You are here: Home » Comment »

Ed Miliband is “Mommy”, David Cameron is “Daddy”

July 19, 2012 9:03 am

Author:

Tags:

Share this Article

In American politics, they call it the “Mommy Problem”, with Democrats scoring well on warmth but badly on power. Invariably the Republicans have the opposite problem (the “Daddy problem”). Neither is capable of providing both mommy and daddy, so it becomes a race to maximise polling positives and minimise polling negatives.*

Ed Miliband has a very clear “Mommy problem”. Yesterday UK Polling Report noted:

“The large majority of ratings were negative, but David Cameron’s best (or least worst) ratings were on being seen as competent (37%), strong (35%), up to the job (35%) and having a clear sense of purpose (35%). His worst ratings by far were on caring about ordinary people (just 22%) and being in touch (25% – with 67% seeing him as out of touch).

Ed Miliband’s ratings were almost the exact opposite, his strongest attributes were being seen to care about ordinary people (46%) and being in touch (35%). However, his main weaknesses were on being strong (22%), decisive (21%) and being up to the job (22% – with 55% thinking he is not up to the job).

David Cameron’s is increasingly being seen as out of touch and uncaring towards ordinary people… but does better on being seen as a strong and competent leader. Ed Miliband is seen as much more in touch and caring, but has still not convinced people he is up to the job.”

That is the Mummy/Daddy political divide in a nutshell. The question is, which do voters prefer in a time of economic and social strife? Warm caring and compassionate? Or tough, harsh and uncompromising? Conventional political wisdom says that people prefer “Daddy”, yet at the moment Ed Miliband’s leadership ratings are better than Cameron’s – or to be more accurate, less bad…(all major party leaders have incredibly negative ratings – a plague on all your houses indeed).

To keep himself in the game in the run up to 2015, Ed will want to maximise his strongest polling advantage over Cameron – caring about ordinary people and being “in touch” – whilst making inroads into strong, decisive and “up to the job”.

But how do you project that you’re up to the job when you’re in opposition? That’s an age old problem. Let’s save that for a another post and another day…

* - if you’re feeling a bit uncomfortable about the nuclear family/heteronormative nature of this metaphor, join the club, but alas that’s how it’s known.

20120719-085253.jpg

Related posts:

  1. David Miliband: Can’t yet tell whether Cameron EU policy is meaningless or dangerous
  2. Cameron “presiding over a shambles” on petrol, says Miliband
  3. PMQs Verdict: David Cameron looks very lonely indeed
  4. My begrudging admiration for David Cameron
  5. Huge majority believe that Cameron is “Out of touch”
  • http://twitter.com/KulganofCrydee Kulgan of Crydee

    What do voters prefer? Strong & decisive leadership.

    • Redshift

      At what point does ‘strong & decisive’ just become twattish though? You need to get it right if you are going to play that role. Cameron hasn’t and his ratings in those areas have slid significantly as a result.

    • Ericcusack1

      Strong and decisive are not words that spring to mind when I think of Cameron!! arrogant, out of touch, patronising, uncaring!!! I could go. You don’t have to lose the common touch to be strong, and certainly you don’t have to stop listening to others to be decisive. I want leadership that can make decisions based on the needs of the whole of a nation, and is prepared to listen when concerns are voiced  and isn’t so hell bent on destroying lives for the sake of political dogma.

  • Cartographile

    Out of every ten people, one of them thinks Dave is tougher than Ed and of them thinks that Ed is nicer than Dave. It might even be the same person.  The vast majority of them don’t think of Dave as tough or Ed as nice.

  • http://twitter.com/joshfg Joshua Fenton-Glynn

    I think addressing the ballence comes down to having a stronger team around him, I think Balls economic sure-footedness helps  address some of the economic leadership issues

  • Emma

    Isn’t this a bit sexist? Who’s to say women (or mothers) can’t be strong and decisive? And who’s to say that men can’t be ‘warm and compassionate’? This is an unnecessary analogy.

    All you need to say is that Ed Miliband needs to show some leadership and stop hanging onto the apron strings of the Coalition.

  • http://www.youngfabians.org.uk/blog/ Louie

    Remember also that our political system is very different from America’s. Parliamentary elections mean that leadership effects play out differently over here than in the states. The bad reputation the Tory party is getting as a whole means Cameron’s ratings alone may not save them 

  • Redshift

    Erm, strange time to bring this up however. Cameron’s ratings for decisiveness and strength have been on a negative slide ever since January. It could well be the case that in a few more cock-ups time Miliband will creep ahead – much will rest on Cameron’s conference performance…

    • aracataca

      Let’s hope so.

  • Martin Yuille

    The next election won’t be on whether Miliband or Cameron are up to the job. 

    The Tories will repeat their 1992 approach: You can’t trust Labour.

    So Labour needs to get in first, get in hard and repeat until election day: “Can you trust the Tories? No you can’t.” From the start of their 2010 campaign – when Cameron hugged a husky in the Arctic – they have said one thing, done another and then bodged it.

    Labour needs some negative campaigning. Starting now. And not stopping until its manifesto is published.

    Can you trust the Tories? No you can’t.

    • Mr 0a

      The Tories were quite clear about most of their policies in their manifesto though. On the big issue – tax and spend, and by extension cuts – Labour would be ill advised to go down a route that is against public opinion:

      http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/voters-will-reject-tax-rises-labour-think-tank-warns-ed-miliband-7953494.html

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mike-Homfray/510980099 Mike Homfray

        If that really is public opinion, then the Tories will win the election. Our task is to shift public opinion

        I don’t want power if it means carrying out current policies

        • Mr 0a

          To be fair I think the article misses the space Ed can work in – that overall taxation should be at similar levels but that it’s fair for the rich to contribute a larger share.

          I do wonder if this will prove to be like the Tories “efficiency savings” – something pretty much everyone agrees with in principle, but something that never materialises into cold hard cash we can spend on services or tax cuts.

          As Hollande has shown there is space for this kind of populist rhetoric.

          • Martin Yuille

            Thanks for all your thoughts… Mr oa, treborc, Mike Homfray and John P Reid.

            In response. Yes what Labour’s election manifesto contains will be important. Its importance is as a tool for Labour to win the election.  It may refer to Labour’s values and philosophy. But such references won’t win the votes that Labour needs to win.

            What Labour needs to do NOW to set the tone for the manifesto is to show that you can’t trust the Tories.

            Today’s news that the IMF doesn’t trust the Tories on the banks or the economy is a case in point.

            Can you trust the Tories? No you can’t. 

          • treborc

            Sorry that all wrong I do not trust labour, welfare reforms the idea that we needed ID cards we needed DNA data bases, we needed thousand of CCTV. Oh yes the waste of time on 90 day detentions

            Housing bubble no building of social housing.

            can you trust labour after thirteen years simple put nope. Will I be voting simple put Nope.

            The idea if labour was in power now we would be better is a laugh.

            The battle now for labour and the Tories will be battle for an ever dwindling electorate and the big boys the floating voter.

            labour is poor the Tories are worse not a hell of a promising world is it

          • Martin Yuille

            Hi Treborc: You sound pretty disillusioned. But the fact that you are joining in this discussions says you are not 100% disillusioned. Maybe you can ask yourself the question whether the Tories have learnt from their past errors better than Labour has learnt from its past errors?
            For example, can you trust the Tories any better today on the NHS than you could have in 1992?

          • treborc

            We will see, I will be sitting at home at the next election and that’s for sure.

            The next election will be full of the political games which was played by  Blair and Brown over welfare.

            I’m not forgetting what labour tried to  flog off, the NHS, Royal Mail, Post office and I have heard very little from Miliband except some words about the NHS, would he then bring back the bits they did flog off I doubt it.

            I think the public are more about needing to know not guessing where labour is going, and  right now I do not think Miliband knows himself.

            Miliband needs to get out and tell us, so far all I heard is about a bloke knocking on a door seeing a disabled person knowing he  could work, he came out with new labour rhetoric about a lot, he then came out with his own view on  Squeezed middle class, hard working people, he just does not sound labour, and I think he is more new labour then he really believes.

          • Martin Yuille

            Sounds to me either like you never want to vote again ever (like in North Korea) or you want to change the Labour Party. So get stuck in and argue your case.

          • Alan Giles

            Martin, I am not ill or disabled myself, but seeing what Freud/Purnell and Freud/Smith and Grayling have done to make peoples lives worse, I am totally disgusted (I joined the party in 1963 and left a few years ago). Similarily when I read misty eyed obfuscations like that written about Remploy by Asato yesterday, it angers me because it reeks of bogosity.

            You say “get stuck in and argue your case.”, well, with all due respect when I and others have done that on LL we get right-wing supporters (one or two of whom are barely literate) abusing us calling us “trots” (sic) “hard left”, “Marxist” etc.

            I think Labour needs once and for all to decide where it stands, stop all this “broad church” tripe (usually dished up by the right-wingers and Progress types), and make up it’s mind – do we have traditional Labour values, or are we now merely a cheap copy of the Coalition – if the latter I have no desire to be the Methadone substitute for the real thing.

          • Martin Yuille

            I agree: I dislike name-calling (e.g. “Trots”… but also “right-wingers”). 
            We need to debate strategy and policy. 
            And I say that the best strategy today is for Labour to say YOU CAN’T TRUST THE TORIES

        • treborc

           The problem is after 13 years of using the public sector to lower unemployment, of telling people most people who are disabled or sick are cheats and scroungers including Miliband at conference, labour going to have a hell of a job  telling people that the public sector are now good great or needed.

          The scandal of the G4S taking over the running of the police would have once been major  battle ground, the sell off of the NHS would have had millions marching, but labour did a brilliant jobs of saying privatisation was good now   nobody gives a dam

      • Flook

        They weren’t specific about much. No mention of the “bedroom tax” for example or expecting terminally ill people likely to live for more than six months to look for work or decimating the armed forces by making soldiers, sailors and airmen redundant en masse. It make you wonder if everything that the Coalition has done had been announced before the last general election whether David Cameron would ever have become Prime Minister in the first place.

    • john p Reid

      in my consittuency of Hornchruch and Upmisnter ,when the Tories were winning the elections of 79-87 we came third with the Tories on 80% of the vote even in 2005 where Labour got 34% of the vote ,not that much different from what we got in the Thatcher victors in Upminster we still got 35% of the vote, the fact was that some working class people are right wing tires and they only ever voted labour for the first time in 97 and 2001 because we accepted the roes were right on union, tax rates etc

    • treborc

       That’s  just politics all parties have done this from way back you attack the others past or previous performance, the problem for labour will be the next Manifesto with Purnell working on it and Cruddas who is not a lefty, it’s going to be interesting

  • http://twitter.com/leepster Lee Webster

    “* - if you’re feeling a bit uncomfortable about the nuclear family/heteronormative nature of this metaphor, join the club, but alas that’s how it’s known.”
    Err, yes I am, and I don’t think we need to perpetuate bad metaphors to make political points.  You’re right this buys into myths about nuclear families and hetereonormitivity, but it also promotes dangerous stereotypes of gendered roles, that frankly, we need to get past.  The article has some interesting points, but the use of sexist metaphors only goes to undermine those points and make me (and potentially other women) feel alienated. 

    • jaime taurosangastre candelas

      “…myths about nuclear families and heteronormitivity…”

      What myths?  Heterosexuality is normal, at least in a statistical sense, and the OED confirms that as the prime sense in definition.  So too are nuclear families in the UK, although less emphatically. Going a level deeper, I would be very surprised if you can discover reputable research and evidence that disproves the idea that after millennia of human development as hunter gatherers, providers and nurturers, and division of essential tasks, humans are not pre-disposed according to certain characteristics by gender, and while nurture reinforces this, it will not all be changed by some policy from the Labour Party before 2015.

      I suspect your use of the word “myths” is to advance an agenda you hold that has no factual or scientific basis. The reality is, if you aim to achieve such a change, it will also take several millennia.

      Please note, “normal” in a statistical sense, which allows for homosexuality to be statistically abnormal, without implying any moral judgement.  So do not think that I pass judgement from a social sense.

      • http://twitter.com/mistyblulabour dave stone

        “it will not all be changed by some policy from the Labour Party before 2015.”

        I wouldn’t be too sure about that, Jaime. Ed’s got a trick or two up his sleeve and I reckon there’s more than a few that are in for a surprise.

        Re the normative malarky – I think you’ve got hold of the wrong end of the stick. We’re not talking social science here, but metaphor. You may find it helpful to think of this as a discussion focusing on literary criticism, or the part of literary criticism most concerned with politics: rhetorics.

        Best to think of metaphor as something that refers a thing which it is not – in politics this becomes a means to an end, a way of effecting change in a particular direction, conceptually at least. So if a metaphor doesn’t proselytise for the desired outcome then, in politics, as Lee has claimed, it is a bad metaphor.

        • jaime taurosangastre candelas

          @ Dave Stone,

          I would be very surprised if Ed is able to change millennia of human evolution, in Britain at least, by 2015.  That would be some remarkable achievement, and I would put all of my scepticism about his preparedness to be our Prime Minister aside and happily vote Labour if he pulls it off.  Someone in Liverpool would have a fit at the thought of me doing so, but even so, he would be worth it.  After that, world peace, an end to hunger and a complete re-ordering of society would be mere little nibbles to achieve. Forgive me however if I feel that is slightly unlikely!

          As to your metaphor, it is quite late and I confess to feeling tired.  But I cannot really decipher your sense.  These metaphors are challenging, it appears.  I believe what you mean is that “the metaphor did not fit Lee’s agenda, so it is useless in a political sense for his ends”.  To which I would reply “it was not a metaphor, it was a statement of the blindingly obvious which Lee’s agenda is trying to ignore”.

          • http://twitter.com/mistyblulabour dave stone

            “After that, world peace, an end to hunger and a complete re-ordering of society”

            Forward!

            Re metaphor: Mark describes it as a metaphor in his lead-off so it’s only appropriate and polite to address this matter as it is presented rather than use rhetorics in an attempt to adapt it to your own political agenda which, doubtlessly, won’t be shared by Mark nor Lee (a she, btw) who are both LP members.

          • jaime taurosangastre candelas

            I apologise to Lee.  

            I suffer from the occasionally socially embarrassing mindset that I make up my own mind.  Just because someone describes something as “so” does not mean that I follow suit.  God gave me a brain, an education and an enquiring and sometimes sceptical mind.  Practice in emergency medicine has increased that:  I rarely accept at face value any statement, because most are degraded in credibility by being made by people who either have an agenda, are not compos mentis, or who do not have the proper intellect to make any reasonable distinctions between this or that (this last category unfortunately encompasses around 90% of normal people, and 99% of internet commenters).  I have respect for Mark, but suspect he has an agenda.  

            And having made up my mind, I stand by my opinion. There’s clearly a risk that I have got it completely wrong, but in what matters (family and work), so far and touching wood, I have been vindicated.

          • http://twitter.com/mistyblulabour dave stone

            “I will no doubt be eased out of any position of responsibility”

            Chin up, old boy. I’m sure it will never come to that.

          • jaime taurosangastre candelas

            I hope not.  But life sometimes gets in the way of plans.

            I am about to try a private venture.  I have been contracted by a Phillipines company to produce a series of DVD lectures on Emergency Theatre procedures – a total of 12 2 hour films, for the benefit of doctors in training in the Phillipines, most of whom wish to work in the USA or the UK after qualification.  The production company is very confident of success, but I have no experience in film marketing.  The fee will however very nearly pay off the mortgage, and I have employed a lawyer who tells me that there is very little personal liability.  No filming has taken place yet, but we start in September and it should be concluded by Christmas.

          • derek

            Good luck! remember on the chemical solutions it’s shaken not stirred. Part one! act one! role…Q!!!!!!! 

          • jaime taurosangastre candelas

            Thank you Derek,

            The first 4 films are on the standards:  breathing, bleeding, fractures and burns management.  I have already sent out some “sketch board” graphics I made on my Mac computer (this takes me a long time, as I am not an expert with the graphics programmes).  

            The next 4 are on chemical interactions around alcohol and drugs, cross-contamination, neuro-depressors and non-identified poisoning (they want something on snakebite and antivenins there, which I am seeking advice upon), and electrical injuries beyond burns.  The final 4 are on triage, management procedures, mass casualty management, and social interaction.

          • derek

            All the best! I’m sure your be a big hit.

            I’ve been doing a bit of reading up on Joey Barton’s eradicate diabetes thoughts, cinnamon, advocado, beef’s, olive oils, berries red and blue and a number of other natural edibles can lower blood sugars without the aid of metformin,glucophage and insulin.I’m kind of concerned by the high numbers of diabetics and the international cost of producing drugs that seem only to cover the symptoms.I’m thinking diabetes has been around for a long time but high fibre diets over carbohydrates diets might have been a factor in the disguise of the disease.Preventative measures with healthy eating habits seem to be a better way to go than feeding those large drug companies more profits to mass produce more really ineffective drugs.

          • jaime taurosangastre candelas

            @ Derek,

            I am not an expert in that area – you need a dietitician and a gastro-enterologist if you want a very good answer, but what you say appears to be broadly correct.  The problem with diabetes is that it covers two main – and different types of condition:  an inability to produce adequate insulin, and a lack of ability to benefit from what insulin should be doing for your body.  It is the latter that is most affected by changes of diet, so if you have the former type of diabetes, dietary changes will have little effect.

            But in general terms, we in the West have for social reasons adopted a sub-optimal dietary regime. Basically, we have our meals the wrong way around.  We should have a big breakfast with lots of fast energy-releasing foods, a medium lunch and a light dinner of slow-releasing energy foods.  It is what we are optimised for.  For quite a few years I actually ate in that pattern, and felt fantastic (but I was also young and fit, so that helped).  Now, we have our main family meal at the end of the day because it is the time we are all together, but it is not ideal to consume large amounts of proteins shortly before sleep.

            There is an English saying I have heard:  “Breakfast like a King, lunch like a Prince, and dine like a pauper”.  I do not know the origin of that saying, but in digestive terms, it is very healthy advice.

  • Leonking295

    Your disclaimer suggests that you see promoting the nuclear family as something of a negative thing. I come from a single-parent background, never knowing one of my parents, and I disagree. All evidence shows that nuclear families are better for children – it shouldn’t need to be said that Labour should do what evidence shows is best for people.

  • timsharp1

    I think the points about promoting sexist metaphors are well made but essentially the article is about what ‘management style’ works best and I think that the evidence on this is that it depends on context with more crisis driven situations requiring stronger central leadership and in less crisis driven contexts democratic leadership tends to produce a higher quality product. 

    • Leonking295

      Sorry, but the nuclear family is not sexist – what an absurd comment to make.

      • timsharp1

        I can’t imagine you were actually replying to me as I said nothing of the sort

  • Mr 0a

    Following on from yesterday’s article, it’s interesting to note how the Tory perceptions of David Cameron compare to Labour perceptions of Miliband:

    Is up to the job

    Tories on Cameron 86
    Labour on Miliband 49

    In touch

    Tories on Cameron 65
    Labour on Miliband 68

    Has clear sense of purpose

    Tories on Cameron 70
    Labour on Miliband 54

    Trustworthy

    Tories on Cameron 78
    Labour on Miliband 64

    Decisive

    Tories on Cameron 63
    Labour on Miliband 44

    Strong

    Tories on Cameron 73
    Labour on Miliband 42

    Competent

    Tories on Cameron 84
    Labour on Miliband 65

    Cares about ordinary people

    Tories on Cameron 63
    Labour on Miliband 80

    Cameron beats Miliband on every measure with their own party base apart from in touch/cares about ordinary people.

    I wonder if this is because Tories that don’t like Cameron are quick to declare a non-Tory voting intention (UKIP?) leaving only Cameron supporters to fill the Tory voting intention, whereas Labour supporters are more tribal and identify with their party even if they don’t like their leader?

    Will these Tories come back and remove the Labour poll lead when push comes to shove?

    I find it surprising that Cameron is still held in such high regard with the Tory party given the recent split in the party.

    • Flook

      How’d Ed do with the Tories? Did they rate him higher or lower on the various measures than Labour supporters? Could Miliband’s problem with Party members be that he isn’t regarded as being Labour enough to pass muster?

  • Mr 0a

    PS Can’t you find a nicer picture of Ed; give him some more pixels, the poor chap.

  • Ibid

    Why are you copying patronising rubbish from American politics?

  • aracataca

    It’s true that there’s been a widespread perception that Labour equals touchy feely qualities (some regulars here would vehemently disagree with that, but that’s another story) whereas the Tories represent realistic, tough, competent responsibility – in short, the kind of chaps and chapesses who’d get us out of a crisis.

    Well, the present incumbents have certainly shot that reputation to pieces, haven’t they?  If there is a silver lining to living under this dysfunctional and cruel government, it’s that they’ve completely blown their reputation for competence.  It’s Labour who now look like models of cool competence – in comparison to this lot, at any rate.

  • aracataca

    I’d just add that the clownish incompetence of the present government didn’t entirely surprise me, since I remember that the last Tory government was shambolic as well.  

    The difficulty for Labour is always that the Tories have the mainstream print media (and also the BBC) by the short and curlies, so it’s difficult for some people to separate myth (ie Tories as competent) from the reality (Tories as dogmatic and shambolic idiots).   

    There comes a point, however, when the Tories alienate so many people that they will no longer be able to fool the people.  So far they’ve alienated sections of society that had previously tended to favour the Tories – such as small business people, the police, the armed forces, teachers, parents of youngsters hoping to go to uni, officials in public services, and so on.

    • Mister Michael

          “So far they’ve alienated sections of society that had previously tended to favour the Tories – such as small business people, the police, the armed forces, teachers, parents of youngsters hoping to go to uni, officials in public services, and so on”.

      Teachers ?  I don’t think so.

  • http://twitter.com/ElliotBidgood Elliot Bidgood

    Is this really a phrase used in real-life US politics, or did the West Wing writers just dream it up for that episode where Santos’ advisors get all flustered about it? I’ve never heard it actually used outside of that context. Anyway, I won’t deny that the dynamic it refers to is real, both here and in the States. And as an aside: no, there’s nothing wrong with the nuclear family, quite the opposite. Whether “mommy problem” is particularly sexist is a bit more your-mileage-may-vary, but I wasn’t that offended.

    I’d point out that in a respect, Ed is perhaps doing worse than the numbers show, however. As you said, the “mommy problem” consists of the Dems/Labour being seen as caring, but not neccesarily strong. The fact that Ed’s relative strength is that he’s seen as in-touch and caring isn’t really even much to do with him, it’s just a function of that fact that almost any Labour leader is seen this way (and almost any Tory leader isn’t), so it’s not even something he deserves all that much praise for. The job of a good Labour leader is therefore to make sure they are seen as strong, something which Ed desperately needs to learn how to do, fast.

  • Owen Edwards

    Mark, I’m just going to pretend that asterisked footnote didn’t happen.

Latest

  • News Ed Miliband statement on Woolwich murder

    Ed Miliband statement on Woolwich murder

    In a statement this evening, Ed Miliband said: “This is a truly appalling murder which will shock the entire country. “All of my thoughts are with the family and friends of the victim. “The British people will be horrified by what has happened in Woolwich. They will be united in believing that this terror on our streets cannot be allowed to stand. “The Labour Party will offer the Government our complete support in establishing the facts of what happened and [...]

    Read more →
  • News Equal marriage – How every Labour MP voted at every stage of the bill

    Equal marriage – How every Labour MP voted at every stage of the bill

    By Kirstin Hay

    With much jubilation, the 3rd reading of the same-sex marriage bill passed the House of Commons last night, carried through on the weight of Labour votes, but how have individual MPs voted on this bill? In the 2nd reading of the equal marriage bill, Labour MP voting totals were: 217 – for 22 – against 14 – non-voters For the third reading 192 – for 14 – against 49 – non-voters —————————————————————- 192 Labour MPs who voted yes on 3rd reading (9 didn’t [...]

    Read more →
  • News Ed Miliband’s Google Speech – full text

    Ed Miliband’s Google Speech – full text

    Speaking at the Google Big Tent event Ed Miliband said (please note, Miliband spoke without notes, but this is the text released by the party): It is great to be here inside the Google Big Tent. My sons Daniel and Sam think I do a very boring job, so they will be excited when I tell them I appeared along with the “Killer Robots” and the “Captain of the Moonshots” at your sessions. I’d like to start by showing you [...]

    Read more →
  • Comment Unions The chutzpah of Peter Mandelson – and why we need more trade unionists

    The chutzpah of Peter Mandelson – and why we need more trade unionists

    By Mark Seddon

    Lord Mandelson, or Baron Mandelson of Foy, as he should be referred to since he was packed off to the House of Lords by a small cabal, recently accused the Unite union of ‘manipulating selection procedures’ in the Labour Party. He went on to warn Ed Miliband that this ‘stores up danger for a future Labour government’. Irony has always been in as short supply as sheer chutzpah has been plentiful with old Mandy – but since his faithful disciple [...]

    Read more →
  • News Cameron says no more EU-turns – Media roundup: May 22nd, 2013

    Cameron says no more EU-turns – Media roundup: May 22nd, 2013

    Subscribers to our morning email get the best of LabourList – including the Media and blog round up – every weekday morning. If you were a subscriber you would have already received this in your inbox. You can sign up here. Cameron says no more EU-turns “After one of his most difficult weeks since becoming prime minister, David Cameron put in a polished and assured peformance on the Today programme this morning. The most notable line came on Europe, with Cameron [...]

    Read more →