Morning Call: pick of the papers

The ten must-read comment pieces from the Sunday papers.

1. This railway fiasco reveals all that's wrong with the Tories (Observer)

If you hollow out the state, expensive disasters like the West Coast franchise will become routine, says Will Hutton.

2. Those awesome Tory tough guys are itching to take on anybody ( long as it's not a fair fight) (Mail on Sunday)

Instead of introducing welfare reform carefully and slowly, the Tories seem hellbent on using brute force, writes Viv Groskop.

3. The Man with the Plan can’t keep avoiding the Blond One (Sunday Telegraph)

There is a clear and present danger that Boris Johnson will steal the show in Birmingham, writes Matthew d'Ancona. The Cameroons must act.

4. Now, Dave, will you take Ed seriously? (Sunday Times) (£)

The prime minister needs to convince us there is more to his own plan for one nation than austerity, says Martin Ivens.

5. Boris Johnson reminds Tories of what David Cameron has lost (Observer)

Number 10 says it is relaxed about the mayor's speech at conference, writes Andrew Rawnsley. It is as relaxed as a cat on a hot tin roof.

6. Spot the clues in the battle of the veeps (Independent on Sunday)

Vice-presidential debates have a chequered history, but sometimes they can be a springboard to the top job, writes Rupert Cornwell.

7. The sheep have stampeded - and they'll sweep Ed straight into No10 (Mail on Sunday)

Miliband will be the next Prime Minister, and, in the end, our political media are power-worshippers, says Peter Hitchens.

8. Why does Jeremy Hunt want to turn the clock back on the abortion debate? (Observer)

The health secretary's intervention on abortion time limits is part of a concerted attack on women's rights, says Catherine Bennett.

9. Dave's best bet is a repeat of the 1983 show (Independent on Sunday)

It may seem harsh, but elections can be won even if a minority is suffering, writes John Rentoul.

10. Mitt Romney teaches the Tories a lesson in conviction (Sunday Telegraph)

Osborne needs some good headlines this week – and that means tax cuts, says Janet Daley.

Photo: Getty Images
Show Hide image

The buck doesn't stop with Grant Shapps - and probably shouldn't stop with Lord Feldman, either

The question of "who knew what, and when?" shouldn't stop with the Conservative peer.

If Grant Shapps’ enforced resignation as a minister was intended to draw a line under the Mark Clarke affair, it has had the reverse effect. Attention is now shifting to Lord Feldman, who was joint chair during Shapps’  tenure at the top of CCHQ.  It is not just the allegations of sexual harrassment, bullying, and extortion against Mark Clarke, but the question of who knew what, and when.

Although Shapps’ resignation letter says that “the buck” stops with him, his allies are privately furious at his de facto sacking, and they are pointing the finger at Feldman. They point out that not only was Feldman the senior partner on paper, but when the rewards for the unexpected election victory were handed out, it was Feldman who was held up as the key man, while Shapps was given what they see as a relatively lowly position in the Department for International Development.  Yet Feldman is still in post while Shapps was effectively forced out by David Cameron. Once again, says one, “the PM’s mates are protected, the rest of us shafted”.

As Simon Walters reports in this morning’s Mail on Sunday, the focus is turning onto Feldman, while Paul Goodman, the editor of the influential grassroots website ConservativeHome has piled further pressure on the peer by calling for him to go.

But even Feldman’s resignation is unlikely to be the end of the matter. Although the scope of the allegations against Clarke were unknown to many, questions about his behaviour were widespread, and fears about the conduct of elections in the party’s youth wing are also longstanding. Shortly after the 2010 election, Conservative student activists told me they’d cheered when Sadiq Khan defeated Clarke in Tooting, while a group of Conservative staffers were said to be part of the “Six per cent club” – they wanted a swing big enough for a Tory majority, but too small for Clarke to win his seat. The viciousness of Conservative Future’s internal elections is sufficiently well-known, meanwhile, to be a repeated refrain among defenders of the notoriously opaque democratic process in Labour Students, with supporters of a one member one vote system asked if they would risk elections as vicious as those in their Tory equivalent.

Just as it seems unlikely that Feldman remained ignorant of allegations against Clarke if Shapps knew, it feels untenable to argue that Clarke’s defeat could be cheered by both student Conservatives and Tory staffers and the unpleasantness of the party’s internal election sufficiently well-known by its opponents, without coming across the desk of Conservative politicians above even the chair of CCHQ’s paygrade.

Stephen Bush is editor of the Staggers, the New Statesman’s political blog.