2007 election (not)

Anthony Barnett (London, OK): Iain Dale has asked me and Lib-Dem Sephen Tall to start an all party (and no party) campaign for FIXED TERM parliaments with the aim of getting all parties to sign up for it. My hope is that the next election is the last one ever held under current rules. Or even better, that the snipped election of 2007 was the last. The website is just under construction but go to it and sign up, and tell all your friends and foes to do so too, or link up to it via facebook. Here is the short summary of what its about,

Anthony Barnett (London, OK): I think it is important to take a step back from the Cameron/Osborne triumph in facing down Gordon Brown and ask what is going on behind the the febrile swings of opinion. As recent readers will know I'm reading Peter Oborne's The Triumph of the Political Class. One of his theses is that the,

Anthony Barnett (London, OK): Peter Oborne's new book The Triumph of the Political Class has a very insightful analysis of the relationship of our rulers to ideas. Because they are professionals their training in political thought and their fluency with ideas "far surpasses that possessed by any previous governing elite". But this fluency is - irony, tragedy - used to shut down all challenging ideas and turn those who express them - in both parties - into mavericks. He quotes John McDonnell who tried to run against Gordon Brown for the Labour leadership on the party's "issue avoidance". So let's hear it from soemone who was right and was angry with the seductions of a snap election, He has has published his statement to the press on his website and says,

Anthony Barnett (London, OK): I've just watched Ed Miliband handling the decision not to call an election. He looked relieved as he justified it, and had probably argued against it as he had to write the manifesto! But the ease with which he dismissed the "bubble of speculation" in "the Westminster Village" as something that the rest of the country will shrug off and forget about as it weighs Gordon Brown's record of delivery on "real issues", while polished and impressive did not convince me. Brown opened his premiership by declaring that the re-establishment of trust would be a guiding priority for him. The disastrous roll-out of the citizens juries has had the opposite effect and this will too.

Anthony Barnett (London, OK): One consequence of the appalling, drawn-out spectacle of the political class getting its knickers in a collective twist as to whether an election should be snapped is that people will want them to be fixed term. It was a mistake of Brown's not to give us a date in two year's time. But without rules how can anyone disguard the opportunity of choosing one's own timing - it is just too tempting? It is also more than tempting not to vote for the lot of them, as increasing numbers are doing, especially younger citizens. At a recent Fabian conference called Democracy Day, Fiona MacTaggert MP set out the case for compulsory voting. An aghast Suzy Dean sent openDemocracy a strong attack on Fiona which you can read here. Fiona has replied with eloquence, facts and draws on her experience as an MP. Read the exchange and comment on it here. I have also done an introduction for oD's global readership, which connects the issues to the dLiberation debate on Europe as well. Do we need some constitutional rules?

Anthony Barnett (London, OK): Clear short summary of balance of views of whether an election is on or not by James Forsyth at the Spectator Coffee, saying on balance he won't. I thought he should have gone before the party conferences began, calling for our own constitution to reframe the demands of a referendum on the European one (and doing inheritance tax as well). But now... one thing I don't think has been factored in the sheer disgust among normal Labour supporters at the sense of being manipulated and the country being played with, a disgust that has mushroomed over the last two weeks. Brown gained a huge wave of support for not being Blair and treating us like grown ups after the failed terrorist attacks. But there was also an unhealthy and superficial desire for  someone to trust.  The problem with trading on this once it has been so personalised is it you can lose it overnight.

Anthony Barnett (London, OK): Ben Brogan has broken the 'news' that there will not be an election. He makes a strong case except for the inheritance tax argument. If Brown needs time here it is to steal the Tory clothes not rubbish them. But if Brown decides against, unless he does so strongly and says something like "not before 2009", he will be damaged. The timing has always depended more on the push of a likely downturn "Things can only get worse" rather than the pull of temporarily good polls.

Sunder Katwala (London, Fabian Society): Moderator, we sent Sunder a brief description of a rude response to his important sweeping article on what the Conservatives should do now. Here is his response: Well, I wouldn't like it if I was them either. The question is what they have to do now. I find Tory commentators and bloggers tend to define adapting to modern Britain as being OK with civil partnerships or having a Muslim woman at the top table, but that is the easy bit.

Anthony Barnett (London, OK): I rushed out my reaction to the Cameron speech thinking I should do so before reading the Conservative blogland. Now, some hours later, a quick look at the Tory blogosphere is not very impressive. Have I overestimated it? Perhaps they are all on the long journey back from Blackpool. Matt d'Ancona found the speech compelling and memorable. Guido was mainly impressed by the toff shedding the contamination of Eton. Dizzy Thinks liked it but there was not much thought, and he was concerned about Cameron quoting a schoolboy saying he was "pissed". He asked his readers if this was a first for a keynote conference speech and Justin Hinchcliffe responded, "Fucking brilliant speech!". Brogan over at the Mail, usually fast and insightful, not yet up to speed. A lapse of judgement. He thinks John Major may have "turned the tide" against Brown by appearing like some strange figure from the past (jealous of Thatcher) but still with that mysterious look (as someone once said, it is as if he has a moustache underneath his upper lip). Major denounced the Prime Minister's "nods, winks and cynicism". I'm afraid any regular member of the public would simply have thought 'it takes one to know one'.

Anthony Barnett (London, OK): First reactions to watching Cameron's speech from a sofa in London and his masterful control over his party conference. He rowed back from Blairism. His repositioning was to project himself as someone who knew how to deliver what he wanted. This was his attempt to answer Brown's competence and to respond to the fashion for grit rather than rhetoric. He did it well. Ruthlessly even, he's not had a career in public relations for nothing. The image was effectively symbolised by discarding the autocue.

Anthony Barnett (London, OK): I'm sorry I couldn't be in Blackpool, it's not the same trying to follow a party conference from outside the goldfish bowl. I suspect that the Osborne bid to raise the threshold on inheritance tax to £1million is a smart move. It is not the numbers of people who are directly affected, it is the many who would like their house to be worth £300,000 or more. It's a kind of 'we are on your side if you want to do better' type ploy. I tried to warn my Labour friends that this would have been a good move for them too - justified as a consequence of the hyper-inflation of house prices. I'd have done it differently though. I'd have kept the threshold at £300,000 and then said that every legacy after that of up to £250,000 would also be taken off the taxable value of the estate. In that way if one person was left a house worth £1million they would pay tax on half of it - but they could afford to. However, if it was left to, say, three children or grandchildren to share there would be no tax. In other words, if the principle of inheritance tax is prevent the perpetuation of inequality why not encourage the fortunate ones to do the distribution, while stopping the racket of trusts etc? I recall that ippr published a learned pamphlet on why this approach could not be done but it was too baffling to understand. Where there's a will there's a way, in my view, if you'll excuse the pun.

Anthony Barnett (London, OK): Cameron would have beaten Blair in an election and he remains a serious, modern candidate. But I find there is something oddly unattractive about his attractiveness, an avatar like sense that his looks have been remodelled for the screen. I felt it the first time I saw him fesh into the leadership at a Demos event. Up against Blair it would have been like a computer game: an election in Second Life in which the latest version has the better pixels.

Anthony Barnett (London, OK): So Boris has won the race and become the Tory candidate for London. By a landslide. No surprise there, but when momentum starts... Coming back from Bournemouth and the extraordinary domination of Brown and seeing the steely glint in Boris' eyes in the Evening Standard, the following scenario unfolded before my eyes as I bumped home on the Northern Line.

Anthony Barnett (London, OK): Well, the first thing to say about Brown's speech is that he enjoys the job and this shows. Blair loved the glamour, he wanted the prize but not the work. Major was out of his depth. Thatcher had a similar passion for the detail and willingness to listen to an argument... until she made up her mind. (Maybe there will prove to be a similarity there as well.)

Anthony Barnett (London, OK): Its a tad cruel to say so, but when I watched Neil Kinnock being asked on the BBC news last night about a snap election one thing became clear. First Kinnock said that he thought Gordon would not call one. Then he explained, not too wordily, why Gordon should carry on for a full two years. As he moved towards his conclusion one knew with absolute certainly that if Brown follows Kinnock's advice he will lose.

Anthony Barnett (London, OK): Just seen that Nadine Dorries MP says in her blog,

"Labour ‘sources’ (as in mates who happen to also be MPs) reckon the announcement will be made next Thursday".

It is a little bit cryptic, but I think this is the first prediction I've seen with an exact date: Brown goes to the palace on Thursday 27th October after the Labour conference. If so, I hope polling day will be the 25th October as I am planning to be in the States the previous week. More to the point it would mean he had agreed the final EU Treaty on the 18th/19th and it would give him a mandate for its ratification by parliament not a referendum. If he goes before it would have to be on Thursday 18th when EU leaders are supposed to be gathering for their informal agreement on the final text. This would be like asking for permission to join them - a "who governs" type question, that would appear weak, and in elections the perception of strength is  everything. Any other predictions welcome.

John Osmond (Cardiff, IWA): The future of coalition politics in Wales spiralled towards a black hole late on Wednesday evening. The executive of the Welsh Liberal Democrats voted against participating in a "rainbow" deal with Plaid Cymru and the Welsh Conservatives in the National Assembly. Just a week ago the same executive voted down a coalition deal with Labour. It was this that sparked the intense negotiations that resulted in the prospect of the "rainbow" option, see my post below. I am not ashamed at its optimist tone at the prospect of a break from a century of Labour domination in Wales.

John Osmond (Cardiff, IWA): A coalition to run Wales of Plaid Cymru, the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats moved a step closer late on Tuesday evening when, following a tense five-hour meeting, Plaid's Assembly Members (AMs) voted to break-off negotiations with Labour and concentrate on the so-called "rainbow" option.

This prompted an immediate split in Plaid's ranks when four of its AMs, led by Llanelli member Helen Mary Jones, signalled their opposition to any deal with the Tories. Nonetheless, the party's 15 AMs voted 10 to 5 in favour of pursuing the rainbow option. The next crunch in the tortuous progress to finding a Welsh First Minister and a stable cross-party government comes on Thursday evening when Plaid Cymru's Pwyllgor Gwaith (National Executive) has to approve a programme for government document currently being finalised between the three parties. If it passes that hurdle the decision goes before a meeting of the party's National Council, a large body of branch and constituency representatives, in Aberystwyth on Saturday.

John Osmond (Cardiff): As Gordon Brown starts his six week wait for the highest office is Camaroon Toryism about to beat him to it and enjoy its first taste of Ministerial power? Tony Blair’s claim that the Welsh Assembly election results on 3 May marked another four years of his Party’s rule in Cardiff, is unraveling in less than two weeks. Labour won just 32 per cent of the vote on 3 May, its worst result in Wales since 1918, and 26 seats, five short of a majority. It had assumed it could form a pact with the Welsh Liberal Democrats, maybe short of a full-blown coalition, but enough to keep it in power. One Labour source declared: “We’ll hug the Lib Dems so close we’ll squeeze the life out of them.” Such hubris has proved counter-productive. Meeting with their national executive in Llandrindod (ancient graveyard of Welsh aspirations) on Thursday night the 6 Lib Dem Assembly Members (AMs) resolved to shelve negotiations with Labour and open talks with Plaid Cymru and the Tories. They will explore the so-called ‘rainbow’ coalition. This would involve a deal between the 15 Plaid, 12 Tories, and 6 Lib Dem AMs. The Cabinet would be made up of 4 Plaid, 3 Tories and 2 Lib Dem Ministers. Intense negotiations over a common programme are predicted for this weekend. Ieuan Wyn Jones has set next Wednesday as a final deadline for a deal to be put to his national executive. It sounds surprising but there is a good deal of common ground in this unlikely line-up: keeping the NHS local, lower class sizes, affordable homes in rural Wales, and a new Welsh Language Act for starters. The Lib Dem demand for STV in local elections in Wales is likely to be agreed. The Tories may even support the cross-party Richard Commission proposals for full legislative powers on Scottish lines, plus 80 members elected by STV, for the Welsh National Assembly. This could go to a referendum by perhaps 2010, in time for a new constitution for Wales to be in place before the next elections, in May 2011.

Pat Kane (Glasgow, Scottish Futures): An extraordinary occasion in the Scottish Parliament today - extraordinary not just for the historical precedent of an SNP government, but also for the inclusiveness of Alex Salmond's political rhetoric: "The nature and composition of this third Scottish Parliament makes it imperative that this government will rely on the strength of its argument in parliament, and not the argument of parliamentary strength", said Salmond in the chamber, and he continued, "Despite all the challenges we will face together, I welcome that as a chance to develop a new and fundamentally more reflective model of democracy". Salmond has been drawing on various jewels of Scottish literature over the last week, most notably Alasdair Gray's "let us work in the early days of a better nation". Commentators like Iain McWhirter "pinched themselves" in disbelief and relief, that he rose to the occasion - whatever else lies in store. The hope is that unlike Margaret Thatcher quoting from St Francis of Assisi when she took office in London 1979, this is not the product of spin and a press office, but draws upon the wellspring of Scotland's political culture. Salmond invokes the discursive vision of the Scottish philosopher George Davie's notion of the 'democratic intellect' – and its corollary, an intellectual democracy – as a guiding spirit of his minority government. The news that the Sunday Herald will campaign to revive the Scottish Constitutional Convention as a civic space to discuss the next evolution of national sovereignty, will hopefully reinforce this. It may well mean that the developing "process" of Scottish self-government will have vigour from bottom-up, as well as top-down. Even Gordon Brown, in current high Ukanian mode, may have to admit the resonance of these democratic forces.