Morning Call: pick of the papers

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

1. Forget Ken's cronies. Now it's Boris's buddies (Guardian)

Boris Johnson's choice of Andrew Gilligan as London's cycling tsar increases the whiff of cronyism around the London mayor, writes Sonia Purnell.

2. Cameron can prove de Gaulle was right about us all along (Daily Telegraph)

Eurosceptics should not barrack the PM’s speech when it comes: they should bank it, says Charles Moore.

3. Cuba’s ideals failed. But at least it had them (Times) (£)

A Tory isn’t supposed to think this, writes Matthew Parris. But Havana’s revolutionaries had something that is missing in Britain.

4. A load of Thunderballs: James Bond is fiction, not a police instruction manual (Guardian)

A shocking ruling (let's call it the 007 standard) gives undercover police licence to break hearts, writes Jonathan Freedland. It's the hacking of people's lives.

5. This week has looked like an obscene remake of earlier western interventions (Independent)

We are outraged not by the massacre of the innocents, but because the hostages killed were largely white, blue-eyed chaps rather than darker, brown-eyed chaps, says Robert Fisk.

6. Barack Obama’s second term (Financial Times)

The US president must recapture the promise of a better politics, says an FT editorial.

7. Both Labour and the Lib Dems are guilty of gross hypocrisy and confusion over the EU (Daily Mail)

The two centre-left parties are in denial about the state of public opinion on the issue, and their utter failure to respond to it, writes Simon Heffer.

8. Unthinkable? Paul Krugman for shadow chancellor (Guardian)

If Barack Obama doesn't want the Nobel laureate as his treasury secretary then Labour should snap him up, says a Guardian editorial.

9. Life in the high street yet (Daily Telegraph)

To save our town centres, we must make them places for meeting and recreation – and why not have people living there, says a Telegraph leader.

10. Armstrong took his countrymen for a ride (Financial Times)

The American self-image of resilience, hard work, charity and ‘dreams has its dark side, writes Christopher Caldwell.

Photo: Getty Images
Show Hide image

What do Labour's lost voters make of the Labour leadership candidates?

What does Newsnight's focus group make of the Labour leadership candidates?

Tonight on Newsnight, an IpsosMori focus group of former Labour voters talks about the four Labour leadership candidates. What did they make of the four candidates?

On Andy Burnham:

“He’s the old guard, with Yvette Cooper”

“It’s the same message they were trying to portray right up to the election”​

“I thought that he acknowledged the fact that they didn’t say sorry during the time of the election, and how can you expect people to vote for you when you’re not actually acknowledging that you were part of the problem”​

“Strongish leader, and at least he’s acknowledging and saying let’s move on from here as opposed to wishy washy”

“I was surprised how long he’d been in politics if he was talking about Tony Blair years – he doesn’t look old enough”

On Jeremy Corbyn:

"“He’s the older guy with the grey hair who’s got all the policies straight out of the sixties and is a bit of a hippy as well is what he comes across as” 

“I agree with most of what he said, I must admit, but I don’t think as a country we can afford his principles”

“He was just going to be the opposite of Conservatives, but there might be policies on the Conservative side that, y’know, might be good policies”

“I’ve heard in the paper he’s the favourite to win the Labour leadership. Well, if that was him, then I won’t be voting for Labour, put it that way”

“I think he’s a very good politician but he’s unelectable as a Prime Minister”

On Yvette Cooper

“She sounds quite positive doesn’t she – for families and their everyday issues”

“Bedroom tax, working tax credits, mainly mum things as well”

“We had Margaret Thatcher obviously years ago, and then I’ve always thought about it being a man, I wanted a man, thinking they were stronger…  she was very strong and decisive as well”

“She was very clear – more so than the other guy [Burnham]”

“I think she’s trying to play down her economics background to sort of distance herself from her husband… I think she’s dumbing herself down”

On Liz Kendall

“None of it came from the heart”

“She just sounds like someone’s told her to say something, it’s not coming from the heart, she needs passion”

“Rather than saying what she’s going to do, she’s attacking”

“She reminded me of a headteacher when she was standing there, and she was quite boring. She just didn’t seem to have any sort of personality, and you can’t imagine her being a leader of a party”

“With Liz Kendall and Andy Burnham there’s a lot of rhetoric but there doesn’t seem to be a lot of direction behind what they’re saying. There seems to be a lot of words but no action.”

And, finally, a piece of advice for all four candidates, should they win the leadership election:

“Get down on your hands and knees and start praying”

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