Media

Will there be TV debates at the next election?

One might have thought that the TV debates would become an immovable fixture in British general elections. But apparently not. Speaking at the launch of a new study of the 2010 election a couple of nights ago, Adam Boulton said that it was far from certain that they will feature at the next election. Will Straw tweeted the news at the time, but it seems to have slipped through the cracks as attention has been diverted elsewhere. Apparently, broadcasters and the parties have reached an impasse at this early stage in the electoral cycle. The Conservatives are reluctant to recommit themselves to something that they believe contributed to their failure

Clegg’s implicit attack on the Tories

Up until a few months ago, David Cameron and Nick Clegg tried to avoid doing big set piece broadcast interviews on the same day. This was driven by a desire to both maximise the coalition’s dominance of the media agenda and to avoid having to give a running commentary on what the other had said. But this rule has gone out of the window as the AV referendum has got rougher and rougher. So, following on from their both doing separate interviews on Andrew Marr on Sunday, they both were on the Today Programme this morning. Clegg even told Justin Webb to ask Cameron about the split between the two

Fraser Nelson

John Humphrys makes the case for voting No to AV

Is AV too complex? Ask John Humphrys, who unwittingly made the case against switching system today, in conversation with David Cameron on the Today programme. It became clear that Humphrys believed that everyone’s second preference vote would be counted under AV — and Cameron pounced. Here’s the transcript: DC: If you go to an AV system you start counting some people’s votes more than once. And you end up, in the words of Churchill… JH: No you don’t. It simply isn’t true that you count votes more than once. DC: Yes, you count all the votes. You start eliminating candidates, and you count people’s second preferences. JH: And I have

The Royal Wedding: across the web

Here is a selection of articles on the Royal Wedding from around the web. For those, like me, who wouldn’t know an Empire Line if it slapped them in the face, Vogue’s fashion live blog has all the details and photographs of what broadcasters have called a “festival of British fashion.” Sam Cam was wearing a dress from Burberry, Princess Beatrice was bedecked in Vivienne Westwood and, the main event, Kate Middleton’s dress was made by Sarah Burton of Alexander McQueen. The Telegraph’s outgoing Fashion Editor, Hillary Alexander has more details here. It’s been quite a sales demonstration for Britain’s leading designers. Export led recovery here we come! As Vanity

Hain puts his foot in it

Crude politics has intruded on the Royal Wedding after all, and all courtesy of Peter Hain. The Shadow Welsh Secretary has complained — on Twitter, naturally — that the BBC’s coverage of the event dwelt too long on David Cameron and Nick Clegg, and ignored Ed Miliband. “BBC airbrushing Labour like the Palace?” he asked leadingly. The Tory minister David Jones has since admonished him, “time, place, Peter.” If Labour have much sense they’ll play this down as efficiently as possible. Miliband, it is true, barely featured in the television coverage — but that’s really beside the point. It is rarely smart politics to take on the Palace at any

The PM turns for his tailcoat

The Prime Minister will now wear a morning suit to the Royal Wedding, Ben Brogan reports. Since I first revealed in the Mail on Sunday that he was planning to wear a lounge suit there has been a slew of complaints that this was not appropriate. Even Bruce Anderson — the columnist most sympathetic to Cameron — joined in the criticism today and used it to tell a broader story about the coalition’s problems.  Downing Street has now clearly listened and realised that the job of a Prime Minister on these occasions is not to make news. I think the issue acquired such salience because it became a question of

Through a different camera: the source of Melanie Phillips’ discontent

It is unfortunate that Melanie Phillips based her allegations of BBC bias in its reporting of Israeli actions on a video by CAMERA (Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America), and not on the original programme as broadcast.  The CAMERA video is a misrepresentation of Jane Corbin’s Panorama ‘A Walk in the Park’.   Following a complaint from CAMERA, this Panorama was thoroughly investigated for any evidence of bias and/or inaccuracy by both the Editorial Complaints Unit (ECU) of the BBC and the Editorial Standards Committee (ESC) of the BBC Trust. In both cases, the film was completely exonerated and no bias found. The ECU is entirely independent

Lansley needs to get his quiet friends talking

Is Andrew Lansley hearing rather than listening? Dame Barbara Hakin, one of the Department of Health’s national managing directors, has written a letter to some GPs that suggests the pace of health reform will not be affected by the ‘legislative pause’. Hakin writes: ‘Everyone within the Department of Health is very aware of the support shown by the GP community to date and we have been struck by the energy and enthusiasm demonstrated in pathfinders across the country. Therefore, although the Government has taken the opportunity of a natural break in the passage of the Health and Social Care Bill, we are very keen that the momentum we have built

Support for AV collapsing

An ICM/Guardian poll suggests that 58 percent of those likely to vote will back the No campaign. The Guardian reports: ‘Three-quarters of Conservatives are planning to vote will vote against, as will a small majority of Labour supporters. Only Lib Dem voters are firmly in favour, with more than two-thirds saying they will vote for the change. The Yes camp could still turn things around by winning over the 23% who say they do not know how they will vote, but this includes many people who say they may not turn out at all. Young people are more than twice as likely to favour AV as pensioners, but pensioners are

Cheap slogans and funding scandals

This week, Bagehot has devoted his column in the Economist to a popular theme: the ‘shockingly low quality of the national campaigns’ in the AV referendum, typified perhaps by the Yes campaign’s latest funding scandal and the No poster pictured above. Bagehot writes: ‘I came away from a whistle-stop tour of the country pretty impressed by the diligence of local activists, as they try to explain the intricacies of the alternative vote (AV) to members of the public. The national Yes and No campaigns are a different matter, I argue: they have blown a chance to have a proper debate about the nature of British democracy. Judging by my anecdotal crop

Saif Gaddafi: victim of circumstance…

There’s truth in the cliché that actions speak louder than words. Benjamin Barber, once a board member of the Saif Gaddafi Foundation, has defended his former patron in today’s Guardian. He declares: ‘I still believe that among the conflicting voices that vie for Saif’s tortured soul there is the voice of a genuine democrat and a Libyan patriot.’        Barber condemns Saif’s ‘abominable actions in the current crisis’, but remains convinced that his dalliance with democracy was genuine. Oblivious of the attendant irony, Barber cites Saif’s book, Manifesto, where the man who would later vow to fight to the death through rivers of Libyan blood wrote: ‘I believe it is

The Tories’ middle-class problem?

Back in July 2003, Bruce Anderson wrote a piece on David Cameron for The Spectator. Its tone was summed up by its headline — “My hero” — and that tone has suffused through much of Bruce’s writing about the Tory leader since. Which is why his piece for the FT today is striking by virtue of its differentness. Its headline is that, “Cameron is losing touch with core Tories.” Its argument is that the Tory party is ignoring the hopes, fears and aspirations of the white middle classes. Admittedly, Bruce doesn’t put all this down to Cameron. On his account, there are demographic factors at play — not least that

Labour fights back in Pickles’ war on propaganda sheets

Most councils publish a newspaper – usually delivered to your door and instantly discarded. The government has decided that these freesheets are both a waste of public money and detrimental to local newspapers competing in the open market; the accusation that they are predominantly used for propaganda purposes has also been made. Labour opposed the revisions to the Code of Recommended Practice on Local Authority Publicity, which might suggest that these publications are too valuable to their councils. However, some of the red camp’s objections were valid. Two weeks ago, Chris Williamson, Shadow Communities and Local Government Minister, said that the proposals were indicative of Whitehall’s continued interference in local

Nick Clegg was claiming that the NHS reforms were the Lib Dems’ idea just three months ago

Ahead of this morning’s Cameron, Clegg, Lansley event on the NHS, it is worth reminding ourselves of what Nick Clegg was saying about these reforms back at the start of the year. On January 23rd, he went on the Andrew Marr show and had this exchange: ‘ANDREW MARR: Huge change to the NHS just coming down the line. Was that in the Liberal Democrat manifesto? NICK CLEGG: Actually funnily enough it was. Indeed it was. We were one of the primary critics in opposition of what we felt was a top … ANDREW MARR: (over) I don’t remember you saying you were going to get rid of Primary Care Trusts

Monbiot’s mission

George Monbiot is undergoing an astounding and very public transformation. Last week he overcame the habit of a lifetime and fully endorsed nuclear power as a safe energy source. He went further this week, attacking the anti-nuclear movement for perpetuating lies and ignoring the consensus around scientific facts. He levels special criticism at the allegedly lax scholarship of Dr Helen Caldicott, a decorated primate of the anti-nuclear communion.  He also debunks the myths surrounding the disaster at Chernobyl and laments that campaigners have abused that tragedy by exaggerating its consequences. Monbiot’s tone is neither arch nor righteous. Rather, he’s disappointed and the piece has a dignified poignancy. He concludes:     

Losing control | 4 April 2011

The future of the Health and Social Care Bill is a test of Craig Oliver. For months there has been a steady drip of quiet critiques of the bill; but some Liberal Democrat grandees have suddenly broken cover and burst into open dissent. David Owen and Shirley Williams have called for the bill’s implementation to be slowed and for consultation to re-open. Both are especially concerned that private sector involvement will expose the NHS to competition law, which they believe would be detrimental to the NHS. As Williams put it: “If it looks as if it’s simply part of what’s becoming a private market we’ll be slap-bang in the middle

A month to go and still none the wiser

It’s supposed to be the day of rest, but there’s no rest for the wicked. The two sides of the alternative vote referendum have been exchanging blows all day. It seems the pro-AV camp have purged black poet Benjamin Zephaniah from some of their leaflets. Apparently, Zephaniah is all present and correct on leaflets sent to London addresses; but he has been apparently replaced by Tony Robinson in those sent to Sussex and Cornwall. The No campaign has described its opponents as “ashamed” of Mr Zephaniah’s colour, and the Yes campaign said the allegation was a “new low”. It’s six of one and half of dozen of the other, and

A shameful episode

Libby Brooks’ piece in The Guardian today is shameful. Writing about the violence that followed last weekend’s march, she  argues that the ‘relevant question is not whether or how to condemn those acts – but if any coherent agenda lies behind them and how important it is for that to sit neatly with the agenda of the whole’. She even quotes approvingly the idea that the violence can be beneficial as it might push the government to do a deal with the moderate elements of the movement and wants us to remember that ‘the vast majority of damage on Saturday was sustained by property, not persons (84 people were treated

Nuclear hysteria

The above Japanese video – explaining the nuclear accident to children — makes a lot more sense than many of the hysterical reports we have been reading in the last few days. The figures are not out yet, but it’s likely that tens of thousands were killed by the tsunami. Yet the newspapers were all focused on the nuclear meltdown — which injured 15 people. The irony is that, when a tsunami strikes, the local nuclear power station is pretty much the safest place to be. This is the argument advanced in the leading article for the current issue of The Spectator (subscribers, click here; non-subscribers please join us for

The threat to a British liberty

It’s a funny old world. I have now been contacted by two journalists informing me that Bedfordshire Police are investigating The Spectator. Why? Because of the Melanie Philips blog where she referred to the “moral depravity” of “the Arabs” who killed the Fogel family in Israel. CoffeeHousers can judge for themselves if they agree or disagree with her language and views – but should this be illegal?  The Guardian has written this story up, claiming The Spectator is being investigated by the Press Complaints Commission. This is untrue. The PCC tell me that a complaint has been lodged, but that’s as far as it has gone. They investigate only if