Red Box - Times Online - WBLG

Ed Balls gets carried away for a second time this week

Ed Balls serenading his wife Yvette Cooper at the Albert Hall to Beatles songs. "Run for your life"? "Yesterday"? "Too much monkey business". Watch that smile.

Is Brown changing his fiscal rules?

Gordon Brown borrowed £2.7 billion to get himself out of a political hole over 10p tax, bringing himself perilously close to breaking the fiscal rules he created in 1997, that public borrowing should not rise to "unsustainable" levels.

It would be very embarrassing if this rule was bust. So was Brown now trying to fiddle the definition of "unsustainable" on the Today programme this morning?

Asked by John Humphrys whether pumping money into the economy had broken the rule, Brown replied "We have not broken the rule, the rule is over a economic cycle. You don’t look at each individual budget; you look at the rules over the economic cycle….." He then added "The sustainable investment rule is over the economic cycle."

Tories dispute this, with George Osborne saying this morning "When Gordon Brown was Chancellor, he said his sustainable investment rule applied every year. This morning as Prime Minister he suddenly announced it only has to be met over the course of a long economic cycle."

So who is right? According to the Fiscal Policy Treasury website: "The sustainable investment rule: public sector net debt as a proportion of GDP will be held over the economic cycle at a stable and prudent level... The Chancellor has stated that, other things equal, net debt will be maintained below 40% of GDP over the current economic cycle, in accordance with the sustainable investment rule."

So no mention of the annual target. In the latest Treasury report setting out its key Public Service Agreements, published in December 2007, it says that "to meet the target with confidence, at the end of every fiscal year of the current economic cycle, public sector net debt must be below 40 per cent of GDP." But again, this isn't quite a commitment.

Alistair Darling said in the budget speech to Parliament.  "Borrowing for investment within the fiscal rules means that we will meet our second fiscal rule the sustainable investment rule in each year and over the cycle." But this is an aspiration and prediction, based on the forecasts he went on to announce, rather than committment.

Smoke and mirrors may yet mean Gordon can wiggle out of this one....

Update: Gordon just admitted there was confusion this morning, and the rule has to be met every year.

Why did Gordon Brown talk about others taking over?

Both parties to Gordon Brown's interview with John Humphries on the Today programme did their best to make it as painful as possible.

After intense and irritating hectoring by Humphries -  which Brown appeared unable to rise above - he seemed to get in a bit of a funk. It's been said before, but often Brown sounds like he is wilfully ignoring questions. Today he was responding to Humphries' questions about Tuesday's 10p u-turn by talking about the orginal 2007 budget decision.

But the low point came towards then end, when he began to sound like he was almost pleading for his job. There was more than a touch of desperation to the line that is now leading news bulletins, "There are many people who could take over but I think I can steer this economy through difficult times."

Why mention life After Brown? Does this mean he's thinking about it? Is he worried about people positioning themselves? What does he know that everybody else doesn't? Or is this reverse psychology, in an attempt to shut people up by making them think through the consequences of ditching him?

Or was it just a meaningless accident?

Lembit Opik caption competition

Lembit Opik and Tory MP Julian Brazier together in a cave. What are they thinking? 9am update, amongst the best:

George Ball : If only he had had a copy of ‘Risk, Responsibility and Regulation’, Trotsky might still be alive today.

A Jones: 'The Borrowers' decide to help fill a large cavity which had given rise to Gordon Brown's pained expressions, in recent weeks.

Hadleigh Roberts: The Credit Crunch won't get us here

The draft Queen's Speech - yeah but no but

So we've had Gordon's big idea(s) and there wont be another one before a general election.

Today's announcements will form the basis of the Queen's Speech (this November) for the Parliament which lasts a year. The Parliament after that (beginning November 2009) will be cut short by an election. So this is it.

Some Blairite reforms. Some big ideas. But quite a lot of 'buts'.

On housing, the government is proposing to buy up unsold houses and rent them out to less well off tenants. But they are only stumping up £200 million, which will only buy a few thousand houses.

On the police, Brown promised "directly elected representatives to give local people more control over priorities". But this is not about scrapping police authorities or putting elected representatives in charge. Instead there might be one or two people elected on to these boards.

On hospitals, Brown is saying that they may be paid money according to "patient satisfaction". This is potentially bold, but they haven't worked out a mechanism or what proportion of the money will depend on making "customers" happy.

On schools, a "legal requirement" for local authorities to "deal" with schools where less than 70 per cent of pupils get 5 A-Cs at GCSE by 2011.

On immigration, the requirement that newcomers will be required to pay into a migration impact fund to help local communities has already been announced.

On agency workers, action is again promised as early as next week, but nothing announced today.

Speaker cleared of wrongdoing by tough new watchdog

Miscreant MPs beware: John Lyon, the new Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, is going to be an extremely tough watchdog.

He has just released a report about Michael Martin and his wife's use of taxis. Opponents of the Speaker wont like the result: he found that the Speaker had a budget of £2,500 a year for taxis and that her use fell within the rules.

He didn't investigate whether this budget should exist in the first place. That was not his job and he couldn't have done anything about it - it's a political question that MPs could and should tackle.

But what is interesting is the extremely assidious way in which Lyon conducted the inquiry. You can see this for yourself here. He wrote, interviewed, re-questioned and double checked every assertion, before clearing Mrs Martin. He is a man to be feared.

One question that remains unanswered: why, given the conclusions of Lyon's report, did senior Luther Pendragon lobbyist Mike Granatt, his former spokesman, resign?

A helpful reader writes: Have you read the minutes at the back of the Standards report. It gives very clear impression the taxi journeys are for the Martins' personal groceries, including a bit of official stuff. Justified on the grounds that Martin doesn't have time to leave the building. Wasn't Granatt's defence at the time that the trips were actually for official functions? Lyon's right about the rules - but as usual it's the rules that are outrageous.

Verdicts and predictions for Gordon Brown

A "friend of Brown" in the Times: “If we lose Crewe then I think a few of us will be telling him to think about quitting,” a former minister and friend of Mr Brown told The Times.

An insider to The Times on why the mini budget now: “The political dynamic changed after the locals,” said one figure closely involved.

Peter Riddell on the mini-budget: So the Treasury will have to raise a very large amount next year. This means either higher taxes or lower spending since higher borrowing cannot be continued. The public finances are not in a healthy state after the sharp rise in public spending since 2000. The Institute for Fiscal Studies estimates that an £8 billion adjustment will have to be made at some stage. Now, with the economy slowing, is the wrong time. But a painful corrective package cannot be put off for ever.

"Roy" in a comment tonight on Red Box at 22.25pm: Crash Gordon - not Flash just Moron

Tamsin Dunwoody, Labour's Crewe candidate, pressed on Channel 4 News on "whether Gordon Brown is an asset or liability": Gordon Brown is our Prime Minister. I'm here meeting people out on the streets and dealing with the issues that affect them.

Labour MPs to the BBC's James Landale: Backbenchers rushed around, clenching their fists in relief, assuring me that at last common sense had prevailed...In the members' lobby, just outside the chamber, a senior member of the Cabinet came up to me, cocked his hand behind his ear and said with all due smugness: "Listen to that - the sound of Tory foxes being shot."

Martin Weale, director of the National Institute of Economic and Social Research: Some of the beneficiaries of this move will probably have to pay higher taxes in the future, but the Chancellor is probably putting off worrying about the future until another time.

Times leading article: On the substance of the shift, Mr Darling has probably made the correct decision.

Neil Harding, Labour supporter in Brighton:  This is no way to run a government. This is a transparent ploy to save Gordon Brown and win votes for the Crewe Byelection. On the road to fair taxation this demonstrates that where there is a will - there is a way and change can happen very quickly indeed - just like when the Tories abolished the poll tax and put VAT up to 17.5% on a panicky day in 1990.

Hopi Sen, Labour blogger: Simple. Obvious. Benefits people who weren’t expecting to pay less tax who are facing rising bills. I like this tax announcement

How much is £2.7 billion?

Dramatic stuff. We've had a crisis mini-budget urgent financial statement from Alistair Darling to address the 10p tax fiasco. He has borrowed an additional £2.7 billion to put up personal tax allowances by £600 - meaning anyone earning up to £40,835 will gain £120 this year. Those in the higher tax bracket - much of the middle classes - get nothing. And it will have to be paid for at some point.

Labour MPs like John McFall, the Treasury select committee chair who was leading the revolt for the mainstream, have said they are now happy after this unfunded tax cut major spending decision ... even though there are still 1.1 million people earning between just over £6,635 and £13,355 who will (only) see their losses halved.

This is panic politics. Darling is throwing money to get the man next door out of his political nightmare. Is £2.7 billion the cost of the Crewe & Nantwich by-election? (go suck on those spending limits, Electoral Commission). Is it enough to get him through the Autumn?

Interestingly, when pressed about the size of additional borrowing, Labour MPs are trying to claim that this sum is nothing compared to £600 billion annual spend by government.

But before they dismiss it as a trivial amount of money, remember Gordon's 2000 budget. After years of sticking to Tory spending plans, Brown made much of his decision to put £2 billion into the NHS and £1 billion into education. Much was made of his generosity spending £3 billion then, as they rightly recognised it's a significant sum.

And that was during the years of plenty.

What is the significance of the Caroline Flint document

Perhaps what is most interesting about the leak of the Caroline Flint document - apart from the incompetence that led to its appearance in the public domain - is how bland the government's "solutions" are.

After succinctly outlining the problem - 5-10 per cent drop in house prices as building stalls - does she really need to commit to paper the assertion that she is to "continue to monitor the situation".

Or that the government needs to put in place "effective measures."

Or that the "market is affected by the global credit crunch".

Alastair Campbell: You're just a f****** hairdresser

Neither Fergus Shanahan in the Sun, nor Libby Purves in The Times are in the slightest bit impressed with Cherie Blair's autobiography, serialised in both papers, suggesting it does her little credit. Maybe it's time she employed Andre Suard, the stylist at Michaeljohn responsible for the £7,700 hair bill during the 2005 campaign, to defend her full time.

Here he is coming to her defence in December 2002, at the height of Cherie's dealings with conman Peter Foster. Dysfunctional does not begin to describe it:

In the afternoon I had my annual children's Christmas party. Every year children from one charity are invited for tea. Father Christmas comes and there's an entertainer. I tried to enjoy myself but I felt like a pariah. André [Cherie's hairdresser] was just getting up steam on my behalf when Alastair came storming into the bedroom.

“That's it,” Alastair said, his arms folded, looking at me via the mirror. “It's now political. The Tories are asking questions and your husband is going to have to answer them. One more time, Cherie, did you at any point have anything whatever to do with the immigration case?”

“I've told you, no. You're determined to humiliate me, aren't you? I know you've been briefing against me.”

“I don't need to. You do it all on your own.”

“Don't you dare talk to Cherie like that!” André exploded.

“You mind your own business,” Alastair retorted. “Remember you're just a f***ing hairdresser.”

“Apologise,” I said.

“I don't think so,” Alastair snorted

Cherie's right to privacy?

Comment Central is not impressed with Cherie Blair's revelation over MMR, reveals Mr Finkelstein

I feel like a bit of a chump.

I strongly defended the Blair's right to privacy over MMR, arguing for that position at The Times leader conference and sticking to that line in any number of private conversations.

My main argument was that, never mind Mr and Mrs Blair, Leo Blair had rights and this was part of his private medical record.

So am I impressed to discover from Mrs Blair's memoirs that the family (to whom I am generally very sympathetic) are happy for this detail to be public now she is selling a book?

Er, no.

More Cherie Unbound in tomorrow's Times. More on the politics, less on the "equipment", promise.

Imagine if today's Ed Balls briefing had been on camera (updated)

First Ed Balls called for an end to "personal attacks or settling old scores". Then the Prime Minister's ally ripped into the character of Frank Field, suggesting he is a dishonourable loner unwilling to strike a deal over the 10p fiasco.

There are plenty of people in the Labour party - even those in the awkward squad - willing to criticise Field whose consistency in his line of argument has something to be desired. So, given the open goal, is it really wise to have one of the Prime Minister's closest chums - in an impromptu off-camera lobby briefing - leading the attack?

To the world outside Westminster, this could well be seen as ugly, bullying behaviour. Lucky the world outside Westminster wont see it because there were no TV cameras present.

But while the Field assault is making the headlines, lasting damage could result from his criticism on the Pre-budget report, and, by proxy, the Chancellor.

Alistair Darling, he suggested, failed to focus on family finances and if the credit crunch's impact had been anticipated "different decisions would have been taken". This, Team Brown believes, is why people are unhappy.

But while sorry is the easiest word at the moment, the apology is still limited in scope from those around Brown. There is still no explicit admission that the original decision to the scrap 10p rate itself should never have happened. They are only apologising for the "handling" of the issue.

Which, they have clearly decided, Alistair can shoulder some of the blame for. Now that really does seem toxic.

(Friends of Alistair Darling say: "Alistair spent yesterday, as he does everyday, dealing with big issues in the Treasury." Ouch)

Nick Clegg: status conscious

Sir Menzies Campbell was always tortured over whether he should use the "Sir" in official Liberal Democrat literature after he became leader. In an effort to be on the side of the common man, he stopped party officials from using it.

So it is nothing short of hilarious that Nick Clegg has decided to adopt the styling "The Rt Hon Nick Clegg MP" in his official literature. It appears in his introduction to the new "City Manifesto" (not yet online, but page 2 when it appears). Maybe he hopes that parading his Privy Council credentials will impress the City.

His proposals - to end "light touch" regulation for consumer financial products - probably will not.

At least there were few witnesses. Despite hosting the launch at the cavernous Bloomberg London hq, only the Times, Scotsman, two Bloomberg reporters plus trade press turned up. At one point they even considered moving to a smaller room.

A net snapshot of Crewe & Nantwich

With the ICM poll for the Mail on Sunday showing the Tories ahead by a whisker, the net is currently a good guide to what's happening on the ground in Crewe & Nantwich. Here's a taste:

Crewe.tv, by Jules Hornbrook, local freelance writer who works in the Bentley factory: The Conservatives weren't as well received around the centre as, say, the Lib Dems or Labour before them, but they were happy to chat to anyone who challenged them. As for Timpson being a Toff, nonsense. He's not a bad bloke. He's been on the campaign trail since last summer and, despite what some think, he is a Cheshire (if not Crewe/Nantwich) man. Is he the right man to take things forward in our towns though?

Crewe & Nantwich Borough Council website: Conservatives took 59 out of the 81 seats on the new shadow Cheshire East council on 1st May. Click here for results for whole Cheshire East shadow unitary authority

Nic Burn, on the letters page of the Crewe & Nantwich Guardian: Who are we going to give £61,820 annual salary and in excess of £150,000 annual expenses to? If they work 40 hours a week it equals £101.83 per hour to employ them. What will they really do for us, or what have they really done to us? 10p' to 20p' doesn't sound much when you say it fast, or slowly for that matter, nor does it sound bad emptying the dirty bins fortnightly, after all, who has to suffer the sickening smell they give off in the summer, and who really cares, who's really bothered?

Lib Dem official website: The nomination of Mark Walklate as an independent candidate for the Crewe and Nantwich by-election has left local Tories campaign staff red faced and in turmoil. Mark Walklate stood as a Conservative candidate in the local elections several times, most recently in 2006 and again in 2007, but left the party after an internal falling out. His nomination papers for the by-election feature two prominent and well known local Conservative activists fuelling speculation of an internal split in their camp.

Keep the Tories out of Crewe blog: I’m a middle aged, working class man living in the West End of Crewe; formerly employed in Crewe Works prior to its destruction by Tory and Thatcherite policies. As someone who remembers vividly the disgraceful contempt with which the Tories treated northern working class communities during the 1970s and 1980s, I am saddened that many of my fellow Crewe residents are considering voting for this sham of a party. This blog will be updated daily, detailing the elitism of the Tories, the snobbery of the leadership, the weaknesses of its policies and the reality of the toff they’ve got standing for election in Crewe.

LabourHome appalled by Labour class-war campaign tactics: The class warfare stuff, although cheap, is bording just about acceptable; but one thing horrified me (on an election leaflet): "Do you oppose making foreign nationals carry and ID card?" Regardless of the fact that I oppose ID cards in anyway, shape or form (the mere idea is distinctly alien to Britain) - "making", "foreign nationals" is the language of the [far] right. What has our party come to? Do we not know who we sound like with such inflammatory, nationalist statement. Unless of course - the plan is to TRY and appeal to the BNP - in which case, i may leave the party now.

UK Polling Report seat profile: Historically Crewe and Nantwich was a marginal seat - Gwyneth Dunwoody held it by only a few hundred votes on its creation in 1983 and by slim majorities in 1987 and 1992. Only after boundary changes in 1997 did it become more secure. The Labour majority slipped in subsequent elections and it now represents the sort of seat that would be Conservative were they to win a decent sized Parliamentary majority.

Cllr Nigel Ash, Labour councillor in Wigan:  Nice to see Dennis Skinner again - he was holding court on the Nantwich Road chatting to passers by and anyone else who would listen. After the battering the Labour Party has taken recently it was reassuring to see so many people from different parts of the country giving up their Saturday morning to help the candidate in this important election.

Labour official campaign website: Local residents are asking the question - who is Edward Timpson? Apparently he has been a candidate for 12 months, but no one in the town has heard much from him. All we know about his is he waffles lots, wants to cut the funding going to our schools, has no idea how to tackle crime and lives in a big mansion house on the other side of Tarporley.

Conservative official campaign website, Timpson's blog: I had a final day off yesterday.  It was good to spend a bit of time with the family and re-charge the batteries in preparation for another busy week ahead.  After lunch I watched the football - the final day of the Premier league season. 

Fighting back

It's difficult to remember hearing Alan Johnson, the health secretary, sounding so rattled on the radio before in the face of persistent questioning from Evan Davis. The new Today presenter effectively homed in on the problem, however. Today's element of the government fightback - re-examining social care for the elderly - is flagging up a problem (£6 bn funding gap) rather than a solution.

Gordon Brown will today talk about his desire help people to save for old age in a way which "insures them and protects their houses and their inheritance", while Johnson hinted that co-payment may be the answer. We are told this is very important for the Prime Minister.

But it's all very vague and all that's on the table is a six month consultation, leading to a Green Paper next year - the first stage in the legislative process. A solution is clearly a long way off. All very laudible, except the government is trying to use this consultation get good headlines now - to get it out of a short term PR hole. And it's hard to make this sticking plaster fit.

Tony Blair was the most to blame

Even though he threw down the gauntlet to Tony Blair to sack Gordon Brown as Chancellor at the height of the pair's rows, what's fascinating about this morning's ST extracts from John Prescott's memoirs is that the ex DPM seems to have sided more with Gordon than Tony.

With Tony, when he was moaning on about Gordon’s behaviour, I’d say, ‘Sack him. Find a new chancellor, if that’s how you really feel’. But neither could take the final step. They were caught in their own trap. Tony knew that sacking Gordon would tear the party apart.

I also think Tony was scared of Gordon. He didn’t want to take him on. Gordon is a very tough negotiator, doesn’t let things drop, keeps at something till he forces you into his point of view. That’s not Tony’s style. Gordon is a difficult character, but sometimes Tony exaggerated how difficult he had been, just to get sympathy.

I have no doubt that Tony was most to blame. He broke his agreement with Gordon, not once but several times. However, in Tony’s defence, most of his promises were ambiguous and on condition anyway.

David Miliband for Chancellor says Blair's former speechwriter

Cherie Blair tomorrow vents her spleen in the Times, having brought forward the publication of her autobiography by six months. Gordon Brown, she suggests, would have got the keys to Number 10 much earlier if he'd helped her husband more along the way.

At the same time, her husband's former speechwriter, Peter Hayman, writes on The Times comment pages that Alistair Darling should be pushed aside and David Miliband should be made Chancellor. Is this all Hyman's own work or is he acting as a Blairite outrider to float an idea?

A prime minister needs his strongest minister as chancellor, and Mr Miliband is currently the strongest minister. He has a feel for economic policy as well as wide experience of all policy development as a former head of the No 10 policy unit. He would be skilful, has spent time thinking through what a post-Blair agenda looks like more than most, and combines an appeal to middle and lower-income voters. ....

Mr Brown never needed a safety-first premiership. Rather, he had to perform an extraordinary act of renewal. He needed a chancellor to stand up in his first Budget and set out an agenda for both economic stability and reform. What Gordon Brown needed was a Gordon Brown as chancellor (minus the aggro). It may well be too late. But at least putting the right chancellor in place would provide a glimmer of hope. For there is nothing more important if Labour is to recover than to convince the public that the good times will return.

Anger at This Morning

ITV's This Morning have already removed the footage of Gordon Brown "opening up" over his children's privacy from their website, in which he talked about this "struggle to have two young healthy children".

Far from being a deliberate strategy to humanise the Prime Minister, Team Brown are claiming Fern Britten ignored a specific agreement not to ask about his children. There is anger all round, it appears, even though Gordon appeared to come off quite well...

Do the Lib Dems want the Conservatives to win Crewe

Not much activity by the Liberal Democrats in Crewe, apparently. While they are talking up their chances in Henley, the Boris Johnson seat - a by-election which is probably some months off - there is little sign of them getting stuck in further north. Only yesterday Simon Hughes was arguing in the Commons that the by-election should be delayed.

Party chiefs have privately suggests that they are too far behind their opponents to make it worth engaging in Sontaran battle mode (which resulted in its stunning mid-Parliament victories like Brent East) unless there are signs the Labour vote is collapsing completely.

This is an interesting tactical choice. Any attempts to engage more fully would presumably result in Labour defectors angry over 10p turning yellow rather than blue. But as it stands, the Conservatives are only having to fight on one front, making their job easier. Why has Clegg chosen this route?

Update: Woosh! A strong set of denials for Lib Dem Central, who have announced a Clegg visit this morning. The well respected Chris Rennard, the election chief, says: Simply not true. Just come to our HQ in Crewe and see us there for proof of our very serious intent! The Labour vote is very weak (as evidenced by our gains in Crewe South in the local elections) - so Lib Dems will aim to repeat earlier by-election successes. Mike Smithson, from politicalbetting.com, adds: "this sounds a bit like what everybody was saying ahead of Bromley and remember what happened there"

Parliament will ignore high court expenses ruling if it goes against them

Court 2, 10.30am tomorrow on the Strand sees the next stage of the battle to get details of MPs' expenses released. The High Court is due to hear the House of Common's appeal against a ruling by the Information Tribunal that every receipt for 14 MPs' £23,000 Additional Costs Allowance should be made public. The Speaker is - inevitably - resisting.

The assumption had been that this ruling would create a legal precident and, in time, would apply to all MPs. Not so.

Apparently if they lose, the House of Commons Commission is considering publishing the details for the 14, but fight any FOI requests submitted about other MPs "from scratch". Apparently there is a belief that the legal team representing the Commission made such a hash of it that they could fight the same fight again - and win.

Seems unlikely - how can this not create a precedent. But what is clear is that details of how MPs spend public money on themselves must be protected at whatever cost.

Brian Paddick does it for free...

Apparently Paddick hasn't (and wont) claim any election expenses for the Mayoral race. A labour of love, it seems. (Apparently his Met Police pension is rather large). Huh.

Is Gordon Brown turning into John Major?

Not ... yet, says Daniel Finkelstein, the man who experienced it the first time round from Downing Street, whose list of the indicators is well worth reading.

Cameron could be more explicit about Rolls Royce link

David Cameron was clearly pleased with himself at his press conference this morning, although at times he can come off a touch too self-congratulatory. There are still complications with Tory policy in some areas, and Benedict Brogan has charted the risks with the Tories' position on helping those affecting the 10p rate.

A second possible flank may open up. At the start of the press conference this morning, he pledged in his opening statement that the Tories would be working with Rolls-Royce as a beacon of British manufacturing, embedding his policy teams with the company. The Press Association has helpfully filed quotes below.

He didn't mention, however, that the (non-exec) Chairman of Rolls Royce is Simon Robertson, one of the main funders of George Osborne's office (see Register of Members' Interests and the Electoral Commission donees register) to the tune of £75,000 and has also given over £200,000 to the Conservative Party.

When asked about this, and whether Mr Cameron should have been upfront about the party's financial links to the Rolls Royce chairman, a party spokeswoman said in a message: "I honestly don't think you can make a story out of this on this occasion" (they may have scored big in the local elections but they don't yet own the media). She said that Robertson donates on a private level and has had nothing to do with negotiating this deal.

That may be true, but it is still perfectly acceptable to question who is funding the Tory operation and who benefits from it (as Rolls Royce surely will, by being championed by the Tory leader) . After the criticism for the lack of transparency over who funds Mr Osborne's office, surely this way danger lies...

Click below to see Mr Cameron's words in full...

Bin taxes were already in the bin

If Gordon Brown wants to restore trust amongst the public, he is going to have to do better than this. Downing Street sources are saying that he will veto plans for councils to impose fines on householders who throw out too much rubbish. Recycling incentives will be allowed but penalties scrapped.

The Tories are absolutely right to point out Brown had already made this decision, again and again. Here's the piece in the Times from October saying the same thing. Brown's only hope lies in positive, new ideas, not re-abandoning old ones.

----------------------

Rubbish tax plan for homes that do not recycle enough is dumped

Philip Webster and Sam Coates
750 words
25 October 2007
11
English
(c) 2007 Times Newspapers Limited. All rights reserved
* The Prime Minister intervened at 11th hour

* Pounds 30 payments were to be announced today

Proposals for councils to impose rubbish taxes on householders who do not recycle properly have been shelved after a last-minute intervention from Gordon Brown.

The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs published the results of a lengthy consultation on the plans yesterday and Hilary Benn, the Secretary of State, had been expected to announce today that the Government was "minded" to approve the new taxes of up to Pounds 30 a year.

Mr Brown ordered that the proposals be stopped because he was worried about the impact on families that produced large amounts of rubbish, and the practicality of imposing the taxes. His decision stunned Whitehall and Defra last night. Officials were preparing today's announcement and learnt at about 6pm that it was not going ahead. "A message came from Downing Street that they should not proceed," an informed source said.

Pickles, the new Tory star, now found in the north on Sky

The arrival in Crewe of Eric Pickles, the mastermind and now hero of the Tories' local election triumph, is a sign of the party's high expectations at the impending by-election.

He has just been on Sky News claiming that the Lib Dem vote is turning blue and talking up his friendship with the Gwyneth Dunwoody - genuine, but also probably in the hope of Labour switchers.

Such expectation-raising may not be a wise idea - the Tories' misplaced optimism over last year's Ealing Southall by-election caused much misery for David Cameron, and the party hasn't won a by-election anywhere for nearly three decades. But Pickles is no Grant Shapps and knows this well, which is interesting.

There was one other stand out line in the interview. Pickles made a toxic charge against Gordon Brown, claiming that he was "tired.. and not looking well". Hinting that the Prime Minsiter is not physically or mentally up to scratch is a surprising and dangerous tactic.

It will be interesting to see if anyone else in the Shadow Cabinet repeats it.

Downing Street hints it will make Boris's life difficult - report

In the final paragraph of a story in the Observer: The government is considering whether to impose greater scrutiny of a Johnson administration on critical issues such as the Crossrail project or the Olympics budget. It is unlikely to claw back powers already devolved to the mayor but while Downing Street was content to allow Livingstone to get on with big budget projects there is greater nervousness about allowing Johnson free rein.

Sour grapes?

Labour pull into second place in last Thursday's elections, plus other post-election titbits

- Rallings and Thrasher have calculated their own share of the vote from 1,350 wards in Thursday's elections which puts Labour back in second. Final scores: Tories on 43% (a three-point increase since last year) with Labour on 24% (down two points). The Lib Dems scored 23%, down a single percentage point from last year, according to Colin Rallings and Michael Thrasher

- Tories spent a quarter of their £400,000 limit on Lynton Crosby, according to the Sunday Times: His four months of work cost the Tories £140,000 – but his decades of election-fighting experience down under proved well worth the money, turning Johnson from an entertaining outsider into a winner.

- Lib Dem HQ knew that Brian Paddick wasn't going to do very well, and were appalled his team were openly predicting he would get at least 15 per cent of the vote. In the even he got less than 10. Just as well that the heavyweights like Lord Rennard stayed away and concentrated on the national campaign, which went well.

- The most astonishing thing about Paddick was that his second preference vote - secret until after polling day - went to a hard left activist standing for Left List. Not something Nick Clegg will be keen to dwell on. Paddick wrote in Lib Dem voice today: "Apparently the best thing to do when you get thrown by a horse is get back in the saddle as soon as possible, although I wouldn’t know one end of a horse from another!" Whatever can he mean.

- Here's what Boris campaign workers missed when they were barred from the CCHQ victory party in favour of donors.  "Party donors spared no expense on the lavish bash – with a grand ice sculpture of the Back Boris campaign as the centrepiece, an all-blonde girl band dressed in black ball dresses, and unlimited oysters and caviar. As a bashful-looking Johnson strolled into the room with his entourage, to clapping and cheering, there was laughter as the band struck up Jerusalem. In a brief speech, Johnson paid tribute to his campaign team, and to David Cameron. The Tory leader returned the favour. “There were no quips, even though everyone was elated,” said one who was present. “Both the speeches were serious and straight, with Boris acknowledging Cameron’s role in the night’s successes, and vice versa. Among the revellers were Tim Rice, Andrew Lloyd Webber’s lyricist; Lord Marland, the former Tory party treasurer; Johnson’s mother and father, and his children. The party continued until dawn."

24 hours late...

Just before the avalanche of Sunday papers begins, there are two must read piece from today's Times it's belatedly worth pointing out. One of Francis Elliott's brilliant piece on Boris Johnsons' route to power, well worth reading in full, which has already been picked up by the Drudge Report for this gem:

As a youngster, he once confided to a friend that he would like to be President of the United States. (His birth in New York made this possible, albeit ludicrous).

There there's Peter Riddell's essential column which makes authoritative but grim reading for Gordon Brown.

No prime minister has ever recovered from as bad a set of local election results as Labour had on Thursday and won the subsequent general election. Gordon Brown has very few options, apart from waiting, and hoping, unless he wants to undermine his hard-won reputation for prudence and long-term stability. Often, with local elections, there are ifs and buts. Not this time.

A final point. Many have commended Ken's gracious concession speech for taking all the blame for defeat himself. In a funny way, this makes life more difficult for Gordon Brown. If Ken had criticised the PM last night, it would have allowed open season amongst Team Brown against Ken. But he didn't, denying them the opportunity to counter attack and distract attention from his woes.

Ken thanking his old enemy just makes life harder. Deliberately?

Emergency Cabinet reshuffle begins

US secretary of state Condoleezza Rice entered Downing Street at 4.30pm for talks on the Middle East with Gordon Brown, according to PA

Pickles: 10p row made it respectable to dislike Brown

Eric Pickles' stock has never been higher, not least for his masterful analysis over the last hour of last night. He has just offered a very cute analysis of the Labour wipeout, laying it at Gordon Brown's door.

He suggested that although there has been simmering discontent with Gordon Brown for several months, the row over 10p tax gave voters "a respectable reason to turn against Brown" because it showed the Prime Minister as "incompetent as well as unjust." He also said that while Labour assumed they had helped those affected, anger spread way beyond the individuals who would lose out. Sounds plausible.

And the news gets worse. As the broganblog revealed moments ago, David Pitt-Watson, Brown's handpicked choice as new General Secretary, has just resigned without even taking up the post. Another huge embarrassment.

What do Labour believe about London

Looking afresh this morning, what is striking is that most of the middle-of-the-night bullish talk from Labour about the London mayoralty being closer than everyone had assumed seems to have disappeared in the early hours. Why did they do it? Was it a temporary strategy to prevent panic? Did they believe it when they said it?

Also keep an eye on this excellent TimesOnline list of the council seats changing hands, by region. It shows the Tories making solid progress in the swing belt in the West Midlands as well as advancing in the south.

Times page 1

It's wrap up time here, but for those who live outside London here is the final edition of tomorrow's front page... A brilliant night for the Tories and full marks for the Tory spin operation. Few crumbs of consolation for the testy Labour ministers on the telly. The Libs look like they've just scraped home in Liverpool and across the country so no early crisis for Nick Clegg.

But after the last month - where Downing Street faced backbench revolts, dire polls and a humiliating U-turn, it's hard to see where the Labour Party can go now since everything that could be said has been said already over the last month. The danger is that Number 10 starting blaming Labour MPs for causing the 10p tax row, and the relationship spirals into violence.

We await the Today programme.

By Philip Wester, Political Editor.

The Conservatives made sweeping gains across the country early today as voters gave Gordon Brown a huge rebuff in his first electoral test as Prime Minister. David Cameron chalked up important successes in the North, the Midlands and the South , securing his top target of Bury in Greater Manchester and taking control of Nuneaton and Bedworth, and Southampton. The Conservatives also took seats in Labour strongholds of Sunderland and Wigan. Labour suffered one of its worst electoral humiliations, with its national share of the vote dropping to 24 or 25 per cent.The Tory share was projected at 43 or 44 per cent, better than its most optimistic predictions. The margin was similar to the drubbing handed out to John Major in 1995 two years before Tony Blair entered Downing Street.

At 1.30am

Labour faces worst local council result in 30 years, losing perhaps to 270 seats according to Times predictions. A stunning result for the Conservatives in Bury, where they have won David Cameron's top target. This is the first proper evidence of a Tory breakthrough in the north.

At 12.30am

Tory say 200+ gains. Labour say they are heading for 25 per cent or less. Turnout large in London, small elsewhere. Biggest spectacular change so far is Tories taking outright Nuneaton and Bedworth in the West Midlands, which Labour have held since 1973.

The electoral map in full

A reminder of what we're looking at. Click to enlarge

Anger in CCHQ at ConservativeHome.com

Further to the previous post about Labour talking up London, it transpires there is considerable irritation at CCHQ towards ConservativeHome.com for calling the mayoralty for London. CCHQ is being deluged with people wanting to know who Tim Montgomerie was talking to, and now fear they have handed Labour a temporary propaganda weapon. It's also messing up the Tory spin night because they want to concentrate on successes in the local elections and leave the Mayor for tomorrow...

Labour on London....

Labour say London too close to call. After the close of polls, they are seeing some signs for optimism. We are post close of polls, so there's no point in them saying this unless they mean it at this stage. No sign of a tacit concession at 11.30pm then. But they need something to cling on to. They are repeatedly saying they have done very badly around the country.

Tony Blair no better than Gordon Brown say voters

For all the Blairite true believers, there is nothing to brag about in the ICM/BBC Poll filling the pre-results information vacuum. This puts the number of people who regard Blair as an asset to the Labour Party roughly comparable to Brown. So while some MPs might wish he was still in place, this isn't shared by the public...

Flurry of information at close of polls... (Updated)

At the close of polls, some Labour sources are suggesting that the Tories are doing extremely well - and could reach up to 47 per cent, up from 40 per cent last year. Tories reject this, say that's impossible but concede 43/44 is possible. We're heading for a good night for the Tories.

The Tories have upped their council seats benchmark in the last 24 hours. Whereas yesterday they predicted council seat gains in the "double digits", now they say a minimum of 120 and going up to 150/160. 200, they insist, is "very difficult". A number of Tory sources claim there is a high turnout in the outer-London donut, which would indicate good news for Boris (both Conservative Home, Betfair and betting website politicalbetting.com are calling London for Boris).

Both parties agree that Labour has lost Reading

Remember, the expectations game is still being fought and these suggestions may bear no relation to the final result.

What do the Mayor teams do now - party

It's all over. Polling stations close now and the agony begins. For the Mayoral teams, the pain is prolonged for another 18 hours. Counting at the four stations around London does not start until tomorrow morning, and processing ballot papers - even automatically - is not expected to finish until the evening. The BBC hopes to have a result for the 6pm news, but this isn't guaranteed.

The bad news for both camps is that if it's too close to call in London - or if there is electronic meltdown - it will go to a manual recount. And, with approximately 6 million ballot papers to process, that wont be quick.

So there's nothing for the campaign teams to do but go to the pub this evening. Both Team Boris and Team Ken will be celebrating this evening, though I'm assured BJ will not get too inebriated this evening despite ending his alcohol ban. Ken hasn't had any such restrictions.

Update: A Frenchman Writes: As an interested frenchman I find it a bit strange that it takes 20 hours to get the results. Here when polls take place in Paris they close at 8pm and the official results are in by 12pm, with early estimates for insiders as early as 6pm and reasonable figures by 9pm. I'm curious to see who will get elected and will be back tomorrow!

What's the point in Boris and Ken obeying electoral law

More than a million of the Livingstone campaign's "don't vote for a joke" leaflets have gone out in the last 48 hours. Team Boris have received more than a million pounds in donations. So what's the betting that one or both campaigns breach the £400,000 spending limit - after all, the stakes are too high in this battle for political survival to bother with such trivialities.

Obviously the parties wont admit this automatically, so expect costs to be heavily underestimated when the returns are published. Even if they are found out, who cares about a slap on the wrist and a fine in a few months' time from the Electoral Commission.

Rumours and gossip while we wait

The political classes are twiddling their thumbs waiting for news. We are in a fact free zone, amid suggestions of high turnout in London. So here's something to chew on in the meantime while we wait, very much buried in Kevin Maguire's New Statesman column.

No 10 whisper is of how Alan "Mr Quiffy" Johnson rejected an uncunning plan by the Supreme Leader's newest consigliere, Stephen Carter, to anoint the Health Secretary as deputy prime minister. Perhaps the well-groomed mod couldn't take seriously a plot devised by a string-puller fighting a one-man war to rescue the tank top from Frank Spencer. Or maybe Mr Quiffy realised that Hattie Harperson and Jack "The Lad" Straw would kill for the post.

And here's Ben Brogan's tale of Labour whips losing their temper with "disloyal MPs"

An MP calls to tell me about a curious incident he witnessed in the Commons chamber last night. He says Tommy McAvoy, stalwart of the Whips' Office, gave Diane Abbott a public dressing-down about her "disloyalty to the Government". Now, it is true that the MP for Hackney North and Stoke Newington is a serial rebel who will vote against lunch it serves to annoy the leader of the day. But a hairdryer treatment is normally delivered in private, not at the Bar of the House.

Sack them, Labour vice chair tells Gordon Brown

There is no shortage of people offering Gordon advice in the countdown to E-Day. After the Fabian chief earlier, here is the Blairite ex-minister with a warning that Labour could "lose the South ... where the next election will be won or lost". If Reading goes blue tomorrow, is it already too late?

Wrapping it up as a call for discipline, the views of Stephen Ladyman - vice chair of Labour and ex minister in an article in Progress magazine do not make comfortable reading for Brown. Top of his to-do list is sacking those advisers whose infighting is hampering government and spilling into the media.

If the people closest to Gordon can’t settle their differences, real or perceived, in private and curb their need to chatter with journalists then they have to go. If influential figures in the party can’t express their ideas in a constructive tone then we have to isolate them and make sure the public understand they speak for no-one but themselves. The private briefings and the bickering of recent weeks has to stop and stop now.

And former ministers bitter after losing their jobs should keep their mouths shut (pot?)

If influential figures in the party can’t express their ideas in a constructive tone then we have to isolate them and make sure the public understand they speak for noone but themselves. The private briefings and the bickering of recent weeks has to stop and stop now.

There's going to be much more of this "advice" in the coming days. When Gordon does the big media interviews over the weekend, will he be able to prove he is "listening and learning".

Clunk - Fabian Friendly Fire

Despite poll gloom, Gordon Brown is having a good day . He had the strength to admit "mistakes" on the Today programme. He stood firm on 42 days in the Commons. He tried out - succesfully - a new, more hostile technique at Prime Minister's Questions, calling David Cameron a "shallow salesman" and reminding MPs of "Cleggover".

All of which makes the outburst by the normally loyal Fabian Society more fascinating. Sunder Katwala, the general secretary, said Brown suffers “neurotic under-confidence” whose administration "risks being written off before its first anniversary”.

And to think Ed Balls was Chair of the Fabian Society just last year.

Since briefing his speech overnight to the Press Association, Katwala has clearly been thunked, saying he had been speaking in a personal capacity (meaningless - damage done) and was a “strong supporter” of Mr Brown (who would believe him now.) The people who attack before polling day will be the last to be forgiven.

Local elections: the expectations game

Before elections, all three political parties give their predictions of what will happen. They frequently bear little reaction to what does happens on the night. That's because these briefings are part of the expectations game. Indeed, if a party's predictions have come true, that's likely because they've done extremely badly indeed.

Here is a round-up of what the three parties are currently saying about the 4,023 seats up for election in England and Wales this year.*

Conservatives say: "Modest two figure" increase in seats, though they admit this is on the low side. Aiming for 40 per cent share of the vote (which they got last time). Possible northern gains in Bury. Expecting to lose Coventry and do badly in Slough. Opponents: If Labour lose 200 seats that will be "meltdown" or "catastrophic". Lib Dems may make net gains or losses.

Liberal Democrats say: Net loss, possibly around 80-100 seats. They say 25 per cent share would be "quite hard" although they regularly poll six points above their national share in the opinion polls. Losses to the Tories in rural areas.  Focusing on possible gains in Sheffield, Cardiff and Hull. Could lose Liverpool, with just two losses meaning it is a hung council. Opponents: Tories should make 300 gains, Labour around 160 losses.

Labour say: Net losses of 200 seats. Expecting to poll 25 or 26 per cent share of vote.

*NB This is the smallest of the four-year electoral cycle (compared to 10,500 last year when Tories gained 911, Labour lost 479 and Lib Dems lost 246)

What does Gordon do about Kate Hoey?

Nothing immediately, it would seem. Even though Ken Livingstone was barely able to contain himself after the announcement Kate Hoey would be joining Boris Johnson's first administration as an unpaid sports adviser, should he win. He told LBC that Hoey has been:

A sort of semi-detached member of the Labour Party in recent years. But I'm surprised he's going to take her advice on sport because I think the reason Tony Blair sacked her at the end of his first term was because she'd been involved in all the fiasco over Wembley. But I suppose she knows more about it than Boris does.

Hoey already is short on friends in the PLP: she has participated in revolts against the government over 200 times since 2001, easily putting her in the top 10. There is a strong case for dismissing her - she has allowed the announcement to be used as part of Boris's campaign, which breaks Labour Party rules about supporting another candidate. The move would rally the troops, who will not doubt be seething at the prospect of seeing a London Labour MP appearing to support a rival. And it would be a chance for Gordon to show decisiveness and impose discipline on a rowdy Parliamentary Labour Party.

But at the same time can he risk making Hoey a martyr, who will continue to sit on the backbenches until the next election as an independent? More importantly, Gordon himself set a precendent by creating a "government of all the talents" including backbench Tories and Lib Dem MPs, so wouldn't it be hypocritical for him to punish one of his own for doing the same?

At this stage it looks like Gordon will do nothing, presumably hoping the issue will go away. Is it the right decision?

The names behind the three Mayor teams

A handy guide from PR Week to the teams behind the candidates. Click on the image to enlarge. On Ken's side this excludes Simon Fletcher, his Chief of Staff, who is a pivotal figure and should probably be in place of Phil Dilks (London Labour press office), while Team Boris also relies on Nick Boles as a link person with CCHQ.

And where was the Chief Whip on Saturday night?

.... in the company of Ben Affleck, Colin Powell, Pamela Anderson, Henry Kissinger, Marcia Cross, Jenny McCarthy and other A-listers at the White House Correspondent's Dinner, the annual bash where the President and Washington press corps show Hollywood what self-congratulation is all about. Our man Geoff Hoon - and his special adviser - was representing HM Government.

According to one witness, they walked down the middle of the red carpet of the Washington Hilton, and about 200 teenage girls and boys behind police barriers started screaming. The informant claims Geoff thought this is for him and his special adviser, looks bemused and poses for the cameras. He fails to notice Ben Affleck and Jennifer Garner right behind. Sadly the Hoon pictures haven't made the international wires...

Mr Hoon was due to be sitting at the same table as Ms Anderson, although this dream never ended up coming true. After his week, who can blame him for wanting to escape...

What on earth can Jack Straw have been referring to

Maybe Gordon will regret substituting Jack Straw for an appearance on Radio 5 Live (see Comment Central on Brown's no show). For as part of the Justice Secretary's full apologia over the 10p fiasco, he said:

"Sometimes even with the best brains available to government there are inadvertent consequences of changes."

Is that a dig at Gordon?

Tony Blair returns to Parliament

An Monday morning surprise for Gordon Brown...

Tony Blair is returning to Parliament, in front of the International Develpment select committee on May 8, according to the select committee forward diary. Wonder how much he's charging them.

In theory he will be there to talk about his work helping Palestinian economic development for the Quartet, but watch as committee members try to get him to say something about Gordon Brown. Which he wont. What he will do, however, is to flirt, joke and fool around with the MPs, no doubt reminding some what they are missing.....

Vince Cable causing trouble for Nick Clegg?

Stepping back from the limelight is never easy, especially for a politician, and when Vince Cable's star continues to shine brighter than Nick Clegg's, tensions seem inevitable.

With characteristic candour, Cable has told the BBC Politics show this afternoon that things aren't going so well in the Liberal Democrats right now, and says people are coming to him (and pointedly not to Clegg) with the big issue of the day - the economy. This feels like a rebuke to Clegg. Here's the extract:

We’re not doing as well as we hoped we’d be.  I’m not complacent. We can do better and should do better.  There is a big opportunity, we’re not doing badly, but we could do a lot better."

I think it's a question of us putting in more work, being credible on the issues that really matter to people. A lot of responsibility comes onto me because the thing people are worried about more than anything is the economy.

Give us proof not smears, Lord Levy

It's unclear what Lord Levy was trying to achieve with his autobiography, but the final result in today's Mail on Sunday frankly isn't very edifying. Consequently it won't do much damage to Brown (undoubtedly the reason he secured a large advance and allowed the serialisation five days before polling day.)

The book presents smears in place of facts in some kind of public quest for revenge justice. The only motivation seems to be a feeling he was let down by Labour, including fascinatingly, Tony Blair. But the details don't live up to the headlines.

"I warned Tony about long massages with Carole" gives the implication that something untoward was going on. But he says his decision to talk to Blair about this resulted from "gossip within No10 concerning visits Carole was making to Chequers to give an increasingly stressed Prime Minister long massages". Nothing further is spelt out. A blow below the belt.

The charge that Tony Blair told Levy that "Gordon can't beat Cameron" isn't well enough evidenced either. It wouldn't be a surprise if something like this was uttered - given the infinitely-documented personal animosity between Blair and Brown - but Levy offers nothing by way of corroboration or context to give it credibility - even before the inevitable Blair (quasi?) denials started to drop. Again, nothing proved.

The Cash for Peerages section is interesting. He explains that he did have views about who should get peerages and honours, and he did tell those responsible in Number 10 about them, but stresses he was never involved in the final peerage/honours selection meetings.

However some key details again lack full credibility. When he was accused by a donor, Sir Gulam Noon in The Times, of asking for them for secret loans rather than publicly-declared donations, he merely replies this statement was "the product of an impaired memory."

The lingering impression of Levy is of a bitter, unforgiving man. Not unlike Sir Menzies' Campbell's recent work, he charts every compliment but also records every snub.

He was - disproportionately? - offended when Blair asked S