Dave vs. Nick

David Cameron and Nick Clegg will go head-to-head over Britain’s voting system with Cameron warning AV would lead to further political horsetrading, and Clegg countering that first-past-the-post fosters distrust in politics. In carefully choreographed speeches, following the referendum on 5 May being given royal assent, the two men will start a delicate operation to set out views on voting reform passionately held by their respective parties without damaging the coalition’s stability. One source described it “as a temporary and limited undocking”. Cameron will speak first in London followed two hours later by Clegg in Leeds. Cameron is expected to be the more prominent campaigner in the coming week after polling showing Clegg is the best poster boy for the no campaign. The prime minister will say: “In the next 11 weeks the debate over AV is going to heat up right across the country. Throughout this time I’ll be making my case loud and clear.” – the Guardian (more…)

Command and control

The Labour leader, Ed Miliband, and the shadow chancellor, Ed Balls, have ordered the party’s frontbenchers to clear all policy statements with them before making an announcement. The order – which covers speeches, newspaper articles, press releases, contributions to parliamentary debates and endorsements for campaigns – applies to every shadow minister. Statements with financial implications must be cleared with the shadow Treasury team as well as the leader’s office, while those that do not involve spending go to Miliband alone. The move will be seen as an attempt byMiliband to impose tight discipline on his party in the hope of fending off Conservative claims that Labour are “deficit deniers” who would allow public spending to creep back up. But it also appears to consolidate Balls’s position by giving him a joint role as arbiter on Labour spending plans. –  the Guardian

Cameron U-turn on forest sell off

The highly contentious plans for a £250m sale of England’s forests will be abandoned because of the furious backlash that has hit the Government. David Cameron humiliated his Environment Secretary Caroline Spelman in the House yesterday, and shocked MPs, when he disowned the policy. The Prime Minister signalled the retreat when he admitted he was unhappy with the proposals under which woodlands owned and run by the Forestry Commission would be sold off over the next decade. – the Independent (more…)

Lib Dem unrest over NHS reforms

Liberal Democrat leaders are trying to douse a growing revolt over the coalition’s controversial NHS reforms. Party critics claim the reforms will increase health inequalities, make tracts of the NHS unviable and simply provide profits for private firms asked to take on the task of commissioning care. The backlash comes as figures show the reforms will cost £1.8bn to implement. The Department of Health today revealed it had sought authorisation from parliament to set the money aside to cover redundancy payments, pension liabilities and the penalties of breaking contractual obligations of the primary care trusts that will be abolished under the plans. But the political backlash poses the greatest risk for the coalition as Lib Dem rebels attempt to raise it at their spring conference next month. Privately many cabinet members have doubts about the politics of coalition health reforms, if not the reforms themselves, and rejection of them by one wing of the coalition would only increase those doubts. – the Guardian

No to AV… because it’s too expensive…

These are not easy times in Britain. There is much to preoccupy the Coalition, not least the parlous state of the economy. The decision to hold a referendum on a change of voting system must, therefore, be viewed as an unnecessary distraction from more pressing matters. The vote will take place on May 5, the same day as local contests in England and Wales and elections to the Welsh Assembly and the Scottish Parliament. It is a price to be paid for the Liberal Democrats’ agreement to enter the Coalition, though whether the referendum will do anything to prolong that union must be doubtful – the campaign will pit the two parties in government against each other. – the Telegraph

NICK Clegg’s crusade to change the way Brits vote will cost taxpayers £250 MILLION, figures reveal today. The bill is enough to pay for 8,000 extra nurses, 7,500 troops or 5,000 cops. Deputy PM Mr Clegg, backed by Labour leader Ed Miliband, wants the controversial alternative vote – or AV – system. The proposed spending spree to introduce it will trigger furious protests as millions of families are hit by swingeing cuts. The cost will be exposed today at the launch of the No to AV campaign, which aims to keep the traditional first-past-the-post voting system. A referendum on change will cost £82 MILLION – with another £9 MILLION for “voter education” in the run-up. Up to £130 MILLION will be needed for electronic machines to count voters’ alternative choices of candidate if AV is introduced. – the Sun

Switching from X to 1, 2, 3 voting might cost £250 million, say the No campaign, if you were to decide it would need “expensive counting machines”, double the number you first thought of (by chucking the referendum costs which apply whether we vote Yes or No too), and then ignore the fact that they count the AV votes by hand in Australia. QED. Still, the Daily Mail and Telegraphtried to take it seriously. The AV referendum gives us a democratic choice about whether we think our democracy would be better if we could express multiple preferences – voting 1, 2, 3 – under AV, or should keep X voting under first-past-the-post. There are arguments for and against this change. In a democracy, whether Britain could afford to count the votes really isn’t one of them. – Next Left

Private firms not volunteers joining Dave’s big society

David Cameron’s attempt to relaunch his Big Society agenda hit trouble on several fronts yesterday as it emerged that American firms could take over the running of libraries in Britain. The Prime Minister made a passionate defence of his flagship scheme, admitting it would not make him popular or win elections. However, his pledge that the Big Society was not a cover for big spending cuts was undermined by growing evidence that private firms rather than voluntary groups could land many of the new contracts to run public services. – Independent

Trainee pilots to be dumped

The MoD said last year’s strategic defence and security review (SDSR) had already outlined cost-cutting measures in the forces. A spokesman said: “The SDSR has already made clear there will be a reduction in the number of assets and airframes across all three services, and that the RAF would be reduced by around 5,000 personnel to a total of about 33,000 by 2015. ”However, any reductions in the RAF will not affect operations in Afghanistan and priority areas of capability will not be compromised.” The Telegraph said head of training Air Vice Marshal Mark Green would visit each of the RAF’s three flying schools to pass on the news. Up to 20 fast jet pilots, 30 helicopter pilots and 50 transport aircraft pilots are said to face the axe. Meanwhile, the Times has reported that the cost of scrapping military equipment as a result of the SDSR was £12bn. –BBC

Hardly a week goes by without fresh evidence that the Strategic Defence and Security Review announced last year was rushed and poorly thought through. From the premature retirement of the Harrier jump jets, whose flexibility will be sorely missed, to the near-vandalism of scrapping the new generation of Nimrod reconnaissance planes before they had even flown a single mission, the consequences have been both perverse and potentially calamitous to the nation’s security. Today, our defence correspondent reports that a quarter of RAF trainee pilots are to be cut in a cull costing the taxpayer hundreds of millions of pounds that will leave the service short of fliers. Many of the trainees who are to be told they are surplus to requirements are close to completing their courses. – the Telegraph

Job losses to rise

Redundancies are set to rise sharply in the next few months as public sector cuts bite, a survey has suggested. The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development study found redundancy intentions with employers were at their highest level since it began in 2004. Four out of 10 organisations planned redundancies in the first quarter of this year, the survey discovered. These included one-third of NHS employers, half of central government and three-quarters in local government. The organisations affected typically proposed to cut around one in 10 employees, increasing to one in eight in the public sector.

Poll shows AV support increase

Campaigners demanding a change in the voting system for Westminster elections have secured a 10-point lead over opponents, as peers are threatened with losing their holiday if they derail the referendum planned for 5 May. An exclusive poll for The Independent on Sunday reveals 40 per cent of people surveyed now back a switch to the alternative vote (AV), while 30 per cent want to keep first-past-the-post (FPTP). The four-point increase in support for the yes campaign since January comes direct from those who last month responded “don’t know”, suggesting that as the campaigns step up a gear public support for reform is hardening.

Cameron relaunch of Big Society

David Cameron will today relaunch the Big Society as his “mission in politics” in a speech to social entrepreneurs in London. The move comes after several notable figures in the charity and volunteering sectors have criticised the initiative in light of sweeping budget cuts. Liverpool City Council have pulled out of Big Society projects altogether. “Let’s make one thing absolutely clear – I’m not going to back down from what I believe in just because of a few bad headlines”, Mr Cameron is expected to say. To bolster the Big Society, he will unveil a Big Society bank, with £200m to provide capital to support successful applicants to the scheme, and a £100m transition fund will be made available for charities and social enterprises bidding for public services. – PoliticsHome

Balls: PM playing a dangerous game

The shadow chancellor Ed Balls has said the government is playing a “dangerous game” with its spending cuts. He accused David Cameron of taking Britain back to the era of “nasty confrontation” which marked Margaret Thatcher’s years as PM. Mr Balls told the BBC Politics Show North West, the government was mounting a “real assault” on public services. It follows Justice Secretary Kenneth Clarke’s warning that Middle England did not grasp the scale of the cuts. In an interview to be broadcast on Sunday, Mr Balls said the coalition’s leadership was out of touch with the realities of life facing ordinary voters.- BBC

Mr Balls said that the Government was playing a “dangerous game” with its programme of spending cuts, mounting what he described as a “real assault” on public services. His comments, in an interview with the BBC Politics Show North West to be broadcast tomorrow, came as Justice Secretary Kenneth Clarke warned that Middle England did not yet fully understand what was about to hit them. Mr Balls cited an open letter to The Times signed by more than 90 senior Liberal Democrat councillors, complaining that the Government cutting too far, too fast, as evidence of the damage that was being done. He said that the coalition’s top leadership – such as Mr Cameron, Chancellor George Osborne, and Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg – were out of touch with the realities of life facing ordinary voters. – the Telegraph

Cameron tries to resuscitate Big Society

David Cameron has launched a defence of the Big Society in an article for the Observer. Responding to a week when the idea faced criticism, the Prime Minister denied the Big Society was a cover for the public spending cuts. He said: “Building a stronger, bigger society is something we should try and do whether spending is going up or down”. But Ed Miliband, writing in the Independent on Sunday has claimed that the Big Society is faltering because David Cameron does not recognise the importance of the state, saying: “The reason why Mr Cameron’s Big Society is in such trouble is not simply because the Government is making painful cuts. The way it is doing it – so far, so fast – speaks to its ideological heart. It really believes that a small state will produce a Big Society.” – PoliticsHome

David Cameron is launching a frantic bid to rescue his much-criticised plan for a “big society” as he promises to back the project with public money and new initiatives to help it survive savage government cuts and public scorn. Writing exclusively for the Observer, the prime minister confronts his critics head on and insists that he will never abandon what he believes is the defining mission of his premiership. Cameron says the big society is not a government initiative, but the opposite – one that will see power handed from Whitehall to the people. “It has the power to transform our country,” he declares. “That is why the big society is here to stay.” – the Guardian

Osborne’s laughable bank deal

The government describes its reform of financial services as a work in progress. But that implies the City will come out of it all looking and behaving differently. Last week, the government announced the results of Project Merlin, a deal between ministers and bankers under which the latter are supposed to lend more to UK businesses and pay themselves less. They did indeed agree to extend more credit to businesses, but with no sanction if they fail. Bonuses were largely untouched. Separately, George Osborneannounced a hike in the levy he plans to impose on bank balance sheets. Combined, these measures are meant to assuage public anger over the role banks played in creating the financial crisis and consequentrecession. It won’t work, partly because the sums aren’t big enough but mostly because the whole deal looks like a stunt. – the Guardian

SIR Fred was blasting partridges as Chancellor George Osborne told the Commons he had caved in on bankers’ bonuses. The climbdown came just ten months after the Coalition pledged ­“robust action”against banks bailed out with public money. Earlier in the week it emerged that the Tories were 51 per cent ­funded by financiers last year. – Sunday Mirror

Mubarak has gone – what now for Egypt?

Everyone suddenly burst out singing. And laughing, and crying, and shouting and praying, kneeling on the road and kissing the filthy tarmac right in front of me, and dancing and praising God for ridding them of Hosni Mubarak – a generous moment, for it was their courage rather than divine intervention which rid Egypt of its dictator – and weeping tears which splashed down their clothes. It was as if every man and woman had just got married, as if joy could smother the decades of dictatorship and pain and repression and humiliation and blood. Forever, it will be known as the Egyptian Revolution of 25 January – the day the rising began – and it will be forever the story of a risen people. The old man had gone at last, handing power not to the Vice-President but – ominously, though the millions of non-violent revolutionaries were in no mood to appreciate this last night – to Egypt’s army council, to a field marshal and a lot of brigadier generals, guarantors, for now, of all that the pro-democracy protesters had fought and, in some cases, died for. Yet even the soldiers were happy. At the very moment when the news of Mubarak’s demise licked like fire through the demonstrators outside the army-protected state television station on the Nile, the face of one young officer burst into joy. All day, the demonstrators had been telling the soldiers that they were brothers. Well, we shall see. – the Independent

Spelman puts forest sell off on hold

The government is on the ropes over its plans to sell off England’s forests. Nearly half a million people have now signed a petition against the plans and local groups are springing up around the country. Last week I raised the issue of the sales in the House of Commons but I was told there was no turning back. A week is a long time in forestry politics. This Friday, the Tory-led government announced a stay of execution for the 15 per cent of forest land they were planning to put up for sale in April. This panic move is the latest embarrassment for the government. The campaign does not stop there. The public bodies bill giving ministers the power to dispose of 100% of the public forest comes back to the House of Lords in a few weeks time. The prize sought is the removal of the forestry elements of the bill by the government. – Mary Creagh, the Guardian

Controversial plans to sell-off 15 % of the UK’s publicly-owned forests have been put on hold, the Government revealed today. Labour leader Ed Miliband this afternoon described the potential sell-off as ‘outrageous’ and told supporters he believed the Coalition could be defeated on the issue. Caroline Spelman has pledged that no woodland will be put up for sale until a new review to ensure the forests are properly protected and have adequate public access is completed. “In light of the Government commitment to increase protection for access and public benefit in our woodlands, the criteria for these sales will be reviewed so that protections are significantly strengthened following the inadequate measures that were applied to sales under the previous administration.  Pending this review, no individual woodland site will be put on the market,” the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said. – PoliticsHome

Clarke warns of cuts pain to come

Mr Clarke’s downbeat prediction risks upsetting Downing Street after he clashed with No?10 over the plans to give prisoners the vote. Today’s interview is likely to further antagonise Tories who voted against the move. Mr Clarke asserts it is inevitable prisoners will get the vote and backs a plan that will see approximately 30,000 inmates, about a third of the prison population, enfranchised. He dismisses No?10’s hope of limiting the franchise to those serving one-year sentences and instead claims a four-year cut-off point is much more realistic. Despite the exasperation from some colleagues and rumours that the Prime Minister is preparing to sack him, Mr Clarke is unrepentant about his policies, which have led to howls of derision from the Tory Right. – the Telegraph

Mr Clarke, who was chancellor of the exchequer in the last Conservative government, described the current economic situation as “calamitous” and warned that there would be no “quick rebound”. “One reason we’re going to get some political difficulty is that (while) the public knows we’ve got to do something about it, I don’t think Middle England has quite taken on board the scale of the problem,” he said. “That will emerge as the cuts start coming home this year. We’ve got to get on with it (but) it’s going to be very difficult. If someone says it’s not as bad as all that, I say (they) just don’t realise the calamitous position we’re in. “We’re in for a long haul to get back to normality. There are so many uncertainties internationally, and I do not see a quick rebound.” Mr Clarke’s gloomy prognosis is likely to alarm both Conservatives and Liberal Democrats in the coalition as they head for important local government and Scottish and Welsh assembly elections in May. They come after shock figures showed that the economy shrank in the last three months of 2010, raising new fears of a possible double-dip recession. Shadow treasury chief secretary Angela Eagle said that Mr Clarke’s comments underlined the need for the Government to change its economic strategy. – the Independent

IPSA under fire

The independent Committee on Standards in Public Life has become the latest body to argue that rules introduced after the 2009 MPs’ expenses scandal are too strict. David Cameron has already warned the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (Ipsa) to relax its rules, and John Bercow, the Commons Speaker, sent a similar message this week. In a submission to an Ipsa review of its rules, the standards committee said that it had received evidence that the current regime is an undue obstacle to MPs doing their work. Sir Christopher Kelly, Chairman of the Committee said that in it’s desire to prevent misuse of public money, Ipsa risked overlooking the need to “support Members of Parliament effectively in carrying out their important and difficult jobs.” – the Telegraph

“If this is robust action on bank bonuses, my name’s Bob Diamond”

George Osborne’s efforts to end the war on bankers are crumbling asVince Cable, the business secretary, said he was still determined to end “unjustified and outrageous” salaries in the sector and his Liberal Democrat ally Lord Oakeshott left his party’s frontbench after damning the government’s attempts to curb bonuses. Oakeshott, who was not in the government but spoke for the junior coalition partner on Treasury matters in the Lords, stood down shortly after he criticised officials working on the government’s deal with the bankers and said: “If this is robust action on bank bonuses, my name’s Bob Diamond.” Danny Alexander, the Lib Dem chief secretary to the Treasury, said Oakeshott had stood down by mutual consent. Osborne hailed his deal as the moment to move beyond retribution to economic recovery. – the Guardian

Lib Dem Councillors questions cuts

More than 90 prominent Liberal Democrat councillors, including the leaders of 18 local authorities, have criticised the scale and pace of government cuts. In a letter to the Times, they say cuts will have “an undoubted impact on all front-line council services, including care services to the vulnerable”. They also accuse ministers of “denigrating” councils in the media. Lib Dem Communities Minister Andrew Stunell urged his party members not to “fall out” over “pointless debate”. The signatories, who include the leaders of Newcastle, Milton Keynes and Hull city councils, say they are facing the bulk of the cuts to their budgets in the coming financial year – giving them little time “to spread the cost of reorganisation and downsizing”. – BBC

The LibDem council leaders say that the decision to both apply the deepest cuts to local government settlements and front-loading these makes it impossible for councils to cut costs in a way which protects services for the most vulnerable, and will inevitably increase costs through making more redundancies necessary. While the letter endorses the need to reduce the deficit and the broad principle of the Big Society, it makes the cogent critique that the damage to local services will be unnecessarily deep as a result of the political choices to cut deepest and fastest of all in local government, which rules out opportunities to make administrative savings in a cost-effective way. – Next Left

Hacking investigation reopens

The reopened police investigation into phone hacking by News of the World journalists has identified a number of new potential victims, including Lord Prescott, the former deputy prime minister, the Guardian has learned. Just a fortnight after reopening their inquiry, in the wake of an 18-month campaign by the Guardian, police said a re-examination of the evidence they had held for years, but failed to fully investigate, combined with new evidence from the Sunday tabloid, had thrown up an “important and immediate new line of inquiry”. The new investigation, they said, had already established “reasonable evidence” that up to 20 people, mainly prominent public figures, were targeted by the paper. The development represents Scotland Yard finally beginning to take the lid off the phone-hacking scandal. – the Guardian (more…)

Conservative party funding links to the City

Half of the Conservative Party’s funds last year came from the City of London, a Bureau for Investigative Journalism study has found. The proportion of the City’s contributions to the party has doubled to 50.7% from 25% when Mr Cameron became the party’s leader in 2005. The findings have led to claims that David Cameron’s party is excessively influenced by bankers. George Osborne’s announcement of an extra £800m bank levy this year would appear to combat the criticism, but critics claim the Chancellor’s decision was politically motivated with Shadow Chancellor Ed Balls labelling it a “damp squib”. – PoliticsHome

The transformation of Tory funding under David Cameron has been highlighted by new research which shows the City of London dominated donations in the runup to last year’s general election. Michael Spencer, the city financier and chief executive of the internet stockbroker ICAP who was appointed by Cameron as Tory treasurer, masterminded an aggressive charm offensive which saw funding from the financial services sector soar. It rose from £2.7m in 2005 to £11.4m last year, according to new research from the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, a non-profit organisation based at City University in London. While in part this can be attributed to Cameron’s greater popularity than his predecessor, Michael Howard, the amount coming from the City has more than doubled in percentage terms, and now accounts for more than half the Tories’ funding. It rose from 24.7% of donations in 2005 to 50.8% in 2010. – the Guardian

Osborne vs. Balls

Ed Balls and George Osborne went head-to-head across the despatch box at Treasury Questions for the first time today. The new shadow chancellor quizzed Mr Osborne over the poor growth figures and the government’s lack of a Plan B, with the chancellor hitting back by calling Mr Balls a “deficit denier”. Mr Balls questioned why the snow was to blame for the poor economic figures, while in the US, which had also been hit by the weather: “…the pace of US economic growth increased, consumer confidence was high, and unemployment fell to a two-year low. Could the chancellor tell the House, is there something different about snow in Britain, or is there a better explanation as to why the American economy grew and Britain’s economy did not?” – Left Foot Forward

In parliament, Balls lambasted Osborne for making the announcement about the levy at breakfast time, rather than in next month’s budget, describing it as a “mini budget”. He also said that even without the increased bank levy, Osborne had cut tax for banks this year because he had not reintroduced Labour’s bank bonus tax and was also cutting corporation tax. Osborne, however, was adamant that banks would pay more tax under the coalition than they would have done under Labour and insisted that he would not sign an agreement with the banks until he thought he had a “good” deal. Meanwhile, the government and the banks are continuing talks over an agreement on bankers’ bonuses and lending. An agreement on the so-called Project Merlin is to be announced within the “next week”, Treasury officials said. – the Guardian

Eric Illsley resigns

Eric Illsley, the first MP to be convicted over the expenses scandal, has resigned. Labour is planning to trigger a by-election in his Barnsley Central seat on March 3. Illsley is due to be sentenced on Thursday after admitting dishonestly claiming £14,000 of expenses on January 11. He could theoretically have stayed on as a MP with a jail term of less than 12 months.  However, following heavy pressure, Illsley expressed “deep regret” over his actions and said he would resign before the court decided his fate. – the Telegraph

Last month, Illsley became the first sitting MP to be convicted of expenses fraud after pleading guilty to three charges of false accounting. At the time, Labour leader Ed Miliband said Illsley should “do the right thing” and resign as an MP. “I don’t think he can be a credible voice for his constituents having pleaded guilty to such a serious offence,” he added. Illsley had been suspended from the Labour Party following the allegations and sat as an independent after being re-elected in last May’s general election. – Sky

Shock defeat in Lords

DAVID Cameron’s bid to introduce a referendum on the voting system and cut the number of MPs suffered a shock setback last night. The Government lost a Lords vote, by a majority of one, on a Labour motion to make May’s proposed poll binding only if turnout was 40% or more. It was the ­Coalition’s third defeat on the Bill. The result opens the possibility the Bill may not become law in time for a referendum on adopting the alternative vote, which the PM wants to be held on May 5. – the Mirror

An unholy alliance of Labour peers, up to 10 Tory rebels and one bishop (we’re all trying find out which Bish) has seen the Government defeated in the Lords on the issue of a threshold for the AV referendum. An amendment by ex Labour minister Lord (Jeff) Rooker calling for a 40% threshold for any vote has won by a single vote. Government whips were clearly caught off-guard by yet another Labour guerilla operation and ambush. The irony is that this is just as the Coalition came up with its carefully considered compromises on two opposition demands on the bill. – Paul Waugh

The government suffered a narrow defeat in the House of Lords on Monday night when rebel Tories joined forces with Labour peers to make the planned referendum on electoral reform non-binding if turnout falls below 40%. Labour hailed its win as highly significant after an amendment by the former minister Lord Rooker to introduce a 40% threshold in the referendum on AV, due to take place on 5 May, was backed by 219 peers to 218. The Labour peers were joined by 10 Tory rebels including the former cabinet ministers, Lord Lamont, Lord Brooke and Lord Forsyth. The Rooker amendment would mean that parliament would have to decide whether to accept a yes vote if turnout fell below 40%. Under the government’s plans a simple yes vote, regardless of the turnout, would lead to the introduction of AV for elections to the Commons as long as the plans to reduce the number of MPs are also in place. – the Guardian

ShadCab meet over prisoner votes

The shadow cabinet will meet later to decide its stance on prisoner voting rights after two ex-Labour ministers clashed over the controversial issue. Jack Straw and Lord Prescott rowed over it on Monday at a Westminster meeting. They disagreed over whether the Commons should defy a European Court ruling requiring that prisoners in the UK be given the vote. MPs will debate the issue on Thursday and the government says it will do the minimum possible in order to comply. At present, in the UK, only prisoners on remand are allowed to vote. – BBC (more…)