Morning Call: pick of the papers

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

1. Here’s how the Conservatives can win back the working class (Daily Telegraph)

Labour is losing in areas such as the North East, where voters long for an economic revival, writes David Skelton.

2. Open season on black boys after a verdict like this (Guardian)

Calls for calm made after killer of Trayvon Martin was acquitted of murder are empty words for black families, says Gary Younge.

3. For Tories, privatisation is still a matter of dogmatic faith (Independent)

The breadth of opposition to Royal Mail privatisation is hardly surprising, writes Owen Jones. Britons have endured a three-decade-long experiment of selling off our utilities and public services.

4. You’ve been Sammed: No 10’s real moderniser (Times)

From arming the Syrian rebels to gay marriage, the Prime Minister’s policies tend to reflect his wife’s core values, writes Tim Montgomerie.

5. Simpson and Bowles are wrong on US debt (Financial Times)

The deficit hawks were mistaken before 2008 and they remain so, writes Edward Luce.

6. By taking sides within sides, Rifkind risks a repeat of Balkans mistakes in Syria (Independent)

It was the Spanish Civil War in the 1930s and the Bosnian War in the 1990s, writes Robert Fisk. Today's superpowers are fighting in Syria, but lets be in no doubt as to their motivations.

7. Tunisia is the model for a new Egypt (Financial Times)

Egyptians should realise that everyone lost when they ceased co-operating, says Marwan Muasher.

8. The writers Alex Salmond is courting now will hold him to account (Guardian)

The arts world may be galvanised by the yes campaign but are likely to ask serious questions of the SNP after independence, writes Alan Bissett.

9. A Register of Lobbyists (Times)

The process by which policy decisions are made should be transparent, says a Times editorial.

10. Letting developers vandalise the countryside won't solve housing crisis (Guardian)

Cynically relaxing planning controls puts rural Britain at risk while doing nothing to ease the housing shortage in our cities, writes Nick Herbert.

David Cameron addresses pupils at an assembly during a visit to Corby Technical School on September 2, 2015. Photograph: Getty Images.
Show Hide image

Can Cameron maintain his refugee stance as he comes under attack from all sides?

Tory MPs, the Sun, Labour and a growing section of the public are calling on the PM to end his refusal to take "more and more". 

The disparity between the traumatic images of drowned Syrian children and David Cameron's compassionless response ("I don't think there is an answer that can be achieved simply by taking more and more refugees") has triggered a political backlash. A petition calling for greater action (the UK has to date accepted around 5,000) has passed the 100,000 threshold required for the government to consider a debate after tens of thousands signed this morning. Scottish Conservative leader Ruth Davidson has tweeted: "This is not an immigration issue, it's a humanitarian one, and the human response must be to help. If we don't, what does that make us?" Tory MPs such as Nicola Blackwood, David Burrowes, Jeremy Lefroy and Johnny Mercer have similarly appealed to Cameron to reverse his stance.

Today's Sun declares that the UK has "a proud record of taking in desperate people and we should not flinch from it now if it is beyond doubt that they have fled for their lives." Meanwhile, the Washington Post has published a derisive piece headlined "Britain takes in so few refugees from Syria they would fit on a subway train". Labour has called on Cameron to convene a meeting of Cobra to discuss the crisis and to request an emergency EU summit. Yvette Cooper, who led the way with a speech on Monday outlining how the UK could accept 10,000 refugees, is organising a meeting of councils, charities and faith groups to discuss Britain's response. Public opinion, which can turn remarkably quickly in response to harrowing images, is likely to have grown more sympathetic to the Syrians' plight. Indeed, a survey in March found that those who supported accepting refugees fleeing persecution outnumbered opponents by 47-24 per cent. 

The political question is whether this cumulative pressure will force Cameron to change his stance. He may not agree to match Cooper's demand of 10,000 (though Germany is poised to accept 800,000) but an increasing number at Westminster believe that he cannot remain impassive. Surely Cameron, who will not stand for election again, will not want this stain on his premiership? The UK's obstinacy is further antagonising Angela Merkel on whom his hopes of a successful EU renegotiation rest. If nothing else, Cameron should remember one of the laws of politics: the earlier a climbdown, the less painful it is. 

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.