"House of Lords reform? Who gives a f***?"

Tory donors and activists give their verdict on the coalition.

In February, the Sunday Telegraph asked Tory donors, "big beasts" and young activists what they thought of the coalition, and of David Cameron's performance as prime minister. Now, as recess begins, they have returned to them - and thrown in the views of their opposite numbers in the Lib Dems too. 

The quotes firmly suggest that Tory donors don't feel the coalition is Tory enough; that it is pursuing all kinds of footling Lib Dem projects while the economy should be the focus. For example, here's Lord Harris of Peckham:

“I don’t think David Cameron is representing core Conservative voters or values — he’s a different generation to mine. I’m against gay marriage — may be it’s my age. And when our economy is faltering, I’d rather we didn’t spend hundreds of millions of pounds on [holding] an EU referendum.”

And here is the exquisitely forthright entrepreneur Hugh Osmond: 

"They need to be radical and pro-growth. And House of Lords reform? Who gives a f***? Get the economy growing at 2, 3, 4% a year then do stuff like that. Nick Clegg is a banana for getting involved with that stuff now.”

Meanwhile, the big preoccupation among the Liberal Democrats was how to disentangle the party from the Tories in voters' minds -- in time not to be wiped out at the next election. Lord Oakeshott wins runner-up prize in the colourful metaphor stakes with this:

"It will be far easier to get our Lib Dem message across at the next election if Lib Dem ministers are not still in Government playing the pantomime horse with their Conservative colleagues right up to polling day.”

You can read the full set of interviews here

David Cameron. Photo: Getty Images

Helen Lewis is deputy editor of the New Statesman. She has presented BBC Radio 4’s Week in Westminster and is a regular panellist on BBC1’s Sunday Politics.

How Jim Murphy's mistake cost Labour - and helped make Ruth Davidson

Scottish Labour's former leader's great mistake was to run away from Labour's Scottish referendum, not on it.

The strange revival of Conservative Scotland? Another poll from north of the border, this time from the Times and YouGov, shows the Tories experiencing a revival in Scotland, up to 28 per cent of the vote, enough to net seven extra seats from the SNP.

Adding to the Nationalists’ misery, according to the same poll, they would lose East Dunbartonshire to the Liberal Democrats, reducing their strength in the Commons to a still-formidable 47 seats.

It could be worse than the polls suggest, however. In the elections to the Scottish Parliament last year, parties which backed a No vote in the referendum did better in the first-past-the-post seats than the polls would have suggested – thanks to tactical voting by No voters, who backed whichever party had the best chance of beating the SNP.

The strategic insight of Ruth Davidson, the Conservative leader in Scotland, was to to recast her party as the loudest defender of the Union between Scotland and the rest of the United Kingdom. She has absorbed large chunks of that vote from the Liberal Democrats and Labour, but, paradoxically, at the Holyrood elections at least, the “Unionist coalition” she assembled helped those parties even though it cost the vote share.

The big thing to watch is not just where the parties of the Union make gains, but where they successfully form strong second-places against whoever the strongest pro-Union party is.

Davidson’s popularity and eye for a good photo opportunity – which came first is an interesting question – mean that the natural benefactor in most places will likely be the Tories.

But it could have been very different. The first politician to hit successfully upon the “last defender of the Union” routine was Ian Murray, the last Labour MP in Scotland, who squeezed both the  Liberal Democrat and Conservative vote in his seat of Edinburgh South.

His then-leader in Scotland, Jim Murphy, had a different idea. He fought the election in 2015 to the SNP’s left, with the slogan of “Whether you’re Yes, or No, the Tories have got to go”.  There were a couple of problems with that approach, as one  former staffer put it: “Firstly, the SNP weren’t going to put the Tories in, and everyone knew it. Secondly, no-one but us wanted to move on [from the referendum]”.

Then again under different leadership, this time under Kezia Dugdale, Scottish Labour once again fought a campaign explicitly to the left of the SNP, promising to increase taxation to blunt cuts devolved from Westminster, and an agnostic position on the referendum. Dugdale said she’d be open to voting to leave the United Kingdom if Britain left the European Union. Senior Scottish Labour figures flirted with the idea that the party might be neutral in a forthcoming election. Once again, the party tried to move on – but no-one else wanted to move on.

How different things might be if instead of running away from their referendum campaign, Jim Murphy had run towards it in 2015. 

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

0800 7318496