The Standard's decision to go free will spook the nationals

Lebedev's contrarian move has caught the nationals off guard

Alexander Lebedev's decision to transform the London Evening Standard into a free newspaper from 12 October is certainly a contrarian one. It comes at a time when significant sections of the industry, notably Rupert Murdoch's News International and the Financial Times, are determined to develop new forms of paid-for journalism and shortly after the closure of one of the Standard's free-sheet rivals, the London Paper.

With London Lite, whose whole raison d'être was to take on Murdoch's London Paper, poised to suffer an early death, it was thought the Standard would be free to recoup the readers and advertisers who had migrated elsewhere. Instead, the Russian oligarch has surprised us all.

Lebedev's willingess to forgo £15m worth of income from the cover price is based on the optimistic assumption that ad revenue will eventually return to previous heights. The decision to increase the paper's distribution from 250,000 to 600,000 copies a day will assist this cause but it remains an unreliable gamble.

Yet the implications of the Standard's decision stretch far beyond the London market. If the paper maintains something close to its present quality it is likely that many readers will abandon their national titles of choice. Lebedev's bold declaration that "the London Evening Standard is the first leading quality newspaper to go free and I am sure others will follow" suggests that the Independent would become a free title if ever he acquired it. A paper with the Standard's history and prestige that is prepared to market itself aggressively represents a potent threat to the future of several national titles.

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

Getty Images.
Show Hide image

The Brexiteers' response to John Major shows their dangerous complacency

Leave's leaders are determined to pretend that there are no risks to their approach.

Christmas is some way off, but Theresa May could be forgiven for feeling like Ebenezer Scrooge. Another Ghost of Prime Ministers Past in the shape of John Major is back in the headlines with a major speech on Brexit.

He struck most of the same notes that Tony Blair did in his speech a fortnight ago. Brexit is a blunder, a "historic mistake" in Major's view. The union between England and Scotland is under threat as is the peace in Northern Ireland. It's not unpatriotic for the defeated side in an electoral contest to continue to hold to those beliefs after a loss. And our present trajectory is a hard Brexit that will leave many of us poorer and wreck the British social model.

But, as with Blair, he rules out any question that the referendum outcome should not be honoured, though, unlike Blair, he has yet to firmly state that pro-Europeans should continue to advocate for a return to the EU if we change our minds. He had a note of warning for the PM: that the Brexit talks need "a little more charm and a lot less cheap rhetoric" and that the expectations she is setting are "unreal and over-optimistic".

On that last point in particular, he makes a point that many politicians make privately but few have aired in public. It may be that we will, as Theresa May says, have the best Brexit. France may in fact pay for it. But what if they don't? What if we get a good deal but immigration doesn't fall? Who'll be blamed for that? Certainly we are less likely to get a good deal while the government passes up pain-free opportunities to secure goodwill from our European partners.

As with Blair, the reaction says more about British politics after Brexit than the speech itself. Jacob Rees-Mogg described it as "a craven and defeated speech of a bitter man". Iain Duncan Smith, too, thinks that it was "strangely bitter".

There is much to worry about as Britain leaves the European Union but the most corrosive and dangerous trend of all is that section of the Leave elite which requires not only that we implement Brexit but that we all pretend that there are no risks, no doubts and that none of us voted to Remain on 23 June. That Blair and Major's speeches - "You voted for it, so we'll do it, but it's a mistake" - are seen as brave and controversial rather than banal and commonplace statements of political practice in a democracy are more worrying than anything that might happen to the value of the pound.

Stephen Bush is special correspondent at the New Statesman. His daily briefing, Morning Call, provides a quick and essential guide to British politics.