Morning Call: pick of the papers

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

1. Osborne economics is not an invincible force of nature (Guardian)

Although many appear resigned to life under this dysfunctional capitalism, there is a way to make the system less inhuman, says John Harris.

2. All coups end in petty tyranny, however good the intentions (Daily Telegraph)

Britain should scorn the idea that military rule in Egypt is the 'least bad’ option, says Daniel Hannan.

3. We have another option in Egypt: to do nothing (Guardian)

We want to avoid another Syria but intervention could prove counter-productive, writes Oliver Miles. Britain should push for a diplomatic solution.

4. No, this is not the road to recovery. It's the road to Wongaland (Guardian)

The notion that the Bank of England base rate is dominant and we should all go shopping has already been punctured, writes Ann Pettifor.

5. Britain's involvement in the EU is too entrenched to achieve any reform (Daily Mail)

To break free and set our own terms requires an Act of Parliament to repeal the European Communities Act and all connected statutes, writes Robin Harris.

6. One year on, Marikana is emblematic of South Africa’s woes (Independent)

In the ANC’s 19 years in power, little has been done to address inequalities, says an Independent editorial.

7. The police keep firing; the bodies pile up. In Cairo, bloodbaths are now a daily occurrence (Independent)

There can be no excuse for the police whose duty is to protect all Egyptians, says Robert Fisk.

8. Conversation dies. Smartphone to the rescue (Times)

It’s not necessarily rude to play with your phone instead of talking, writes Matthew Parris. It’s just a way of relieving the pressure.

9. The Conservative Party needs to be more inviting (Daily Telegraph)

It's no wonder the Tories are losing members when Conservative associations appear to be stuck in the Fifties, writes Graeme Archer.

10. Japan’s past and future meet at Zero (Financial Times)

Controversy over a new film highlights the change in Japanese attitudes since the 1990s, writes David Pilling.

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 just 216 refugees) 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.