Question Time hasn't "bowed" to anti-war pressure

The extra panellist Lord Ashdown is pro-war

The Times claims that Question Time has bowed to pressure from anti-war campaigners by deciding to include Lord Ashdown as an extra (sixth) panellist on its upcoming Afghanistan special.

One slight hitch with this theory is that Lord Ashdown isn't anti-war. He may have made some pointed criticisms of British military strategy, but he remains an unambiguous supporter of the occupation. If anything, he has attacked the government for not prosecuting the war strongly enough, accusing it of "thinking it can win this war on half-horsepower".

If the inclusion of Ashdown is designed to ensure that the largely pro-war panel is more representative of public opinion it won't succeed. A recent poll showed that, unlike Ashdown, 63 per cent of the public support an immediate withdrawal.

It seems more likely that Ashdown has been drafted in to appease angry Lib Dems, bemused that the original panel of five didn't include a single member of their party.

 

Follow the New Statesman team on Twitter

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

Can Philip Hammond save the Conservatives from public anger at their DUP deal?

The Chancellor has the wriggle room to get close to the DUP's spending increase – but emotion matters more than facts in politics.

The magic money tree exists, and it is growing in Northern Ireland. That’s the attack line that Labour will throw at Theresa May in the wake of her £1bn deal with the DUP to keep her party in office.

It’s worth noting that while £1bn is a big deal in terms of Northern Ireland’s budget – just a touch under £10bn in 2016/17 – as far as the total expenditure of the British government goes, it’s peanuts.

The British government spent £778bn last year – we’re talking about spending an amount of money in Northern Ireland over the course of two years that the NHS loses in pen theft over the course of one in England. To match the increase in relative terms, you’d be looking at a £35bn increase in spending.

But, of course, political arguments are about gut instinct rather than actual numbers. The perception that the streets of Antrim are being paved by gold while the public realm in England, Scotland and Wales falls into disrepair is a real danger to the Conservatives.

But the good news for them is that last year Philip Hammond tweaked his targets to give himself greater headroom in case of a Brexit shock. Now the Tories have experienced a shock of a different kind – a Corbyn shock. That shock was partly due to the Labour leader’s good campaign and May’s bad campaign, but it was also powered by anger at cuts to schools and anger among NHS workers at Jeremy Hunt’s stewardship of the NHS. Conservative MPs have already made it clear to May that the party must not go to the country again while defending cuts to school spending.

Hammond can get to slightly under that £35bn and still stick to his targets. That will mean that the DUP still get to rave about their higher-than-average increase, while avoiding another election in which cuts to schools are front-and-centre. But whether that deprives Labour of their “cuts for you, but not for them” attack line is another question entirely. 

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

0800 7318496