Morning Call: pick of the papers

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

1.Cameron's speech told Europe's emperors to get dressed (Guardian)
The EU's elder statesmen tried to run before they could walk. We may not like it, but Cameron's call was brave and timely, writes Simon Jenkins

2.Cameron leaps into the unknown (Financial Times)
PM’s speech was a gamble to get the eurosceptic monkey off his back, writes Paul Goodman.

3.The Shard is the height of fashion, so could we live in a tower block? (Independent)
High-rises suffer from a bad reputation, but they can be more comfortable for occupants than ground-floor living.

4.If Gove axes AS-levels, equality will feel the blow (Guardian)
Modular courses and retakes help students in struggling schools bridge the gap between GCSE and A-level, argues Franklyn Addo.

5.The Labour Party will do anything for the workers – except trust them (Telegraph)
While David Cameron puts his faith in the people, Ed Miliband clings rigidly to belief in the state, writes Fraser Nelson.

6.World is right to worry about US debt (Financial Times)
America must face up to its responsibilities, writes Kenneth Rogoff

7.A Lib-Lab Coalition could be back on - if only Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband can bear to bury the hatchet (Independent)
David Cameron's offer of an In/Out referendum both reduces the chance of a future Tory-Lib coalition and the likelihood of a Tory majority government, argues John Kampfner.

8.Orwell endures because his nightmares do too (Times)
Fanatics in Mali, Syria and Iran prove the timeless truth of his words on the horrors of unrestrained power, writes Philip Collins

9.David Cameron may have finished off the Tories – but he had no choice (Telegraph)
EU referendum: David Cameron's Conservative Party gamble over Europe has been tried before, by Labour. It fatally split the party, explains Peter Oborne

10.Britain: a boarded-up high street of mediocrity (Times)
Despite the pound being on the slide Britain remains depressingly uncompetitive, writes Stephen King.

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.