Peter Oborne
Why has Downing Street has been
leaking to favoured journalists details of a sordid and deeply unedifying
private dinner which took place between the Prime Minister, the Chancellor of
the Exchequer and a small group of hangers on late last Thursday night?
The story is damaging for the Prime Minister because it undermines the idea that he is a British patriot who supports the union, and makes him look instead like a worthless political schemer.
For those who missed it, here is the story. Just as the polls were closing, and the nation holding its breath ahead of the referendum result, Cameron and Osborne are said to have met privately.
According to two of Britain’s best-informed Conservative journalists, they met in order to work out a sordid plot how to stitch up the Labour Party by rushing through "English votes for English laws."
One Downing Street insider told the Sunday Telegraph’s Matthew D’Ancona – famous for his well-placed Downing Street contacts – that “Cameron exploded a massive bomb in enemy territory”.
James Forsyth of the Mail on Sunday adds that: "Osborne was an enthusiast for the move, relishing the raw politics of it." As one Downing Street source says: "It appeals to the Chancellor on every level."
I don’t know whether Craig Oliver, David Cameron’s Director of Communications, was the direct source of this information. But I am afraid he must be held responsible for putting the story in the press.
It is easy enough to work out Mr Oliver’s motivation. I assume wanted to show his boss David Cameron and the Chancellor in a favourable light and make them look like clever chaps.
If so, Mr Oliver’s plan has backfired.
The story raises very troubling questions about whether the Prime Minister, let alone the chancellor, has the patriotism and personal maturity to make the very serious decisions that Britain needs if our constitution is to be reshaped and the Union is to be rebuilt.
There is indeed a case for reshaping the way that England is governed along the lines Osborne and Cameron decided over their Downing Street supper.
But it is important it is not done as part of some squalid, partisan, political calculation.
Messing around with the Constitution needs time and consideration, with all parties (including Labour) very much involved. Ed Miliband is absolutely right about this.
The story is damaging for the Prime Minister because it undermines the idea that he is a British patriot who supports the union, and makes him look instead like a worthless political schemer.
For those who missed it, here is the story. Just as the polls were closing, and the nation holding its breath ahead of the referendum result, Cameron and Osborne are said to have met privately.
According to two of Britain’s best-informed Conservative journalists, they met in order to work out a sordid plot how to stitch up the Labour Party by rushing through "English votes for English laws."
One Downing Street insider told the Sunday Telegraph’s Matthew D’Ancona – famous for his well-placed Downing Street contacts – that “Cameron exploded a massive bomb in enemy territory”.
James Forsyth of the Mail on Sunday adds that: "Osborne was an enthusiast for the move, relishing the raw politics of it." As one Downing Street source says: "It appeals to the Chancellor on every level."
I don’t know whether Craig Oliver, David Cameron’s Director of Communications, was the direct source of this information. But I am afraid he must be held responsible for putting the story in the press.
It is easy enough to work out Mr Oliver’s motivation. I assume wanted to show his boss David Cameron and the Chancellor in a favourable light and make them look like clever chaps.
If so, Mr Oliver’s plan has backfired.
The story raises very troubling questions about whether the Prime Minister, let alone the chancellor, has the patriotism and personal maturity to make the very serious decisions that Britain needs if our constitution is to be reshaped and the Union is to be rebuilt.
There is indeed a case for reshaping the way that England is governed along the lines Osborne and Cameron decided over their Downing Street supper.
But it is important it is not done as part of some squalid, partisan, political calculation.
Messing around with the Constitution needs time and consideration, with all parties (including Labour) very much involved. Ed Miliband is absolutely right about this.
Alex Salmond has been rightly
criticised for not attending the service of reconciliation at St Giles in
Edinburgh last Sunday. I am afraid that the same criticism apples to David
Cameron.
As British prime minister his job is to lead a process that gives
fresh meaning and vitality to Union.
Certainly he ought not to have been
conspiring against Labour last Thursday night in the wake of a hugely divisive
referendum campaign.
Brilliant. The great thing is nobody in Parliament can talk about putting "party before country". Labour spent 13 years wrecking the constitution ( indeed causing this mess) to do just that. They even abolished 900 years of history in a heartbeat, when they threw out 650 hereditary peers because they had the temerity to block some of Labours lousy legislation.
ReplyDeleteIt's almost as if they don't like it when it happens to them.
What goes around...
Peter Oborne is not "in Parliament".
DeleteYou're in favour of putting party before country aren't you? Your excuse for a party spent 13 years doing that-and defiling the constitution (and the union) in the process. By the time they were finished Scotland was under the SNP, Parliament was an eviscerated husk and the House of Lords was a House of Labour Donors.
ReplyDeleteSo don't give us the high minded stuff.
It's a bit late in the day for that.
Bedtime.
DeleteOr well past it.
Peter Oborne writes;
ReplyDelete""There is indeed a case for reshaping the way that England is governed along the lines Osborne and Cameron decided over their Downing Street supper.""
Indeed if Scotland is to have devo max the case is unanswerable.
If you didn't want this you shouldn't all have voted for constitutional revolution in 1997.
Now let's see who is prepared to stand up for the rights of the English.
They are already bored of the whole thing. The English don't do constitutional questions. Such things do not interest them. If you doubt that, then bring on the referendum. There certainly wouldn't be a Scottish-style turnout.
DeleteThat was back when the English left the constitution alone.
ReplyDeleteBut now it's been turned upside down, this situation requires a resolution to make it work fairly in the interests of all, as Frank Field outlined yesterday.
Municipalism, public ownership and the role of the trade unions were all integral to the organic Constitution by the 1970s.
Delete