Politics explained

During his last months as leader of the opposition, after the MPs’ expenses scandal, David Cameron famously predicted that the next great scandal waiting to happen was in lobbying. Sure enough, three Labour ex-ministers were “stung” shortly afterwards by a newspaper, caught trying to peddle access during the dying months of Gordon Brown’s government. One, Stephen Byers, was unfortunate enough to have compared himself to a “taxi for hire”. At the time, Cameron reflected on the sorry state of affairs: “I think what it shows is a party that has been in power for far too long and has lost touch with what it’s meant to be doing.” That has quite the echo now.The conundrum at the centre of what we may now call the Cameron-Greensill affair is that, at least since Cameron left office, the only reason why Lex Greensill would find a clapped-out politician like the former prime minister useful is because of his connections. “Useful”, that is, to the extent that Cameron might once have been in line for share options in Greensill Capital worth about £50m. Even to a man as wealthy as him, that would qualify as “real money”. For his part, Cameron, a man of intelligence and much political and diplomatic experience, had to offer his wise advice and, it turns out, his knowledge of the chancellor of the exchequer’s phone number, to which texts were dutifully delivered. There is nothing wrong with anyone wanting to make some cash, and no one has suggested any wrongdoing, but it is best to see the Cameron-Greensill relationship for what it was – a commercial, if not mercenary, one. More

The cold war between Nicola Sturgeon and her predecessor as leader of the Scottish National Party, Alex Salmond, is now a hot one, as they prepare to face each other on the election battlefield.Salmond insists that his new party, Alba, is intended to help the nationalist cause by getting more pro-independence candidates elected to the Scottish parliament than the SNP can on its own. But Sturgeon seems unconvinced that her former mentor is trying to be helpful.“At the end of the day, we’ve got to win independence fair and square. We can’t game, or cheat, our way to that,” she said in a Daily Record interview yesterday. So why did she think he was putting himself forward to be elected back into the Scottish parliament? “I think he is standing because he loves the limelight and can’t bear not to be on the stage.” More

In a tight corner, with few real options open to them and wanting to be seen to “do something” about a bout of unpopularity, political leaders, in government and in opposition, often take the option of “refreshing” their frontbench team. For a prime minister it at least has the advantage that it can be spun as an act of decisive leadership (even though it is more likely to be blind panic), and the new incumbents will at least be in power and in a position to make some real changes. Few, of any, cabinet reshuffles have transformed the fortunes of any government, except perhaps at the margin and offering the gossips some material for profiles of “the next prime minister”. An opposition leader has not even those scant benefits to look to, and the speculation about changes can destabilise an already pressurised team. So it is with the position of the shadow chancellor, Anneliese Dodds. She set out on Sunday for a five-mile run in support of the Oxford Hospitals Charity with some particularly unkind coverage in the press. She was, apparently, for the chop. Sir Keir Starmer, or his allies, were reported to believe that she was highly intelligent but not as effective as she might be at getting the messages across. The likes of Rachel Reeves and Lisa Nandy were offered up as possible replacements. Yvette Cooper, a former Treasury minister, is another female Labour MP who is qualified for their role. Tempting as it might be, though, it would certainly look a little panicky. With an important round of elections coming up in May, the last thing Labour needs is a fresh round of stories about splits and failing cabinet ministers. Besides, Ms Dodds is hardly responsible for the recovery in the fortunes of Boris Johnson and the Conservatives, relative to Labour. The reason for that is as plain as a needle going into arm – the transformation of the Covid crisis since the arrival of the vaccines, and the (comparative) lack of mass disruption caused by Brexit. In the year since he became leader, Starmer has narrowed the Conservative lead considerably, and overtaken them at times, and has looked like a competent alternative prime minister. More

On social media there’s a good deal of debate about the correct pronunciation of “Alba”, as in “Alba Party”. Alba, being the Scottish Gaelic name for Scotland, is not spoken as “AL-BA” but rather as (almost) “ALaBPA”, a softness and micro-gap between the two syllables.Of course, given the personality of its de facto leader, the “Alba Party” should probably be more correctly called the “Alex Party”, because Alex Salmond, former leader of the SNP and now famously estranged from it, will no doubt dominate it. It is not quite a vehicle for his outsized ego, but there’s not that much room for anything else.Apart from relaunching the political career of Mr Salmond, what is the Alba Party for? The party itself deserves its aim as creating a “super majority” for Scottish independence in the Holyrood parliament after the elections on 6 May. Apart from that: “The party’s strategic aims are clear and unambiguous – to achieve a successful, socially just and environmentally responsible independent country … We intend to contribute policy ideas to assist Scotland’s economic recovery and to help build an independence platform to face the new political realities.” More

Tribal as people tend to be, the display, or not, of flags, banners and emblems tends to be a contentious affair, even in the most liberal of democracies and usually tolerant of populations. Even in states where the burning or other desecration of the flag is illegal, such as France, disrespect is sometimes shown as a gesture of political dissent or defiance. As with statues and historical monuments, flags have the power, often as not, to divide as well as to unite communities. When political parties attempt to appropriate a flag to themselves, the reaction among others can be especially severe.Such is the case with the sudden popularity of the union flag among British ministers and other Conservative politicians. In the past, the Tories, the party of empire, were happier than most to drape a union flag over a trestle table at a public meeting or decorate a manifesto with a few, to remind the voters of their opponents supposed and implied lack of patriotism. But it was a trick sparingly used, even by the likes of Margaret Thatcher, who once semi-jokingly draped a hanky over a model of a British Airways plane featuring one of its then new international ethnic designs, rather than the traditional red, white and blue. No longer. Cabinet ministers now seem to compete as to who can manage to jam the most and the biggest union flags into a Zoom call. When the communities secretary, Robert Jenrick, was gently teased about his union jack “rating” when he appeared on BBC Breakfast, the presenters, Naga Munchetty and Charlie Stayt, were publicly reprimanded by BBC management. A Tory backbencher even asked the BBC why it didn’t have more union flags in its annual review.Read more: More

It may seem surprising, but it is perfectly possible, that is to say legal, for the government to directly intervene in the operation of a local authority, and indeed the power to do so by central government has pretty much always existed, one way or another. The earliest example of such a battle of wills occurred a century ago, in Poplar, east London, when a working-class socialist council refused to put the rates (council tax) up and risked going to prison as a result. The spirit of what was then called “Poplarism”, usually pitting Labour councils against Tory governments, remains in certain quarters to this day. Yet the most important thing about the appointment by the government of commissioners to oversee Liverpool City Council, apart from its impact on the city and its people, is that it is not really a political, or at least a party political move. There are many examples of such politicking, especially in Liverpool, but here it arises from police investigations and the arrest of five men, including the mayor of Liverpool, Joe Anderson, in relation to city council matters. As a result of that, Robert Jenrick, the secretary of state for housing, communities and local government, decided last December to exercise the powers granted to him under the Local Government Act 1999, and ordered Max Caller to carry out an inspection of the authority’s compliance with its “best value duty”. More

A year on from the first lockdown, and the old firm make another not-quite-celebratory appearance at a Downing Street Covid-19 press briefing. The prime minister, with his principal lieutenants, the chief medical officer, Chris Whitty, and the chief scientific adviser, Sir Patrick Vallance, aka the two gentlemen of corona, reprised their triple act, for the benefit of a nation roughly where it started, in lockdown. They are older, wiser and and no doubt chastened by the ordeals of the past 12 months (during which Boris Johnson and Whitty caught Covid). Another year over, and what have the press conferences done?In the earliest days of the pandemic they played a vital role in public education and accountability, as the officials and the prime minister were subjected to daily questioning about this mysterious and terrifying new virus. The cast list gradually developed, with other clinicians and showings and alternative ministers leading proceedings, but up until June they were held every day. After that the frequency was gradually wound down as the first lockdown was relaxed, adding perhaps to a false sense of security during the summer of 2020. In due course, through the tier system and then the second full lockdown the frequency has picked up, though weekend sessions (as with the announcement of lockdown number 2) are rare and they are kept to a half an hour, compared with an hour plus in the early days. The first press conference was in fact held on 16 March last year, by Johnson, Whitty and Vallance. Johnson asked for voluntary self-isolation, and a few days later expressed the hope that the coronavirus tide would be turned in 12 weeks. Those were the days. Mostly they have been informative rather than sensational, and the advisers have mostly refrained from taking the opportunity to publicly chastise ministers. More

The verdict of the independent inquiry into Nicola Sturgeon’s behaviour during the Salmond affair could not be clearer: “I am of the opinion that the first minister did not breach the provisions of the ministerial code in respect of any of these matters.” The “verdict”, determined by James Hamilton QC, former attorney general of Ireland, cannot be challenged on the grounds that he is partisan or otherwise unreliable. Unlike the committee of Scottish parliamentarians, with an opposition majority, who narrowly found that Ms Sturgeon had offered “inaccurate” evidence to them, and thus arguably misled the parliament, the Hamilton judgment is unequivocal, and relates precisely to the terms of the ministerial code. This requires ministers never to knowingly mislead MSPs, and plainly Ms Sturgeon did not. It gets better for Ms Sturgeon. Overplaying their hand, the Scottish Conservatives gambled on a more damning report coming out, and had already tabled a vote of no confidence in the first minister. With the SNP and the Greens backing her she will win that vote, cementing her victory and uniting her own party, at least cosmetically. By the end of the day Ms Sturgeon will be able to say that she has been vindicated by an independent inquiry and has the confidence of parliament, which now goes into recess, ready to launch the SNP campaign for the Holyrood elections on 3 May. Ms Sturgeon will be hoping for a fresh overall majority, a personal vote of confidence from the Scottish electorate, plus a mandate to seek a second independence referendum. More