Christmas cheer in the polls for Dave

After a long period in which the polls have been in a 'holding pattern', they have delivered a Christmas present for Dave Cameron in terms of a jump in the ratings: Polls

As the experts at Nottingham University point out, this is undoubtedly related to the exercise of the European 'veto' and probably involves an erosion of UKIP support. However, they also doubt whether the boost will be an enduring one, given the low salience of the EU in British politics and the fact that UKIP voters have other concerns.

Nevertheless, it does once again raise the issue of why the Labour Party is not doing better given the overall economic and political situation. One reason is that the polling evidence suggests that the electorate have no confidence in their economic competence, a reasonable given view given the way in which they spent what would have been a substantial budget surplus after 2001.

The other factor is Ed Miliband who continues to fail to impress. There are situations in which he could made more off. For example, the 'We are the 99 per cent' claim of the Occupy movement does resonate, even though it is ultimately spurious given that it assumes that the 99 per cent have a homogeneous set of interests and values which is clearly not the case. Nevertheless, Miliband could have recognised that they had an emotional case which required some intellectual development.

What instead we get is a lot of dithering and sitting on the fence as he tries to steer a course, for example, between the public sector unions and those who work in the private sector. In the dispute over public sector pensions, the Government has had to make some concessions but has largely got what it wanted in terms of higher contributions, later retirement ages and smaller entitlements.

Labour loyalists seem determined to stick with Ed to the last, however.

Ed's conference speech

I have to say that I am a bit underwhelmed. It often seemed that he was addressing the conference hall rather than the country. The speech went down well in Liverpool, especially the barbs against the Tories and Nick Clegg. But for me it didn't deliver a coherent strategy for government. It had the feeling of a speech that had been worked on a bit too much and hence sometimes came across as pedestrian when it aspired to be inspirational.

There was a theme there: I lost count of how many times values was mentioned. Ed was trying to say: these are my values and I think they are your values and the country's values as well. And Ed tried to sell himself as someone with an outsider's background who could deliver real change. He declared that he was his own man who would do things his way, making a real break with Tony Blair and Gordon Brown.

Much was made of the new bargain. This would create a society in which one got something for something, in which effort would be rewarded. A distinction between good and bad companies had been trailed beforehand, but how does one decide which company is a good one?

Ed thinks the system is flawed, and it may well be, but how does one make the link between this and the everyday concerns that people have, even though Ed tried to give concrete examples in his speech?

Labour's search for credibility

What Labour really needs out of its conference is the development of a view among voters that it is a credible alternative government. Of course, the first obstacle there is Ed Miliband. Voters do not see him as a credible prime minister in waiting. They think he lacks that indefinable but essential quality, charisma.

The answer of the Labour image makers is to portray Ed Miliband as 'one of us', cue photo opportunities with his children. Apart from the fact that the photos were rather trumped by one of Villa supporting Dave Cameron at the match at Loftus Road with his son, voters do not want prime ministers to be 'one of us'.

They expect them to have an understanding of their problems, but they also expect the prime minister to have qualities that separate him or her from the crowd, a sense of command and authority. Dave Cameron's confidence can shade into the appearance of arrogance and complacency, but he does look as if he is in charge.

When it comes to policy, there is something of a vacuum, reflecting Labour's overly complex policy review. Unfortunately, the first major announcement, capping student fees at £6,000 does not stand up to close scrutinty.

First, it is not clear what its status is. Certainly it is not a manifesto commitment (and what happened to the graduate tax anyway?) Apparently that is still on the agenda.

Second, the cut will only be of benefit to those who earn enough to repay their loans. So better off graduates could find their fees cut. Graduates earning more than £65k a year would have to pay a higher rate of interest on their loans, but in order to raise the required amount, these rates of interest would have to be prohibitively high.

This might seem to be a way of enticing students disllusioned with the Liberal Democrats, but students (and their parents) are going to look at this proposal long and hard.

Statement by the prime minister

Sometimes I wonder about the parallels between this current crisis and the Westland crisis which was supposed to bring down Margaret Thatcher as prime minister but which is barely remembered today (although it did unleash Michael Heseltine as an unguided missile). Actually Ed Miliband was more effective in the questions that he put to the prime minister today than Neil Kinnock was then.

Dave Cameron said that he had learnt from the experience of employing Andy Coulson and with the benefit of hindsight he would have done things differently. If Andy Coulson was shown to have lied, he would then apologise, but this 'conditional apology' was not good enough for Ed Miliband. I must say that I have never quite understood the fashion for apologies.

Ed Miliband was at his strongest when he pointed out that there were five opportunities for David Cameron to doubt Andy Coulson's suitability and the strongest of these was in relation to a New York Times article last September which led to the re-launch of the police investigation. Miliband suggested that the prime minister was caught in a tragic conflict between personal loyalty and the standards and integrity required in public life.

These are all powerful points, but Labour's relationship to the media has not been squeaky clean. The prime minister was able to castigate them as the 'slumber party' and pointed out that Rupert Murdoch had named Gordon Brown as a personal friend.

Nick Clegg's body language throughout was interesting, one of frozen immobility most of the time. Clearly the Lib Dems seen an advantage in distancing themselves over this issue.

Despite the saturation media coverage, I just wonder how interested those outside the political class are in all this. The crisis in the eurozone threatens to unleash a sovereign debt crisis and a second banking crisis which would be far more serious than what Ed Miliband described as a 'a catatsrophic error of judgment'. Which of us has not made poor personnel choices?

David Cameron faces media storm

All my hopes of a quiet Sunday at home were shattered after first Rebekah Brooks was arrested and then the Commissioner of Metropolitian Police resigned. A classic media storm quickly developed with one reporter suggesting to me that 'the dominoes are falling' and David Cameron himself might be in danger.

Apparently, Dave did not hear of the news of the Commissoner's resignation until he was 1 hour 10 mins. into his flight to South Africa when he had a satellite phone conversation with Home Secretary Theresa May.

There is no doubt that David Cameron has made errors of judgment in relation to Andy Coulson, not least in failing to heed advice that he was given, although some of that advice appears not to have reached him. David Cameron also said last week in the House of Commons that some of the assurances he was given by Andy Coulson may not have been well founded.

Ed Miliband has made good use of the situation and has been able to take his L-plates off and for once look authoritative. Tom Montgomerie suggests mischievously in The Times today that this is bad news for Labour as he is now well entrenched. His poll numbers have certainly not improved all that much (yet) but he now may look less like the head boy asked at short notice to make a speech.

Yvette Cooper has probably been an even more effective performer and has insisted that David Cameron has questions to answer. As it so happens, the Prime Minister is in South Africa and will not return until after Parliament goes into recess (he is about to give a press conference), although some Labour MPs are calling for the House of Commons to be recalled. David Cameron said in his press conference this morning that it would be appropriate for the House to be recalled on Wednesday for a statement and questions.

What is really serious about this crisis is that it further erodes trust in institutions, not just the media, but even more important the Metropolitan Police. The Met has had problems in the past with corruption and institutionalized racism and these have been tackled to good effect. Crime in London has been falling. However, it is evident that some members of the force have had a closer relationship with the media than is desirable.

It is now becoming apparent that the Mayor of London had lost confidence in the Commissioner and in effect he went before he was pushed (Theresa May would have probably implied that he should go in the Commons statement scheduled for todday). Bozza and Dave had a number of conversations over the matter over the weekend which must have been interesting given their political rivalry.

The Liberal Democrats have come out of this quite well because they were not having informal meetings with News International but in part this because they were not regarded as serious players before the last election. Nevertheless, Nick Clegg has managed to sound sensible and authoritative.

It should be remembered that there is a serious crisis in the eurozone and a potential debt default in the US, either of which could trigger a second recessionary wave at a time when governments have no shots left in their locker. Voters will make their decision at the next election in terms of the economy and public services, not the phone hacking scandal.

Nevertheless, David Cameron's image has been dented. He is good at the big picture but the flip side of that is that he does not always master crucial details and up to now has been able to breeze through on the basis of self-confidence. Clearly he now faces a more difficult phase as this story will rumble on for months and years.

But George Osborne is not going to be moving into No.10.

A good night for Dave

Dave Cameron has reason to be pleased with the local election results so far. BBC projections put the Conservatives on 35 per cent as against 37 per cent for Labour and 15 per cent for the Lib Dems. This is not a bad outcome for a party implementing unpopular policies. The Conservatives are also likely to be able to celebrate a big majority in the AV referendum.

In Scotland the presidential style campaign run by the canny Alex Salmond has paid off with a clear majority for the SNP. Labour may be able to take sole charge of the Welsh Assembly, but even there the result is on a knife edge. The results hardly show that voters think that they have a convincing alternative narrative or that they see Ed Miliband as a future prime minister.

Once again it is the Lib Dems who are the whipping boys for the Coalition Government. As expected, they have lost heavily in the council elections, especially in the north. There will now be increased party pressure on Nick Clegg to differntiate himself from the Conservatives.

Some of the things said in the AV referendum have left a sour taste in the mouth. It may never be glad, confident morning again, but it is not the end of the coalition. The two parties are inextricably bound together.

The competence theme

Ed Miliband made the competence of the Government his organising theme at PMQ's today. However, he is going to have a bit of an uphill struggle according to the results of a new Populus poll.

44 per cent of those interviewed said that they trust the coalition's key economic figures to manage the economy as against 33 per cent for Labour. 41 per cent agreed that the Conservatives have 'a good team of leaders' as against 34 per cent for Labour.

However, Labour's lead on 'shares my values' has gone up from 1 per cent to 9 per cent, while the number agreeing that Labour is 'for ordinary people, not just the best off' has also gone up.

The Liberal Democrats have taken a big hit on whether they are 'honest and principled' down from 40 per cent in September to 24 per cent now. No longer can they claim to be above or beyond politics.

Is Labour making an impact?

The latest YouGov poll puts the Conservatives on 42 per cent, Labour on 40 per cent and the Lib Dems on 8 per cent. I would agree that polls at this stage of a Parliament are largely irrelevant, but one might think that Labour would be making a greater impact.

I have not been impressed by Ed Miliband at Prime Minister's Question Time. He does land the occasional punch, but it is often stilted or over prepared. David Cameron is usually able to out point him, often with a spontaneous put down like the Basil Brush comment on Wednesday (after Ed had tried to claim that the PM was 'air brushed').

It looks like in its haste to get away from New Labour (which did win three elections in a row) the Labour Party has reverted to its old principle: never compromise with the electorate.

Of course, it's possible that the Government will be overwhelmed by a tidal wave of revulsion against the effect of the cuts. No doubt that is what the Labour Party hopes. But they have to have a credible alternative economic plan and as yet they don't. Admittedly, they do have time to fill in the famous blank sheet of paper, but they can't take too long.

Meanwhile, David Cameron has followed Nick Clegg in getting in some populist shots at bankers' bonuses. They are an easy target and they haven't showed much political skill. Whether it's good policy is another matter.

The big freeze

Sky News announced last night that the country was 'at a halt'. Given that there has been relatively little snow in the West Midlands and traffic was flowing freely, I was a bit puzzled about this until I realised that Kent and Sussex were at a halt (plus the north-east and most of Scotland but they don't count).

Labour has tried to make political capital out of the weather which is a bit rich given the problems they encountered when they were in office. Of course, all oppositions have the irritating habit of jumping on any bandwagon that comes along. The Conservatives were doing it all the time and the Lib Dems were even more opportunist as events have shown.

Even so, Mr Milibean (as Private Eye have named him) ought to think before he or his shadow ministers speak out, notwithstanding their success on sport partnerships.

There have been the usual chorus of complaints about our inability to cope although it has been a very heavy snow dump in many parts of the country. Even the Isles of Scilly have been hit.

The big problem has not been lack of grit or gritters, but snow ploughs. One could spend more money on snow ploughs but they are an expensive capital asset will stand idle for much of the time (admittedly one can improvise a snow plough as many farmers do). One could have more snow ploughs but the price would be a cut elsewhere in already depleted local authority budgets.

Where there are legitimate grounds for criticism is the lack of inadequate contingency plans and the failure to provide information to stranded travellers, in particular by updating internet sites. Information can be disseminated very quickly by sites and text messages.

Yvette or Ed?

Husband-and-wife team Yvette Cooper and Ed Balls came first and third in the poll for the shadow cabinet yesterday. But which of them will take the key role of Shadow Chancellor?

Ed Balls is a heavyweight political bruiser and has long experience in the Treasury as Gordon Brown's Deputy Chancellor. But I think Yvettte Cooper, has the forensic skills required to tackle the detail of Coalition Government spending plans and has better presentational skills. I would choose her, but I suspect that Ed Miliband will choose the other Ed, although he could make him shadow foreign secretary.

Jack Straw said yesterday that half a dozen of those elected would not be up to serving in the real Cabinet. Who could he mean? Perhaps the Eagle twins who have both been successful?

The big society

This was the unifying theme of David Cameron's speech to the Conservative Party conference. The implication was that this was the way forward which would enable the country to withstand the cuts in public expenditure necessitated by the budget deficit and take us to the sunlit uplands beyond.

The 'Big Society spirit' was mentioned more than once, as was the notion that 'your country needs you'. The prime minister used the example of the 100,000 people who had volunteered for the Olympic Games as evidence that additional volunteers were available. He attacked the notion that 'if government takes care of this, we won't have to'.

Citizenship was more than a transaction - although citizens have been increasingly encouraged over the years to define themselves as consumers of public services with certain entitlements, not least by New Labour. In other words, this idea has become quite embedded. This is not to say that it should not be challenged, but it's a perception that will be hard to dislodge.

It was noticeable that the attacks on Labour got the loudest applause in the hall. He managed to define Labour, in terms of the views of Ed Balls, as opposed to aspiration and there was a neat dig of Neil 'we've got our party back' Kinnock. Ed Miliband was more or less a non person, which is probably the way to play it for now. The prime minister's defence of the union also went down well with the audience.

The comment that we were geared up to fight old wars did not sound like good news for the Navy or the RAF. It seemed to me that there was a clear endorsement of Ken Clarke's refreshing approach to criminal justice issues.

It was interesting that two references were made to football, the last World Cup and the hope of holding the 2018 one in England.

I didn't think there was much that was new in the speech, but probably there didn't have to be. It was an attempt to define Cameron's distinctive approach and brand. There is such a thing as society, but it's different from the state (Sam Cam's idea originally) and it needs to be an active and engaged society. I don't think it is just cover for the cuts, but I'm not fully convinced either.

Interesting how much the cameras focused on Sam Cam during the warm up video and at other times. But she was looking very glamorous.

Red Ed? Come off it!

That was Ed Miliband's message as he gave a heartfelt (and apart from the odd stumble) polished performance to the Labour Party conference this afternoon. Sometimes it did feel as if the Revd. Blair had been replaced as vicar by his curate who combined youthfulness, earnestness and a commitment to optimism, the theme on which he ended.

Ed Miliband tried to differentiate himself from Old and New Labour, while acknowledging the latter's achievements, by presenting himself as part of a new generation which wanted a new politics. How many times have we heard politicians say before that they want to change politics?

He presented his back story quite well, with a self-deprecatory remark about his father, Ralph (Adolph) Miliband. There were also references to the future in terms of his 16 month old son.

One of the clear themes came through to me was that he was not going to vacate the centre ground of politics, although he also argued that the centre ground can be re-shaped. He endorsed the central premise of the New Labour argument: one can deliver both economic efficiency and social justice. He also tried to make a strong ethical appeal, emphasising that 'my values are my anchor'.

He also made clear that the party 'wouldn't always like what I have to say ... but lead I will.' Militant trade unionists got a slap on the wrist with a reference to 'overblown rhetoric about waves of irresponsible strikes'.

On the deficit, he said that the need to reduce it would have meant painful cuts under Labour. Even if Labour regained office, it would not be possible to reverse all the cuts. Fiscal credibility had been hard won by New Labour and it must be won back. What this all came down to at the end, however, was a rather lame endorsement of the approach of halving the deficit.

One of the most potentially important statements was the announcement that he would vote in favour of AV in referendum, a move away from the opportunistic opposition Labour had been pursuing. It should increase the chances of the measure passing.

So a good start, but the real tests lie ahead. How will he match up against David Cameron at question time?

What will David do?

David Miliband has to decide within the next 24 hours to carry on in front-line politics, if he has not decided already. His acclaimed speech to the Labour Party conference yesterday could be his last from the front bench.

One can understand why he might not wish to continue. He has been pipped to the leadership of the party by his own brother. Even if Labour regain office, he would never be prime minister.

Moreover, if he did carry on as a front bench spokesman, the media would constantly be looking to expose differences between him and Red Ed - and they do exist.

On the other hand, if he does stand down, Ed Balls is likely to be the Shadow Chancellor. Balls is a leading deficit denier. Or to put it more generously, he believes that a lot of the gap can be closed by clamping down on tax evasion and avoidance. If it was that easy, it would have been done years ago.

The UK economy is on the mend

That is the verdict of the International Monetary Fund in a positive report on the UK economy: Fund .

The report praises the Coalition Government's 'strong and credible' deficit reduction plan. While fiscal tightening could dampen short-term growth, it will not stop it, one in the eye for the double dip recession school of thought. CPI inflation should be back on target by 2012.

There are some araes of concern in relation to the banks and the report emphasises the need for the momentum of financial sector reform to continue. Backing for Vince, then. BTW, it was interesting to see my local Conservative MP Chris White writing an 'I'm with Vince' piece in the local paper.

Quite how 'Red Ed' will respond to this remains to be seen. It is his first test on the economic front.

Dave or David, Nick or Nicholas?

Given names often cause problems. I happen to have a Welsh one which gives people a lot of problems. I shortened it from 'Wynford' years ago. (There used to be a Welsh televison broadcaster called Wynford Vaughan Thomas who was a kind of sidekick to David Dimbleby on state occasions: I am not named after him!)

It is becoming increasingly common to call politicians by their first names as celebrity culture takes hold. It all started with the last London mayoral election when it was 'Ken' or 'Boris' or sometimes the affectionate 'Bozza'.

In private before the election David Cameron used to say 'Call me Dave!' But now he is prime minister, we must refer to him as David. But why is it Nick rather than Nicholas? I was talking with a colleague yesterday who specialises in culture and the media and she suggested that 'Nicholas' was a child's name.

Obviously it's 'Ken' Clarke as he is so blokeish. William Hague tried to be blokeish as opposition leader, but never shortened his name to 'Bill'. Just as well now that he is Foreign Secretary. George Osborne changed his first name from Gideon which was a smart move. I suppose one could shorten 'Theresa' to 'Tessa', but 'Theresa' sounds better for a Home Secretary. Incidentally, I have met her and I think that she is both very pleasant and very sharp. Choosing distinctive shoes is a smart branding device.

On the Labour benches, it's 'Ed' rather than 'Edward' Miliband. But David Miliband is not 'Dave'. I think he should become 'Dave' now to enhance his populist appeal. I knew their father slightly and I have to say that he is one of the few people I really disliked and not just because he was a Marxist. I actually find Ed a lot smarter and more likeable than Dave and it appears they are going to stand against each other for the leadership. Whether Yvette Cooper will stand against her husband remains to be seen, but she is smarter and more likeable.