Five of the Best

The top five comment pieces from today's papers

The Times's Daniel Finkelstein says that if the Liberal Democrats want to become the leading progressive party, they must target Tory, not Labour seats at the next election:

Mr Clegg's stated strategic goal of taking over the centre left is at odds with his tactic of targeting Labour seats at the next election. Labour retains sufficient regional strength that an attempt by the Liberal Democrats simply to wipe them out seems almost certain to fail. They may, to be sure, win a few seats in Labour areas next time. But, after that, progress will stall. And the targeting will have had a huge cost. It will make the sort of soft merger of the forces of the centre left -- the informal coalition-in-all-but-name that the Liberals must hope to lead in a few years' time -- much harder to form.

In the Daily Telegraph, Irwin Stelzer reflects on Irving Kristol's life and his influence on David Cameron's thought:

It was Kristol, too, who realised an important fact that underlies much of David Cameron's thinking: culture affects economic performance. The family must be preserved, as it is the source of the stability that permits people to look to the future, save and invest. Crime must not be condoned, lest society unravels. Welfare that induces dependence is a disservice to the recipients, even if those who make it available feel good.

In the Guardian, Vernon Bogdanor writes that Britain's unreformed electoral system allows the main parties to ignore their declining membership:

There has been a prodigious alteration in the public perception of parties, but it remains unnoticed because the electoral system fails to register it. The system refracts rather than reflects opinion, emphasising the major party vote and de-emphasising the vote for minor parties and independents. It enables Westminster to remain a closed shop, so allowing the major parties to postpone confronting the crucial question of how they are to regain their lost members and voters.

The Wall Street Journal's Thomas Frank argues that the Democrats must champion health-care reform on moral, not technical grounds:

From the beginning they have understood the problem primarily as a technical consumer issue, not a bid for social justice in a manifestly unjust time. In their criticism of the insurance industry they have largely avoided terms like "profiteering" in favour of dry talk about lower costs and more competition -- hardly an ideal platform from which to launch a crusade.

The Independent's Johann Hari says that the EU and the US should concede to China's key demand at the Copenhagen climate talks:

China has hinted it would agree to more substantial restraint at Copenhagen if the rich world -- responsible for 90 per cent of all the warming gases belched into the atmosphere so far -- agrees to give 1 per cent of its GDP annually to poor countries to adjust to clean fuels. There's a lot to criticise the Chinese dictatorship for, but this isn't one of them. It's a reasonable request for simple justice. Poor countries have done very little to cause this crisis, but they will feel the worst, first. They deserve our reparations. Yet both the EU and US have damned this sane proposal as "totally unrealistic".

 

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

Getty
Show Hide image

Voted Remain? How you can use the general election to kick out hard Brexiteers

Open Britain, the European Movement and Britain for Europe will be sending volunteers to assist MPs who oppose hard Brexit. 

There’s no escaping the fact that Britain’s impending departure from the European Union hangs over this general election and all of the other issues it will throw up. Those who believe in an open, tolerant Britain, with strong links in our interests to our European neighbours, have a duty to stand up and fight against a destructive hard Brexit.

The Prime Minister made it very clear when she fired the starting gun on this general election that she felt this election would be about one thing and one thing only – Brexit. On the steps of 10 Downing Street, she called out all those who have raised valid questions about her approach to Brexit for “political game-playing”, and was unapologetically explicit in her aim to “make it harder for opposition politicians who want to stop me from getting the job done”, and to “make me stronger.”

This government has decided to pull the UK out of the single market and the customs union – and all the proven benefits they bring – before we have even got to the negotiating table. Ministers have discarded the best economic option from the get go, and persist in the belief that the nightmare scenario – Brexit with no deal, defaulting onto World Trade Organisation rules – would be “OK”, as Boris Johnson has said. They have failed to guarantee the rights of EU citizens living in the UK. The government appears intent on a destructive hard Brexit that will put jobs at risk, cause investment to decrease and prices to rise. Pro-Europeans, of all parties and none, have a duty to stand up and fight against that hard Brexit path.

That is why Open Britain has come together with the European Movement and Britain for Europe to take the fight to hard Brexiteers on the ground in this election campaign. As the three biggest pro-European groups in Britain, with more than 600,000 supporters between us, we have volunteer groups the length and breadth of Britain.

We will be directing our activists to key seats during the election. In half of these, we will be challenging supporters of hard Brexit, like Iain Duncan Smith, Steve Baker, and Kate Hoey. Open Britain volunteers will get involved in the campaign for the candidate who is challenging them.

The other half are seats held by an MP who has been vocal in opposing a hard Brexit. These stretch from Lewes and St Ives to Belfast East and Edinburgh South. We are urging our activists to get involved in any way they want to and in whatever way will help the specific campaigns on the ground in those key seats, with the aim of securing the greatest possible representation of MPs who will fight against hard Brexit and for an open Britain in the next Parliament.

If we succeed in doing so, we can build a brighter future for Britain. We can stop this government cashing a blank cheque for hard Brexit, which would undermine our trading, security and diplomatic relationships with our European partners. We can secure a meaningful final vote on the Brexit deal for MPs, so they can hold the government to account for the divide between their rhetoric and reality. And we can put forward an alternative vision for Britain – one where jobs and businesses are protected, our workers’ rights and consumer protections are maintained, and Britain stays open and internationalist. If you would like to join us in this campaign, you can find out more details of how to get involved on our website.

James McGrory is the co-executive director of Open Britain.

0800 7318496