Monthly Archives: April 2010

Jim Pickard

I’ve just come away from Brown’s grilling by Jeremy Paxman on Panorama, which will be broadcast later tonight.

It was fascinating on several levels – and comes ahead of what is rumoured to be a nasty opinion poll for Labour later tonight.

Here are some interesting points to take away:

Brown would cut back spending on roads in the next Parliament. There could also be cuts to the housing budget. “We will be moving from road to rail so we won’t see the same level of expenditure on roads.” “Housing, it is essentially private sector activity.”

He isn’t an insomniac, honest. “I sleep through the night. I have studied history and there is not a prime minister or leader of the Labour party that hasn’t had real difficulties and real problems to deal with.” Brown is known to keep incredibly late hours and awake very early.

He claims he misunderstood what Gillian Duffy said: “I thought she was talking about expelling all university students from this country who are foreigners.” This is preposterous and bears no relation to what the widow actually said.

We only got the Olympics because we are a multicultural society. “Diversity we benefit from, it is one reason we won the Olympics, a lot of people saw Britain as one of the great diverse countries of the world.”

VAT won’t go up. Asked by Paxman if it is an option, he said: “It is a no. Because it is not in our deficit reduction plan. It is a Tory tax.”

On coalitions. “You’re not going to get me to talk about what happens after the election.”

Why people don’t seem to warm to Brown. “That’s for people to make up their own minds.”

A little sample from Matthew Hancock’s election literature in West Suffolk. You’ll notice that he’s modest enough not to mention his time working as George Osborne’s chief of staff. A remarkable show of restraint.

Last night’s Question Time ended on an extraordinary note. The public are more in favour of a hung parliament than the Tories care to admit. But I never expected an audience to heckle and boo Liam Fox when he warned of an indecisive election result triggering a run on sterling.

You can watch it here — the mob turn on Fox around 58 minutes in.

This should be a salutary lesson to Cameron’s team. People seem to like the idea of politicians working together. The worm in the election debate shot up when Clegg spoke about a cross-party co-operation to tackle the deficit. And it took a dive when Cameron warned of the dangers of a hung parliament leaving Brown in power.

Voters are in an iconoclastic mood. Tory strategists seem to think the best antidote is warning of economic calamity should the electorate spurn their wish for a majority. It’s a message that could easily backfire.

Amid expectations (among opponents) and fears (among supporters) that Gordon Brown is leading Labour to a calamitous defeat in next week’s general election, Lib Dems have been checking their electoral statistics and commentators dusting down George Dangerfield’s The Strange Death of Liberal England – a well-thumbed text when I studied history at Oxford too many decades ago to mention.

Dangerfield’s book, published during the 1930, provides the classic account of the pre-World War One upheavals that saw then then Liberal Party surrender its claim to be a party of government.

It offers a reminder – and perhaps an incentive – to Nick Clegg that it is precisely 100 years since his party won a larger share of the vote than Labour.

In the second of 1910′s elections, Asquith’s Liberals secured just under 44 per cent of the vote against the fledgling Labour party’s 7.1 per cent. By 1918, after the end of the Great War, Mr Clegg’s party was split between Liberals, with 12.1 per cent, and Coalition Liberals (13.5 per cent). Labour trebled its share to 22.2 per cent. Three years later Labour’s 29.5 per cent had nudged ahead of the combined vote of Liberals and Coalition Liberals (29.1) and Mr Clegg’s party was heading into the wildnerness.

So if he ends up ahead of Mr Brown, the Lib Dem leader will be able to claim his party’s best result for a century. Now, that’s something to aim for.

Somewhere in Lib Dem HQ is a top secret target list. These aren’t the seats Nick Clegg visits; it’s an underground movement behind enemy lines. Not even Clegg will know the full battleplan. When Chris Rennard was leading campaigns, it was said that “the leader could never be trusted enough to see the canvas returns”. That probably still holds true.

Sadly I’ve failed in a long quest to uncover the list, but I’ve been given a few hints. The odds on Lib Dem wins have shortened considerably of late and I was waiting for a better moment to put down some money. But I’ve waited long enough. It’s time to take the gamble.

The strategy, if you can call it that, is to lay £5 on a eight seats that the Lib Dems have an outside chance of winning. They are split into four categories:

The podcasts will be recorded twice a week for the duration of the campaign – see the full list in the UK election podcast archive.

Jim Pickard

(Apologies if you’ve already read this – it was rather lost as an update to my earlier Blair post).

The Tories claimed this morning ( WRONGLY) that the Charity Commission was opening an investigation into claims – by Tory MP Greg Hands – that one of his charities, the Tony Blair Africa Governance Initiative, had breached the law.

Hands is alleging that the initiative had “supported political activity”.

Kenneth Dibble, executive director of legal services and compliance at the Charity Commission, confirmed that it was looking into the claims in this letter. He said he had opened a case “within our assessment unit” to explore the concerns.

I’ve called Matthew Doyle, Blair’s press officer, but he isn’t picking up the phone.

FURTHER UPDATE

The Charity Commission say they have NOT opened an investigation. Instead they are responding to the complaint in the way they do with any such letter.

“Please note that this does not mean that we are investigating this charity, rather that we are currently assessing the specific issue raised. When issues or concerns about a charity are raised with the Commission we assess these first to see whether there is or is not any regulatory concern for us. We also assess these in line with our Risk and Proportionality Framework”

Jim Pickard

An update on our betting competition after last night’s debate: I came away with £20 after correctly betting at 3/1 that the audience viewing figures would be between 5m and 10m. They peaked at 8m, according to reports today.

Alas I lost out on a few other gambles; Clegg didn’t win (although he was close), America wasn’t the first country mentioned and my audience bet on 10m to 15m (effectively a hedge) must be written off.

So I spent £20 on the four bets and have walked away with £20. Could have been much worse.

UPDATE

In fact PaddyPower have paid me £9 – it turns out that America was, after all, the first foreign country mentioned. That changes things in my favour.

Jim Pickard

Tony Blair has returned from his Africa safari and will be making a speech in 10 minutes (sorry, some time soon) in a bid to turn Labour’s life-support machine back on.

Here are the two reasons why it probably won’t help:

1] If Blair is brilliant – as he often was in years gone by – it will only serve to remind people of the unfavourable contrast with Gordon Brown.

2] If he is not brilliant (last time he looked weirdly orange and had a strange Lloyd Grossman trans-Atlantic accent) then he is wasting his time.

Interesting that Labour aren’t giving out any details to the press (the last speech in Sedgefield was also very tightly controlled). They don’t want Blair to face any difficult questions.

Btw we are wondering: what is Blair doing wandering around a health centre in Harrow chatting to the staff – given that he is no longer a politician. It seems a little surreal.

If you want to know why he’s in Harrow West, praising local MP Gareth Thomas, it’s a Labour seat which is thought to be at risk. Although, as Rob Hutton of Bloomberg points out to me, the notional majority is much bigger (due to boundary changes) at 20,018 to 12,199.

I should clarify that there was no speech in the end – just the walkabout, in which Blair said Labour still had a chance of winning. If you say so.

It’s a pretty anticlimactic appearance given all the hype about the former PM playing a key role in the campaign: eg “He’s been pencilled in for weeks now and by all accounts he can’t wait to get started… Labour sources said that Mr Blair was “champing at the bit” to begin campaigning” (Daily Telegraph, 29 March 2010).

UPDATE: Apparently David Cameron has said that Blair’s return is “very good for sales of Tango”.

  • Gordon Brown appears with Peter Mandelson and Harriet Harman about Labour’s final week message
  • David Cameron visits the West Midlands, the East Midlands and Yorkshire
  • Nick Clegg campaigns in Derby North, Leicester South and Sheffield
  • Jeremy Paxman interviews Gordon Brown on BBC

Britain’s historic general election – Martin Wolf for the FT
Cameron’s plans risk a postcode lottery – Vernon Bogdanor for the FT
UK hung up about hung parliament - The FT
Beleagured Labour unleashes Blair - The Guardian
Cameron is concealing his inner Bush - Johann Hari for the Independent

The debate:
An international view: In final British debate, economy is the focus – The New York Times
No surprises, lots of disappointment - The FT’s Chris Giles for Money Supply
The last debate – have Labour imploded? - Gideon Rachman’s blog for the FT
Barring an earthquake, David Cameron is on his way to No 10 - Jonathan Freedland for the Guardian
We came, we saw, but what did we learn? - David Aaronovitch for the Times
Pundit reaction – Politics Home

They all flunked it. The television debates have energised this election campaign. There are encouraging signs that they have jolted the nation out of its long drift to insouciant indifference. Voter turnout may well rise on May 6. But illumination? Clarity? Honesty? There was no winner on that score in Birmingham.

The third and final of these encounters should have been the best. It was about the issue that matters most to the voters: the economy. What they saw were three, rather shifty, politicians running away from the truth.

Continue reading “Leaders fail to own up to scale of task ahead”

Jim Pickard

Alex 10.50 Final post. An intriguing tweet from Evan Davis. Did any of the candidates actually win this debate? Or was it a dead heat? The polls indicate that Cameron prevailed. But the numbers are suspiciously close to broad voting intentions. Could it be that the public reverted to the person they were intending to vote for at the begining of the debate? I suspect few people would have had their opinion changed by the last 90 minutes. It will be interesting to see whether the post-debate spin has more of an effect.

Alex 10.47 Some final thought from Alan Schroeder, our US debate guru.

Debates do not always produce clear verdicts, and in my opinion this one qualifies as a three-way stand-off. Judging purely on optics and not on substance, I would call this Brown’s best debate of the three. I thought he handled the Mrs. Duffy gaffe with deftness, and I liked his lawyerly closing argument. Even Brown’s goofy smile at the very end came across as endearing rather than menacing.

Cameron has never quite come into focus for me in these debates. He’s obviously an intelligent, thoughtful, and well-spoken man, but from my perspective he doesn’t leave much of a footprint. That criticism notwithstanding, I would also call tonight Cameron’s best debate, and I wouldn’t be surprised to see him do well in the snap polls.

Clegg has consistently been the most interesting performer of the three, but tonight he seemed to be drawing from the same familiar well instead of broadening his message. One wonders if Clegg’s surprise win in the first debate may have caused him to peak too soon. A strong finish in round three might have given Clegg, in the immortal words of Spinal Tap’s Nigel Tufnel, “that little extra push over the cliff.” Instead, he allowed both Cameron and Brown to make gains on him.

Jim 10.46 Clegg should also brace himself for a row tomorrow over his claim that 80 per cent of immigrants into Britain came from the EU. Apparently the real figure could be much lower; closer to a third.

Jim 10.43 Also, how come no one mentioned Gordon Brown’s Achilles Heel – ie his claim to have extinguished “boom and bust” permanently? And how come the other two didn’t nail Clegg over the LIb Dem policy of joining the euro? And did Cameron have a lucky escape in not getting grilled over his opposition to rescuing Northern Rock?

Alex 10.32 One thing to note. Was Vince Cable ever mentioned? What happened to the great Lib Dem economic titan? Had the economy been the topic of the first debate, we’d have heard Clegg repeating his name ad naseum. Shows how much his confidence has grown as leader. He don’t need little old Vince any more.

Westminster blog

on the UK political scene

About this blog Blog guide
Jim Pickard and Kiran Stacey, FT Westminster correspondents, share the latest news and analysis on the UK's political scene.

Follow the latest news on the UK politics and policy.

To comment, please register for free with FT.com and read our policy on submitting comments.

All posts are published in UK time.

Contact the Westminster blog team: Jim Pickard, Kiran Stacey, Nicholas Timmins, Elizabeth Rigby and Helen Warrell.

The illustrations of Jim and Kiran are by Nick Hardcastle.

See the full list of FT blogs.

The authors

Jim Pickard joined the lobby team in January 2008. He has been at the Financial Times since 1999 as a regional correspondent, assistant UK news editor and property correspondent.

Kiran Stacey is an FT political correspondent, having joined the lobby in 2011. He started at the FT as a graduate trainee in 2008, working on desks including UK companies and US equity markets before taking over the FT's Energy Source blog.

Contributors

Elizabeth Rigby, the FT's chief political correspondent, joined the lobby team in September 2010. Elizabeth has worked at the FT for more than a decade and was most recently its consumer industries editor.

Helen Warrell is the FT's UK reporter, covering home affairs, crime and policing. She joined the FT in 2008 and has spent time as a reporter in the Brussels bureau and more recently, editing the paper's Asia coverage on the world news desk.

Archive

« Mar May »April 2010
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930