Three Thousand Versts of Loneliness

With less than one week to go, David Cameron has given his party much needed momentum by winning the last leaders’ election debate. Most of the major pollsters agree that the Conservative leader was the clear victor, while one, Populous, put Cameron level pegging with Nick Clegg. Gordon Brown, fresh from his travails in Rochdale, trailed the two younger men in every poll. Seymour Major is sceptical , but Conservative supporters will be closely scrutinising tonight’s newscasts, and the Sunday papers, to discern whether Cameron will get a similar bounce when the polling companies survey voting intention. Although their accuracy is questionable, it would settle Tory nerves considerably if the party’s poll figures began to edge out of the mid thirties, towards forty per cent. And I believe that, as election day draws closer, support for the Liberal Democrats will soften, to the Conservatives’ advantage. In Northern Ireland we are accustomed to the distortion of opinion polls by a so-c...

What are you if you don't agree with Gordon Brown? A bigot, apparently. On the campaign trail in Rochdale, the Prime Minister encountered a former Labour voter who asked him some awkward questions. He answered, as best he could, bid her a cheery farewell and then got into his plush limo before describing her as 'a bigot'. 'That was a disaster' Gordo complained. Unfortunately the PM still had a microphone on and Sky News recorded the whole thing . Brown has since issued a grovelling apology. And if 'bigotry' is implied by contempt for his Labour party, then the vast majority of people in Britain are raving bigots!

We’ve had X Factor, Britain’s Got Talent and Master Chef. Tonight television audiences will be treated (subjected?) to the Leaders’ Debates. In an unfortunate piece of scheduling the first election showpiece, screened on ITV, will appear at the same time as the satirical news show, Have I Got News For You, which is broadcast on BBC 1 at 9pm. I’d imagine a few politics junkies might be tempted to reach for the remote if the leaders’ contest is too sterile or facile. Certainly the profile programmes which have preceded the debate have been unforgivably fatuous. Mark Austin’s fawning interviews were straight out of the Alan Titchmarsh school of broadcasting. These were little more than thirty minute party election broadcasts. Not that the parties‘ publicity drives were all well advised, Gordon Brown was not even the most obnoxious character in his ‘spotlight’ programme. Wheeling out Satan himself may have alienated fewer people than an endorsement from Alex Ferguson. Then again, wh...

Sometimes Gordon Brown's brass neck literally makes the jaw drop. His latest spat with former soldiers comes smartly on the heals of the prime minister's appearance at the Chilcot Inquiry, during which he claimed that military commanders were always provided with the equipment they requested in Iraq and Afghanistan. The chronology is instructive, and tells us all we need to know about the veracity of Brown's statements. First the prime minister makes his claim. Lord Guthrie and Admiral Lord Boyce accuse Brown of disingenuous answers. At PM's questions Gordon reacts with the equanimity we have come to expect and rants about Tory officers. Soldiers on the ground in Afghanistan and Iraq have persistently complained about the inadequacy of their equipment. Should we suppose that they too are motivated by party political spite?

Now online ! In today's Belfast Telegraph I argue against Gordon Brown's proposed electoral reform. Today MPs decide whether to hold a referendum on the introduction of ‘Alternative Vote’ for Westminster elections. It is part of Gordon Brown’s plan to rehabilitate the damaged reputation of Britain‘s politics. It is also a spectacularly bad idea. How can an electoral system which affords less clarity, demands more fudge and disconnects lines of accountability between the electorate and its government help to revive public confidence in tarnished institutions and discredited politicians? Of course we are accustomed to Alternative Vote in Northern Ireland because it is used in council and assembly by-elections. Like AV’s close relative, Proportional Representation, it is popular amongst politics aficionados, who relish its complexity, its labyrinthine twists and the strange vocabulary of ’surpluses’ and ’quotas’. However, if the prime minister really wants to tackle the ’c...

Gordon Brown’s plan to introduce Alternative Vote is a cynical exercise. It is also foolhardy and it is likely to alter profoundly Britain’s constitutional landscape, despite its conception as a half-hearted sop to a public disillusioned with politics. There are three reasons why the prime minister is considering this type of electoral reform and none of them make it a good idea. First, he wishes to be seen to be doing something to address a so-called ’crisis of legitimacy’ which has afflicted politics since the expenses scandal. There is a flourishing perception that MPs are not sufficiently accountable to the people they represent and that that is the source of corruption at Westminster. Alternative Vote gives the appearance of accountability. After all, we get to make more than one mark on the ballot paper. Second, whatever the outcome of the forthcoming general election, Labour is destined for a period in opposition. First past the post is believed to work to the advantage ...

From the Impressions Show.

‘Compassionate’, ‘red’, ‘progressive’ – whichever adjective one applies to the conservatism which David Cameron espouses, his leader’s speech , at conference yesterday, reemphasised its key characteristics. The modern Conservative party’s credo has moved on since the 1980s and Thatcherism. It is socially aware, committed to addressing poverty and steeped in a ‘one nation’ tradition which Tories rather neglected in their overzealous embrace of free market liberalism. The Guardian is wrong , in this morning’s editorial, to imply that Cameron’s speech attempted an incongruous marriage of convenience between a pre crash message of compassion and a post crash discourse of state trimming. The twin principles of social responsibility and a less intrusive state have been inseparably wedded within the new Conservative philosophy since its inception. Cameron does not believe, and has never suggested, that big state solutions are the best means to tackle social problems. There is no inconsis...

The Guardian carries a story which is especially salient, given the conversation about Tories and Scottish secession, taking place below . David Cameron has distanced himself from the ideological approach to public service cuts, associated with Thatcherism, and Conservative policy in the 1980s. Following on from yesterday’s Vince Cable piece, I had intended to write today about the perils, for the Tories, of focussing too myopically on budgetary measures. Which is not to imply, by any means, that I underestimate the centrality of economic issues in the forthcoming election, or the necessity to the UK of spending within its means. As the Guardian article identifies, the Conservatives have won the finance argument with Labour. Gordon Brown has conceded that his government must also instigate cuts and it is not a choice between continued investment, under the present government, and a Tory regime, zealously hacking back services. The public doesn’t need to be reassured that a Conserv...

This afternoon a recalled Scottish parliament is due to discuss the decision of its justice secretary to release convicted Lockerbie bomber, Abdul Baset Ali al-Megrahi. It promises to be an uncomfortable session for the SNP administration, but newspaper suggestions that Alex Salmond’s minority regime could be toppled are guilty of overstatement . Although unionist parties in Scotland remain happy to make political capital from nationalist misgovernment, there is little genuine appetite to bring down the executive. The Conservatives have been most consistent in their opposition to Megrahi’s release. However justice spokesman, Bill Aitken MSP, has indicated that a vote of no confidence in Kenny MacAskill, whilst possible, would be ‘premature’. The Tories have something of a contradictory relationship with nationalists in Scotland, despite taking a strong line on the Union. On this issue, Labour’s response is even more problematic. The party’s Scottish leader, Iain Gray, has spoke...

I must confess, the ‘we love the NHS’ campaign, organised to respond to American criticism of the institution, makes me vaguely queasy. Gordon Brown has joined the Twitter group, of course, in another ill advised foray into internet campaigning. Iain Dale has posted rather effectively on the topic, arguing that it is ‘puerile’ to claim ‘love’ for a public service. Don’t misunderstand me. Reactionary voices in the US, which contend that the NHS is ‘evil’ and resist any move towards state funded health provision, make me even more bilious. I understand the reflex to defend our health service. But there’s more than a little impulsive nationalism to this popular response to American criticism and there's a distinct whiff of populist opportunism where politicians seek to clamber on board the band wagon. Everyone has experiences of the NHS, and many of them are good, but few would contend that the service is perfect. We have reason to be proud that health care is available, free ...

I mentioned in a previous piece Tim Montgomerie’s open letter to David Cameron, in which he urged the Conservative leader to place Britishness at the centre of the party’s election campaign. Conservative Home today carries Cameron’s reply . In it he argues that patriotic pride is a bottom up phenomenon, inspired chiefly by providing citizens with something to be proud of. It is a sound response to Montgomerie’s missive because it rules out the option of entering a ‘flag waving’ contest with Gordon Brown, whilst showing an innate understanding of the civic nature of Britishness, whereby institutions, history and certain common cultural coordinates draw a diverse nation together, rather than race, perceived ethnicity or a narrow prescription of culture. In the previous article I contrasted the conceptual nature of Brown’s unionism with Cameron’s genuine engagement as regards matters pertaining to the Union. By seeking to secure Northern Ireland’s full participation in national poli...

Apologies for the rather bitty nature of some posts at the moment. Various aspects of everyday life have tiresomely intruded on blogging time. Admittedly some of the prevalent stories have also required little or no lengthy commentary. They have spoken for themselves. Take Labour’s ‘Building Britain’s Future’ document, which Gordon Brown will unveil this afternoon. It will form the central plank of the party’s manifesto for the general election and is expected to outline the government’s public services strategy. The Prime Minister and Liam Byrne have trailed its contents in elliptical fashion. We know that there will be a lot less talk about ‘targets’ and a lot more about ‘rights and entitlements’. But before we have the opportunity even to scrutinise detail in the paper, or examine whether it is merely an exercise in semantics, Peter Mandelson has revealed on the Today programme that the government’s comprehensive spending review will be delayed until after the next election....

Neil O’Brien argues in the Telegraph that the Conservatives should drop plans to cut inheritance tax. I can see his point. Although George Osborne’s proposal is to be funded by a tax on non-doms, it is inconsistent with the imperative of tackling Britain’s budget deficit. Quite simply, tax cuts are an aspiration for governments beyond the immediate future. In the short term priority must be given to combating the public debt and delivering public services as efficiently as possible, whilst striving to retain quality. Making inheritance tax an exception to an important rule has the capacity to confuse an issue where the Conservatives appear increasingly credible in comparison to Labour. The electorate is not naïve enough to swallow Gordon Brown’s claims that his government represents continued investment in public services, whilst the Tories offer cuts. It is fully appraised of the baleful state of the nation’s finances. But whilst voters understand that spending will be slashed...

What he gives with one hand, he takes away with the other. Gordon Brown’s ideas for constitutional reform , announced yesterday, include a proposal to reduce the period during which the publication of government documents is prohibited, from thirty years to twenty years. A highly commendable measure, designed to facilitate more transparent government, you might suppose. But the Prime Minister also intends to increase the range of documents released only after the statutory period has elapsed, by removing the ‘public interest’ proviso which exists under Freedom of Information legislation. It is a typical piece of New Labour sophistry, which seeks to give the appearance of openness, rather than ensuring its actuality. When Brown succeeded Tony Blair as premier, he made much of his reformist credentials, as regards the constitution. But far from offering a different style of government to his predecessor, the Prime Minister has contributed more of the authoritarian and centralist st...

It’s hardly a surprise . I suspect Lady Hermon might vote for Gordon Brown to become Prime Minister for life, if legislation to that effect were put before the House of Commons. A sizeable chunk of the Labour leader’s cabinet has deserted him, but the member for North Down is a die hard loyalist. She’s like Ed Balls without any influence. In a motion put before the House yesterday evening calling for a general election, Hermon voted against all the opposition parties (other than the SDLP) who supported the motion and with the dying, discredited government. Perhaps she thinks the electorate need not be consulted at all and that Gordon (who plainly knows best) should continue to exercise his wisdom as some manner of benevolent dictator.

Four ministerial resignations, including the Home Secretary, a back bench plot to unseat the Prime Minister from his leadership of the Labour party, rumours that an impending cabinet reshuffle will precipitate bitter recriminations rather than freshen and revitalise Gordon Brown’s team, predictions that the party could be beaten into fourth place in local and European elections, being held today. A new and strident challenger has emerged to contest the title of ‘worst week’ in the history of the disintegrating Labour government. There is a strong feeling that, for Brown at least, next week has the potential to be even worse. Even loyal Brownites, who have found that they are not immune from their leader’s briefing operation, are reportedly starting to feel restive. There is speculation that Alistair Darling will refuse to be shuffled from the Treasury into another cabinet post, for instance. It is becoming increasingly clear that the ‘big clunking fist’ which comprises Brown’s fac...

All of Northern Ireland’s main candidates for the European election in June have now handed in their nomination papers and placed their deposits with the Electoral Commission. Each of their sultry mugs now adorns various lamp-posts throughout the country and the first party literature began to arrive in households curiously early. Thirty days remain until the polls open, so the voting public will be subject to appeals for their support for some weeks to come. The Conservatives and Unionists candidate, Jim Nicholson, has adopted the slogan ‘Vote for Change’ as his motif for the campaign ahead. One sceptical friend, at the weekend expressed the view that the logo was not without irony, given that Nicholson has been an MEP since 1989. I can see his point. But whilst Jim may not offer its freshest face, the electoral force, which his candidature represents, does promise an exciting departure for unionist politics in Northern Ireland, as well as a change of course for the United Kingdo...

"I think people know by now that I want us to stand up for the poorest in Britain and to show that fiscal responsibility can go hand in hand with a social conscience." David Cameron addressed the Tories’ spring forum yesterday and assured his audience that although Conservatives are ready to usher in an ‘age of austerity’, the commitments which he has made to prioritise social justice will nevertheless be upheld. With a general election imminent, it is his party’s central task to ensure voters remain convinced that efforts to constrain public debt will not entail compromising Cameron’s communitarian vision for Britain. The Conservative leader has consistently argued that combating society’s dysfunction is an effective means by which to ease the burden on the public purse. Far from hampering the imperative to spend money efficiently, tackling social problems is a prerequisite for renewed prosperity. Cameron must repeatedly insist upon the compatibility of these two agendas...

Inevitably on any occasion that our creaking, aging government narrows the Conservatives’ lead in the opinion polls, speculation about an early election follows. Gordon Brown has moved quickly to scotch suggestions that 2009 might see him go to the country. The Prime Minister is probably realistic enough to appreciate that any ‘bounce’ offered by his preening G20 performance will be short lived when the summit’s purportedly world changing effects are less than discernible. When the Chancellor of the Exchequer delivers his budget statement later this month he will be forced to admit that he failed to anticipate how sharply the economic downturn would effect Britain. Yet his predecessor fails to acknowledge his role in precipitating the crisis and has not admitted that his policies have exacerbated its effects in the United Kingdom. Indeed he continues to present himself as the only man qualified to guide this country through recession. Gordon Brown has shown pathological relucta...