The Queen takes a swipe at Gordon Brown over gold sale

George Osborne was amused as the Queen said that "regrettably" the UK's gold bars "don't belong to us".

Unlike Prince Charles, the Queen usually avoids making political interventions, but she lapsed while visiting the cabinet today. Walking along the line of ministers inside No. 10, she reached George Osborne (see video above) and, in a reference to her recent visit to the Bank of England, remarked, "I saw all the gold bars, which regrettably somebody said don't belong to us."

An amused Osborne replied: "Some of them were sold, but we've still got some left." The politically-minded Chancellor resisted the temptation to add "sold by Gordon Brown". Between 1999 and 2002, Brown sold 60 per cent of the UK's gold reserves (395 tonnes) for an average of $275.6 an ounce, only to see prices subsequently rise to above $1,600 (£986).

In 2010, Osborne declared: "Gordon Brown's decision to sell off our gold reserves at the bottom of the market cost the British taxpayer billions of pounds. It was one of the worst economic judgements ever made by a chancellor." At a time when his own strategy has failed dramatically, Osborne will no doubt be pleased to discover that the Queen appears to agree.

The Queen sits next to David Cameron as she attends the government's weekly cabinet meeting. Photograph: Getty Images.

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

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.