CommentPlus: pick of the papers

The ten must-read pieces from this morning’s papers.

1. It's madness to split the centre-left vote (Independent)

It is nonsense to pretend that the Lib Dems are equidistant from Labour and the Tories, writes Andrew Adonis. The return of a Labour government offers Nick Clegg the best chance to implement his agenda.

2. Labour are now the reactionaries, we the radicals (Guardian)

Elsewhere, David Cameron argues that his party's pledge to investigate public pay inequality proves that it is the Tories who offer the chance for bold, progressive change.

3. The Tories have just the man to find more jobs for British workers (Daily Telegraph)

Iain Duncan Smith's benefit reform proposals could transform the British labour market, says Fraser Nelson. If the Tories win, he should head a new Department of Social Justice, dedicated to healing our "broken society".

Read the CommentPlus summary

4. The long parliament is over. Good riddance (Times)

The disillusion caused by the MPs' expenses scandal holds back any chance of an inspiring election campaign, writes Roy Hattersley. The one hope is that the rehabilitation of democracy can now begin for real.

Read the CommentPlus summary

5. Now Obama is president with an endgame (Financial Times)

Obama now looks like a leader in command of his agenda, says Philip Stephens. That he has rebuilt his political authority at home means that he is being taken more seriously abroad.

6. As democracy unravels at home, the west thuggishly exports it elsewhere (Guardian)

The west has greatly oversold the benefits of democracy, writes Simon Jenkins. The forced elections in Afghanistan and Iraq do little to justify the death and destruction we have seen in both countries.

Read the CommentPlus summary

7. If you're looking for class war, just read Cameron's policies (Independent)

The right may accuse Gordon Brown of waging "class war" but it's the Tories who are truly guilty of the charge, argues Johann Hari. If elected, David Cameron would institute a huge redistribution of wealth from the poorest to the richest.

Read the CommentPlus summary

8. The case for a written constitution (Financial Times)

We need a written constitution to act as a further barrier against parliamentary misconduct, writes Samuel Brittan.

Read the CommentPlus summary

9. Arms and the plan (Times)

The case for Britain retaining an independent nuclear deterrent is strong, argues a leader in the Times. Future generations would pay a high price for any mistakes.

Read the CommentPlus summary

10. First round to the Tories, but the debate remains unreal (Independent)

Cameron has won the political battle over National Insurance but he has not answered the charge that he has gone soft on the deficit, says a leader in the Independent.

Sign up now to CommentPlus for the pick of the day's opinion, comment and analysis in your inbox at 8am, every weekday.

Getty
Show Hide image

Is defeat in Stoke the beginning of the end for Paul Nuttall?

The Ukip leader was his party's unity candidate. But after his defeat in Stoke, the old divisions are beginning to show again

In a speech to Ukip’s spring conference in Bolton on February 17, the party’s once and probably future leader Nigel Farage laid down the gauntlet for his successor, Paul Nuttall. Stoke’s by-election was “fundamental” to the future of the party – and Nuttall had to win.
 
One week on, Nuttall has failed that test miserably and thrown the fundamental questions hanging over Ukip’s future into harsh relief. 

For all his bullish talk of supplanting Labour in its industrial heartlands, the Ukip leader only managed to increase the party’s vote share by 2.2 percentage points on 2015. This paltry increase came despite Stoke’s 70 per cent Brexit majority, and a media narrative that was, until the revelations around Nuttall and Hillsborough, talking the party’s chances up.
 
So what now for Nuttall? There is, for the time being, little chance of him resigning – and, in truth, few inside Ukip expected him to win. Nuttall was relying on two well-rehearsed lines as get-out-of-jail free cards very early on in the campaign. 

The first was that the seat was a lowly 72 on Ukip’s target list. The second was that he had been leader of party whose image had been tarnished by infighting both figurative and literal for all of 12 weeks – the real work of his project had yet to begin. 

The chances of that project ever succeeding were modest at the very best. After yesterday’s defeat, it looks even more unlikely. Nuttall had originally stated his intention to run in the likely by-election in Leigh, Greater Manchester, when Andy Burnham wins the Greater Manchester metro mayoralty as is expected in May (Wigan, the borough of which Leigh is part, voted 64 per cent for Brexit).

If he goes ahead and stands – which he may well do – he will have to overturn a Labour majority of over 14,000. That, even before the unedifying row over the veracity of his Hillsborough recollections, was always going to be a big challenge. If he goes for it and loses, his leadership – predicated as it is on his supposed ability to win votes in the north - will be dead in the water. 

Nuttall is not entirely to blame, but he is a big part of Ukip’s problem. I visited Stoke the day before The Guardian published its initial report on Nuttall’s Hillsborough claims, and even then Nuttall’s campaign manager admitted that he was unlikely to convince the “hard core” of Conservative voters to back him. 

There are manifold reasons for this, but chief among them is that Nuttall, despite his newfound love of tweed, is no Nigel Farage. Not only does he lack his name recognition and box office appeal, but the sad truth is that the Tory voters Ukip need to attract are much less likely to vote for a party led by a Scouser whose platform consists of reassuring working-class voters their NHS and benefits are safe.
 
It is Farage and his allies – most notably the party’s main donor Arron Banks – who hold the most power over Nuttall’s future. Banks, who Nuttall publicly disowned as a non-member after he said he was “sick to death” of people “milking” the Hillsborough disaster, said on the eve of the Stoke poll that Ukip had to “remain radical” if it wanted to keep receiving his money. Farage himself has said the party’s campaign ought to have been “clearer” on immigration. 

Senior party figures are already briefing against Nuttall and his team in the Telegraph, whose proprietors are chummy with the beer-swilling Farage-Banks axis. They deride him for his efforts to turn Ukip into “NiceKip” or “Nukip” in order to appeal to more women voters, and for the heavy-handedness of his pitch to Labour voters (“There were times when I wondered whether I’ve got a purple rosette or a red one on”, one told the paper). 

It is Nuttall’s policy advisers - the anti-Farage awkward squad of Suzanne Evans, MEP Patrick O’Flynn (who famously branded Farage "snarling, thin-skinned and aggressive") and former leadership candidate Lisa Duffy – come in for the harshest criticism. Herein lies the leader's almost impossible task. Despite having pitched to members as a unity candidate, the two sides’ visions for Ukip are irreconcilable – one urges him to emulate Trump (who Nuttall says he would not have voted for), and the other urges a more moderate tack. 

Endorsing his leader on Question Time last night, Ukip’s sole MP Douglas Carswell blamed the legacy of the party’s Tea Party-inspired 2015 general election campaign, which saw Farage complain about foreigners with HIV using the NHS in ITV’s leaders debate, for the party’s poor performance in Stoke. Others, such as MEP Bill Etheridge, say precisely the opposite – that Nuttall must be more like Farage. 

Neither side has yet called for Nuttall’s head. He insists he is “not going anywhere”. With his febrile party no stranger to abortive coup and counter-coup, he is unlikely to be the one who has the final say.