Two down from the Met

Events continued to surprise me yesterday and today in the hacking scandal. I didn't expect Met Commissioner Stephenson to stand down, but he did.  After that I shouldn't have been surprised when Yates went, but I was.

Two people have gone for hiring Neil Wallis: a man who hasn't yet even been charged let alone convicted of any wrong doing.  As such I am unsure I will be celebrating: two senior police officers were in charge of an organisation facing serious allegations over corruption and they resign not over that but over who they hired to handle Public Relations.  Something seems wrong here to me.

More interestingly, two people have stood down for hiring someone considered toxic due to their association with the News of the World, but someone who hired his boss remains in post.

For the first time since the start of the scandal I am seriously wondering if Cameron can survive this.

On balance I come to the conclusion that he can. There are several reasons:

1. No Tory will wield the knife. I don't think all the Conservative party are even sure there is a problem with Cameron having hired Coulson.
2. Following on from that there isn't an obvious successor. A piece by Henry G Manson on political betting examined the possible successors. When the best bet looks like Hague I'd imagine most Tories would like to sit and wait for bit. See my PS for an example.
3. It isn't a confidence issue, and the Liberal Democrats are quite enjoying Cameron being a bit inconvenienced.  I can't see how Labour can drive a wedge between the coalition here: the crude attempt to last week was undermined by sensible reactions from the government in agreeing to the motion.
4. Cameron hasn't broken the law or been caught doing anything wrong personally. Spin doctors are dodgy: don't forget that Malcolm Tucker rang true to the Labour spin machine. I would question his judgement in appointing Coulson but that is hardly a resignation issue for the PM.
5. The scandal includes Labour too, and no amount of whitewash can remove that fact.
6. Least significantly the scandal is blowing itself out: given the failure of Gordon Brown's accusations to stick to the Sun it appears that it hasn't spread to other papers.  The flip side of this claim is that we haven't gone even two days without something significant happening if you include the resignations. (I also ought to add that although the obtaining medical information part has been rejected, I don't recall the blagging of financial details being dealt with: did I miss this or has this been (tacitly) accepted by the Sun?)

What might change this? If Coulson is charged or convicted then it might be a different matter. At that point number 3 and 4 begin to look shaky.

However I am now actually thinking about it which I wasn't on Friday.

Post Script: If you need to cheer yourself up try saying "The Prime Minsister, Michael Gove"...

Budget Blues*

The rhetoric has been getting more and more over the top.

I suspect this means that the budget today will be less extravagant than people fear.

I do hope that the coalition doesn't whack VAT up across the board. I fear however it will.

My only budget prediction is Labour hypocrisy. Remember they promised in the budget last year, that if re-elected, they'd perform £44bn of public sector cuts. However suddenly sticking to Labour's plans is cruel and regressive and nasty and...

This is not going to be a fun day to be a Liberal Democrat.

* and, to be fair, yellows too.

Cuts that are and cuts that aren't

Well we knew whoever won it'd happen: the cuts begin.

And of course the people who did so much to get us into this mess aren't going to admit that, not after the new government has had literally weeks to settle in and sort out the mess.

But I do find Labour's "anger" about the North Tees and Hartlepool hospital almost comical in the hypocrisy stakes. Labour said they would spend £450m on this in an attempt to shore up the vote in the area. (Which didn't fully work. I imagine the new Conservative MP for Stockton South not be best pleased.)

This is an idea. Not a hospital. There are nice pictures drawn by architects but no constructions. It is to replace exisiting hospitals. Cutting it does not affect anyone's health care. Except the little model people who now won't be used in the scale model.

Labour are playing opportunistic opposition. Fair enough but don't expect to convince anyone. Perhaps engagement in the problem might be a better option. If we can't cut something suggest alternatives.