beautifully foolish argument on Sunday that voting for electoral reform wasn’t British. It was so alarming to see him forget all British history from 1832 onwards, where small but steady electoral reform has been a very, very British thing to do (votes for women, anyone?) that I’m now quite alarmed he has any say over how our children are educated.
Lib Dem Voice has polled our members-only forum to discover what Lib Dem members think of various political issues, the Coalition, and the performance of key party figures. Over 530 party members have responded, and we’re currently publishing the full results.
(Part I of ‘What Lib Dem members think about immigration’ is available to read here.)
LDV asked: Generally speaking, do you think that the issue of immigration has been discussed in Britain too much, too little or about the right amount over the last few years?
36% – It has been discussed too much
29% – It has been discussed about
Nick Clegg wrote an article for the Evening Standard yesterday aimed at London voters, who’ll only be voting in the AV referendum on May 5th as London does not have council elections* this year.
As well as outlining the reasons for voting Yes to Fairer Votes, “I believe most Londoners want a new way of electing MPs that cleans up politics, makes MPs work harder and makes every vote count,” Nick busts the myths about AV: “vote-counting machines that don’t exist and won’t be needed. Claims that the alternative vote is too complex for the British people to understand, as …
Recently Ed Miliband’s Labour Party TV broadcast expressed his frustration that the world of politics wasn’t like the real world. Considering that the entire broadcast was along the lines of painting Ed Miliband as an ordinary guy, it got me thinking on the subject of whether we really want our politicians to be ordinary people. It seems common sense that we want the people who represent us, to be like us. I would question this assumption, especially when we look at some of the other requirements we place on them.
The first requirement is obviously that they are knowledgeable about the …
Yesterday, David Cameron took up the issue of people on incapacity benefits, claiming that “We are finding a large number of people who are on incapacity benefit because of drink problems, alcohol problems or problems with weight and diet” (see footage here).
There’s only one problem with the claim.
He said “a large number”. Yet the Department for Work and Pension’s own figures show that it’s less than one in twenty of people who are on incapacity benefit for those reasons (3.9%).
So if 3.9% is “a large number”, what does that make the 96.1%? A huge, enormous, gigantic, big, …
David Cameron’s speech on immigration has unleashed a wave of criticism and debate, both inside and outside the coalition government. Although some of the fallout tells us more about the political dilemmas facing coalition partners who must now fight an election campaign against each other than it does about immigration, today’s discussions have neatly illustrated some of the challenges facing the Government on this issue.
The first is how to best engage in the public debate. David Cameron is right to say that “the role of politicians is to cut through the extremes of this debate & approach the subject sensibly …
Today, the Prime Minister took on the “pen-pushers and busybodies” whose red tape is threatening hundreds of Royal Wedding street parties up and down the country. In language rather untypical of a Prime Minister, particularly in recent years, he said:
“I hope people are able to join in and celebrate and I am very much saying today that if people want to have a street party, don’t listen to people who say “it is all bureaucracy and health and safety and you cant do it.” It is very important to understand if anyone wants to have a street party you don’t need a food license, you don’t need an entertainment license, you don’t need to have written documents about closing your street, you don’t have to pay for street closures, you don’t have to have special health and safety permission because there are councils out there telling you you do need these things – you don’t.”
Very nice of the Prime Minister to step in. But somehow I imagine few sighs of relief being breathed across the country, people giving up their fights with local councils and digging out their bunting.
Earlier this week, David Cameron made a speech against AV in which he invoked Winston Churchill’s views on electoral systems – and saying, “If in doubt, trust Winston”.
Now it’s true Winston Churchill didn’t like AV. But can you guess what electoral system this quote from Churchill was about?
The present system has clearly broken down. The results produced are not fair to any party, nor to any section of the community. In many cases they do not secure majority representation, nor do they secure an intelligent representation of minorities. All they secure is fluke representation, freak representation, capricious representation.
Yesterday, Pollwatch looked at the current state of the parties; today it’s the turn of the party leaders, Messrs Clegg, Cameron and Miliband.
As with all polls, what follows comes with caveats. Five of the polling companies – YouGov, Ipsos-Mori, ComRes, ICM and Angus Reid – ask questions specifically to find out the public’s views of the party leaders. And each asks variants on the basic question – do you think Clegg/Cameron are doing a good job – to come up with their figures, so comparison ain’t easy. For that reason, I’m taking a 3-month rolling average which isn’t very statistically …
Well, there’s a headline that will cause equal consternation among both Lib Dem and Conservative supporters… and doubtless prompt some no-surprise-there snarks from Labourites too.
But what’s more interesting than the stark headline (prompted by this Telegraph interview) is Norman Tebbit’s reason for admiring Nick Clegg over his own party leader:
He says he is more of a Conservative than David Cameron. The Big Society is just a “buzzword. It’s a logo looking for a product”. He wants to turn the party back to being nationalist and jokes that he would like it to go into coalition with the UK
It’s been rather a self-inflicted wound by the Coalition Government to leave such a long gap between announcing that it would abolish the Education Maintenance Allowance and publishing details of what will be introduced in its stead. I’m happy to wait until we know what the replacement will be like before judging whether the EMA abolition is a good move or not, but it’s not exactly a surprise that many people have made up their minds knowing only part of the story given that huge gap.
That said, the substance of the issue is an important one and the noises coming …
Here are some selections from today’s debate in Parliament so far on the United Nations resolution on Libya and subsequent military action which touch on the questions of international law, the Liberal Democrat position, what is happening in other countries and the question of Iraq:
Bob Russell (Colchester) (LD):In view of the obviously barbaric attacks by Gaddafi on his own people, does the Prime Minister agree that those officials and military chiefs who are still standing firm with Gaddafi stand every chance of being hauled before the war crimes tribunal?
The Prime Minister: The hon. Gentleman makes an excellent point. The
Nick Clegg has voiced his support for possible military intervention in Libya, saying that any action would be carried out in order to “uphold international law”.
The deputy prime minister, whose Liberal Democrat Party opposed the war in Iraq, said: “This is not Iraq. We are not going to war”.
His comments came after Prime Minister David Cameron confirmed that UK forces would join an international operation to enforce a UN resolution which demands an end to attacks on Libyan civilians.
For the full story, and a video of the BBC’s interview with Nick Clegg, see the BBC website.
David Allen A clear, credible, principled strategy from the Yorkists! Makes a welcome change.
Sadly, followed by twenty below-the-line posts, providing nearly twenty ve...
Simon McGrath so we get a permanant increase in costs for these subsidies based on ( alleged ) windfall profits. Its another big increase in spending -how is it to be paid ...
Peter Davies @Kira CollinsThat assumes we want to help people more with their energy bills than with all the other bills they may be struggling with. There is no reason why ...
Rob Heale Agree that we need to focus on strategy and have clearer messaging:-
1. We MUST prioritise membership recruitment in all we do, including PPB's, most leaflets...
Kira Collins Disappointed. The most obvious means of reducing energy bills is to remove VAT. Relatively straightforward to do and does not adversely impact on the attractive...
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Brexit and summer holidays
The pine martens of Shropshire
The shame of Liverpool Labour councillors taking their allowances but not turning up to do the work
David Allen 
Simon McGrath 
Peter Davies 
Rob Heale 
Kira Collins 