Chris grayling

The coalition’s big choice on Incapacity Benefit

The coalition’s plan for moving claimants off Incapacity Benefit and into work is, at heart, an admirable one.  For too long, IB has been used a political implement for massaging the overall unemployment figures, and it has allowed thousands of people to wrongly stay unemployed at the taxpayers’ expense.  There is, quite simply, a moral and economic case for reform. But that doesn’t mean that Professor Paul Gregg’s comments in the Times today should be ignored.  Gregg is one of the architects of the current system for moving claimants off IB, and he raises stark concerns about how that system is currently operating.  The main problem, he says, is the

Osborne turns his attention to welfare

George Osborne suggested as much in his Today interview last week, but now we know for sure: the government will look to cut the welfare bill even further in October’s spending review, and incapacity benefit will come in for special attention from the axemen. It was, you sense, ever going to be thus. With unprotected departments facing cuts of over 25 percent unless more action is taken elsewhere, the £12bn IB budget was always going to be a tempting target for extra cuts. Particularly as so much of it goes to claimants who could be in work. The questions now are how? and how fast?  The first answer seems clear

What to do with all that knowledge on welfare

Is Frank Field back? The Labour MP has spent much of his life talking about the poor. Judging by reports today, he might be offered a job chairing a commission on child poverty. This is good news but, as Mr Field has already said, there is not much point in him debating the finer points of poverty definitions. He would need to be given remit to suggest policy. What should those suggestions be? First, he should argue that we need to be a lot less self-indulgent about how we think about child poverty. It may be great to think of ourselves as tackling a major social ill, but the past

Frank Field would complete the Tories’ welfare reform jigsaw

So now the coalition stretches as far as Labour, with the news that Frank Field is being lined up as an anti-poverty advisor for the government.  In itself, this is an encouraging development: Field is one of decent men of Westminster – committed, informed and passionate.  But when you look at it beside the Tories’ other appointments in this area, then it really becomes exciting.  Field, IDS, Grayling and Lord Freud – all are deeply knowledgable about the welfare reform agenda, to the point where it’s difficult to think of many more impressive teams in recent political history.  So perhaps there is hope for this most difficult of policy areas,

Who is missing?

The Cabinet is taking shape, admittedly with one or two surprises and not all of them good ones. There is still a way to go, even though action has already been taken on the NI increase. I understand that Michael Gove will be education secretary, which obviously leaves the hugely impressive David Laws to find another brief. Work and Pensions is a possibility, a job that has also been earmarked for the equally impressive Philip Hammond. There is a very obvious lack of women – Sarah Teather is highly regarded on the Lib Dem side, probably more so than her counterparts on the Tory side. I’ve heard rumours that she’s

The government, not Chris Grayling, is misleading the public over violent crime

The New Statesman’s George Eaton admonishes Chris Grayling repeating his ‘false claim that violent crime has risen dramatically under Labour.’ Eaton cites the British Crime Survey’s findings that violent crime has fallen by 41 percent since 1997. True, the BCS asserts that violent crime has fallen since 1997. Changes in recording practice in 2002-03 mean that comparing current statistics with those compiled a decade ago is inherently inaccurate – a point conceded by UK Statistics Agency head Sir Michael Scholar with regard to Grayling’s police statistics, but not the BCS’. The independent House of Commons Library gave a more accurate assessment, finding that violent crime rose from 618,417 to 887,942

Grayling wins the perceptions battle

Another day, another TV debate – only this time it was Alan Johnson, Chris Grayling and Chris Huhne behind the lecterns, talking crime on the Daily Politics.  Just like yesterday’s debate, the questions were incisive and insistent.  But the politicians conspired to turn proceedings into a mush.  There was very little clarity, a sizeable dollop of bickering, and proof, were it needed, that Huhne really can go on a bit. To my mind, it all boiled down to likely audience perceptions.  Chris Grayling was cornered on a number of issues (including a question addressing his “homophobic comments”), but he probably gauged those perceptions right when he emphasised the “sense” that

The return of Chris Grayling

Adam Boutlon’s interview with Chris Grayling this afternoon felt like a pressure valve being released.  Grayling’s recent low profile had already become a rolling story, and his absence from the speaking line-up at his party’s manifesto launch was bound to fuel more murmuring and speculation – so the Tories clearly decided to wheel him out in front of the cameras to calm things down a bit.  As it happened, Boulton was on combative form – arguing that elected police commissioners would just add “another layer of bureaucracy” to society – but Grayling sounded quite reasonable in response. Here’s the video, so you can judge for yourselves:

Come out, come out wherever you are

Chris Grayling, the Shadow Home Secretary and former attack dog, seems to have been cast into outer darkness. As with Oliver Letwin’s disappearing act in the 2001, Labour is toasting this unofficial scalp. Denis MacShane has been adding poison to the potion this morning. The Tories are paying a heavy price for Grayling’s B&B gaffe, but it’s self-inflicted. Grayling’s comments were cackhanded and I think he is wrong, but they were nowhere near as controversial as was claimed – he was seeking a clarification of the law, not calling for Sandi Toksvig to be lynched. I doubt Grayling will be Home Secretary but such a senior Shadow minister can’t hide

Europe as a campaign message … for Labour

As I said earlier, today’s PMQs was all about giving the various parties’ campaign messages a walk around the block.  Cameron’s questions reduced down to “They’ve failed – give us a go”.  Clegg pushed the Lib Dem’s Labservative prospectus.  And Brown droned on about “£6bn being taken out of the economy,” as well as about Lord Ashcroft and “securing the recovery”. In which case, it’s striking that Denis MacShane used a question to denounce the Tories’ alliances in Europe.  Indeed, Peter Mandelson did exactly the same in a speech this morning.  Here’s how he put it: “David Cameron chooses to sit alongside the xenophobes and homophobes in the European Parliament.

Have a gay time

Chris Grayling’s erstwhile view that Britain’s inn-keepers can interpret anti-discrimination legislation as they see fit belongs where he originally found it: in the biggot bin. There is no place for anti-gay views in British politics, or the Conservative Party. This is not just a question of electioneering — ie currying favour with a symbolically important segment of the electorate – but is a matter of decency. Homosexuals have as much place in modern Britain as everyone else. A worrying part of the airing of Grayling’s (now-disavowed) comments is that it has given Labour an excuse to tarnish the Conservatives with an anti-homosexual brush. Grayling’s words had barely hit the airwaves when the

Grayling’s gay gaffe

The Tories have weathered Chris Grayling’s gay gaffe. The story could only gain momentum if the papers had gone to town on it. They have not. The Times gives it a couple of paragraphs at the bottom of an inner page and even the Independent and the Guardian relegate it to the interior. The news agenda has gone into election over-drive, but I doubt this story would have had legs anyway, even before his denial. Grayling is no homophobe and whilst he voted for the Equality bill he is right that it should be applied with a soft-touch where the boundary between public and private space is blurred. The State should not dictate

A new Brownie Buster

Michael Scholar: hero. The newish head of the UK statistics authority is finally coming to the aid of the statistics nerds who have been protesting that Gordon Brown makes things up. Normally, the ONS do not censure Mr Brown when he misrepresents their data: that’s not their job. But as head of the Statistics Authority, Sir Michael has – wonderfully, inspirationally – written an open letter to the Prime Minister telling him not to lie. Well, not quite in so few words, but this is the plain implication. What is significant is that Sir Michael is using his job to protect  the integrity of statistics in Britain. One of my

No place for porkies in digital politics

We have just witnessed a fascinating glimpse of the use of the internet in elections. This morning, Cameron proposed a unilateral bank tax – moving, I suspect, ahead of what he believes Darling will announce in next week’s budget. Next, at 1.19pm, Will Straw digs up a selectively-edited version of Chris Grayling speaking in his local constituency (put online by the Labour candidate, Craig Montgomery). Straw’s headline: “Calamity Grayling opposes Cameron’s unilateral bank tax.” Now, this headline – a lie – might have worked on a Labour Party press release. But it’s far harder to lie on a blog. Grayling is quoted saying “there is absolutely no point on earth

Tough on dangerous dogs, blind to the causes of dangerous dogs

It’s ‘dangerous dogs’ season again – but is there more to the story? The Today programme gave this its main 8.10am slot. The BBC sought to interview some chavs to sneer at – the listener being invited to conclude that the law must be brought to bear on them. But Brendan O’Neill was quite right in this week’s magazine, where he describes how government seeks to use this scare for yet another power grab over the citizens. The aim, he says “is not only to bring dog-owners into that very big tent of People Continually Spied On By The Authorities, but to weed out the ‘devil dogs that terrorise socially

Confusion surrounds the Tory position on the Muslim Council of Britain

The government broke off relations with the Muslim Council of Britain over Daoud Abdullah, its deputy secretary-general, signing the Istanbul declaration, which the government believed encouraged attacks on British forces if they attempted to enforce a weapons blockade on Gaza. Last week, the government retreated; inviting the MCB back in despite Daoud Abdullah’s signature remaining on the document. The question now is whether the Tories are going to go along with this surrender. The first test of this is a fundraiser that the MCB is holding on the 22nd of February. The invitation boasts that Jack Straw and Nick Clegg will be attending and says that Chris Grayling has been

Drink isn’t the curse of the working classes, but its easy availability is

It must be stated from the outset – most drinkers are responsible and drink only on special occasions, with other people or by themselves. However, binge drinkers, or that caste of drinker whose evening is neatly rounded-off with a stomach pump, are a minority, albeit a growing one. Relaxed licensing laws and the government’s refusal to strong-arm the drinks industry have led to roving bands of Sally Bercows traversing town centres, and who end the night by falling out of their dresses and into a taxi, or onto a pavement. Readily available alcohol has over-stretched the NHS’ dwindling A&E resources and the police’s time – Alice Thompson discloses that alcohol

The politics of self-defence

The spin machines are gearing up as we amble towards an election, and strategists’ latest hobby-horse is self-defence. Following the sentencing of Munir Hussain, Alan Johnson admitted feeling “uncomfortable” about Judge Reddihough’s decision. Never one to miss the bus, Chris Grayling went further and faster, suggesting that householders should be immune from prosecution unless they had responded in a “grossly disproportionate” fashion.   It’s rather unfair, but deliciously cutting, of cartoonists to portray Grayling as a plump second hand car salesman posing as James Bond, but Grayling deserves criticism because “grossly disproportionate” is as ill-defined as the “reasonable force” that current legislation describes. Conservative proposals would still leave decisions entirely

The Tories need an attack dog

Iain Martin has a thought-provoking post up about how the Tories lack an attack-dog. Certainly, the Tories lack a shadow Minister for the Today Programme, someone who can be relied to go on when it is a bad morning for the party and deal robustly with a tough interview. This is a position the Tories will need to fill before the campaign gets under way. As Iain says, Chris Grayling was at one point used as the party’s attack dog. But this has come to overly define his political persona and he hasn’t really recovered from his Wire speech and a lacklustre conference, although his recent more thoughtful speeches on

Commissioner Boris

The Evening Standard reports that Boris Johnson is set to become the Tories’ first elected police commissioner. Chris Grayling told the paper: “We envisage the Mayor of London being the elected police commissioner. This would strengthen the role of the Mayor. However, I’m absolutely clear that no reform we introduce will allow any elected politician to interfere in operational policing and we will make absolutely certain that the independence of operational policing is protected in law.” Under Tory proposals the mayor will be responsible for hiring and firing chief constables, tailoring police objectives to local requirements and budgeting. Naturally, the contrarians are gathering. I give it 24 hours before Sir