Attack, attack,attack,attack, attack!

Alan Johnson's fall was anticipated by many for some time though it is always disappointing to lose someone of such obvious talent. Every cloud though and the silver lining is that as Shadow Chancellor Ed Balls is going to be a high profile attack dog for Labour.

I've found it difficult to see the Tory government making their most aggressive cuts while Labour and Ed Miliband get their own house in order. Balls is likely to be aggressive and abrasive and will ensure Labour gets heard. This is vital, for there needs to be an alternative narrative to that emanating from the Tories. If not, the Tory narrative could be the one upon which the next election id fought on, and that would be bad for Labour.

It helps of course, that there was a second silver lining for Labour on Friday with Tory media chief Andy Coulson resigning. That makes it just a bit more difficult for the Tories to spin that narrative.

A new airport for London, are you serious Boris?

I underestimated Boris Johnson. I didn't think he was that serious in pursuing plans for a new London airport in the Thames Estuary. I'm sorry for underestimating Johnson and not anticipating the all of the bad ideas he throws his considerable weight behind.

After suggesting that Heathrow cannot meet London's needs into the future he proposes to undertake yet another study into the viability of a new airport somewhere else. Not so long ago he was espousing the virtues of a new airport in the Thames Estuary, Boris Island. This idea was widely panned, by airlines and locals alike for cutting off access to large parts of the UK and for cutting off the jobs supply to west London.

If airlines don't want to move and the government doesn't want to provide any money for a new airport our mayor would be better of spending time and scarce money improving London's current transport headaches. He could negotiate with the tube unions and put a stop to strikes, like he promised, or he could accept that he needs the money from the Western Congestion Charge zone and bring it back, he could introduce a higher charge for gas guzzlers, he could investigate options for future London transport links, like cross-river tram, that he cancelled.

While Heathrow really matters to London, Boris has wasted most of his mayoralty investigating plans for an alternative and has delivered nothing. He has also delivered only one major change to London's transport - higher costs and lower revenues. I really should have anticipated that.

Does anyone actually read election leaflets?

There was a minor media furore when Phil Woolas was booted out of parliament for telling lies on his election leaflets. Last night Labour won Oldham East and Saddleworth and increased a slender majority of the shameless Lib Dems. What particularly struck me is that almost none of the reporting or TV  interviews with voters mentioned the Woolas "scandal". People weren't interested it seems. This suggests that nobody really cares about political leaflets, other than for the nuisance they cause to porches and doormats. If they really mattered there would have been a backlash against Labour, but there wasn't.

The media have also reported the drop in support for the Lib Dems and Tories as "expected" and typical for a government at this stage. When Labour lost by elections it was always magnified to be a huge setback for Brown. The real test, for the media and Miliband's Labour, will come when there is a by election in a Tory-Labour marginal. The result and how that is reported will then give a good indication of both the political and media mood.

Despite everything, Labour expected to win Oldham East and the only "disastrous" result for any party would have been for Labour to lose. Miliband has passed his first test with this by election a good demonstration of the enthusiasm that seems to be back within the Labour Party. Victor Debbie Abrahams reported that there were over 1400 Labour volunteers helping her campaign. That is phenomenal. Onwards to the next one. More of that sort of turnout from the Labour ranks and a win over the deeply unpopular Tories in a future by election is a real possibility.

UPDATE: just to be clear, this isn't a defence of Woolas' actions, merely me noting that despite the gravity of his expulsion this wasn't that important in the campaign.

A year of pain

It was fashionable in the 1980s for our high streets to have closed down shops, for people to be out of work, for there to be regular protests against the government and for each new year to be welcomed with huge increases to the cost of commuting. After the years of plenty in the noughties it appears that we are headed for a 1980s re-run.

Both the Tories and Lib Dems promised us all at the election that they wouldn't put up VAT. The sales tax is commonly regarded as regressive, hitting the poorest hardest.

Instead of a new politics of trust 2011 is already showing to be a year of expensive broken promises. Expect the resentment to continue, the cost of living to rise and the shops to start closing.

Happy New Year.

The end of the SDP?

It is bbvious that there are splits of opinion among Lib Dems. They have always been, in effect, two different parties with two very distinct ideologies. I can't see how ex-Labour Party and SDP members like Vince Cable can really stomach acting as puppets for an incredibly right wing Tory government.

If ministers wholeheartedly disagree with the government's programme and they don't feel that they can fairly argue their case within it, they should do the honourable thing and quit. Perhaps the SDP splitters should think about what happened in the early 1980s and come back to Labour.

Are we in football manager territory?

Ed Miliband has not been Labour leader for very long. I spoke briefly on this morning's LBC breakfast show with Nick Ferrari about whether he is doing a good job or not. Is it too early to be making this kind of judgement?

Of course it is. It feels like we are applying football manager levels of scrutiny to our leaders. This is unrealistic but also reflects the political and media landscape today. Everyone is looking for an immediate response to feed the 24 hour news and Twittering demand.

John Reid said today that Ed needs to show some of his cards now. He is right but I get the feeling that Ed is devising his. plan and is taking a long term view and had picked those as the battles he wants to win.

He is now building a team and has appointed his spokesperson. I want to see Ed hit the ground running in 2011. The coalition have plenty of weaknesses that are ripe for exploitation.

Is it too early to judge? Yes, but those judgements are being made already. The time is ready to start running.

Just what they would have wanted

Reading through the weekend's newspapers it struck me that the Tories are doing quite well out of this coalition. There have been mass protests against student fees, but the Lib Dems and Nick Clegg were the butt of that. Unpopular decision have not significantly affected their poll rating and neither has a new Labour leader. Yet they are driving through a programme of cuts and policies that they will long have dreamed of and are getting the Lib Dems to do their dirty work for them. Perfect?

There could be trouble around the corner with Ken Clarke's relaxing of criminal justice. The cuts will bite and people will lash back at the Tories I'm sure. The Tories are as guilty as the Lib Dems of breaking pre-election promises. David Cameron gave personal guarantees that Child Benefit wouldn't be cut and nobody ever suggested that VAT would go up, yet it has.

The mud hasn't stuck to the Tories, I bet they cant' believe their luck.

Bother for Teather

Lib Dem education minister and former Islington councillor Sarah Teather will be lining up with her colleagues to vote for trebling of tuition fees tomorrow. That much was clear today when she refused to answer questions from Sky News about why she had changed her mind on fees. Like many Lib Dems she probably hasn't and like most Lib Dems hadn't thought there would be any consequences of any of their policies as they all knew they wouldn't  win the election - except Nick Clegg who still hides behind the claim that the policy only counted if they won.

The Lib Dems are being punished on this issue precisely because they made such play of being honest and offering a new politics and because this policy was used at the election to demonstrate this. They are being punished because it was this policy that garnered so many votes for them. They can't have it both ways.

This isn't about voters not understanding the art of compromise and coalition. People haven't forgotten that the Lib Dems specifically targeted the student vote to win university seats.

Teather might not like it but she and her colleagues have to live in their own mess. Her more than many because she chose to raise the issue of student fees in her maiden speech to parliament. She said: 


"tuition fees are serious issues of concern to my constituents. All the evidence suggests that fear of debt will deter those from lower income families and ethnic minority communities."


Finally, a reminder from her own website in 2008, courtesy of the Wayback machine:

Of course, just like the real Sarah Teather, and despite the issue being so "close to her heart", her current site makes no mention of tuition fees at all. If actions speak louder than words, tomorrow she and the rest of the Lib Dems get to show us what they really think.

Judge Lib Dem MPs on what they do, not what they say

I picked up a great letter in Exeter's Express and Echo reminding us all of the specific wording of the Lib Dems' tuition fees election pledge:


'I pledge to vote against any increase in fees in the next parliament and to pressure the government to introduce a fairer alternative.'


Abstention means they will still be breaking their promise as they pledged to vote against. As is rightly pointed out, the pledge doesn't specify that this is dependent on being in government - when even Lib Dem supporters have to admit there was zero chance of them being the largest party after the election. They pledged to vote against increased fees. Full stop. End of. 


For once the language of the Lib Dems was plain. They should be held to that. 

How many straws can a camel's back hold?

This week's tuition fees vote is the first big tests of the Lib Dems coalition strength. I don't expect any major casualties yet as Clegg's belief in himself and the coalition remains strong. Cracks are appearing underneath though with junior ministers looking set to quit the coalition this week. When you only have 57 MPs there isn't a great choice for the party when selecting for government jobs.

Michael Crockart looks set to be the first to go. More are likely to follow. When the coalition was first announced and Tories were just happy to be back in government and Lib Dems couldn't believe their luck I predicted that the biggest tests were then unknown. The coalition agreement could only plan for what the two parties knew would arise, not for the unknowns to come.

That Clegg is facing his first casualties from the "know" policy agenda should be a worry for him.

Tuition fees: what changed for Nick Clegg and the Lib Dems?

Nick Clegg has claimed the reason his party can't stick to their pre-election pledge to scrap tuition fees is that they didn't win the election. He is right, the Lib Dems lost seats. It is an insult to anyone with half a brain to suggest that the Lib Dems were ever likely to win the general election.

Reading the full transcript of Clegg's Independent on Sunday interview reveals him to be a fantasist presenting himself as a realist. If he really thinks that his party could have won the election he deserves to be given his own three hour Sunday evening television show. Everyone knows that Clegg had no chance of being the first election winning Liberal prime minister since Asquith in 1911.



If we all accept that Clegg was never going to win the election that should be discounted as a reason for not standing up for his party's most prominent election pledge in coalition. Clegg could feasibly argue that not winning the election 'changes' everything so much that his party have no policies at all. If that is so why bother voting for them?

Lib Dem credibility hits a new low

Just over six months ago Nick Clegg was basking in the glow of being publicly recognised for the first time after the televised leadership debates. In Islington his party had clung on to power since a knife edge election in 2006, controlling the council since 2000. How things have changed. Islington went Labour in a landslide result and Clegg faces revolt from his party after selling out to take part in a slash'n'burn Tory government. Golden boy Vince Cable can't even work out whether he supports his own policy of hiking tuition fees.

Not content with letting the Tories push through a severe programme of cuts to education funding nationally, in Islington the Lib Dems are up to their old scaremongering tricks (see leaflet, left). Their latest leaflet suggests that the local Labour council is planning to close a range of primary schools.  What is going on? I thought the Lib Dems were in charge of education now as part of a coalition with their Tory chums? Former Islington Lib Dem councillor Sarah Teather runs the education department with Michael Gove and Cable is pushing through the tripling of tuition fees.

Admittedly Islington Lib Dems have mis-spelt the name of "Hugerford" (sic) school so I can only presume that this latest campaign isn't serious. What I expect is the Lib Dems to "campaign" against the fictitious school closures and then claim victory in a few months when, miraculously, the schools don't close. That means at least two more leaflets.

Local councillors, like me, are perplexed at where these allegations have come from. Perhaps this list was written by another Lib Dem activist, just like when Kingston Lib Dem Dan Falchikov admitted he was behind the bogus claims that Kingston Hospital was going to close. Of course, Clegg was quick to jump on that bandwagon and have his photo taken "campaign" there.

Having lived under a Lib Dem council in Richmond and then Islington for many years I've got used to their negativity. I've never got used to the cheek of it all though.

Lets not forget that elsewhere, Lib Dem leaflets are smelling the coffee and encouraging their former voters to go with Labour. At least the Lib Dems have managed to overtake "other" in the latest YouGov poll. There is at least some comfort for the wicked.

No more mister nice guy

The Economist is there to make me feel guilty. Guilty that I don't read it often enough. Guilty that I'd feel a better person were I to read it regularly. I read it today and found two articles resonating with me. One speculating that the Lib Dems are losing their branding as the "nice guys" of British politics and the other suggesting that Labour needs "to find an updated, outline version of Tony Blair’s election-winning Labour philosophy, combining respect for markets with a belief in strong public services, but fitted to the no-money age."


An election is unlikely to take place until 2015 but the fault lines of party politics are shifting already. We have a coalition for the first time since the second world war. The Lib Dems are in power for the first time since the first world war. Labour is out of power for the first time this century.


Nick Clegg went into the election with a sky high reputation, suffered a poor election result but was rewarded with power. The "sacrifices" made to secure coalition already look like proving fatal for the Lib Dems. Sooner or later "ordinary voters start to think of the Lib Dems and the Tories as a sort of amorphous “coalition party”, if that happens Clegg will be the loser.


At the same time Labour have a huge opportunity. A gap is likely to appear which will need to be filled with only one party able to credibly oppose and argue against the coalition. The faster it works out how to do that the better or it may find that the fault lines have shifted yet further, requiring another reinvention.

Lib Dems falling apart at the seams

Ever since propping up the Tories in government I've reported on the Lib Dems plummeting poll ratings and of an increasing number of splits in the party. The Lib Dem bird was flying high after Nick Clegg's first appearance in the pre-election leaders' debates but now appears to be cowering in a corner, waiting for the inevitable as the party falls apart from the seams.

In their first six months in power since the first world war the Lib Dems have managed to record their worst opinion poll ratings in two decades, hovering around 10%, after their 23% saw them lose 10% of their seats at the last election.

We've had rumours that former leader Charles Kennedy will defect to Labour, councillors in Devon, Birmingham, Sheffield, six in Rochdale have quit the party and the leader of Liverpool Council Warren Bradley has warned that the party face being wiped out after giving in so weakly to Tory cuts.

Closer to (my) home in Islington, the Lib Dems were once running a 'council of the year' (awarded before they'd even been in power for a year) but were wiped out in May (after presiding over an unpopular cutting frenzy), even before their bigger brothers and sisters turned blue.

There are only 11 Lib Dem councillors left in Islington but even they are now at war with each other over student tuition fees. Highbury East's John Gilbert has excused his party's volte-face after a single issue election campaign to scrap tuition fees by claiming that they were duped into accepting almost every Tory policy in coalition government finances were worse than expected. At the same time one of Gilbert's colleagues, Hillrise councillor Greg Foxsmith hit out at Nick Clegg's lack of credibility following the tuition fees debacle:

"In fact, when you go into an election promising to be straight with people you have to honour that. It is going to be difficult for Mr Clegg, and those in the Coalition, to keep their credibility."

It will be almost impossible for Islington Lib Dems, like those across the country to keep faith with the party under such trying circumstances. I'm not surprised that so many have broken and split from their (old) party. I'm not sure how long committed councillors like Foxsmith will be able to keep faith when the party they joined no longer exists, much as he and many like him left Labour in the 1980s when it lost touch.

A year ago I took part in a Five Live debate with Mark Oaten entitled: "What is the point in the Lib Dems?" Growing up in South West London I used to think it was to provide a local alternative, strong in local government. This has now been undermined. Nick Clegg might not mind as he prepares to follow Ramsay MacDonald's footsteps and become a full-blown Tory.

How long before Islington Lib Dems are down to an even smaller rump than they already are? It seems only a matter of time before some of them follow the lead of their (former) counterparts across the country walk away while there is still the chance of some dignity.

Labour ahead again

After the Independent, YouGov/Sun both put Labour ahead of the Tories in the opinion polls recently, The Guardian's ICM poll has also given them a slender lead.

Aside from appearances at Prime Ministers question time we've seen very little of Ed Miliband as yet. That he finds himself in a slightly advantageous poll position could result from several factors. The first is that not having Gordon Brown in charge seems to make Labour more popular/less unpopular. Not being the Tories helps too.

Until Ed Miliband's reign begins to take shape in public - and it hasn't yet - the main story is the demise of the Lib Dems. This was widely predicted at the outset of the coalition and the prophecy of many is being borne out. The third party's support is now the lowest among under 24s, the same group that supported them most strongly at the election only a few months ago. The Lib Dems are paying the price for campaigning on a single issue, student tuition fees, then dropping their core pledge as soon as they gain any power. The party was clearly to the right of where many (mistakenly) thought they were, repeatedly banishing their left wing policies and of course electing a proto-Tory in Nick Clegg as their leader.

After yesterday's showcase interview with The Guardian I'm looking forward to Ed Miliband making further dents in the Tories position. His strategy seems to be to re-build in-party morale first before turning outwards to the Tories. Nothing sorts party morale out like taking control of the media agenda and kicking the unpopular Tories.

Labour sustain lead over Tories

Labour lead over Tories holds

Labour has maintained its opinion poll lead over the Tories, despite doing very little of note as Ed Miliband gets his feet settled in under his desk.

Having spent several years helping my clients understand data about their reputation I can safely say that a graph showing an upward trend is definitely a good thing in this context.

What wins elections?

Is it enough to be an opposition to a disliked government to win elections? Of course not. Neither is it enough to complain but not to offer an alternative. Perhaps the least likely path to electoral success is by heading into ideological extremes. Whenever Labour or the Tories have been perceived as occupying the left or the right respectively, they have been rejected by voters. 


YouGov's Peter Kellner has argued that while politicians and parties need to be seen to be centrist to be accepted by the electorate there were other reasons that were more significant in seeing a change in government since 1945. Kellner's advice is that Ed Miliband should be careful where he positions himself: follow current public opinion and look weak - the perceived centre shifts over time; "give swing voters solid reasons to hope their lives will get better if you win. Then they will vote for you". The point is simple and echoes what I've said for some time - opposition isn't enough for Labour. Labour needs to be a credible alternative and needs to set out some specifics about what would be different in a Labour Britain to a Tory one. As Dan Hodges states: "There is protest. And there is power. Labour cannot be the party of both".


Labour must not just shout, it needs to show it can act, in the centre ground but sensibly, to show it understands what people want and how their lives will be better if they vote for the party.

Sunday poll boost

The latest YouGov poll puts Labour (again) ahead of the Tories. ComRes for The Independent also puts Labour ahead. the first time the party has been ahead in that poll since Gordon Brown took charge.

We could see a rise in cynicism over the next few years. The Lib Dems profited in the last decade by ypresenting themselves as the only party honest enough to say what people needed to hear on Iraq and student tuition fees. The wheels have fallen off very quickly once they have had a sniff of power. Much like my own experience of a Lib Dem council in Islington. If a party that made such sway of a single policy trashes it as soon as they get in government what hope does anyone have of believing politicians any more?

The NUS planning to campaign against all Lib Dem MPs. This week's protest showed that the youngsters haven't become cynical and do still care. I was warmed by that. It showed that the cuts won't be easy to implement.

The Tories are little better than their coalition partners. Cameron made much of cutting back on special advisers. He has done that but only by employing a raft of Conservative Central Office staffers in the civil service anyway. This isn't new politics, much more like old politics. It just got interesting again, just like the 1980s.

Student protests and fees

Today's student protests will gain far more attention than any the preceded it over the last ten years. The violence will see to that but I expect there to be a positive trade-off from this - that alongside reports of the unrest will be an analysis of the issues involved. That hasn't happened as much as it should, I just hope the real issues are not over shadowed. 

Those pushing the changes through in the coalition didn't have to pay for their own education, though many did through pri. What worries me most about this is that charging students even more will cause further social problems with a long time lag. These issues were not addressed by the Browne review. At the moment most graduates spend most of their 20s paying off their loans. When fees double or treble this will take people almost half way through their working life before they pay it all off well into their 40s in some cases. As a result many graduates won't save for a pension or to buy a house. I fear the hike in tuition fees will have far greater implications than may of those waving the legislation through have even considered. 

With an ageing population which already saves too little for retirement and with first time buyers priced out because they can't save big enough deposits is heaping even more debt onto them really a good idea? I don't expect the coalition to u-turn, Tories never do. 

The dénouement will take some time. The first effect is likely to be that the Lib Dems who campaigned so hard for the student vote will lose many of their university seats such as Sheffield Hallam, Nick Clegg's seat; Manchester Withington, John Leech, held by only 4%; and those in Bristol, Cambridge and Leeds. That reckoning will come in five years. The rest will wait, but could be serious.

Lies, lies and leaflets

The Phil Woolas furore reminded me that many election campaigns probably sail close to the wind but nothing gets done as the result isn't as close as his. First let me say that he was wrong to use the statements he did. All the same he is entitled to a full legal process before the world sweeps him away.


It wasn't that long ago that Elwyn Watkins' own Lib Dem party were forced to pay my neighbouring MP Emily Thornberry four figure compensation for making false claims in leaflets about her attendance in Parliament. That seems to have escaped many people.


Lib Dem Deputy Leader Simon Hughes also profited from a slanderous by-election campaign in 1983 when there were unsavoury and homophobic attacks on Labour candidate Peter Tatchell. The Guardian thought there was an "insistent level of vilification which infected the campaign." Hughes has held the seat ever since. 


What about Tory Peter Griffiths who in 1964 asked voters "if you want a nigger for a neighbour, vote Labour"?


Phil Woolas is the first in 100 years to have been taken to task in this way but I do feel that if these rules were applied more strictly that there would have been others. Woolas was wrong and I hope we have moved on from 1964 and 1983, but the other examples are a fruit for thought.