6 hours ago
6
Gluttons for punishment. You’d have thought that after their experience of the last week in which they were forced to make not one, but two U-turn concessions to secure the support of MPs over the welfare bill, Labour would have been after a little down time. A chance to build bridges with its own backbenchers. A moment to regroup and hope the media can run stories about something other than where it all went wrong for Labour in its first year. Or just a chance to run down the clock to recess in a fortnight’s time. Then everyone in Westminster can go home for six weeks. Give us all a chance to forget.
But that’s not the style of this government. No sooner has one row ended – well, just about; there may still be some on both sides who want afters – than Labour opens up another one. This time, the target isn’t adults, it’s children. Which makes the education secretary, Bridget Phillipson, either very brave or very stupid. As a general rule, picking on kids is not a vote-winner.
No matter. On her media round on Sunday, Bridget very deliberately refused to guarantee there would be no cuts in her planned changes to special educational needs and disability (Send) provision. When the early years education minister, Stephen Morgan, was asked the same questions on Monday he too refused to rule out any changes.
Now, Send is not perfect. The bill is getting bigger by the year, thanks both to better diagnosis and to some parents gaming the system. But it is essential for many children who benefit from education, health and care plans, and parents are worried sick they might lose out. In the absence of any clear direction from the Department for Education, many disability campaigners are fearing the worst. That children will be treated as cost centres to be downsized. That children diagnosed in the future won’t be entitled to the same benefits as children with the same level of disability are now. This one will now run and run well into the autumn.
To be fair, going for pensioners over winter fuel allowance, then adults with disabilities over personal independence payments and now children over Send probably wasn’t high on anyone’s radar for Labour values. Then, what do we know? But one party most definitely living its values is Reform. Its policy for migration is one in and one out. Which is exactly the same policy it seems to adopt in regard to its parliamentary party.
At the last election, Reform won five seats. That then dropped to four when Rupert Lowe lost the party whip for either – take your pick – threatening to be more popular than Nigel Farage or being too obviously unpleasant to foreigners. Then Reform went back to five as Sarah Pochin won the Runcorn byelection. Now it’s back down to four as James McMurdock has resigned the whip while some Covid loans he took out are investigated. Who could possibly have guessed Reform’s vetting procedures might not be totally fit for purpose?
Not that Nige was taking any personal responsibility for Young James. Rather, he was throwing him and his long-suffering sidekick, Dicky Tice, to the wolves as he made a visit to see how his councillors in Kent were getting along. James was nothing to do with him, he said. Dicky had been running the party at the start of the last election campaign and he had had nothing to do with vetting candidates. It was all Dicky’s fault. Everything always is. Dicky’s job is to be Nige’s punchbag. His reward to enjoy brief moments of reflected glory.
Luckily for the Tories, they have currently ditched most of their values – certainly the ones around credibility and responsibility – and so are free to do whatever they want, whenever they want. So on Monday afternoon, the shadow chancellor, Mel Stride, was in the Commons to ask an urgent question of his opposite number about the government’s performance against the fiscal rules.
To everyone else, this appeared the height of cheek. Not to say hypocrisy. After all, the Tories had raced through seven different sets of fiscal rules in 14 years as they ran the economy into the ground. But the Melster is yet another of the current breed of politicians who lives entirely in the present. He thinks a year of failing to apologise for bankrupting the nation is more than enough. So no more shows of fake contrition from the Conservatives. He now demands to be seen as the voice of reason, even though he knows and understands little about macroeconomics. Though he is the best the Tories currently have.
So Mel gabbled out his questions. How was Labour planning to fill the £6bn black hole it had dug for itself during last week’s welfare U-turn? Did it even know or was it just keeping it a secret? What followed was one of the more pointless 45 minutes anyone has spent in the Commons recently. Because we all learned precisely nothing. As was always going to be the way. If the roles had been reversed, it would have been the Tories saying nothing.
As it happened, Rachel Reeves had decided to go awol for this UQ. Maybe she felt it was too soon to return to the Commons. Or just didn’t fancy wasting her time. So in her place, we got the chief secretary to the Treasury, Darren Jones. In opposition, Dazza appeared to be the real deal. Sharp, bright and always ready to hold the government to account. In office, he’s become many of the things he used to dislike. Condescending among them.
There are ways of saying that you have no intention of engaging with the details of any question. That it is government policy not to comment on day-to-day performance and that all spending commitments will be revealed in the autumn budget. But Darren managed to do so with a lack of grace. It could have been the time for humour. To remind the opposition of the damage that Liz the Lettuce had done. Instead, he chose just to be boorish and patronising. Let’s hope this is a one-off. Not a new Labour value.
