Morning Call: pick of the papers

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

1. Everyone thinks David Cameron has screwed up over the EU - except for the voting public (Independent)

The main story this week for journalists has been the Conservative decision to stage a case study in disunity - but is that what most interests the public, asks John Rentoul.

2. David Cameron must not cave in to the UKIP threat (Daily Telegraph)

For his own sake and that of the country, Cameron has to make the case for staying in the EU, says Peter Mandelson.

3. History is more than one thing after another (Times)

Whether its art, books or political ideas, arranging things in strict order of time is not as logical as it looks, says Philip Collins.

4. The truth is that we can’t afford a shiny new transport system like HS2 (Daily Telegraph)

History is littered with failed projects that appealed to politicians in thrall to modernity, writes Fraser Nelson.

5. The flight paths of Britain and Poland diverge in a disunited Europe (Guardian)

Poland is eyeing a place in the group of leading EU nations just as Britain seems to be leaving, writes Timothy Garton Ash.

6. Britons want more work – let’s help them (Financial Times)

There is very substantial spare capacity in the British economy, writes Samuel Brittan.

7. Xenophobia in Italy bodes ill for migrants right across Europe (Independent)

Today's battleground is on the right to citizenship, writes Peter Popham.

8. France: waiting for Godot (Guardian)

A pressing task for Mr Hollande is to persuade a French audience he is capable of pulling his country out of its torpor, says a Guardian editorial. And on that test, he is failing

9. Brass Tax (Times)

The government must lead efforts to change cross-border tax rules that are being exploited by the multinationals, says a Times editorial.

10. Leaving Europe would be bad for British business (Guardian)

We must not lose sight of what's important – economic growth, says John Cridland. This means maintaining access to, and influence over, the EU.


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.