PMQs Preview - 26th January 2011

This is not going to be a long post. In fact I wrote that sentence just to beef it up a bit. Because PMQs tomorrow is only going to be about one thing: today's shock 0.5% GDP contraction. Balls has already launched a pretty effective broadside on Osborne tonight, claiming that the 0.7% GDP growth in the previous quarter was a legacy of Labour's spending plans and that these are the first set of figures that reflect the Conservatives' economic policies.

Surely even Ed Miliband can make this stick tomorrow. For all their bluster Cameron and Osborne know that the weather did not cause all this damage alone - and that blaming the snow is a line that won't play well in the House. Expect their VAT hike to take a beating. Despite this, Balls' record under Brown and the resignation of Alan Johnson late last week should give Cameron something to hold on to, even if Miliband can just point to Coulson and previous Tory calls for more financial deregulation. It should be fun... 

Weekly Round-up - 23.01.11

This week will certainly be remembered for the two dramatic resignations that came on Thursday and Friday. Alan Johnson's decision to resign, taken late Thursday afternoon, was a shock because despite his rather embarrassing inability to master his economic brief he still retained the confidence of Ed Miliband. His decision to leave for personal reasons - it appears his wife is filing for divorce -will mean that the attacks on Miliband's personal judgement which will inevitably come next week will not be as effective. But the Labour leader will still have to answer some awkward questions now that Ed Balls, the man that he deliberately snubbed last year, is his new Shadow Chancellor.

We were also treated, early on Friday morning, to the resignation of Andy Coulson, David Cameron's Director of Communications. This was not a total surprise - it had been a question of when not if - but the timing was a little unexpected. The case against Coulson personally has a lot of circumstantial evidence but has so far lacked concrete proof. He had quite accurately realised that he had committed the cardinal sin for a press officer and become the story, but that had been true to some extent since he was hired. While it was excruciating to see an opportunistic Ed Miliband question Cameron's judgement just hours after his own inept Shadow Chancellor had walked, the PM will quite rightly face some hard questions next week about his decision to hire the former NotW Editor. As a final point, it is worth noting that without question both Johnson and Coulson chose to use the appearance of Tony Blair at the Chilcot inquiry as cover for their resignations.

The rest of the week was dominated by unemployment figures that made particularly depressing reading for young people, and the official launch of Andrew Lansley's NHS reforms, which - although well-intentioned and if successful will radically improve the way the NHS operates - represent an unusual gamble by the PM.

Weekly Round-up - Festive Edition

The Christmas break has been punctuated by a couple of big stories. At the end of last year we had the Telegraph’s sting of a number of Lib Dem MPs, including Vince Cable. We also saw a big political battle over the hike in VAT to 20% on 1 January.

Other stories have rumbled on over the holidays, with Conservative MPs increasingly uneasy with their leader’s approach to the Lib Dems and the Oldham East and Saddleworth by-election. Angus Reid conducted an interesting poll showing that the Coalition would struggle if if fought as one in 2015 because Lib Dem voters would desert it. Ed Miliband has changed up his press team and looks to be making more of an impact, although there is a long way for him to go.

The NotW hacking scandal came back again to ruin Andy Coulson’s New Year, and the Coalition has got itself in a bit of a mess trying to decide what to do with Control Orders. Half of Westminster decamped this week to Oldham for the by-election, which is expected to return the Labour candidate, Debbie Abrahams, and David Chaytor became the first MP to be sentenced for his expenses claims. He was given 18 months in prison.

YouGov Polling 06-01-11:
Conservative 39%
Labour 43%
Lib Dem 7%
Government Approval: -20%

Cracking Hacking

Right. So there is a bit of debate on the internet at the moment over the term 'hacking'. All the papers are calling it 'hacking', but right wing bloggers like Iain Dale and Dizzy are saying that it's not. It is, apparently, 'cracking'. This is because hacking involves getting around security and breaking it, and cracking involves going through it by guessing a password or, in this case, a voicemail pin.

The problem here is clear. By semantically challenging the term hacking right wing bloggers are seeking to influence public opinion and suggest what happened wasn't as bad. They might protest that they are just seeking to uphold the technical definition of the word - Dizzy, in particular, argues strongly for this - but in reality they are seeking to chip away at the consensus that something bad has happened. This is why left wingers like Alan Rusbridger are so determined to keep the word hacking, because to change it disrupts the narrative and makes it seem less illegal. This is true even if, as Dizzy does, they acknowledge that cracking is still illegal and immoral.

So what is it? Cracking or Hacking? Well, to me it's pretty simple: HACKING. Frankly, no-one gives a stuff what the technical definition is. Dizzy's argument that Rusbridger et al have "used their position in the media to weirdly create and morph the use of a term in popular culture inaccurately" takes no account of the wonderful flexibility of English.

If everyone in the country believes that guessing a password and getting into a private account is hacking, then the small community of hackers is just going to have to live with it. The fact is that in English, hacking means to get into someone's account without permission - that's what people think when they see that word. Anyway, there is nothing to say that cracking can not be a subdivision or form of hacking, meaning that hackers can continue to use the word to be more specific about what type of hacking they mean, while the rest of us can go on calling this hacking.

Andy Coulson: A Story?

Is this a big deal or not? If you read the Guardian or listen to some Labour MPs you'd get the impression that the heart of government is filled with criminals; read the Murdoch press, Guido Fawkes or Iain Dale and you'd think that nothing untoward has happened. The truth is probably somewhere in between.

Coulson resigned from his post at News of the World in January 2007 when the paper's royal editor, Clive Goodman, was jailed for intercepting the voicemail messages of royal aides. He became the Conservatives' Director of Communications in June 2007, 5 months later.

Coulson had been lined up for an appearance before the Press Complaints Commission but his resignation meant they lost interest. The same is true of the police, who decided not to pursue the question of how many people were involved in similar voicemail interceptions and, importantly, who these people were and how far up the scandal went. This meant that the line drawn under the scandal by Coulson's resignation was a squiggly one.

The story had disappeared until last week, when a piece in the New York Times alleged that the interceptions had been common practice and that Coulson had actively encouraged them. These allegations come from a former NotW hack called Sean Hoare, whose credibility is clouded by the fact he was sacked by the paper for alleged drink and drug problems. The accusations have clearly been timed for maximum political impact, coming just days before the end of the parliamentary recess. Labour are, naturally, seeking to use this issue for political gain.

On the one hand then, you have those who seem to suggest that this is simply not news. Coulson, they say, did not know about these practices and there is no evidence to suggest that he did aside from the bitter grumblings of a former employee. Furthermore he did the honourable thing in 2007 and resigned from his post as editor of the NotW, and should not be punished twice. They also suggest that the story is being driven by the left wing press, particularly the Guardian, and Labour MPs who all despise the power of Murdoch in British press and who want to hurt his paper, the NotW, and his former protoge, Andy Coulson.

On the other hand, some are alleging that these new revelations give the police cause to reopen their investigation. Moreover, they point out, that initial investigation was deeply unsatisfactory, as the police failed to make any effort to go past the work of Goodman and look at others working for the paper, meaning that Coulson was never actually exonerated.

On a simple level - removing the politics from the situation - this is a big story. It is clear that the original police investigation was not perfect. Whether this was intentional or just a result of the pressure always on the MET is not clear, and probably never will be. There is evidence to suggest that the interceptions were widespread at the NotW, and indeed at other newspapers as well - something which must lead us to lament the spinelessness of the PCC. If the allegations can be proved - and we must remember of course that he's innocent until proven guilty - then he'll have to resign and may well face jail. But that's a big if.

With the politics put back in however, while there is some evidence to suggest that Coulson knew about these practices, what matters is what can be proven in court. I just cannot see Coulson in the dock, unless we are suddenly presented with concrete evidence, for example an email from Coulson approving it. Frankly, I doubt that the police investigation will get anywhere, as they have little to gain but a lot to lose from it. Assistant Commissioner Yates has already said he'll talk to the New York Times, Hoare and Coulson, but I'd be surprised if these discussions went anywhere at all.

What is more realistic is that Coulson will be forced to resign from the government. He has already broken the cardinal spinner's rule and become the story. If this doesn't go away quickly he will be under a lot of pressure. The coalition just does not need this now, as it has big fights on its hands over the next few weeks.

The problem if he goes is that it instantly raises a big question about the judgement of David Cameron, who faced down scepticism at the time from his own backbenchers about Coulson's appointment. Simply because of this I expect him to stay, but this matter will continue to be a headache for the government, and a big story in the press.