ConservativeHome's ToryDiary

All but The Mirror may desert Labour

Newspaper endorsements are not as valuable as they once were but the editorial endorsements of a newspaper are still actively sought by politicians - not least because they tend to influence the overall news priorities of that newspaper.

Over the last 24 hours I've been speaking to journalists within all of Britain's main daily newspapers (and The Economist) - at least two on each - and speculating about their likely endorsements at the next election.

What we are likely to witness is Fleet Street making a mass defection from Labour to the Conservatives.

Only The Mirror is sure to endorse Labour.

Fleet Street's four swing voters - the FT, Economist, Times and London Evening Standard - are likely to endorse the Conservatives although no final decisions have been taken.

Commercial and ideological reasons mean that The Guardian and Independent will stop a long way short of endorsing the Conservatives but are likely to continue to give David Cameron a fairer hearing than they have given any previous Tory leader.

More details below the graphic.

The survey of likely endorsements will be hugely encouraging to the Tory machine.  Andy Coulson has coordinated targeted wooing of all of Britain's newspaper editors and proprietors.  David Cameron's office was in touch with the new owner of the London Evening Standard within hours of him assuming control of the title.  CCHQ are encouraged by the thinking across Fleet Street but assume that they will still have to work hard to ensure that each individual deal is sealed.  Most newspaper editors won't make a final decision until much, much closer to polling day.

David Cameron to be first guest on The Sun's internet-based radio station

Press Gazette is reporting that David Cameron will be the first guest on The Sun's new internet-based radio station, launching on 20th April.  The Gazette writes:

"Sun Talk is being heralded by the paper as "The Home of Free Speech" and will be hosted five days a week from 10am to 1pm by columnist Jon Gaunt. Gaunt hosted a mid-morning radio show on TalkSport until November this year, when he was suspended and then fired for likening a councillor to a "Nazi" during a discussion on whether smokers should be banned from being foster parents. As an internet-based radio station, Sun Talk will not be subject to regulation by the Ofcom Broadcasting Code – which includes sections on "harm and offence" and "due impartiality"."

I wish this initiative well.  Britain needs a more gutsy broadcaster.  Sky News has more or less the same worldview as the BBC News Channel (and not at all like Fox News although both are owned by Rupert Murdoch).  The lack of regulation of the internet should allow 'Sun Talk' to be more partisan.  A right-leaning broadcast outlet was the goal of the short-lived and probably over-ambitious 18DoughtyStreet Talk TV (of which I was an early part).  I'm delighted that David Cameron is supporting The Sun's endeavour by being its first guest.  More here.

Tim Montgomerie

Is Simon Heffer paid according to the number of rude words he can use against David Cameron in a single column?

It's probably the angriest article he has written since dumping all over Boris Johnson.  Here are some extracts from Simon Heffer's critique of David Cameron's Davos speech, already online -

"I understate my case to say that it is one of the most shallow, ignorant and vacuous speeches by a supposedly serious politician that I have ever read."

"It is a typical, all-things-to-all-men, Cameron speech."

""People are angry with capitalism," he says, showing again that what drives him is not an attachment to principle but an obsession with focus groups."

""Markets are a means to an end, not an end in themselves," he says, in one of the clichés that pepper this speech and reveal the collection of small minds that were at work on it ("the stakes are high" and "the devil is in the details" are two more depressing examples)."

"The Davos speech terrifies for what it says about the Tories' approach to the government in which they may quite soon find themselves. Yet it is also meaningless, for the obtuse and infantile understanding Mr Cameron and his friends appear to have of the operation of capitalism would soon be corrected by global realities."

"Sovietising capitalism out of existence, as Mr Cameron proposes, is nowhere near the answer. Until he works out what the answer might be, he would do us all, but especially himself, a great favour by resuming his period of embarrassed silence."

So long as traditional capitalism has defenders as personally offensive as Simon Heffer - and it does need defenders - it really is in poor shape.

Tim Montgomerie

Does The Telegraph have an infiltrator?

Look at the caption below the photo...

The link (until it's corrected).

The end of Brown's "strategic relationship" with the Daily Mail

The Press Gazette notes an interesting confession by the Daily Mail's Political Editor Benedict Brogan. Ben, speaking in a personal capacity, comes close to saying that his newspaper has been played by Gordon Brown:

"Brogan said that although Tony Blair was seen by many as "the master of spin", he believed the Gordon Brown spin machine was "even more formidable than the one attributed to Blair". "When the time comes to write a record of Gordon Brown's time as chancellor, I think the record will show that Gordon Brown was phenomenally good at building strategic alliances with certain newspapers, mine included, and certain journalists and using that to his advantage," he said."

From the look of today's Mail front page, the "strategic relationship" is over.  The juxtaposition of a grinning Brown with the £1TRILLION debt figure is particularly strong.

The Chief Leader Writer of The Times disowns The Times' coverage of George Osborne

Earlier today James Forsyth noted that The Times had not written a leading article on 'Yachtgate'; a story it had splashed on its front page for three successive days. 

Back from a short holiday the Chief Leader Writer, Danny Finkelstein has written that the whole thing had been a "non scandal".  His newspaper has given a "non scandal" a lot of coverage.  Daniel, a personal friend of Mr Osborne, is quite right, of course, to be so dismissive of his newspaper's behaviour.  This has been a bad week for The Times - reminiscent of its late 1990s campaign against Michael Ashcroft.  Headlines and stories worthy of The Mirror have crept on to its pages.  The big question is 'Why?'.  We weren't aware that Tom Baldwin had returned.

9.45pm: Daniel Finkelstein has replied.

The Sun: Cameron is ready

The last three leaders in The Times have been positive toward the Conservatives. And tomorrow another Murdoch title, The Sun - a newspaper which backed Boris for Mayor - will declare that David Cameron is ready.

Read The Sun Says here.

Why Fraser Nelson is Britain's best centre right commentator

He was your choice for writer of the year and Fraser Nelson's blog over at The Spectator this morning confirms (again) that verdict:

"The Scorched Earth policy has begun. The FT has a hugely significant story – that the Treasury is “working privately on plans to reform Gordon Brown’s fiscal rules” which would “initially allow for increased borrowing”. In the vernacular, Brown has realised that if the Tories win the next election the he is now spending with Cameron’s Gold Card – every by-election bribe, every union sellout will be funded by borrowing with the bill sent to D. Cameron Esq. Cameron will have to tax us to pay for what Brown is today spending."

Read Fraser's whole blog here.

Has Dacre given up on Brown?

On Tuesday the Mail decided that Jacqui Smith wasn't up to the job: How sad in these deeply worrying times that we are saddled instead with the vapidity of Home Secretary Smith.

Yesterday the Chancellor was dumped: Fiddling while the economy burns.

And now this:

George W Bush and David Cameron hold second meeting

It's very unusual for George W Bush to meet opposition leaders but America's President did meet David Cameron for thirty minutes earlier today, during his London visit.  That's a good sign of (a) the White House's awareness of the Conservative Party's ascendancy and (b) Much improved Tory-GOP relations.

William Hague, George Osborne and Pauline Neville-Jones accompanied the Conservative leader during at meeting at the US Ambassador's London residence.

CCHQ has released the following statement from David Cameron: 

“I had a very productive meeting with President Bush, taking forward some of the issues we discussed when we met in Washington last November.
 
I raised the situation in Zimbabwe, and the pressing need to do everything possible to prevent Mugabe from stealing the election. It is extremely important to make sure that independent observers have full access to the poll.  We continued the discussion we had before about the importance of standing up for free trade.
 
I underlined the commitment of the Conservative Party to Britain’s role in the NATO-led mission in Afghanistan. I also raised with the President my concerns about the need for improved co-ordination of the civilian effort of the ground, and greater clarity and unity of purpose between the different military chains of command – in particular between the NATO-led International Security assistance Force (ISAF) and Operating Enduring Freedom.”

***
Over the weekend we twice blogged about The Telegraph's mischief-making re David Davis (here and here).  The Telegraph's take on the Bush-Cameron meeting, from Rosa Prince: Green David Cameron undermined by George W Bush meeting.  A headline worthy of The Independent/ Guardian/ Mirror.

Related link: ToryDiary report on the first Cameron-Bush meeting, last November.

The Telegraph makes more mischief

Yesterday we noted how The Telegraph's most senior political journalists twice reported that David Davis had been excluded from the party leadership's 9.15am strategy meeting.  What The Telegraph wrote was simply false and interviewed by Andrew Marr this morning, David Davis confirmed it was false.  Unfortunately The Sunday Telegraph makes more mischief this morning.  This is the headline that appears on today's front page:

But if you read what Liam Fox actually said to reporter Melissa Kite he did not say that David Davis had been selfish.  These are Dr Fox's words so you can judge for yourself whether Ms Kite and the newspaper have been fair:

"Many of us feel very similarly to David but his way of highlighting it, calling a by-election, was a personal decision, it wasn't something that was taken in consultation with the shadow cabinet.

I think there's still a fair amount of mileage in the battle in Parliament at the moment. We've still got a fair amount of fighting to do, in the Lords and in the Commons."

Asked what he would have said to him if he had been consulted, Dr Fox replied: "I think the reason he wasn't consulting colleagues is he didn't want to be talked out of it. He made up his mind.

"David has very strong views. He's decided that's how he would like to highlight it. Obviously that's his personal decision and, as David Cameron said, it's a courageous thing to do because you never know what will happen in a by-election. But it was not a collective decision."

Dr Fox, a one-time rival of Mr Davis in the 2005 leadership campaign, which saw Mr Cameron elevated, appeared to suggest that Mr Davis had better get used to life on the back benches if he were to re-take his seat. "When he comes back to the House of Commons, I imagine he will want to continue pressing on these issues, issues of personal liberty being eroded."

Asked whether it would not seem odd to have such a big hitter on the back benches, Dr Fox said: "No. One of the things that's been a great tragedy in recent years is the lack of senior politicians on the back benches. I think Parliament actually benefits from having people of experience on the back benches, rather than it just being a training ground for young, ambitious newcomers."

Asked whether he thought the decision selfish, Dr Fox replied: "I think it's clearly a decision he made for himself. It is evidently not something I would have done. It wasn't something that was decided collectively, so David takes responsibility for that action."

Liam Fox made it clear that David Davis made the decision alone but he certainly did not use the word "selfish" and, in our opinion, did not even imply that he thought David Davis was acting selfishly.  [Liam Fox was speaking to The Sunday Telegraph in advance of an interim report from Frederick Forsyth on defence matters - reported perfectly fairly here by Sean Rayment].

This is not the first time that Melissa Kite has been guilty of sloppy and sensationalist journalism.  She recently speculated that Oliver Heald should be demoted from the shadow cabinet even though he isn't in the shadow cabinet.  Last year Alan Duncan accused Ms Kite of "shoddy" journalism after she had written a trouble-making story about David Cameron wanting to demote William Hague.  A little earlier she had tried to derail the launch of Iain Duncan Smith's Breakdown Britain report with a spurious story about the former party leader's view of gay parenting.  If a Tory wants to be interviewed for The Sunday Telegraph they'd be wise to deal with the newspaper's PolEd, Patrick Hennessy.

The Telegraph makes mischief

"Every morning at nine, Mr Cameron meets key aides and shadow ministers including William Hague, Michael Gove and George Osborne. Mr Davis has always been put out that he is not invited."

Those two sentences appeared in yesterday's Telegraph, from Robert Winnett.  Quite damaging on the face of it but not true.  We happen to know that David Davis attended the morning meeting as often as George Osborne.  When David Cameron and William Hague are both away David Davis actually chaired the meeting. 

Not content with getting it wrong once the Telegraph's Political Editor Andy Porter repeats the idea again this morning:

"Davis was irked that despite his seniority, he was rarely asked to attend the Tories' regular 9am strategy meetings. Instead, the close cabal is made up of George Osborne, Michael Gove and William Hague; chiefs of staff Ed Llewellyn and Catherine Fall; and communications chief Andy Coulson. Steve Hilton, the Svengali figure credited with rebranding the Tories, used to attend, but recently his appearances have been limited, as he prepares to move to California."

The Telegraph would be on stronger ground if it wrote about the closeness of David Cameron and George Osborne, for example.  (Only natural given Mr Osborne's chairmanship of Cameron's leadership bid).  They didn't do that but have made very specific and more troubling accusations about David Davis being sidelined from this key meeting.  We know that The Telegraph is not writing the truth.  We can't believe that CCHQ hasn't told The Telegraph that it's untrue.  Why The Telegraph persists in writing it is the real question.

10am, Sunday 15th June: David Davis, interviewed by Andrew Marr, confirmed that he did attend the 9.15am strategy meeting.

3pm, Sunday: Andrew Porter has now blogged on these morning meetings.

Will The Sun give Mackenzie full backing?

Surprisingly, there's barely any mention of Kelvin Mackenzie's candidacy in The Sun today, despite it being an idea supported by Rebekah Wade and Rupert Murdoch himself (it started off as a dinner party joke). Mackenzie - who failed to unseat a Conservative at the last local elections - said he was 90% certain of standing.

Davis' confirmed rivals so far include the OMRLP, the Miss Great Britain Party and a local fruit-n-veg trader. Whether The Sun throws its weight behind its former editor or not, the Conservatives - especially Davis - have lost favour with the paper recently. One story it does cover today is Dominic Grieve's remarks shortly after 7/7:

"The new Shadow Home Secretary sparked fury after the 7/7 attacks – saying he understood terrorists’ anger. Dominic Grieve said a month after the London bombings – which killed 52 people – that he found it “totally explicable”. And the barrister claimed the Iraq War was partly to blame. Details of his offensive remarks re-emerged yesterday in a fresh embarrassment to David Cameron."

As we noted yesterday, "one of the first things that Mr Grieve needs to do is rebut Labour suggestions that the party is soft on terrorism".

83% of Conservative MPs voted for 22 weeks (80% of Labour MPs voted against)

Research by the BBC for Radio 4's World at One programme reveals the significant party divide hidden behind last night's free votes on the need for fatherhood and for a lower abortion limit:

• 92% of Conservative MPs backed Iain Duncan Smith's call for fatherhood to be recognised when decisions about fertility treatment are being made.  82% of Labour MPs were opposed to such a recognition.
• A very similar divide was clear when it came to the unsuccessful attempt to reduce the time limit for abortion.  83% of Tory MPs favoured a lower limit and 80% of Labour MPs opposed it.  Tory MP after Tory MP gave speeches last night in favour of increased protection for the unborn child.

If the Conservatives win the next election and if new MPs vote in similar proportion to the way their existing parliamentary parties vote then it is very likely that a tougher regime for abortion will be introduced.

The only clues to the next Conservative intake's views on social issues come from a November 2007 survey of candidates by ConservativeHome.com.  Abortion wasn't addressed but euthanasia and gay adoption were.  Candidates were divided on a right-to-die for very sick people but largely in favour of Catholic adoption agencies being free to deny placing children with gay couples.

'Fleet Street' is becoming friendly again

The Sun backed him earlier this week and, today, The Times endorses Boris Johnson:

"The Conservative candidate is an enormously intelligent man. His eccentricities are, it should be remembered, basically harmless and inoffensive whereas Mr Livingstone's various attempts to summon up the political spirit of 1968 and cosy up to political thugs and merchants of hate most definitely are not. The thrust of Mr Johnson's policy suggestions on crime, transport and planning are sensible. His candour is welcome. His energy, enthusiasm and appetite for the role are much needed, particularly as London's economy heads into a testing few years. He is alive to Londoners' very deep concerns about drugs, stabbings and gangs, disappointment about persistent poverty and housing shortages, as well as their frustrations at traffic jams, empty bendy buses and an Underground network that is held to ransom by Bob Crow and the RMT."

There will be real delight inside Team Cameron that two Murdoch-owned titles have 'voted for' a Conservative candidate for the first time since the creation of New Labour.  Although many dispute that newspaper endorsements are of much electoral value - and Cameron won the Tory leadership despite much early hostility from right-wing newspapers - there is much more benefit to be had from positive coverage on the news pages, which can often flow from changes in editorial stance.

Team Cameron can already rely upon the endorsement of The Express and The Telegraph.  The Telegraph would like more boldness from David Cameron (ConservativeHome's position, too) but the only newspaper that backed the Tories in 1997, 2001 and 2005 will back the Conservatives again.

What would you like to see happen to The Telegraph's Comment pages?

Many congratulations to Iain Martin.  Iain has been appointed the new 'Head of Comment and Community' at The Telegraph.  This involves responsibility for overseeing comment on the Daily and Sunday newspapers plus all of the community blogging.  He's a great guy and we wish him luck.  We certainly hope he prospers - there have been, we think, eight comment editors at The Telegraph in as many years (and the inconsistency has been very evident).

Iain Martin won't be short of advice over the coming weeks but let's use this thread to get the advice going.

The temptation will be to dumb down - like the rest of the newspaper.  Our principal hope would that that would be resisted.  We'd like to see The Telegraph's Comment pages become the home of British conservatism (note the small 'c').  They should be pages alive with discussion about reclaiming powers from Europe, how to improve our nation's schools, how to lower the tax burden and about distinctively conservative solutions to poverty.  They should be articles linked to campaigns.  The internet is dissolving the walls between what is a newspaper, a campaign organisation and a political party.  Let's see The Telegraph lead the way through those changes.  In short Telegraph Comment should play the role that The Wall Street Journal's 'Opinion Journal' has played for the American conservative movement.  For years The Telegraph was the Conservative Party's in-house journal.  With party politics in retreat and single issue politics growing, it should become the home of small 'c' conservative thinking.  Give the Barclay Brothers something to be proud of - a jewel in the crown of campaigning opinion journalism.

The thought-leaders of British conservatism should regularly populate the comment pages: David Green, Allister Heath, Jill Kirby, Douglas Murray, Ruth Lea included.

Use the Comment pages to engage with the culture wars.  Peter Whittle of the New Culture Forum would be perfect for that task.

Other advice to Iain: Please try and get Mark Steyn back and see if you can poach James Forsyth and Fraser Nelson from The Spectator.

In other media news: Jenny Scott is leaving The Daily Politics to become Head of Press at the Bank of England.

Is The Sun cooling towards bullying Brown?

Earlier this week Irwin Stelzer - 'Rupert Murdoch's representative on earth' - gave an interview to The Guardian in which he signalled a growing warmth of The Sun (and News of the World) to David Cameron.

The Murdoch-Brown-Cameron relationships have been taken up by Roy Greenslade today in his 'Media Analysis' column for the London Evening Standard.  Mr Greenslade quotes a number of evidences for believing that The Sun etc might have stopped spinning for Brown:

• The Sun's strident campaign on the EU treaty including yesterday's page lead approvingly quoting Labour MP Gisela Stuart and her startling suggestion that Brown might be behaving dishonestly;
• The Sunday Times' criticisms of Labour's moves on Capital Gains Tax;
• The Times' leaders yesterday attacking Brown on tax and Miliband on the EU Treaty.

I understand that there is also growing resentment within the Murdoch press - and at other media outlets - of Brown's bullying nature.  I've sometimes been concerned that the Tory operation hasn't been on the phone enough to senior political correspondents but Brown and his operatives are seemingly overdoing the contacting.

Editors of national newspapers have had the Prime Minister on the telephone on a number of occasions some days.  It makes him look too political (he's supposed to be running the nation after all) and his operatives are getting a reputation for being bullies.  Bullying works better when you are on the up (Mandelson before 1997 in particular) - it doesn't work so well when you're tanking... when you've given cosy exclusives to rival journalists (Brown to Marr on Chicken Saturday)... and when the press pack has reason to doubt your honesty (Brown: 'I wouldn't have gone to the country if opinion polls were predicting a 100 Labour majority!').

Mirror journalist joins Telegraph's political team

The Press Gazette is reporting that Rosa Prince, a political journalist at The Mirror for the last ten years, is to replace Brendan Carlin as a political reporter for The Telegraph.  Brendan Carlin is leaving for the Mail on Sunday.

The Telegraph's recently-appointed political editor Andrew Porter said: "I am delighted Rosa is joining The Daily Telegraph’s political team. She has an excellent track record and will add a new dimension to the team."  'What new dimension?' will be a question on the minds of many Tories who have worried about The Telegraph's friendliness towards Labour in recent times.  ConservativeHome has been worried about The Telegraph's editorial direction for some time (see here, here and here).  Earlier this week Guido also voiced his concerns at goings-on at what he dubbed 'The Daily Labourgraph'.

It's the News of the World wot stopped it?

More details of the ICM/ News of the World poll:

• 77% disapprove of Labour's record on immigration.
• 63% of its law and order performance.
• 62% disapprove of Labour  on tax.
• More than half (52%) give Labour the thumbs down on the NHS.

The NotW leader offers advice to David Cameron:

"The Tories' alluring promise of stamp duty and inheritance tax cuts has resonated with a public tired of overbearing taxation and weary of not being able to get on the housing ladder. We have long believed that a party of smaller government, less bureaucracy and lower taxes is a winning party."

Earlier this evening, on Channel 4 News, George Osborne insisted that the tax announcements were only a part of the reason for the Tory fightback.  He also credited David Cameron's speech - which the NotW notes "had a considerable impact" - and the overall message of the party on the NHS and education.  What is clear and welcome, however, is that lower taxation is back at the heart of the Conservative pitch.

BROWN CANNIBALISED HIS OWN PRINCIPAL ADVANTAGES:

The Mail and Telegraph fail their readers (it's Cameron's job to change that)

The Sun is at its best this morning.  Not only does its front page attack Brown for his dismissive 12 second mention of the EU Treaty (and its own high voltage campaign for the referendum we were promised) but its Sun Says column exposes the hypocrisy of yesterday's speech:

"In Bournemouth, he promised to abolish child poverty. Yet under Labour the gap between rich and poor has grown.

Mr Brown warned foreign drug dealers and gun-wielding thugs will be kicked out of Britain. But where to? Not to the EU or anywhere they might be in danger. The EU would probably send them back.

He vowed to give power to matrons to rid wards of hospital superbugs.  But this is the third time of promising. Meanwhile, thousands have needlessly died because staff won’t wash their hands.

We are to have the most modern health care and access to doctors and hospitals of our choice.  Yet after doubling NHS spending, Britain still has the worst survival rates for cancer and strokes in Europe.

“Suffer the little children to come unto me,” said Mr Brown in one of his frequent biblical quotations.  Yet Britain is close to the bottom of the western world league table as a place for children to grow up."

In stark contrast, The Mail and Telegraph choose almost identical headlines... "Brown targets Tory heartlands" splashes The Telegraph and The Mail's front page headline is: "Brown woos the Tory heartlands".  Both highlight the fact that Brown used the words British and Britishness 71 times (The Telegraph's count) and 81 times (The Mail's count) as if this excuses a speech that will amount to a relentless  expansion of state welfare.  It's true that both newspapers publish leading articles that are critical of Brown's 63 minute performance but the news coverage is much more important.  Why didn't The Telegraph choose "Brown's promises will raise taxes" as its headline?  Why didn't The Mail attack Brown for his not-too-coded attack on David Cameron's support for two parent families?

Ten years ago - at the start of the Brown-Blair years - newspapers could have been forgiven for taking Brown's promises at face value but it's unforgivable now.  Every Brown Budget contained sleights of hand.  Labour's failures on crime, immigration, Europe, inner city renewal and the environment could all have been heavily featured but that blue background seemed more interesting to these two once clear-headed newspapers.

A large part of their reluctance to attack Gordon Brown is probably rooted in their lack of enthusiasm for David Cameron.  That is the Conservative leader's main task in Blackpool next week.  He has to enthuse the Conservative media and the Conservative base.  He needs to show that there is a real alternative to Gordon Brown's stealthy undoing of Thatcherism.  Until the next election becomes a real choice I don't think enough people will be more than half-hearted in their resistance to Gordon Brown.

2.15pm: Fraser Nelson blogs that Gordon Brown "spent ages at the Telegraph party".

What's going on at The Telegraph?

On each of the last three weekdays the newspaper formerly known as The Daily Torygraph has been causing big headaches at CCHQ.

On Friday it gave massive attention to a YouGov opinion poll - a lot of the data for which was already a week old.  That week had included the energetic Cameron offensive on crime and social breakdown.  The Telegraph talked of a landslide Tory defeat.

Yesterday The Telegraph gave Gordon Brown celebrity treatment on the back of an interview he gave to the newspaper.  A front page splash was accompanied by a two page spread by new political editor, Andrew Porter.  That spread included large pictures of a laughing Gordon Brown and a very prime ministerial portrait shot.

Today's Telegraph has given headline coverage to Michael Ancram's untimely intervention.  A leader in today's Telegraph - 'Tories must rediscover their core principles' - concludes: "What is at stake is more than the next election: it is the survival of the Conservative cause itself and the values that it embodies."

The next election is not a referendum on David Cameron.  It is a choice.  A choice between a Conservative leader who is beginning to get his message right and a Labour Prime Minister who has increased tax to record levels, presided over the defeat in Basra and denied people a vote on the EU Treaty.  Why is The Telegraph giving Mr Brown so much comfort?

Related link: Cameron cannot win without The Mail, Telegraph and Express writes Nick Wood in his new Spin Wars column for ConservativeHome.

8.30pm update: Patience Wheatcroft has resigned as Editor of The Sunday Telegraph (Guardian).

News International boss says Brown "formidable" and Cameron "clever"

In a rare interview in September's Esquire magazine Les Hinton, the executive chairman of News International (owners of the Times, the Sunday Times, the Sun and the News of the World), said that the next election will be "the first time we've had a contest since 1992" and that it is "impossible to say" who will win it.

He said that "the next year will show that Brown has been underestimated and my guess is that he will turn out to be formidable." Adding "Brown is a formidable intellect. So is Blair, but he had the ability to be a bit more folksy - which Gordon is learning."

On David Cameron Les Hinton said "Cameron has made some horrible misjudgements but is still a fresh, eager, clever man."

Les Hinton is Rupert Murdoch's right hand man in the UK, he was a 15 year old copy boy on the Adelaide News when he met a 28 year old Rupert Murdoch. Whether the views he expressed are his bosses we do not know but they are certainly observations worth noting from a former journalist who runs some of Britain's biggest newspapers.

The Mail praises Brown's "return to decent values"

All of the papers are reporting that Gordon Brown has killed off Tony Blair's supercasino plans.  The Mail can barely contain its delight:

"To his huge credit, Gordon Brown is turning his back on the big-money interests that held his predecessor in thrall and is signalling that Britain's first supercasino is dead in the water.  Admittedly, Blair's wretched gambling policy had already become a farce.  Only weeks after Manchester was awarded the licence to run this vast new opportunity to exploit the weak and vulnerable, the House of Lords threw out the proposal - and with it, plans for 16 smaller casinos.

But that doesn't alter the significance of what Mr Brown had to say on the subject yesterday.  He doesn't repeat Downing Street's arrogant claim last March that the gambling industry is still 'very much alive', despite the Parliamentary vote.  He acknowledges frankly that there is 'no consensus' in either the Commons or the Lords.  He knows most voters don't want a supercasino.  And unlike Mr Blair, he is listening."

Gordon Brown's friend Paul Dacre may have been positive about IDS' marriage report yesterday but today's leader shows that The Mail's affection for the new Prime Minister remains strong.

David Cameron has attacked the manner of the supercasino u-turn - announced at PMQs in response to a question from a Labour backbencher.  The Conservative leader said it contradicted Brown's declared wish for a return to Cabinet government: "Suddenly the Government's policy is torn up on the sort of whim of an answer at Prime Minister's questions."  I'd prefer the Tories to simply welcome the u-turn and the abandonment of a supercasino that Hugo Swire did so much to successfully oppose.

Big welcome from centre right press for IDS' report

The traditionally right-of-centre newspapers give a warm welcome this morning to yesterday's policy recommendations from Iain Duncan Smith.  Although there is some discussion of the breadth of the report, the main focus is on the promises to help families.

Daily Mail (not online): "For ten years, Gordon Brown has presided over a tax and benefits system that not only destroys incentives to work, but positively encourages parents to live apart, while penalising those who stay together.  Mr Cameron's determination to redress that balance not only makes good sense for Britain; it makes good politics for the Tories too.  If he has the sense to match properly costed policies to his brave words, he'll find he's on to a vote-winner."

Daily Telegraph: "The outcomes for children raised by two parents living together are far better than for those raised by single parents, and couples are far more likely to remain together if they are married rather than cohabiting... This is clearly a sphere in which Mr Cameron feels comfortable and to which he can bring sincere personal conviction. It may well be his key to a successful opposition strategy."

The Sun (not online): "For the first-time, the Tories have carved out vote-winning territory beyond the reach of New Labour.  They promise to use the tax and welfare system to reward marriage... A stable and happy marriage offers the best family environment for children... Now - instead of suggesting we pay more for our booze, museums and cheap flights - the Tories are backing marriage.  And that has to be a good thing."

Daily Express (not online): "David Cameron is right to set a political course that encompasses tax breaks for married parents.  Marriage should be encouraged because children thrive when they grow up in stable, two-parent families.  Labour's welfare state tinkering has led to parents lower down the income scale being much better off if they split up.  That cannot be right."

Leaders in The Guardian and Independent are critical of the marriage recommendations although The Independent is impressed with much of the report: "This voluminous report is for the most part admirably free of preconceptions, and contains ideas that would deserve consideration by a government of any complexion."

David Cameron writes for the Mail about his commitment to marriage.

Will Brown choose Harman or Dacre in the great marriage debate?

The Tory-Mail relationship hasn't been great of late so there'll have been a few smiles within Team Cameron at this morning's Daily Mail front page splash...

The Mail's enthusiasm for Iain Duncan Smith's likely recommendation that action is taken to reduce the disincentives to marry within the tax and benefits system will be a test for Gordon Brown.  Our new Prime Minister has courted The Sun and Mail ever since he set his eyes on Number Ten.  He will be concerned that he may lose Paul Dacre if he goes too hard against the Tory marriage policy although Harriet Harman et al will be pressing him very hard to do so.

This is how today's Mail leader column concludes:

"Duncan Smith's report is a welcome challenge to political correctness. Though some of his proposals may prove contentious - for example, swingeing taxes on alcohol to fund treatments for drug addicts - his case for strengthening family structures is compelling.  As David Cameron says, mending Britain's 'broken society' is the biggest issue of our times. It will be instructive to see how other parties respond."

Ms Harman's political correctness means she despises any hint that one form of family structure is usually better for children than any other.  That political correctness forces her and her ideological Labour colleagues to ignore the evidence that poverty is almost certainly unbeatable if public policy does not support two parents and marriage.