David cameron

Last night a group of Liberal Democrat and Conservative MPs met to discuss Lords reform. Public outbursts from the Conservative backbench have so far focused on opposition to the bill and the programme motion that the whips are trying to impose on the legislation, but the group of pro-reform MPs, who have informally dubbed themselves the Democratic Majority, are optimistic that the legislation will make a successful passage through the House of Commons. There are 27 Conservatives on board at the moment along all the Lib Dems, standing up the list of 100 MPs that the rebel leaders claim to have among their number. Ringleader Jake Berry, a member of

I have been waiting more than two years for this government to say or do something really radical. By this I don’t mean taking the Blairite revolution to its logical conclusion (or is it reductio ad absurdum?) by introducing pseudo-markets deeper into every area of the public sector and reforms to the welfare state New Labour certainly considered but never dared to carry out. But what was genuinely counter-intuitive for the Labour Party is not necessarily so for the Conservatives. For Tony Blair to embrace the private sector, distance himself from the trade unions and challenge the received wisdom of Labour’s state-ism was a genuine break with the past. For

David Cameron’s position on Europe is becoming clearer. ‘Fresh settlement, fresh consent’, the soundbite he kept using, is simply a euphemism for renegotiation followed by a referendum. It seems that this renegotiation will span the next election. Indeed, it will start as soon as a new EU treaty is proposed. In response to a question from Peter Lilley, Cameron said he will try to use any forthcoming treaty to attempt to bring powers back to this country. Those close to Cameron say that the plan is to get as much back before the next election and then accelerate the process as soon as there is a treaty negotiation under a

Over at the books blog, former Tory MP Jerry Hayes has reviewed James Hanning and Francis Elliott’s Cameron: Practically a Conservative. The key to Hanning and Elliott’s analysis resides in their title. David Cameron is a practical politician, not an ideologue; his quiet values instilled by a comfortable upbringing and a natural talent for conciliation. Jerry concludes: ‘Personally, I would hate to be governed by an ideologue who had to jump through self-imposed Jesuitical hoops before making a decision. I much prefer someone who tries to do the right thing, even if they don’t always succeed.’ I recommend reading the review in full (and Jerry recommends all to read the

Ed Miliband stands accused of many faults, but he rarely slips an opportunity to be opportunistic. James has said that the error and arrogance of the banking establishment, epitomised by the LIBOR and mis-selling scandals, allows Miliband to pose as a ‘tribune of the people’. And so it has come to pass. Miliband has today addressed the Fabian Society – a generous audience for him to be sure, but a suitably humble platform for him nonetheless.  He received a sort of reverse show trial: a lot of predictable questions to which he gave answers of breath-taking predictability. But that is their strength. Tony Parsons has a piece in today’s Mirror

Ed Miliband was spoilt for choice at today’s PMQs. Scarcely a week goes by without the government reneging on some budget promise, so Labour’s  leader had a whole fistful of blunders to consider. Wisely, he took the simplest option and quoted an apologia made by David Cameron on April 11th. ‘I will defend every part of the budget,’ the prime minister told some interviewer somewhere. ‘I worked on it very closely with the Chancellor. Line by line.’ That was pure gold for Miliband. And pure poison for the prime minister. ‘What went wrong?’ asked the Labour leader casually.   Cameron flipped into full denial mode. ‘I cannot be a U-turn!’

Talk to anyone in Downing Street and they can give you the four main reasons that voters cite for switching from the Tories to Labour: the Tory leadership is out of touch, the cost of living, immigration and welfare. The first two of these reasons are why the government has been prepared to risk further ridicule by changing the Budget again to postpone the 3p fuel increase planned for August until the end of the year. The timing of today’s move, just hours after Ed Balls said Labour would call a Commons vote on the matter, will attract much Westminster comment. But the Tories are confident that this will pass

Why has David Cameron chosen to launch what is effectively a 2015 manifesto pledge on welfare today? The Prime Minister’s speech, which he has just finished giving, had quite interesting timing: we still, after all, have just under three years before the next general election. Cameron has already dropped hints about how much further the Conservatives could go on key areas – and specifically referred to welfare – without the Liberal Democrats holding them back, but this is the first instance where he has pinpointed a particular post-2015 policy. It leaves the Liberal Democrats once again on the back foot over benefits, suggesting to a public hungry for a more

A few years back the radio disc jockey John Peel died. Some public sorrow was expressed and soon Tony Blair issued a press release explaining his personal sadness. A little while later someone else who was popular died and the same thing happened. A few days later still and hundreds of thousands of people were killed and many more made homeless by a Tsunami out East. For several hours Blair was silent. Some media jumped on this and whipped up public expressions of shock. ‘Why has our Prime Minister not expressed sadness about the Tsunami deaths?’ and so on. I don’t know why Blair took a few more hours than

Michael Gove’s plan to scrap GCSEs and replace them with a beefed-up O-Level are, as Brother Blackburn observed earlier, threatened by the Conservatives’ coalition partners. It seems quite probable that Gove’s proposals will be watered down following the usual “consultation” with the Liberal Democrats. This will, understandably, vex Tories. Gove’s proposals have considerable merit even if, as always, the advantages of his plans are (partially) offset by their drawbacks. As successive governments have discovered it is difficult to build an education system that is demanding, universal and equitable. There must be winners and losers and the argument is chiefly about defining those terms. Today’s developments also demonstrate that neither partner