±«Óãtv

I blame jet lag. Somehow it's easier to say that than to put it down to stupidity.

No sooner had I stepped off a plane from my holidays than I found myself answering questions on Test the Nation - ±«Óãtv One's national IQ Test. I was on a panel last night with a footballer, a soap star, a stand up comic, a sports presenter and a TV historian. The producer's conceit was obvious - the three graduates (Clare Balding, Dan Snow and yours truly) were being pitched against the non-grads (John Barnes, Louisa Lytton and Joe Pasquale).

At the end of the test they invited a clairvoyant to predict who'd come out top. I could see it coming - "he's bald, he's four eyed, he's interested in politics .....it must be Nick Robinson". Dear reader, the clairvoyant was exposed (one good side effect) and I was humiliated.

The viewing public were given the top three scores. Since there was a tie for third place that left just 2 of us exposed as dunces - Snow and Robinson. I've promised Dan that the news of which of us actually came last is something I will never reveal - it's a promise that I will never break if only to protect his pride.

My conclusion after this is to stick to the day job. So, after Laura's very able filling in for me, I'm back and normal political blogging will resume shortly.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• - What's this?

The German leader, Angela Merkel is making her first during Gordon Brown's premiership. (You might remember it's not the first time they have met as leaders - Gordon Brown raised a few eyebrows by choosing to go first to Berlin as PM, rather than across the pond to visit George W Bush).

I'm told the two leaders are discussing health matters in the developing world. But what is not officially on the agenda, and what at the beginning of the summer Gordon Brown didn't really fancy talking about either, is the draft EU reform treaty.

As we reported on the Ten O'Clock News a few weeks ago, the Conservatives claim it is literally a 'cut and paste job' of the former EU constitution. Yes, the one Tony Blair a referendum on. But it never got to that, because French and Dutch voters threw it out so EU leaders had to go back to the drawing board coming up with the draft that was agreed in June.

Gordon Brown and his ministers still insist there doesn't need to be a referendum because the new treaty is substantively different to the constitution. Their case isn't helped though by the succession of prominent EU bigwigs who have queued up to point out just how similar the documents are.

Emboldened by this, the Conservatives are keeping their foot on the gas, demanding again today that a public vote go ahead.

And now, Gordon Brown faces similar demands from the left. Four unions are tabling motions at the upcoming TUC conference for a referendum to take place, although this isn't so much about the referendum as political tactics.

The RMT, Unite, Unison and the GMB's desire is to push the government into opting in to the charter of fundamental rights. The TUC as a whole hasn't yet made its mind up on taking a position on this. But union whispers tell me there are plenty in the movement who want to make as much noise about this as possible to force Gordon Brown's hand. If they got what they wanted on that, unlikely I suspect, their demands for a referendum might miraculously disappear.

But the PM, who after all, said he wanted a new style of government, with more consultation of 'the people', could face a tough break explaining to critics on the left and the right who are ramping up their demands for the public to be allowed a say.

With critics on both political sides pressing hard in this debate, it can't be that comfortable in the middle.

PS. I'm about to leave Westminster for the probably-not-sunnier climes of the Highlands. As I do so, it's interesting to note that the issue at stake today is one on almost the first day of the summer.

Blogging activity will resume in early September on Nick's return. If you'd like to read an archive of my posts, click here.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• - What's this?

More confusion for the Conservatives today. After disputes over their claims on potential department closures at district hospitals yesterday, the plot thickens.

One hospital in Telford received an apology from the party today for it being included on their list. Except, in the last hour there has been an '' from Andrew Lansley, the shadow health minister, saying he stands by the claim and saying the apology shouldn't have been made after all.

That's after what the party described as a 'clerical error' over naming the Altrincham General when they meant to name the Trafford. And after an apology made by a shadow minister over the inclusion of one of his local hospitals in the lists that was clarified during the day yesterday. The same MP, Henry Bellingham, then later said he meant to apologise for there not being more of his local hospitals on the list. That's not to mention the complaints from some of the hospitals themselves.

Confused? I certainly am. Certainly the party has had a lot of attention for this campaign and as some Conservative bloggers have pointed out, it has kept the issue of potential downgrading of departments in district hospitals in the news for longer than it might have been otherwise. But I think that is a pretty optimistic view of the saga. And Central Office is clearly frustrated by events.

This was meant to be a tough campaign that took the fight to the government. It's ended up as a row between the Conservatives and hospital trusts who objected to the claims and to the fact that they were not all contacted before information about them was put into the public domain. The muddle over the facts has damaged the credibility of the message. That doesn't do much for Mr Cameron's efforts to re-anchor his party to the centre ground or calm the nerves of some in the party who've had doubts about his leadership.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• - What's this?

As predicted, Wendy Alexander, the sister of the very same Douglas Alexander who is in the Cabinet, will be the Labour Party's , and the first woman to take on the job.

She was not contested by any other MSP for the post, and received 41 nominations for the post - only five MSPs didn't put her forward. Maybe they all wanted jobs in her shadow team! Although it seems no other candidate had the stomach for the job. Maybe we should not be that surprised.

It is of course an important role, yet the pressure on her will be enormous. Labour are well behind in the polls in Scotland at the moment, on Gordon Brown's home turf. Unless he is to face embarrassment of losing many seats in Scotland next time round, Ms Alexander has to pick up the party's fortunes. And after their first defeat at the ballot box there in decades, egos have been dented.

She is well respected and no doubt has a lively intellect. Yet some worry she may be short on the ability to communicate easily with the public. With the verbose, and currently popular, nationalist First Minister Alex Salmond, she faces a tough opponent.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• - What's this?

David Cameron was seeking to show he was back in charge, and back on top of the agenda by what he said was the threat to 29 District General Hospitals in England. Certainly, the NHS is reorganising lots of their services and thousands of people around the country are involved in campaigns to try to make sure that departments don't disappear from their local hospitals. There is public anxiety out there as I saw in Worthing yesterday where the health authority is consulting on plans that include the possible downgrading or transfer of some departments.

But as I wrote yesterday, the party presented varying amounts of proof for each individual site on how certain any closures were. Some are just at the consultation stage, some possible proposals leaked by e-mails. Few seemed set in stone.

In the last two hours, one of David Cameron's own MPs has expressed his unhappiness at how the party used the information. Henry Bellingham, Norfolk North West MP has apologised unreservedly to worried staff and patients at his local hospital, the Queen Elizabeth in King's Lynn, for the fact that the party claimed maternity services there were at risk when he says they are not.

He says the party should have contacted the hospital's chief executive before putting the information out and that "there are lessons to be learnt for opposition parties and governments" about making such claims.

It's also emerged that the Altrincham General, where the party's dossier claimed maternity and A&E were at risk, has neither a maternity unit, nor an A&E, but a minor injuries unit.

The party has just admitted that they made a mistake on that one, and meant to refer to Trafford Hospital. It's not yet clear what the situation is there. But they are standing by their other claims, including the hospital in King's Lyn where they say a consultation that could include the closure of units is still going on.

David Cameron himself has just that he stands by the document, apart from that mistake. He says every one of the other hospitals mentioned is under some form of consultation or threat of losing departments. He says also there are probably other places that the party could have included, and he wants the government to clarify what will happen to them. The problem with that is that while of course, the Department of Health centrally will be involved in these decisions, they are supposed to be decisions that are made locally, not by central government.

Now clearly there are big reorganisations going on in the health service. And that potentially includes the closure or downgrading of maternity and A&E units in district generals around the country. Naturally that would be a big concern to patients and staff in that area, and a political headache for the local MP. But any party making claims that are then directly disputed, especially by one of their own MPs, is on shaky ground.

Yesterday was meant to be David Cameron's comeback. As party leader he has devoted a lot of time and effort to the health service and no doubt there is a lot of political mileage in any potential closure. It's known in Westminster as a seat-loser for constituency MPs if a hospital shuts on their watch. But run a campaign like this with inaccurate information and any politician is asking for trouble. Mr Cameron is out visiting more district hospitals this afternoon. I wonder if he now wishes he was somewhere else.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• - What's this?

It's still August, just, but David Cameron is back at work today and clearly determined to try and get back on top of the agenda. Today, he's to try and guarantee the survival of 29 district general hospitals. The Conservatives claim that these are under threat of losing their A&E departments and, or, their maternity units.

Now looking through the dossier of evidence of planned closures that they've provided us with, it varies in how certain the plans are to go ahead. Some - for example, the Royal County in Surrey - has a consultation about to start, but no decision has yet been made. At another - the Queen Mary in Sidcup - the potential closures are not official but proposals have been revealed in a leaked e-mail. So they are not always talking about departmental closures that are set in stone.

Even though a significant quotient of expert opinion believes that it does make sense to downsize some local hospitals and concentrate resources on bigger sites that can provide a whole range of specialist care, local communities are often prepared to fight tooth and nail to keep their district generals intact. And campaigns can spring up with the first whiff of potential cutback or closure.

David Cameron knows this and wants to associate himself with the vigour and energy of these local grassroots activists. Politically, it could be very fertile ground. There is an independent MP , and an MSP in the Scottish Parliament (thanks ) former MSP , who both fought and won election campaigns based on the battle to keep hospitals open. After a tricky few weeks, and talking tax last week, this fight on health service territory refocuses Mr Cameron's party in the political centre.

I'm off to Worthing Hospital later in the day where a local campaign is up and running. When Mr Cameron visits some district generals in the area I hope we'll hear more about what he would do about them - and we'll see how the Labour party responds to his claims.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• - What's this?

So the Conservatives ARE talking about tax - and very extensively too. John Redwood's on making the economy more competitive is detailed and wide ranging. And there's plenty in there for voters who feel as if they are being squeezed financially, as well as Conservative supporters who have been desperate to hear more on tax.

The idea that will probably find most resonance with middle income voters is the idea of scrapping inheritance tax. Given the astronomical rises in property prices in recent years, more people, even though it's still a small number, only 6% of us, pay the tax. Many think it's unfair, and it could be just the thing to pull in the floating voter. Suggestions of reducing corporation tax could be a magnet for people who run business.

But will the Conservative leadership take these proposals on board? They have welcomed them pretty warmly. George Osborne, the shadow chancellor, says he "likes the look" of the ideas. More to the point, he, one of David Cameron's closest political friends, appeared on the stage alongside Mr Redwood at the report's launch and was involved in putting the document together.

But remember David Cameron's caution so far in discussing tax. Despite all the talk in recent days, there is no sign of a shift away from the position he and Mr Osborne have taken since he took over the party's leadership - tax cuts should only take place if the economy is rock solid.

Of course, some Conservatives believe that tax cuts are what create a successful economy in the first place. But the work done in this report so far hasn't shifted the leadership's view that cutting taxes are something to aspire to in the long term. They remember what happened at the previous election when they made promises of specific tax cuts. But of course Labour will do their best to try and paint the Conservatives as pushing the same old tax cutting message.

The test will be whether Mr Cameron can communicate a subtler promise, and whether it finds favour with voters. He believes in lower taxes in the long term, but won't guarantee he'd introduce them in a hurry. Against our expectations, tax could now be a battleground in the next election, but despite it feeling familiar, it won't be precisely the same old fight.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• - What's this?

So Jack McConnell is off. The outgoing Scottish Labour leader has been expected to go sometime since the party's bruising encounter at the election a couple of months ago. So as Labour north of the border comes to terms with the SNP being in charge they find themselves looking for a new boss in Edinburgh.

Whoever it is, they have a tough brief. The SNP are riding high in the polls, and Alex Salmond is working hard to push forward his long term agenda of moving the country towards a referendum on independence.

But will there be a fight for the job? Don't put money on a contest. It's not certain, but the most likely outcome is that Wendy Alexander - yes, the sister of a certain Douglas Alexander, one of Gordon Brown's staunchest cabinet allies - will become the Scottish Labour leader unopposed.

Does it matter outside Scotland? Yes, if only for this reason. One of the things that could hold Gordon Brown back from calling an autumn election is Labour's unpopularity in his home country at the moment. If the polls in Scotland don't shift, going for a ballot in a few months could mean him presiding over the loss of dozens of seats in his own back yard.

The opposition parties delighted in embarrassing Gordon Brown when the Lib Dems pulled off a victory in Labour's Dunfermline stronghold, right near his constituency, not so long ago. Losing a good number of seats to the SNP at a general election would be a much bigger political humiliation.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• - What's this?

I come from spending much of the day with the Environment Secretary Hilary Benn. We had been granted special access to visit the new animal disease control centre in Guildford with him, to talk about the progress of efforts to combat the disease. Nearly 200 staff, vets, animal inspectors, trading standards officers, even police, from all over the country, have gathered there to do their utmost to stamp it out.

It's an impressive operation and clearly the minister enjoyed meeting and talking with the staff. So much so, that his team were having a hard time trying to keep him to his timetable for the day. Things at the centre seemed to be run with military precision. The staff are clearly all working very hard, but they seemed positive about their progress.

But later, once we'd arrived back in London the mood changed. News of a potential case of the disease, in Kent, more than 60 miles away from the original outbreak, broke. A meeting was scheduled for the minister with farmers, vets, and other groups affected. I understand they had been planning to talk about ways of moving towards easing the movement ban. But instead, top of the agenda , another potential case. An outbreak, if confirmed, in Kent would be serious indeed because it would show efforts to confine the disease had failed. Somehow it would have got through and if it had been able to travel that far, where else might it turn up?

And in the past 20 minutes another possible outbreak. This time in Surrey, but outside the original control area that was set up around the first case. Defra, and most of all, farmers around the country will hope fervently that neither case is proved to be foot and mouth. And it's important to remember that it's in a sense MORE likely that suspected cases will be found because farmers are on high alert. That said, it's a nervous wait for ministers and those whose livelihoods depend on this disease being stamped out.

In terms of identifying a source for the outbreak - still no news. Hilary Benn told me this afternoon he just didn't know when the results of the tests from the Pirbright labs would be complete. There may never be a conclusive outcome.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• - What's this?

Well almost...

John Redwood wants to ease the burden of red tape on business and cut waste. A out on Friday will promise measures that could save business 14 billion a year. Interestingly, he calls them 'tax cuts' in all but name, despite the leadership's caution in using those words. David Cameron has always hesitated to talk about cutting taxes to the frustration of many in the party.

Memories of the 2001 and 2005 elections when Conservative promises on specific tax cuts were used by their opponents to suggest they'd slash money from public services guided his near silence.

Yet here, the latest in the Tories' policy reviews promises a whole range of measures described as 'tax cuts' that the party would introduce as long as the economy is stable.

Mr Redwood, former minister from the right of the party wants to scrap some health and safety legislation, reduce the number of data protection laws and roll back regulation on the hours we work. He recommends making it easier to make staff redundant, simplify the tax regime, and axe the controversial ±«Óãtv Information Packs. Those are not, in a direct sense, tax cuts. But the report will claim repealing large chunks of legislation could save business billions. That could appeal to many voters - no one likes red tape.

And there's more. , he outlines plans to get the private sector more involved in updating our roads, railways and water system. Mr Redwood seemed robust in interviews, confident that Mr Cameron has read his report and very hopeful that unlike some of the other Tory policy reviews, it will get backing from the leadership.

George Osborne, the shadow chancellor, was involved in drawing up the report, although we're told in terms of its presentation, not its policy ideas. But he is perhaps David Cameron's closest political friend. It's difficult to imagine him not discussing the proposals with the party's leader.

Mr Osborne and Mr Redwood also say if they had to withdraw from some EU agreements to achieve these reforms they would. No doubt these ideas are of the right, and somewhat Eurosceptic. Many Conservative activists will delight in these ideas. These are policy proposals for the party to get its teeth into.

So why do the Labour party look so pleased about it?

Well, government ministers have already seized on the report as evidence that the Conservatives are swerving to the right and abandoning the centre ground where the Tories are arguably most dangerous to them. John Hutton, cabinet minister, said following this route would lead the Tories to 'oblivion'.

Now as I understand it No 10 was delighted when David Cameron the subject of Europe at Prime Minister's Questions a few weeks ago. And I sense the same sentiment in evidence here.

Why? Well it gives them ammunition to make an easy, although some might say predictable, attack. Conservatives talk about tax and Europe, Labour says they're the 'same old Tories'.

They say it shows David Cameron, after a difficult few weeks, has given in to the party's old guard and retreated to familiar conservative territory.

Yet this report has been a long time coming. I'm told it's a detailed and extensive piece of work, certainly not a rush job cobbled together to shore up support for the party leadership after a rough few weeks. They may well strike a chord with many voters.

But the proposals give Labour plenty of ammunition for an attack. The TUC's concerns also allow them to present the plans as a challenge to employees' rights. The report will be published in full on Friday. And the parties are warming up for a fight.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• - What's this?

A-level students around the country have probably almost chewed their fingernails down to the quick by now. Their results are due next week. But today there is chatter round Westminster today that raises the prospect of more change in the exam system.

Sir Mike Tomlinson, the former chief inspector of schools, back in October 2004, that academic and vocational qualifications be united in a single diploma, more like the International Baccalaureate. That would have included scrapping the 'gold standard' A-level.

But his idea was shelved - he believes, in part because ministers were afraid of the political consequences of getting rid of exams. Today though, he sounded a note of optimism for his reforms, citing a change in mood and a 'willingness' in government circles to revisit the idea of one overall qualification for teenagers.

After announcing a , and looking again at , can we detect a sniff of another potential Brown u-turn? Estelle Morris the former education secretary gives weight to the idea, saying that Gordon Brown will look at the issue.

The part of Sir Mike's reforms which did survive, the vocational diploma, is due to be introduced next year across England. Academics have some doubts about the qualifications, but the plan is they will count towards university entrance. They'll cover subjects like construction, engineering, and IT. But could it be that once the diplomas are up and running, academic subjects in the shape of A-levels, are incorporated too?

The schools department tells me categorically there are no plans to get rid of 'the gold standard' A-level as they call it. But they make it clear that ministers are determined to end the divide between academic and vocational education. So it's not a bad bet that ministers will consider eventually bringing A-levels into the diploma system. Without being seen to scrap the decades old exam, that would bring academic and vocational education together.

So no u-turn yet, but a hint of what could be seen in future as a rather neat solution. Watch this space.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• - What's this?

The eagle-eyed Sun readers among you may have spotted a reference to me and my colleage from Sky News in the paper's Westminster column, The Whip, this morning. John Craig is congratulated for being heard on the ±«Óãtv microphone I was using in Downing Street reporting for the Ten O'Clock News, while he was on air for Sky at the same time.

Of course security outside No 10 is very tight, so there is limited space for us to set up our cameras. So, as often happens, on Tuesday night our two camera crews and sound men were set up cosily right next to each other.

Us humble correspondents do speak at different volumes and despite the wonders of modern sound technology, and the fact that I am no whisperer, ±«Óãtv viewers may well have been able also to hear John talking to Sky viewers in the background.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• - What's this?

After a day of waiting, within the next half hour we should have the initial findings of the Health and Safety Executive's report into the foot and mouth outbreak. And we're due to hear from the prime minister about the situation - he's to speak in Downing Street, making a statement as the report is published. The political stakes are high.

If the report suggests the infection came from the government lab, that could cause ministers serious political damage. Farmers, not traditional labour supporters anyway, will be incredulous and furious that a government agency designed to protect them has caused as yet unknown financial damage. If on the other hand, the report points the finger at Merial, the private company on the site, ministers will be relieved, and the political damage may indeed be contained, as long as the disease can be controlled.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• - What's this?

So the holidays haven't happened. In contrast to , today has been a whirl of activity. Gordon Brown has now cancelled his Dorset holiday. Environment Secretary Hilary Benn returned early from his. David Cameron has delayed his departure. And chief vet Debby Reynolds has just finished a press conference.

The government knows the way it handles the outbreak of foot and mouth disease will be put under the microscope. And Gordon Brown no doubt has bad memories of the criticism the government's handling of foot and mouth attracted in 2001.

So there's activity almost everywhere you look. The prime minister meeting farmers' leaders this morning, and farmers and disease experts in Surrey. The government's emergency committee, Cobra, meeting twice daily since Friday night. David Cameron too meeting representatives from the National Farmers' Union. And of course, people at Pirbright holding their breath for a verdict on whether either of the labs there were the source.

Behind the scenes, Downing Street sources are guiding journalists to focus on Merial, the private lab. I'm told that's where large stocks of vaccine were produced in mid-July. But the firm say they have not found any potential breaches. And the investigations are not complete. So there is still the very real possibility it could have come from the government funded Institute of Animal Health (IAH) next door. Evidence to MPs in both 2002 and 2006 suggested there were difficulties with cash - they said last November they'd been dealing with real term cuts in their funding from Defra.

It does not follow automatically that a breach of biosecurity was therefore more likely. The IAH - just like Merial - say they have all the correct biosecurity measures in place. And Hilary Benn says there have been improvements since then. But it does suggests people at the IAH were working under pressures. Could it be that a government funded lab, that's meant to combat foot and mouth, was the source of the infection? We don't know. And we may never know. I'm told by an official that the scientific tests expected on Gordon Brown's desk tomorrow may not be 100% conclusive.

But what is certain is that if the government lab ends up being confirmed as the source, ministers will face the anger of the country's farmers and thousands of others who live in the countryside whose livelihoods are being affected. On top of stamping out this disease, the government is hoping the source will not be traced back to its own facility.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• - What's this?

We're all going on a summer holiday...

Well I'm not. But things have slowed down at Westminster today. The streets around Parliament are extremely quiet - more or less blocked off due to construction work.

But even if they weren't, today, nearly the only people about would be tourists spending their holidays here, while the politicians spend theirs elsewhere.

The PM has taken the hint, and is starting his family holiday today, in the Dorset countryside. After that, as promised he'll spend some time later in the summer in Scotland, staying at the family home in North Queensferry by the Firth of Forth.

Compared to jetting off to the homes of popstars like his predecessor Mr Brown's holiday plans seem rather frugal. And there'll be no visit this year to his previous holiday favourite of Cape Cod on the east coast of the US.

We're told by Downing Street that he means the deputy-less prime minister will still be in charge although he's on holiday, because he's staying in this country.

David Cameron is still working, the focus on looking in charge of his party, promising today a 'bare knuckle fight' with the government over . But next week he'll be heading off for France, on what we're told is a bucket and spade holiday in Brittany, in rented accommodation with friends and family.

Ming Campbell is ahead in the holiday stakes - he's already had a few days on the island of Tiree off the west coast of Scotland. He's now en route to the south of France for five or six days. I wonder if he got the train? His party's released this morning would certainly recommend that.

Compared to the attention Tony Blair's holidays used to attract the three leaders' this year are pretty low key.

But some politicians are still around and for the many of you who posted your own interesting, and wildly differing thoughts on the EU treaty, I predict more rumblings on that early next week.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• - What's this?

So the official English translation of the new draft EU treaty is (PDF link). The weighty constitution died a death in 2005 when French and Dutch voters threw it out. The government says the new draft is inherently different from the old treaty. Therefore they don't, they say, as they promised for the consitution, need to hold a referendum to approve it. But the Conservatives contend much of it is the same - and that all that's happened is a cut and paste job.

Well much of the text is the same. For example, (PDF link, again) in article 1-46 set out the principles of representative democracy. You'll find that word for word in the draft treaty in article 8a.

But what about some of the more contentious issues?

The former constitution would have created a European foreign minister. In the new document the name has been changed to the high representative - but in article 13a the job description appears exactly the same.

The Tories claim the text is so similar its substance is practically identical, and that 96% of the documents is a match.

William Hague tells me (for tonight's Ten O'Clock News) that he is determined not to let the government wriggle out offering a referendum on what he says is an almost identical document. It could be fertile political ground for the Conservatives - after all Gordon Brown said he wanted a more consultative government.

But is the substance of the two documents actually the same? The same sentence could have a very different meaning in a different book.

Ministers say all mention of a constitution, an anthem and a motto has been removed from the draft. They say what it does is update existing treaties so it can't considered the same. But it's hard to compare the two directly because the draft treaty is a work in progress, not a final complete document.

Europe Minister Jim Murphy tells us the Conservatives are completely wrong and that the entire constitutional approach has been abandoned. He says this is about reforming the EU to make it work better for the British population.

The old document may be gone but debate continues about whether its spirit lingers on in the draft. Negotiations aren't expected to produce a full final document until October at the earliest. Expect sceptics and europhiles to be battling it out until for months to come.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• - What's this?

Just a thought on those early election rumours floating around again, since the leaked document from Lord Gould was splashed on the front of .

Should we really take them seriously tonight? Nick blogged a while back that in his view, the notion of Gordon Brown going to the polls as early as autumn was tosh. A conversation I've just had with a very senior Labour source suggests strongly that's still the case. And there's a simple reason why.

Labour may be ahead in the polls for now, and Gordon Brown has been giving the impression at least of announcing lots of policy. But that third essential ingredient you need to fight a campaign, lots of cold hard cash, is missing. Until that begins to change, don't think about even penciling in a date for an election within the next year.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• - What's this?

Watching from a distance, we pored over the words they chose, the body language, even why George Bush took Gordon Brown for a spin in Golf Cart One. But what did the White House press corp's finest make of the prime minister's first visit to the United States? Could he match the affection in which much of American public opinion held his predecessor?

Not quite. The tone of most of the American newspapers, networks and blogs is respectful. But are not falling over themselves to praise Gordon Brown.

The Huffington Post, one of the leading liberal blogs says there is 'no kinship' between the Bush and Brown compared to 'the kinetic Blair'. , talking from the other side of the political spectrum says there was 'no daylight' visible between the two men on George Bush's priority, fighting terrorism.

But they note that Gordon Brown went way beyond discussion of things Mr Bush could do anything about, by setting out a long term agenda that will involve the NEXT president of the US, not the man who was standing at the Camp David podium beside him.

There's relief reported in many outlets that Gordon Brown said there were 'duties to discharge' in Iraq - no sign of decision on pulling out troops in Iraq before the US General Petraeus reports in September.

But although, as reported, the two men worked to present a 'united front', many American commentators remark on a 'coolness' between Bush and Brown - very different to the 'George' and 'Blair' relationship of the last few years. No doubt the men both know the importance of being strong allies, but US observers don't think there's much chance of them becoming best buddies.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• - What's this?

So Ali Miraj, whose extraordinary of David Cameron I first reported on the Ten O'Clock News on Monday night, is struck off the list of approved candidates for the Conservative Party.

The view from the leadership, his behaviour was completely unacceptable and he therefore should be punished.

Now there is no chance of him being selected to fight any constituency for the party at the next election. But he knew that would be the case when he opened his mouth on Monday night for his scathing attack on what he termed, David Cameron's "complete lack of judgement". He told me, "I know this means I'll never be an MP now but I felt I had to speak out."

So if he knew he would never have a chance of being selected, did the party actually need to suspend him? Was it smashing a nut with a sledgehammer?

Ali Miraj was not a big name in the party. A 'new Tory' and someone formerly close to David Cameron yes, but by no means a major player.

Indeed, had his criticisms not come on the same day as comments from Lord Saatchi, arguably they might not have been much reported.

The story was beginning to die down yesterday afternoon when the party then announced his suspension. So why reignite the row? Didn't that just draw more attention to Ali Miraj's criticisms?

Certainly, there was real anger that an obscure former parliamentary candidate could, in the leader's office, make clear his ambitions for a peerage, be turned down, and then march out and brief journalists like me, and circulate what was clearly a pre-prepared and damning critique of the leader. So the party wanted to make it clear they wouldn't put up with it.

But this isn't just about Mr Miraj's behaviour. David Cameron's authority has been under attack in recent weeks.

First the over grammar schools, then two disappointing , then his decision to to go to Rwanda while much of his constituency was under flood water. So the Miraj episode presented itself as the perfect chance for him to assert that authority, to look in charge, and tell members of his own party, 'Don't mess with me'.

David Cameron knows there are plenty of people in the party who have doubts about the direction he's taking them in. But by suspending Ali Miraj they have all been told, keep those doubts to yourselves.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• - What's this?

Most of the politicians are on holiday, and after his encounters with the US president, so is Nick.

So for the next few weeks I'll be tending to the blog. I've been working in Westminster since 2003, becoming a political correspondent via ±«Óãtv Two's Daily Politics, Newsnight and other encounters with ±«Óãtv News across the country over the years.

Highs? Nail-chewing moments as the results dripped in while I was reporting the last US Presidential elections from Washington DC. Talking our way in to a prison for the first ever live outside broadcast for the ±«Óãtv from behind bars.

Lows? Spending weeks filming the cull of thousands of animals during the foot and mouth epidemic. Being caught in a hailstorm during a live broadcast at an old coal mine wasn't so much fun either.

I have never however, as some assume, worked full-time in my native land, Scotland. So sporadic trips to Holyrood Parliament, including telling the story of the May election for the 10 o'clock news, have to suffice.

I studied history at Edinburgh and at Georgetown University in Washington DC, indulging an interest in politics stateside. But Westminster goings on are plenty to keep me busy. Parliament may already have packed up for the summer but with Gordon Brown keen to keep the political momentum, and the Conservatives determined to try and get it back, don't be surprised if this turns out to be a very political summer.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• - What's this?

±«Óãtv again. Phew. Just time to pack my bags and head off again on the family holiday. Never would have guessed that I would be heading off with an ultra confident Prime Minister Brown soaring in the polls - and a stricken Mr Cameron sliding in them. Still, the Autumn is another country.

In my absence Newslog will not rest. I am handing it over to my highly capable colleague Laura Kuenssberg, who will chart the summer of action ahead.

If like me, you're off for a rest - enjoy. If not, stay tuned...

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• - What's this?