Morning Call: pick of the papers

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

1. We in the Gaza Strip will not die in silence (Guardian)

If the world will not defend the Palestinians against Israel, we have the right to defend ourselves, says Musa Abumarzuq.

2. Lynton Crosby is a disastrous signing for the Tories (Independent)

The Tories have appointed a man who could undermine all that David Cameron stands for and whose approach risks long-term damage to the party brand, writes Ian Birrell.

3. Is this the death of the Republican party? No chance (Guardian)

Republican courting of white people was based on strategy not principle, writes Gary Younge. To reach out wider would not require a great leap.

4. Don’t get frothed into a right-wing bubble (Times) (£)

‘Political entertainment’ could be as harmful to the Conservative Party as it has been for the US Republicans, writes Tim Montgomerie.

5. UK must be an active RBS investor (Financial Times)

The government must not be hamstrung by its commitment to keep RBS out of full state control, says a Financial Times editorial.

6. As the 'gates of hell' open once more in the Middle East, these old journalistic clichés won't do (Independent)

Whether it's 'surgical air strikes', 'rooting out terror' or 'cyber-terrorism', the stench of hypocrisy is rife, says Robert Fisk.

7. For Britain, the EU is good value for money (Guardian)

The UK's demands for cuts to the EU budget are wrong-headed, and a veto would backfire, says Radosław Sikorski.

8. Not a single penny more for the EU’s begging bowl (Daily Telegraph)

The demand for a budget increase amid such an abuse of public funds is outrageous, says Boris Johnson.

9. Obama’s path to Xanadu runs via Jerusalem (Financial Times)

If the US President can build "strategic trust" with China in the Middle East, the habit could take hold elsewhere, writes Edward Luce.

10. Vince’s mansion tax rises from the dead (Daily Telegraph)

The mansion tax – or whatever form the Quad’s bargain eventually takes – is not a coherent approach to economic management, says a Daily Telegraph leader.

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.