Mandelson and Johnson urge Labour to vote Yes

Two Labour grandees have accused the coalition of hijacking the AV debate to air its “petty tensions” and cynically turn it into a bitter row between the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, after a series of high-profile clashes between ministers over next week’s referendum. Alan Johnson, the former home secretary, told the Guardian that the debate was “bigger than the Liberal Democrats” and appealed to Labour voters to back the alternative vote, claiming that a vote against reform was in effect a vote for the Conservatives. Lord Mandelson, the former cabinet minister, claimed the prime minister had adopted a high profile role in the no campaign to divert attention away from a debate about AV. The cabinet will meet for the first time after the Easter recess on Tuesday, with coalition relations at a new low. – the Guardian

David Cameron is today accused of cynically turning the referendum campaign on the voting system into a bitter row between the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats to head off a Yes vote. In his first intervention in the AV referendum, Lord Mandelson, the former Labour cabinet minister, claimed that the Prime Minister had adopted a high-profile role in the No campaign in order to divert media and public attention away from a debate about the alternative vote (AV). In an interview with The Independent, Lord Mandelson warned Labour figures who are backing the No camp that their actions could condemn the party to years in the electoral wilderness. He appealed to Labour supporters to vote Yes in next week’s referendum to damage the Tories and undermine Mr Cameron’s position. – the Independent

After AV, will the Lord’s be the next Coalition issue?

Like all of God’s earthly creation, the House of Lords is imperfect.  Its powers, its composition and its legitimacy have all come in for severe criticism over the years, from different parts of the political spectrum.  There have been several major reports, a Joint Committee and numerous votes in Parliament in recent years.  The result has been a lot of disagreement, and no change. It has now been reported that — as prefigured in the Coalition Agreement — the Government will publish a Bill at the end of May to bring in an 80% elected Upper Chamber of 500 or so using Proportional Representation.  “Senators” would apparently be elected in thirds every five years. People will differ over the merits of this and other possible models.  The question is, should an elected House of Lords be a priority right now?  To answer it, what we need are non-partisan arguments, arguments that ignore party politics and just look at the merits of the issue in the current context. From this viewpoint the answer is pretty clearly No.  – Conservative Home

Conservative whips under fire from newbies

For years they have been feared and loathed in equal measure, rumoured to have the ability to reduce errant MPs to tears and submission with a flick through their “little black book”. But now the fabled Conservative whips – who provided the inspiration for the murderous Francis Urquhart in The House of Cards – are facing a rebellion they are finding hard to control: the modern world. They are under attack from their new MPs who make up almost half the parliamentary party and cannot understand for need for the cast-iron discipline and subservience to the whips’ office that their predecessors took for granted. Most have had jobs in the “real world” as bankers, doctors and accountants and believe the whips should be keener on “career development” than career control. But what has caused the most ire among the new backbenchers is the whips’ policy of using “overwhelming force” to ensure they never lose a parliamentary vote. – the Independent

Clegg and Cameron’s choreographed war

Nick Clegg is spoiling for a fight with just about everyone – David Cameron, Andrew Lansley, all Tories, Ed Miliband, John Reid, universities, the Daily Mail, Germany, even his own MPs. Rivals will dismiss this as mere pre-election posturing: creating false dividing lines in a desperate attempt to avert a bloodbath in town halls the length of the country. But it seems to go deeper than that. After he has attacked in all but name by every Tory from the PM down, the rules of engagement have changed. Aides say Clegg has woken up to pleas from his party to make clear the Liberal Democrat influence in government, even if that means rocking the coalition boat. As a final effort to save his own skin, it could be too late. But he is going down fighting. The main battleground is over his attempt to ditch first past the post for the alternative vote in 5 May’s referendum. The stakes are high, which explains the escalation of tensions at the heart of government. The Prime Minister, in particular, gets both barrels: accused of telling “lies”, using big Tory money to fund “the very nastiest reactionary politics”. – the Independent

The criticism is seen by some in Westminster as an attempt by the Liberal Democrats to create clear dividing lines between the Lib Dems and the Tories in the run-up to the local elections. It follows yesterday’s public spat between Cameron and Clegg over internships which centred on comments made in an interview in which the prime minister admitted to recently giving work experience to a neighbour’s son. Cameron said he was “very relaxed” about the situation and that he would continue to help friends by offering their children internships. The remarks appeared to contradict a policy unveiled by Clegg earlier this month that seeks to reduce the number of unpaid internships, described by the deputy prime minister as a bar on social mobility. Yesterday, Clegg admitted he disagreed with Cameron. “I’m not relaxed about this at all,” he said. “It just can’t be right that plum internships are decided by who you know, not what you know.” – the Observer

Cameron’s new lords cost tax payer £18.25million a year

DAVID Cameron has broken his pledge to slash the cost of politics by packing the House of Lords with his cronies. The PM vowed the Coalition would bring in a plan to save £12million a year by cutting the number of MPs from 650 to 600 at the next election. But Mr Cameron’s move to appoint 117 new peers since the last General Election a year ago will cost taxpayers a staggering £18.25million a year – £6.25million a year more than his promised savings. Each new peer will cost an average of £156,000 a year, according to figures ­released by the House of Lords. The total cost of the 117 new peers will land ­taxpayers with an extra bill of at least £91million over a five-year ­Parliament. Labour MP Thomas Docherty said: “David Cameron said he wanted to cut the cost of politics. But, by creating a record number of new peers, he’s the one making the cost of politics go up.” – the Sunday Mirror

David Cameron has broken his manifesto promise to cut the cost of politics by creating an unprecedented number of peerages, Labour claimed last night. New figures show that the taxpayer will have to foot the £6m-plus balance from the creation of 117 new peers by the Prime Minister since the election. In the Conservative manifesto last year, Mr Cameron promised to slash the number of MPs from 650 to 600, saving £12m a year. But the cost of swelling ranks in the House of Lords – at £156,000 per member – was £18.25m, more than £6m more. A report last week claimed that Mr Cameron’s decision to elevate 117 people to the Lords, more than any other PM in his first year, had led to a cramped upper chamber, with 792 peers. No 10 indicated he will continue to create peerages to redress the balance in the Lords, where Labour is the main party. – the Independent

Mandelson says ‘Yes’

The ruthless and increasingly shrill determination they have shown in protecting their party interest in the AV campaign is part of a wider ambition to rebuild the same foundations for electoral success in this century that saw them dominate the last. I do not criticise them for it. Long-term majority Conservative government is their project and it will be greatly emboldened by a no vote on 5 May.  Equally, a yes vote would greatly undermine Cameron and spark a rupture in his party. The strains are already starting to show and we need to understand what’s going on. Cameron is fighting to retain the long-term advantage of a split between the progressive parties. But at the same time he is fighting to retain the unity of his party and his job. That’s why we have seen his more rightwing crowd-pleasing interventions of late. If he lost the referendum, a sin the Tory right would not forgive, it could fatally weaken and shatter his leadership. So progressives must wake up, including Liberal Democrats who need to reassert their own interests and self-confidence, just as their coalition partners are doing. Labour needs to recover the hunger we had in the 1990s, born from years in the wilderness. That means, above all, doing the hard work to regain trust in our capacity to manage the economy and public finances responsibly. – the Observer