The leader of the Liberal Democrats picks books that explore human experience and interpersonal relationships. He will be talking about his own book, “Why I Care: and why care matters”, at the Oxford Literary Festival on Friday 27 March.

Middlemarch

George Eliot, 1871

Reading “Middlemarch” shifted my perspective on what it means to be “good”. Eliot shows that being a kind person isn’t about grand gestures. Instead, she writes about the importance of small, simple, everyday actions to remind the reader that they have the greatest impact on others.

Enduring Love

Ian McEwan, 1997

This was a humdinger. By turning a freak ballooning accident into a nightmare stalking situation, McEwan left me reflecting on the fragility of relationships and the unpredictability of the human mind.

Waterland

Graham Swift, 1983

This novel tells the story of two East Anglian families divided by class but connected by a dark secret. As a history lover, this was right up my alley. Swift shows how we are shaped by our past and can never truly escape where we come from.

There Are Rivers in the Sky

Elif Shafak, 2024

I loved the concept of following a single drop of water across centuries and cultures. It’s a beautiful way to reflect on our shared humanity and personalise the vastness of history.

The Name of the Rose

Umberto Eco, 1980

Set in a 14th-century Italian monastery, this is a wonderfully complex murder mystery. Eco challenges the reader to become a kind of detective, and leaves you questioning the nature of truth itself. The suspense feels dangerous and exciting.

Wild Swans

Jung Chang, 1991

This one is a total emotional roller-coaster that stays with you long after the final page. Chang takes the reader through a heart-breaking story of survival, focusing on three women. The sheer grit and strength of human spirit in this book is incredibly moving and gave me a new perspective on everyday challenges.

“Ed Davey has lost none of his skill at the eye-catching but ultimately vacuous video-opportunity,” said The Independent.

He paraded into the Liberal Democrat annual conference in Bournemouth this weekend at the head of a drummer band, proudly twirling a baton. Yet even if the stunt was cringeworthy, it’s true that the Lib Dems are “on the march”. Having shrunk to a low point of just eight MPs after the 2015 election, the party won 72 seats in last year’s election, the best result by any third party in Britain in a century.

The Lib Dems now control more councils than the Tories do, said Oliver Wright in The Times, and, with polls suggesting that they’re trailing the Conservatives by only two points, the Lib Dems believe they could end up winning more seats than them at the next election. “It’s not a completely implausible scenario.”

‘The Gail’s strategy’

The Lib Dems owe their recent success partly to a more focused electoral strategy, said Ian Birrell in The i Paper. In the 1992 election, they won almost one in five votes, but only 20 seats. Last year, Davey’s tactic of targeting prosperous Tory constituencies – nicknamed the “Gail’s strategy” because of the popularity of the high-end bakery chain in such areas – won them 72 MPs with the support of only one in eight voters.

The party’s plan now seems to be “to sit tight, play it safe, and seek to pick up more seats” from the two stricken main parties. “But is this really sufficient?” One can’t help feeling that in this tumultuous era of populism, with Nigel Farage’s Reform UK party dominating political debate, the Liberal Democrats are failing to meet the moment and offer a proper defence of “liberalism and democracy”.

‘Profile-raising stunts’

For all Davey’s much-mocked stunts, only 37% of people were able to identify him from a photo in a recent survey, said Andrew Rawnsley in The Observer. But he has had some success in raising his profile by speaking out on issues that other leaders prefer to avoid. For instance, he said he would not be attending the recent state banquet for Donald Trump, in protest at the treatment of the people of Gaza. Such statements go down well with Lib Dem activists, who “skew left”.

At the same time, though, Davey has attacked Labour for imposing VAT on private school fees and removing inheritance tax relief from farms, a stance that puts him to the right of the Government. This attempt to peel off centre-right voters is risky: it could exacerbate the existing “tension between the kind of party the Lib Dems are and the kind of seats they aspire to hold or already do”.

"How do you excite people about moderate positions?"

“In the clamour of politics in 2025” that is the “quandary” facing the Liberal Democrats, said Laura Kuenssberg on the BBC.

Leader Ed Davey’s answer up to now has been to try to cut through with a series of attention-grabbing stunts. These have proved surprisingly successful electorally, winning his party 72 seats at the last general election, a record number.

That is all well and good, said Charlotte Henry in The Spectator, but “at a time at which there is a horrendous, and horrendously unpopular, Labour government”, as well as a Conservative Party “in seemingly terminal decline”, the Lib Dems “should be offering more”.

What did the commentators say?

Those hoping this weekend’s party conference would usher in a new, more serious Lib Dems were quickly disappointed after Davey entered the Bournemouth venue at the head of a marching band. It was undoubtedly “eye-catching”, said The Independent’s editorial, but ultimately another “vacuous video-opportunity”.

“This is the perfect time for the Lib Dems to take it to the next level, presenting themselves as a serious alternative to the rise of Reform,” said UnHerd. Unfortunately, the decision “to march into conference at the head of the world’s most embarrassing parade – while his party had a deeply stupid row over trans issues” showed that “these are not serious people”.

The public, it seems, is also growing weary of the endless stunts. Polling conducted by More in Common and presented to members gathered in Bournemouth showed more than 60% of voters think Davey’s campaign antics make the party look less serious. This also extends to nearly half of Lib Dem supporters. Perhaps more worrying is that many voters are still unsure what the party stands for.

Despite the criticism, Davey remains in a “strong position, with a largely happy party behind him”, said Kuenssberg. He will, however, “need to think through how to sell a set of moderate ideas to a voting public that appears to be eager for more drastic solutions”.

It is true they “need a harder edge to their policies, but they should focus on issues on which they could influence a government in a hung parliament, which ought to be the only point of people voting for them”, said The Independent. Social care and sewage “should not be the limit of Lib Dem ambition” when they could offer a “more forward policy on integration with the EU, a more compassionate approach to immigration and a more genuinely liberal attitude to the cause of equal rights”.

What next?

With two-thirds of constituencies where the Lib Dems are behind by less than 10,000 votes held by the Conservatives “winning over disillusioned Tories is the focus”, said The Telegraph.

This explains Davey’s decision to “lay out his pitch” in The Telegraph before the conference. In the article he denounced the “divisive politics being peddled by the likes of Kemi Badenoch and Nigel Farage” and promised to “provide a home to the millions of former Conservative voters repulsed by the extremes of both the right and left”.

The Lib Dems hope this strategy could result in them gaining more than 100 MPs at the next general election, according to The New Statesman, making them a serious force if, as the current polls suggest, no party emerges with an overall majority.

This still requires “hefty qualification”, especially given that “we are still a long way from knowing how willing people are to vote tactically around Reform”.

Tory woes, however, mean that “the Lib Dems need only stand still for the next three years to profit from the decline and fall of Britain’s oldest party”.

In the 1951 general election Labour and the Conservatives between them secured 98% of the vote. By 2024 that had dropped to 59%, and polling suggests support for the two main parties has continued to fall over the past year, driven in large part by the rise of Reform UK.

What this reveals is that UK politics has been "slowly but steadily unwinding from a two-party to a multi-party system for decades", said Byline Times. But "just like going bankrupt, things in politics change gradually and then very quickly".

What did the commentators say?

With Reform, Labour and the Conservatives roughly tied nationally and the Lib Dems slowly gaining ground in the south, "British politics is heading towards a place it was never designed to go, with a fractured four-way split", said The Economist. "Call it 20-20-20-20 vision."

This is because "politics is no longer one-dimensional," polling expert Sir John Curtice told the Financial Times. The old left-right divide no longer explains British politics; cultural issues are now a key factor.

With both Labour and the Tories shedding votes, "the conditions are there for the biggest challenge to the political conventions of British politics since the 1920s".

Seizing this opportunity is Farage's insurgent party, which "is proving adept at adapting itself to the ideologically fluid political positions of its target voters, for whom the distinction between left and right in politics is not set in stone", said the FT.

The "story of polarisation" – when "working-class" and "middle-class" had clear meanings and strong party affiliations – "holds the key to understanding the threat to the Labour-Tory dominance", said pollster Peter Kellner in Prospect. He described the condition of Britain's two-party system as "chronic".

"We shall of course see fluctuations in party support" but with issues like "Ukraine, slow growth, weak public finances and Donald Trump's presidency" all presenting "tough challenges for years to come" there is "no obvious reason why today's mainstream total, Labour plus Tory, should return to sustained dominance of the electorate".

What next?

This "unprecedented fragmentation puts the electorate on a collision course with the electoral system", said Robert Ford, professor of political science at Manchester University, in The Guardian. "First past the post is an amplifier: the winner takes all, everyone else gets nothing. But when voters divide evenly between multiple choices, this is a recipe for chaos."

This means "once unviable strategies" – like putting up a celebrity candidate with little experience but huge name recognition – "can work", said The Economist. Tactical voting, "the grease that keeps British democracy turning, becomes close to impossible".

Many agree that a new electoral system is needed to better reflect this new multi-party political reality. But neither Labour (who won two-thirds of seats at the last election on a third of the vote) or the Conservatives, nor it seems Reform, appear interested in this – at least for now.

"That doesn't mean that events like another pandemic, war or a climate catastrophe won't squeeze voters back into the two-party fold," said Byline Times. "But it won't be willing and will therefore only ever be temporary."

If the polls are right, this general election could deliver the most "lopsided" results in modern history, said The Guardian. The Labour Party looks set to enter Downing Street with "a record number of seats and an immense majority", despite receiving slightly fewer votes than Jeremy Corbyn in 2019. 

The latest YouGov MRP poll projects Labour taking 39% of the vote, and winning 425 seats, its largest-ever number; the Tories, with 22%, would have only 108 seats. Our first-past-the-post (FPTP) system is notoriously unfair to third parties, but this time the outcome would be particularly "skewed". Nigel Farage's Reform UK, according to YouGov, would come third, with 15% of votes, but would win only five seats; by contrast the Lib Dems, with only 12% of the vote, would get 67. In short, this election "could make the case for proportional representation (PR)".

'PR for foreigners'

FPTP has long been defended on the grounds that it roots MPs in their local community and provides stable governments, said Tim Stanley in The Daily Telegraph. "PR was for foreigners, typically Italian, who like being governed by chaotic coalitions" collated from party lists. But that case now looks less convincing. "The two-party system is dying." 

Smaller parties have emerged to represent "the disenfranchised" and "the discontented": the SNP, Reform UK, the Greens. Yet elections are still delivering results as if we were living under two mass-membership parties, circa 1945. Curiously, this is one part of the political system Keir Starmer doesn't want to reform. "Votes for 16-year-olds, Lords reform, yes." But why would he "tinker with an electoral system that hands him Napoleonic powers"?

'Screwed by the system'

Still, the Lib Dems, long the victims of FPTP, have shown a way to adapt to it, said Andrew Adonis in Prospect. Experts in "tactical opposition", they have built up their support so that it is concentrated in a hundred or so seats, mainly in the southwest and the Home Counties.

FPTP has always had its "quirks", said John Burn-Murdoch in the FT. But the "mismatch between votes and seats" is becoming much harder to wave away. And it's not clear that it "ensures greater political stability" and moderates the influence of extreme parties, as its defenders claim.

Analysis by the group Make Votes Matter shows that governments actually stay in power longer under PR than under FPTP. And if next week it deprives smaller parties of seats, its effect will be to boost populists like Farage by leaving "millions of voters with a justifiable sense of having been screwed by the system". It's time for change. "The make-up of Britain's Parliament should reflect the views of Britain's voters, not the peculiarities of its electoral system."

More than 100 seats in the general election "could be ripe for tactical voting", said The Independent.

Analysis by the paper, using data from YouGov's latest MRP poll, found that almost half of the Tories' projected wins would have a margin of less than five points, making them vulnerable. The Conservatives might also be eyeing up some tactical voting wins if they can persuade Reform UK voters to back them.

How does it work?

Voters deliberately choose not to vote for their first-choice candidate, usually because their favourite has little chance of winning. They might opt for their second choice if they think it will stop another party from getting into power. For instance, if a Labour voter lives in a marginal seat that is closely contested by the Conservatives and the Lib Dems, they may vote Lib Dem to keep the Tories out.

Tactical voting websites claim to show the most likely contenders in each constituency, based on polls or previous elections, and some recommend which party to choose in order to keep another out of government.

Has it worked before?

When the Conservatives have suffered landslide defeats in the past – as they did in 1906, 1945 and 1997 – "these have been at the hands of co-ordinated anti-Tory coalitions", said The Economist. And "another such coalition may be forming now".

Widespread disillusionment with 14 years of Tory rule has combined with Keir Starmer's efforts to move Labour to the centre, making it easier for Liberal Democrat voters to countenance backing his party. By contrast, Reform UK appears much less likely to back the Conservatives in order to stop progressive candidates winning.

One of the "striking features of local elections and parliamentary by-elections in this parliament has been the incredible willingness of Labour voters to vote Liberal Democrat, and vice versa", said Stephen Bush in the Financial Times. But we don't know if this will translate to the general election, which has a lower proportion of engaged voters.

"Less politically engaged voters, who are more likely to vote in a general election than in by-elections, may not be as attuned to these possibilities", said The Economist.

A survey carried out by Deltapoll last year found that just 52% of voters could correctly identify the winning party in their local area, dropping to 19% when asked who came second.

Will it make a difference in 2024?

There is a "mixed mood" among party insiders on how big a role tactical voting tools will play, said Politico. "Skeptics say British voters just aren't clued up enough on the finer points of the country's system to get tactical voting really firing."

Constituency boundary changes, which represent a once-in-a-generation shake-up in the electoral map from the last general election in 2019, have made it even harder to work out which party has the best chance of winning.

Like in previous elections, said Joe Twyman, director of polling firm Deltapoll, it might turn out to be the "case of the dog that failed to bark".

Millions of voters are heading to polling stations around the country today to choose who will represent them in 650 constituencies.

The political parties have spent six weeks on a campaign trail filled with policy pledges, hustings and energetic photocalls from the Lib Dem leader Ed Davey.

The polls suggest Labour is on course for a huge majority, but nobody will know for sure until the final results are called. While the smaller parties are vying to be the "third party" in the House of Commons rather than leading the country, manifestos from parties such as the Greens and Reform UK offer a flavour of what they might push for in opposition.

Labour Party

Labour leader Keir Starmer acknowledged there were few surprises and "no rabbit out of the hat" policy announcements when he launched his party's manifesto.

The party has pledged to cut NHS waiting times by delivering 40,000 more appointments each week on evenings and weekends, paid for by "cracking down" on tax avoidance. It wants to launch what it calls a new Border Security Command, using specialist investigators and counter-terrorism powers to "smash criminal boat gangs". 

A centrepiece of Labour's manifesto is a promise to create a publicly owned company called Great British Energy to invest in new renewable energy projects, with £8.3 billion being committed over the next five years.

Other key pledges include a promise to recruit 6,500 teachers in key subjects where there are shortages, such as maths, physics and computer science. Labour says it will open an additional 3,000 nurseries "through upgrading space in primary schools", as well as providing a free breakfast club in every primary school. 

The party has committed to votes for 16- and 17-year-olds, a policy it says will "increase the engagement of young people in our vibrant democracy".

Labour has said it will not raise personal tax rates to fund its manifesto commitments, with the plans instead paid for by raising £8 billion through putting VAT on private school fees, clamping down on those who are underpaying tax and a windfall tax on oil and gas companies. 

But the BBC's chief economics correspondent, Dharshini David, said there remained "much uncertainty about the amount these sources can raise and the assumptions that underpin the numbers".

Indeed, the manifestos of the two main parties "leave voters guessing over policy on tax and spending", said Paul Johnson, director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS). Whoever wins will face a "stark choice": raise taxes by more than they have promised, cut public spending or borrow more. "That is the trilemma."

Conservative Party

The abolition of National Insurance (NI) for the self-employed was one of the few policies that had not been briefed to the press ahead of the Conservatives' manifesto launch. Currently the self-employed – of which there are more than 4 million in the UK – pay 6% on profits between £12,570 and £50,270 and 2% above £50,270. 

The Conservatives also plan to cut NI for employees by a further 2p by 2027, which is in addition to the 4p already cut this year. The Tories say they will pay for these policies through welfare reforms, which they say will save £12 billion. However, the independent IFS has said that making such savings "looks difficult in the extreme".

The Tories have promised to introduce a "triple lock plus" for pensioners, by increasing the personal tax-free allowance for them. The allowance would rise by whichever is highest out of inflation, wage growth or 2.5%.

The manifesto includes a pledge to build 1.6 million new homes over the next parliament, although the party had a similar pledge in 2019, which it failed to deliver.  

For those looking to get on the property ladder for the first time, the Conservatives plan to launch a £1 billion scheme that would allow first-time buyers with government-backed mortgages to buy a home with just a 5% deposit. Modelled on the recently closed Help to Buy scheme, it can be used for home purchases under £400,000. 

The manifesto also commits to ensuring a "regular rhythm of flights every month" to Rwanda, starting in July.

Liberal Democrats

The Liberal Democrats were the first party to officially launch its manifesto, which centres on an £8.4 billion package to improve the NHS and social care. 

The party has pledged 8,000 more GPs in England to ensure everyone has the right to see a doctor within seven days, or 24 hours for urgent care. The Lib Dems also plan to introduce free personal care for the disabled and elderly in England, in a system similar to that already operating in Scotland. 

Further health pledges for England include a guarantee that all cancer patients would start treatment within 62 days of urgent referral, as well as guaranteed access to an NHS dentist for anyone needing emergency care. 

On housing, the party has committed to building 380,000 new homes a year across the UK, including 150,000 social housing units. This would be done through the creation of 10 new "garden cities" as well as "community-led" development.

The party has said it would scrap the government's controversial Rwanda scheme entirely and "provide safe and legal routes" for asylum seekers. It would scrap the current salary threshold for migrant workers and replace it with a "merit-based" system. The party promises to end the recently introduced ban on foreign care workers bringing dependents to the UK as well as reversing the increase in income thresholds for family visas.

Reform UK

Reform UK's official manifesto – entitled "Our Contract With You" – is "short on details", said Politico, but pitches several "critical reforms" it says would be needed within 100 days of a new government taking office.

Chief among these is the party's flagship pledge to "stop the boats" as part of a four-point plan to curb illegal immigration. This would include taking the UK out of the European Convention on Human Rights, setting up a new department for immigration and freezing "non-essential" legal migration.

It will aim to ease the tax burden by raising the income tax threshold to £20,000, while also scrapping inheritance tax on estates under £2 million. Plans to abolish VAT on energy bills, lift the VAT threshold on businesses to £150,000, and cut fuel duty and corporation tax would be paid for by a £50 billion a year reduction in government spending – working out at around £5 in every £100.

The manifesto proposes scrapping net zero plans and green levies to bring down energy bills while increasing drilling for gas and oil. The party would introduce a patriotic curriculum in primary and secondary schools that banned the teaching of "woke" and "transgender ideology".

Under its healthcare plans, Reform would exempt all front-line healthcare and social care workers from the basic rate of income tax for three years, and offer 20% tax relief on all private healthcare and insurance. It would also enforce a two-strike rule for job seekers on benefits and hold a referendum on changing the voting system.

Scottish National Party (SNP)

The Scottish National Party was the last major party to launch its election manifesto and unsurprisingly put independence front and centre.

It advances the independence policy agreed at the SNP's conference last year, whereby winning a majority of the 57 Westminster seats up for grabs in Scotland would be treated as licence to begin negotiations with the UK government "to give democratic effect to Scotland becoming an independent country".

Newly installed SNP leader John Swinney has "attempted to paper over some of the party's yawning divisions" in the manifesto, said the BBC. However, the document is "thin and amounted to only 32 pages, three of which are completely blank", said The Telegraph.

Among pledges that are included are a demand for the "full devolution" of tax powers to Holyrood so that more cash can be raised. It also endorsed a series of windfall taxes on Scottish businesses and backed Labour's plans to impose VAT on private schools.

The SNP has demanded that the UK government pump an extra £10 billion annually into the NHS, claiming this would "address rampant inflationary pressures and improve performance". But in stark contrast to Labour it has vowed to scrap the two-child benefit cap as well as the Trident nuclear deterrent. It also wants to "reverse the damage of Brexit and re-enter the single market restoring free movement for EU citizens", but acknowledges the UK will not be rejoining the EU. Instead, the manifesto emphasises a "vision for an independent Scotland in the EU".

Green Party

The Green Party, which is targeting four seats, is building on its "expansion beyond its environment and climate focus to become a left-wing foil to Labour", said the Financial Times.

Co-leaders Carla Denyer and Adrian Ramsay are promising a "greener, fairer country" in which "we are all safer, happier and more fulfilled". To deliver it, they are promising a massive investment of an additional £8 billion of NHS annual expenditure within the first year of the next parliament, which will increase to £28 billion by 2030. Doing so, they say, will help to cut waiting lists, guarantee access to NHS dentists and urgent access to GPs, and give NHS staff an immediate pay rise. 

The Greens would push for a "green economic transformation", involving a carbon tax to reduce the economy's reliance on fossil fuels, nationalising railways and water companies, as well as the "big five retail energy companies", and investing £40 billion a year into shifting towards a green economy. The party would also aim for wind power to make up 70% of the UK's electricity by the end of the decade, and removing all oil and gas subsidies, as well as cancelling recently agreed fossil fuel licences. 

Improving home insulation is key to their environmental and energy missions, with £29 billion promised over the next five years to insulate UK homes to an EPC B rating or above. The party has pledged to provide 150,000 new social homes every year, and for local authorities to be able to exercise rent controls.

The Liberal Democrats are on course to overtake the SNP and become Westminster's third largest party at the upcoming general election, according to the latest modelling by pollsters.

YouGov's first MRP projection of the campaign suggested that Labour would win a "historic" majority of 194 seats, with the Conservatives reduced to 140 seats, while the Lib Dems could end up with 48 seats, up from 11 at the 2019 general election. The SNP would be left with 17.

Meanwhile, the Green Party is predicted to win its second ever Westminster seat, in Bristol Central, with Plaid Cymru also on course to win two seats. Reform UK – despite the party's meteoric rise in voter intention polls – would come away "empty handed", according to YouGov's poll.

What did the commentators say?

For the Liberal Democrats, supplanting the SNP as the third-largest party in the House of Commons isn't simply "vanity and Westminster one-upmanship," said Freddie Hayward in The New Statesman. It comes with some "serious benefits", including the "top prize" of a guaranteed two questions at Prime Minister's Questions. 

This would be a valuable opportunity to regain credibility. If the party can tell a story of relevance and success, "the broadcasters and the papers might start giving them more coverage", plucking them from the relative obscurity they have resided in for more than a decade. 

While current modelling predicts the Conservatives will be the second-largest party, Nigel Farage's decision to "enter the fray" as leader and a parliamentary candidate of Reform UK is "threatening to eat further into the Conservative vote with an attack from the populist right", said Politico's Esther Webber. 

Some recent polling, said Sky News, suggested that Reform UK is close to overtaking the Conservatives. But while some commentators have suggested that Farage's party could "take over or even replace the Conservatives by the 2029 general election", said Will Prescott on UnHerd, "sadly for Farage, that appears very unlikely". 

Even if, as the very worst opinion polls for the Tories suggest, the Conservatives are reduced to third place in the Commons behind the Liberal Democrats, "they will still be comfortably the largest right-of-centre force in Parliament". And by Farage's own admission too, even if the Reform UK leader were to become MP for Clacton, it would be "very difficult to see Reform capturing more than a tiny number of seats" as the party's vote is "too evenly spread across the country". Despite winning 12% of the vote at the May local elections, the party picked up just two council seats. 

Nevertheless, Farage's re-entry into British politics is "a sign that he thinks something is up" and that he could "enjoy real success if he plays his cards right", said Stephen Bush in the Financial Times. While Farage's decision to stand is a "symptom rather than a cause of how badly the Tory party is going to do at this election", it "could mean that this election isn't just a transfer of power from one of the UK's two big parties to another, but a wider reconfiguration of the British party system".

What next?

Ed Davey sought to maintain the Lib Dems' momentum today with the launch of the party manifesto, which includes a promise to "save the NHS". The manifesto, which Davey said is fully costed, pledges to recruit 8,000 more GPs, give unpaid carers a right to paid carers' leave from work, and introduce free personal care in England. 

Publicly, leading Conservatives have remained "bullish" about their election prospects. Andrew Bowie, an energy minister and Tory candidate, told Politico that he was "absolutely not" worried about Reform's impact on the Tories' electoral prospects, adding that Farage had "run, and lost, in a number of general elections gone by".

Others are not so optimistic. Former culture secretary Nadine Dorries told The News Agents podcast last week that the Tories will "probably disappear" at the next election if Reform continue their surge. "Given tactical voting, which is taking place already in many constituencies, and given the uprising in Reform's votes and support since Nigel Farage decided he would stand as leader, I think you could see the disappearance of the Conservative Party," she said.

The Conservative Party is facing growing calls to hand back £10 million donated by a businessman accused of making racist remarks about former shadow home secretary Diane Abbott.

The Guardian claims that Frank Hester, the chief executive of The Phoenix Partnership, told colleagues at a business meeting in 2019 that the Labour MP made him "want to hate all black women" and "should be shot".

The alleged remarks "raise questions" about the "workplace behaviour and professionalism of a man whose money will be helping to bankroll the Conservative Party's general election campaign", said the paper. Rishi Sunak said the reported comments were "racist and wrong".

It has shone a light on the, at times, opaque world of political donations in Britain. With the 2024 general election on course to be the highest-spending contest ever, here are some of the big donors of 2023.

Frank Hester – Conservatives

The West Yorkshire businessman runs healthcare technology firm The Phoenix Partnership, which has received more than £400 million from the NHS and other government bodies since 2016, "primarily to look after 60 million UK medical records", according to The Guardian.

Hester was made an OBE under David Cameron and has praised Sunak's leadership on artificial intelligence (AI), saying in a recent interview that "the future is AI and we've got a prime minister who gets it".

He donated £5 million to the Conservatives last May, followed by a similar amount from his company in November shortly after he attended the PM's landmark international AI summit. A Tory party spokesperson said this made Hester its "biggest ever donor". However, he has now come under fire for racist comments about Abbott, which she has described as "frightening".

Gary Lubner – Labour

The South African car-glass repair tycoon Gary Lubner was the highest single donor to the Labour Party last year, giving £4,577,500 according to the Electoral Commission.

The son of Jewish refugees, Lubner told the Financial Times (FT) at the time that he was been impressed by Keir Starmer's mission to rid Labour of anti-Semitism and that the "long list of Tory failures in the last 13 years" had made him committed to bankrolling the opposition, with Brexit being "top of the list".

He stepped down from his role as chief executive of Belron, the world's largest auto glass company, in March 2023, with South Africa's News 24 saying the size of his donation means the "largely unknown" Lubner is now emerging as a "key player" in British politics. It is not thought, however, that he will have an official role in either the campaign or in government if Labour wins, The Times reported. Nor is he interested in a peerage, having previously suggested the House of Lords should be abolished.

Sainsbury family – Conservatives, Labour and Lib Dems

Members of the supermarket dynasty have long been among the largest and most active political donors in Britain. Last year, according to the Electoral Commission, the biggest personal donation came from a bequest from Lord John Sainsbury, a Tory peer, who left more than £10.2 million to the Conservatives after his death.

His cousin, Lord David Sainsbury of Turville, who served as science minister under Tony Blair, was consistently one of the largest donors under New Labour. An "ardent Europhile", reported the Financial Times (FT), in 2016 he gave money to Labour and the Liberal Democrats, "ringfencing the sums for the Remain side in the EU referendum as well as £4m to Britain Stronger in Europe, an anti-Brexit campaign". His donations to Labour dried up after the party moved to the left under Jeremy Corbyn but he has stepped up his funding to the party since the arrival of Keir Starmer, donating over £3 million last year. His daughter Francesca Perrin became the highest-donating woman in the party's history last year, giving over £1 million.

Mohamed Mansour – Conservatives

The Egyptian-born Mohamed Mansour gave more than £5 million to the Conservatives last year, making him one of the party's biggest-ever individual donors. A naturalised UK citizen, the self-made billionaire served as transport minister under Egypt's late President Hosni Mubarak and now heads the Mansour Group, a huge conglomerate that covers real estate and banking as well as holding Egypt's McDonald's franchise and a large supermarket chain.

An early investor in Facebook, Uber and Airbnb and co-founder of 1984 Ventures, a Silicon Valley venture capital firm, Mansour – like Hester – has backed Sunak's stance on AI. "I believe this country has a very capable prime minister," he wrote in The Telegraph, one who "understands how growth is generated". He also "gets the importance of technology and innovation. He can make the modern economy work for all UK citizens."

Graham Edwards – Conservatives

Tory coffers were also boosted by Graham Edwards, co-founder of Britain's biggest private property firm Telereal Trillium, who donated more than £4 million last year, said The Telegraph. "He said that he had decided to hand over the cash to help keep a hard-Left Labour government out of power," reported the paper.

Amit Lohia – Conservatives

Another Tory donor who donated large sums last year was Amit Lohia of the manufacturer Indorama Corporation. The tycoon is "nicknamed the 'Prince of Polyester'", said the Daily Mirror. He gave the party £2 million in March 2023.

Dale Vince – Labour

Labour received over £1 million from green energy supplier Ecotricity, founded by Dale Vince, last year. A controversial figure, Vince has been "condemned in the rightwing press as a hippy turned eco-tycoon who donates thousands of pounds to Just Stop Oil – and even more to the Labour Party", said The Guardian.

Rishi Sunak appears to have all but ruled out a May general election but the Liberal Democrats could attempt to force the prime minister's hand. 

Speaking at a rally in the Surrey town of Guildford, Lib Dem leader Ed Davey said his party would put forward legislation to reinstate the Fixed-term Parliaments Act – introduced by the coalition government in 2011 but repealed by Boris Johnson in 2022 – which would force a general election on 2 May.

"Britain can't wait for the change we need. People are fed up of waiting," he told supporters on Wednesday. But Davey also conceded the plan was a "long shot given it was unlikely to receive the backing of the ruling Conservatives", said the Financial Times (FT). 

And Rishi Sunak later appeared to rule out a snap spring poll, telling journalists that his "working assumption" was that the next election would be in "the second half of this year". 

Davey's party grows 'more ambitious' 

Whenever the election comes – and it appears now to be at least 10 months away – the Liberal Democrats will be hoping to overtake the Scottish National Party (SNP) to regain their position as the third largest party in the House of Commons. 

The party has "long been confident" of its ability to oust the Conservative Party from its traditional strongholds in the southeast of England. But Davey is becoming "more ambitious", said the FT, as polling shows growing support for the party in western England, with the party further buoyed by four recent by-election wins.

Although it is not yet clear exactly how many seats the Lib Dems will be targeting in the next election, Davey told the paper that there was a "real movement against the Conservatives like we haven't seen for quite some time" in large parts of the southeast, southwest and London, as well as the suburbs of Manchester, Sheffield and Harrogate. 

A YouGov pollster reportedly predicted the party "could win between 30 and 40 seats at the next election". 

'Life-long Tories' and 'Surrey shufflers' key targets

The party is still "trying to rebuild momentum" after its opposition to Brexit "delivered a sugar hit to its finances and membership" that quickly fizzled out, said Freddie Hayward in The New Statesman. In the 2019 general election, the Lib Dems lost one seat, leaving them with just 11 MPs in the Commons. The party's election strategy has now firmly shifted from "opposing Brexit to "opposing the Tories". 

Lib Dem strategists are targeting two key demographics. First, "lifelong Tories" who are now so disillusioned with the government they are willing to switch allegiance. Second, the so-called "Surrey shufflers": young Londoners who have moved out of the city to the home counties, but refuse to vote for the Tories. 

Its strategy is proving successful, with the party winning by-elections in Chesham and Amersham, North Shropshire and Tiverton and Honiton. But the party's prospects "shouldn't be overstated", said Hayward. Its electoral fortunes are "inevitably bound up with the performance of the other parties" and "ultimately, as the party leadership recognises, their chances may depend less on Lib Dem success than on continual Tory failure". 

With Reform UK now polling at close to 10%, some Tory MPs fear that the pro-Brexit party could prove to be a disruptor at the next election. But it is Davey's party that "could inflict even more Tory damage", said Paul Waugh writing for the i news site.

The "biggest threat" to the Conservatives, the factor that risks turning a small Labour majority into a Labour landslide, "is tactical voting", said Waugh.

Evidence from recent by-elections "suggests an electorate seeking out the best possible route to routing the Tories from office – and voting accordingly", he continued. Labour supporters are "ready to back Lib Dems where necessary, and Lib Dem supporters [will] return the favour in key Tory-Labour battlegrounds".  

And Reform UK's decision to stand in every Conservative constituency could deliver "an extra dozen" seats to the Lib Dems and to the Labour Party.

The authority of Liberal Democrat leader Ed Davey's ship has been dented this week after party members rejected his plans to scrap its national housing target.

Davey had previously announced he wanted to drop a pledge to build 380,000 new homes a year in England in favour of local targets focused on new council or social homes. 

But his plan was "foiled by a group of young activists", Sky News reported, who put forward an amendment after arguing that Davey's policy was "not ambitious enough".

The Young Liberals ultimately gained the support of the majority of members at the party's national conference in Bournemouth.

The 'prehistory' of the conference 

The last time the Liberal Democrats gathered in Bournemouth for their conference the place was "giddy with excitement", said Stephen Bush in the Financial Times (FT), as "defectors" from both Labour and the Conservatives hoped to reignite the party in 2019.

But the attempt to woo back voters in that year's election proved disastrous, when the party lost seats, including that of their leader, Jo Swinson.

The December 2019 election "is a vital part of what you might call the prehistory of this year's conference", Bush added, as Davey has been determined to "shed and downplay" any policy that could turn off Conservative voters. 

To emphasise his point, the leader "wheeled out" his predecessor Tim Farron, said The Spectator's Steerpike, and he "decried" the housing proposal as "pure Thatcherism".

Farron told the conference the "vague and vacuous" housing targets would not work, as they achieve "naff all". He urged conference to reject the amendment proposed by the Young Liberals.

But he was "booed" by disgruntled members, said the Daily Express, and ultimately "had his microphone cut off having spoken for the maximum duration allowed".  

Bruising defeat

The vote has been a "blow to Davey's authority", said The Guardian, in the "first sign of internal pushback" against the leader's ideas.

For some, it has led to questions about the Lib Dem leader, while others are uncertain what the party stands for, if it cannot agree on key issues.

The party is "being coy about who they really are", said Suzanne Moore for The Telegraph, a tactic that "never plays well in the polls". 

While many are "sick of the two-party system", the notion that the "Lib Dems have nothing to offer" having been so "badly burnt" during their coalition government experience, could well put voters off supporting Davey at the next election.

What's the plan now?

Although the aim of the Liberal Democrats is to overtake the SNP and reclaim their position as the third largest party in Westminster, it is Davey's refusal to state the party's official position on key issues that has been perplexing for some.

This "hasn't gone unnoticed", said Sky News' Beth Rigby, particularly on Brexit and the question of rejoining the EU.

Davey's future relationship with the Labour Party is equally unclear. He has refused to be drawn on the prospect of a coalition, "trying to squirm out of a tricky answer" when pressed, Rigby added. Even so his "non answer speaks volumes".

Coalition has not been favourable for the party in the past, but the prospect of entering government once again has "whetted the appetites" of the party faithful and those businesses "who have sniffed out a scent of power", said the BBC.

Ultimately, the Liberal Democrats will need to "think about their relationship with Labour", especially as the pair's "non-aggression pact has broken down", The Observer's Andrew Rawnsley stated. If either hopes to be successful, they will need to "kiss, make up and refocus" on their common goal – "removing as many Conservative MPs as possible". 

Victory for Yimbys 

Although housing may not be a policy on which the next election is won or lost, it will continue to be a major talking point amid the cost-of-living crisis.

On this particular issue, "Yimbys beat Nimbys", said Politico. But the party may yet be able to unite around the housing goal and put its internal differences aside. When asked by the political website about the defeat on the conference floor, Farron said: "You always want to win, but I'm a Liberal Democrat so I'm kind of used to it." 

1. Are we witnessing the twilight of the woke?

Tim Stanley in The Telegraph

on an anti-woke culture secretary

“Political correctness is losing its grip,” cheered Tim Stanley in The Telegraph in the wake of Nadine Dorries’ appointment as culture secretary. An “advantage of having a columnist in No 10” is that Boris Johnson has “upset everyone under the sun, but has learnt the best way to handle an angry letter is to put it in the bin”. If the PM ignores Twitter it “becomes Angela Rayner in a broom cupboard screaming for people to resign”. There has been a “liberating realisation” that Tory ministers needn’t quit “because they’ve upset four people on Twitter” and that a government can “confront the Left via legislation”. Heralding what he feels may be the “twilight of the woke”, Stanley welcomes steps to “protect free speech in universities and put the brakes on decolonisation”, and the government’s order for broadcasters to produce “distinctly ‘British’ content”. Dorries’ promotion “is not a two fingers up to the culture industry”, he says, “but the direction of travel”.

Read more

2. Nadine Dorries will monster the arts

Sarah Ditum on Unherd

on the perfect bogeyman

“For years now, people in the arts have been wishing for the culture brief to go to someone who is actually interested in culture,” wrote Sarah Ditum on Unherd. This comes after a range of recent office-holders, from “PR man” Jeremy Hunt to Matt Hancock, “whose passion for the arts reached the ecstatic heights of quite liking Galway Girl by Ed Sheeran (in 2018, that was the most intimate thing any of us knew about Hancock, and what a blessed time it was)”. So, for the arts world, Dorries “is the thing outside”. She writes books, she’s been a primetime star and “she was one of the first MPs to be active online, and started blogging in the noughties, around the time David Cameron was still making woeful ‘tweet’/twat’ puns”. Dorries “could hardly be better credentialed”, said Ditum, but at the same time she has an “undoubted capacity to turn every minor dispute into a flame war”, be it the licence fee or culture wars. “The arts world will be unable to resist responding with passion, fury and polarisation,” concluded Ditum. “Dorries is the perfect bogeyman, an irresistibly perfect enemy: she’s exactly the thing they wished for.”

Read more

3. What’s the point of the Lib Dems? Judging by Ed Davey’s speech it’s a question he still can’t answer

Ian Dunt in The i

on an eerie silence

“What’s the point of the Liberal Democrats?” asked Ian Dunt. Having heard the speech by leader Sir Ed Davey at this year's party conference, the i news columnist feels that he still can’t answer the question. During the coalition years, Dunt reminded us, the party “embraced the right-wing laissez-faire model” but mainstream opinion is now “largely accepting the need for extensive state intervention in the economy”. Dunt wondered where the party stands on this spectrum now. “Liberalism is facing a battle for its life,” he declared, as a “global wave of nationalist politics” threatens liberal principles. Britain needs a “vibrant, proud liberal voice”, added Dunt, but “there is only an eerie and despairing silence – the product of a leadership which does not have the bravery to stand up for its values or the capacity to articulate them”.

Read more

4. Australia is making a risky bet on the US

Sam Roggeveen in The New York Times

on the trilateral defence agreement

The Aukus submarine deal has “thrust Australia into a central role in America’s rivalry with China”, Sam Roggeveen wrote in The New York Times. For many US observers of China’s increasing aggression, Australia has become the “canary in the coal mine for great power competition with China”, subject to economic coercion from Beijing, hacking and reports of espionage, said Roggeveen, director of the International Security Program at the Lowy Institute, a research centre in Sydney. “For most of its history, Australia has relied on a friend or ally to help secure the Pacific Ocean,” he adds, so it makes sense that it would want to bring the US “into a closer embrace”. Yet, “the United States is in Asia by choice; Australia has no such luxury”. Roggeveen asked: “Why should the United States commit itself to a contest with China when the stakes are less than existential? Without a clear answer to that question, Australia must assume that it will ultimately need to ensure its security alone.”

Read more

5. Boris Johnson aims to push for more climate action during trip

Laura Kuenssberg at BBC News

on a major excursion

“Boris Johnson bounced from behind the grey curtain on the plane, clearly delighted to be travelling out of the UK, press pack and uniformed RAF stewards in tow, not the pilot perhaps, but acting as the host of the government plane he has had repainted with the Union Jack on the tail, urging journalists to approve of the new paint job,” wrote the BBC’s political editor Laura Kuenssberg, who travelled with the PM to the US this week. However much he enjoys being back in the air, this trip doesn’t come at an easy moment, as his government grapples with “rising fears about supply chains, a shortage of gas and its many potential consequences”, says Kuenssberg. Bill hikes could also be a “tricky consequence” of the actions ministers want to take to combat climate change, she added. “This is the start of a major trip for Mr Johnson – climate talks in New York when the issue has never mattered so much at home; a head-to-head in the White House, after the visible chaos as the two countries left Kabul; a world of shifting allegiances as the worst of Covid seems hopefully past at home.”

Read more

1. WhatsApp is where real political power lies in Britain

Sebastian Payne in the Financial Times

on a small green icon

“During the pandemic, all human life has been found on WhatsApp,” writes Sebastian Payne in the Financial Times. “A small green icon became our portal to the outside world.” But in particular “the social network’s prevalence has spread to those running the country,” he says. This was brought sharply to light when Dominic Cummings leaked private WhatsApps from Boris Johnson. In doing so, the prime minister’s former adviser “revealed the awesome power that WhatsApp holds in Whitehall” as “the political communication method of choice”. “Power flows through the thousands of one-to-one exchanges and informal groups that have replaced emails and formal meetings when it comes to decision-making.” Of course, “no one in Whitehall is certain of how official these discussions are, or whether they are secure”, and have rightly begun to worry “about backdoor access”. Although when it comes to political journalism, “WhatsApp is a godsend for transparency”, Payne adds. Westminister should ask itself, “when is too much WhatsApp?”, but as we struggle through the pandemic, it’ll remain as the platform “where the real power lies”.

Read more

2. Boris Johnson wants to jolt commuters back to work

James Forsyth in The Times

on cultural long Covid

“Boris Johnson wants to see busy, bustling cities again,” writes James Forsyth in The Times. “He has been talking about ‘Johnson’s law’: the more people see each other on Zoom during lockdown, the more they’ll want to meet up when life resumes”. But others are not so sure. “If months from now the streets are still almost deserted, the country will have developed a form of long Covid. How to prevent this is one of the big debates in Whitehall.” But “[e]ven once all the legal restrictions have gone, the government is braced for cultural changes brought about by the virus to linger”, Forsyth adds. “Bosses will be far less likely to thank coughing and spluttering staff for struggling in now than they were before. And, perhaps, less likely to pay for expensive city office space to accommodate them all.”

Read more

3. It is Keir Starmer, not Boris Johnson, who should be more worried by the Buckinghamshire uprising

Tom Harris in The Telegraph

on a surprise victory

“There’s no denying it was a remarkable by-election victory for the Liberal Democrats – a swing of 25% against a government in power for more than a decade,” writes Tom Harris in The Telegraph. Although, in some ways, it “feels almost like a return to normality: in the 1980s and 90s the Lib Dems were renowned for their by-election campaigns, particularly against the Conservatives”. But the significance of this win is not that it raises a threat to the Conservatives, but rather to Labour. “If the Lib Dems can win in ‘safe’ Tory seats, then the prospect of Labour not even being able to hold on to one of its own secure seats is truly ominous for Keir Starmer,” Harris adds. “Who will lead the opposition to the government in such circumstances: the party that can beat the Tories in their heartlands, or the party that can’t even hang on to constituencies it managed to win in the dark days of December 2019?”

Read more

4. Compulsory care-home staff jabs may sound sensible but would create a catastrophe

Polly Toynbee in The Guardian

on learning our lessons

“It’s a no-brainer, isn’t it? Of course every care and NHS worker should be vaccinated against Covid and anything else that puts them and their patients at risk,” writes Polly Toynbee in The Guardian on the news that Covid vaccinations are set to become mandatory for care home staff. “Facts, scientific facts, that’s the dose the vaccine-refusers need. Or so every good rationalist believes. But why do we never learn our lessons?” Toynbee asks. “Humans don’t live by reason alone – maybe scarcely at all,” and the fact is “if all unvaccinated care workers were sacked, in some parts of the country care homes would cease to function at all. They would be closed overnight as unsafe, leaving nowhere to send the frail but into hospital beds,” she adds. “There are already 112,000 care-worker vacancies, so compulsion, the ‘rational’ thing to do, risks turning a crisis into a catastrophe.”

Read more

5. Juneteenth is a national holiday now. Can it still be Black?

Kevin Young in The New York Times

on commemorating freedom

“We might count Juneteenth among those things Black people have long enjoyed that white folks don’t know about – like Frankie Beverly and Maze,” writes Kevin Young in The New York Times. “What Juneteenth and other Emancipation days commemorate is both the promise of freedom and its delay,” he says. “For June 19, 1865, doesn’t mark the day enslaved African Americans were set free in the United States but the day the news of Emancipation reached them in Texas [the last rebel state], two and a half years after the Emancipation Proclamation. It is a holiday ringed, like a good brisket, though not in smoke but irony. Out of such ironies Black people have made the blues, made lemonade, made good,” writes Young. President Biden has declared Juneteenth a federal holiday, but “will it still remain Black?” asks Young. “Can it be both serious and playful, and recognize, as the poet Toi Derricotte reminds us, that ‘joy is an act of resistance’? Can we cook and laugh while we remember, remaining rooted in tradition while telling the full story of America and Black life in it?”

Read more

The Week’s daily round-up highlights the five best opinion pieces from across the British and international media, with excerpts from each.

1. Diana Hodali in DW

on Beirut

Lebanon's worst enemy is its own government

“... How ever one looks at it, the huge explosion on Tuesday is the result of the dire corruption within numerous Lebanese governments. For years, politicians from all parties and factions have looted the country and driven it to ruin. Even politicians on opposing sides have joined together in this corrupt system to enrich themselves — when it came to lining their own pockets, they were always in agreement. This catastrophe is just the most recent and most horrifying example of how one Lebanese government after the other has failed to fulfill its most basic tasks: looking after the citizens' welfare and well-being.”

2. Dr Masao Tomonaga in NBC News

on the legacy of nuclear devastation

Surviving the nuclear bomb at Nagasaki 75 years ago showed me nuclear weapons shouldn't exist

“... the idea of nuclear weapon-dependent international security is just a pandemic that has spread over many big and wealthy nations since the Cold War era; the imaginations of politicians are infested with this political illness for which they constantly refuse treatment. The danger that comes from this adherence to old ways of seeing the world could be catastrophic. Were a nuclear war to take place, there would be an immediate, huge loss of human life, an ensuing nuclear winter, a succeeding devastating agricultural crisis causing a global famine for billions and, ultimately, possible human extinction.”

3. Jane Shilling in The Telegraph

on how to keep food

The art of storage is the next hip food trend we badly need

“This lack of poetic sensibility is no doubt the reason why I got such terrible marks in all my English Lit exams. But it brings us to the current hot topic of food waste. When it comes to chucking out comestibles, the Covid lockdown concentrated our minds wonderfully. Long queues, empty shelves and a fear of shortages fostered a national outbreak of culinary prudence. But the easing of restrictions has seen a return to a throwaway food culture. WRAP, the Government’s food waste watchdog, reports a 30pc rise in ‘self-reported waste’ – a tendency that it is trying to reverse with its ‘Let’s Keep Crushing It’ campaign, which includes an alphabetical list of food storage advice.”

4. Katy Balls in The Spectator

on a floundering party

The Lib Dem paradox

“The new leader will be integral to setting the direction for targeting these seats – and the type of relationship the party can form with Starmer's Labour. Moran and Davey have different approaches to finding relevance again. They are going after different types of potential liberals. Moran is the outside bet. She has declared that, if picked, she would make the party ‘more radical’ than Labour and has promised to be ‘unapologetic’ about it. Her supporters argue that the fact that she wasn’t an MP in the five years of coalition government means her untainted brand can win over young voters – with a particular focus on soft Labour voters. Her allies say her approach will be similar to Charles Kennedy’s, taking the fight to Labour. However, Moran allies also argue she is in the best position to try to form non aggression pacts with Labour as she does not carry the coalition baggage that Davey does.”

5. Dean Obeidallah in CNN

on Biden’s quick wit

Joe Biden just destroyed one of Trump's biggest attack lines

“That exchange not only aired on Fox News, it went viral on social media. And then almost on cue Saturday afternoon, around the same time Biden was on his bicycle, Trump tweeted out from the posh confines of his country club one of his go-to attack lines against the former VP, calling him ‘Sleepy Joe Biden.’ The irony was delicious. There's Biden briskly riding a bicycle while Trump is at his private country club, where the only exercise he seems to get is getting in and out of his golf cart.”

David Steel has quit the Liberal Democrats and will retire from the House of Lords “as soon as possible” following yesterday’s publication of a report into allegations of child sexual abuse linked to Westminster.

The Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse accused Steel of an “abdication of responsibility” when he learned about allegations of child abuse against his fellow MP, Cyril Smith.

The 173-page report said: “Lord Steel should have provided leadership. Instead, he abdicated his responsibility. He looked at Cyril Smith not through the lens of child protection but through the lens of political expediency.”

The 81-year-old said: “I have received indications that some in the Liberal Democrat party wish me suspended and investigated again, despite a previous disciplinary process in Scotland which concluded that no further action was required.

“I am told that others are threatening to resign if a new investigation is started. I wish to avoid any such turmoil in my party and to prevent further distress to my family.”

The report described a culture in Westminster of “failing to recognise abuse, turning a blind eye to it, covering up allegations and actively protecting high-profile offenders including politicians”.

It found that politicians valued reputation “far higher than the fate of the children involved”. The Daily Mail says the inquiry has produced a “bombshell report”.

The Guardian adds that the long-awaited report found that political parties, police and prosecutors “turned a blind eye” to allegations of child sexual abuse connected to Westminster, ignored victims and showed excessive “deference” to MPs and ministers fighting to clear their reputations.

Senior Conservatives are also criticised over the case of former Cabinet member Sir Peter Morrison, who had a “penchant for small boys”.

The report said “Margaret Thatcher was aware of rumours about Morrison but did nothing” and neither did party chairman Norman Tebbit.

However, the report stressed that “there was no evidence of any kind of an organised ‘Westminster paedophile network’ in which persons of prominence conspired to pass children amongst themselves for the purpose of sexual abuse”.

The Times turns its attention to former Labour deputy leader Tom Watson, saying his “lurid claims of a Westminster paedophile conspiracy” were rejected by the “damning report”.

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––For a round-up of the most important stories from around the world - and a concise, refreshing and balanced take on the week’s news agenda - try The Week magazine. Start your trial subscription today –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

The Week’s daily round-up highlights the five best opinion pieces from across the British and international media, with excerpts from each.

1. Iain Martin in The Times

on history repeating itself

Conservatives face a backlash if they win

“Veteran party observers have cited similarities between this general election and 1983, when voters concluded that they simply could not countenance a far-left leader like Michael Foot. The more striking parallel I see is with 1992. Then the Conservatives won with a relatively new leader, John Major, and promises of a brighter future. Six months later they were ruined by the collapse of their European policy and the ERM debacle. In the years that followed they were buried under an avalanche of sleaze allegations. This time the Tories have been in power for nearly a decade and, in policy area after policy area, they are overdue a kicking from a country increasingly concerned about the condition of public services. If that kicking does not come next month, because voters sensibly realise that Jeremy Corbyn is unfit to be prime minister, then it’s likely the dam will break next year.”

2. Joel Golby in The Guardian

on the mystical allure of the PM

Look at Boris Johnson eating a scone. This? This is your shagger god?

“With eyes open and hearts brave, we must watch this video of Boris Johnson eating a scone. This is what we’ve come to: Boris Johnson eating a mediocre baked good is somehow a sort of galactic-brained version of everyman campaigning, a highpoint of election conversation, and a stunning and remarkable example of strategic nous. When really, it looks like grainy VHS footage of a toddler eating a cracker for the first time re-enacted by a man who, on every other version of Earth, is the village weirdo famed for acting erratically near urinals, and not, as we have it here on Earth-Prime, the most politically important man in the United Kingdom. But there we are.”

3. Stephen Bush in The i Newspaper

on the battle for the opposition

The Liberal Democrats' dismal polling is down to Jeremy Corbyn - he is the party's real leader

“Lib Dems understandably resent Labour’s attitude that they are, in reality, little more than a strange adjunct onto the United Kingdom’s main opposition party. Labour partisans, too, find it incomprehensible that voters still view the Liberal Democrats, who spent five years sharing power with the Conservatives at Westminster, as a legitimate home for anti-Tory sentiment. But in 2019, as in every election in the modern history of the Liberal Democrats, most voters believe that, given a choice, the Liberal Democrats’ first preference is a deal with Labour – and if the Conservative voters that the party needs to flip to win seats are turned off by the Labour leader, they won’t back the Liberal Democrats.”

4. Judith Woods in The Telegraph

on the beauty of aging

It’s time we woke up to the allure of the older woman

“Young people flinch at our crow’s feet while we see laughter lines. We’ve been round the block often enough not to sweat the small stuff. It’s a curious paradox that young women wear far more make-up than my age group, even though they need it less. Could it be that each of us already grasps the strength and depth of our foundation so we don’t need to keep slathering on more? Just a thought. I have no inclination to stir up an inter-generational catfight, as it only fuels the cliches about women being their own worst enemies. Besides, would any of us swap wisdom for youth? There are good reasons why Freaky Friday is one of the most palm-sweatingly frightening films my demographic will ever watch.”

5. Carlos Eduardo Pina in Al Jazeera

on the overestimation of power

Is Venezuela really a threat to Latin America and the Caribbean?

“On closer inspection, the accusation that the Venezuelan government is a threat to the survival, stability and democratic integrity of the countries in the LAC region appears to be an exaggeration. Caracas currently has neither the intention nor the military, economic or political power to take on any major political actor or alter the dynamics within the region. Caracas' petrol income has reached record lows and its economy is in a shambles. The Maduro government is incapable of providing for its own citizens let alone spending money abroad to hurt its political rivals. Moreover, Venezuela does not currently have the capacity to embark on a military intervention in another country.”

The Week’s daily round-up highlights the five best opinion pieces from across the British and international media, with excerpts from each.

1. Sharelle Jacobs in The Daily Telegraph

on the Conservatives

A shock, 1997-style landslide is suddenly within Boris Johnson's grasp

“The Tories can’t hide their confused fascination with the lack of opposition. They have the flat, adrenaline-pumped feeling of rugby players who have psyched themselves up for the most brutal game of their lives, only for the opposition not to show. In this sense, the parallels with New Labour are glaring. Just as the Conservatives were mired by sleaze then, Labour is soiled by anti-Semitism today. Just as the ’97 Tories couldn’t decide whether to go after Tony Blair for being a diet Marxist or a diet Tory, the Corbynistas have no line of attack. With wages rising again, and the job market defying gravity, the public has no desire to bite on Jeremy Corbyn’s anti-austerity carrot. Aware that class hatred no longer resonates in betrayed blue-collar towns, Labour has been reduced to calling a vegetable a mineral – accusing soggy, herbivorous neo-Cameroonians of being iron-hearted Thatcherites.”

2. David Aaronovitch in The Times

on Labour

The left’s self-righteousness is repellent

“The characteristic flaw of the political right tends to be callous smugness. That of the left is a repellent self-righteousness. The right tends to think everyone is as venal as they are and the left tends to think no one is as virtuous as them. We are on the side of the poor and the downtrodden and we are innately anti-racist and unless you are exactly like us then you must be on the side of the billionaires, the arms manufacturers and the apartheid Israeli state, whoops where did that come from? Under Corbyn, that self-righteousness has intoxicated the troops. From what I can see from their publications and demeanour they genuinely believe that anyone with a contrary view is irredeemably morally deficient.”

3. Stephen Bush in the New Statesman

on the Lib Dems

Jo Swinson began the campaign boasting she would be the next PM, so why did it all go wrong for her?

“The worry that a vote for the Lib Dems is perceived as wasted haunts the party, but it is particularly damaging when voters believe that the outcome of the election as a whole is uncertain. While there are plenty of voters – particularly in the affluent, largely Conservative and pro-Remain constituencies where the party hopes to gain seats – who dislike both Brexit and Corbyn, there are very few who dislike both equally. Most voters are willing either to put aside their doubts about Brexit to prevent a Corbyn-led government, or to sacrifice their concerns about Corbyn to stop Brexit. Swinson’s attempt to cast herself as a potential prime minister was a way to square the circle, and her support for a maximal Remain position was intended to facilitate the realignment to make that possible. But it hasn’t worked. Instead, it has emphasised that the choice in the election is Johnson or Corbyn.”

4. Peter Franklin in Unherd

on the European Union

Should we have just waited for the EU to die?

“If the EU is doomed, we shouldn’t assume that its demise will be gradual and therefore manageable. In the modern world, multi-national political entities have a habit of going out with a bang not a whimper — Yugoslavia, the Soviet Union, various European colonial empires, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, the Ottoman Empire. Of course, the EU is neither an empire nor riven by war; but arguably it’s more easily collapsable, because national governments are already in place to (re)absorb the EU’s functions.”

5. Piers Morgan in the Daily Mail

on giving thanks

Reasons to be thankful: To ten well-known whiners - from Teigen to Trump – on why they really should count their blessings this Thanksgiving

“The rise of social media has made ingratitude almost a badge of honor, something to be aggressively pursued and celebrated. It’s no longer acceptable to be thankful for small mercies. Now, we must stamp our manicured feet like whiny little brats until we get exactly what we want, when we want it – and destroy, cancel and shame anyone who dares to challenge us. This shockingly selfish philosophy is fueled by ego-mad celebrities from all walks of life, whose sense of entitlement knows no bounds and whose tolerance of the word ‘no’ knows no start. These self-aggrandizing malcontents are seemingly oblivious to the fact that they lead some of the most privileged lives in the history of Planet Earth.”

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––For a weekly round-up of the best articles and columns from the UK and abroad, try The Week magazine. Start your trial subscription today –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

The Week’s daily round-up highlights the five best opinion pieces from across the British and international media, with excerpts from each.

1. Martin Fletcher in the New Statesman

on political egotism

How People’s Vote destroyed itself

“When the history of the 2019 general election is written, of how Boris Johnson managed to win a mandate for a catastrophic hard Brexit, a whole chapter should be reserved for the shameful story of the People’s Vote campaign. It will record how the country’s leading pro-European force collapsed on the eve of that momentous vote, betraying the millions of ordinary citizens who had supported, financed and placed great hope in it over the past three years. It will tell a tawdry tale of political shenanigans and clashing egos; of leaks, smears, charges and countercharges; of startlingly vicious infighting that spiralled so hopelessly out of control that 40 energetic, experienced and deeply committed young campaign staffers found themselves sitting in a Thames-side pub in Pimlico as the general election gathered pace, trading legal threats with the multi-millionaire head of one of Britain’s top public relations companies, instead of battling for the nation’s votes.”

2. Sherelle Jacobs in The Telegraph

on Britain’s third party

Unable to stem their Remainer exodus, the Lib Dems are on the verge of crashing and burning

“Here is the thing about the Liberal Democrats: their claim to represent a peppy new political alternative is a conceit. They are a clapped-out old rocker of a political movement. The Liberals have not come up with a genuinely new domestic policy since Beveridge’s trail-blazing social reformism. Their vision of the future – which mixes bureaucratic despotism and moth-eaten retro-socialism – is Fleetwood Mac riffing off North Korea. On paper, as a third party, they make no sense, given that the most compelling gap in the political market exists across the country’s rust belt – the Midlands, North and Wales. But, imprisoned by their own snobbery, the Lib Dems have opted to scrap for airtime in the most overcrowded space – Remainia – where centrist Tories and Labour’s dominant wing vie for favour.”

3. Robert Hardman in the Daily Mail

on Prince Andrew

This isn’t a short-term solution. It’s early retirement

“On the basis that everyone is innocent until proved guilty, some will simply leave things as they are and see how events unfold. What is clear, however, is that this is not a short-term solution while things ‘die down’. Until there is some sort of legal resolution, this is early retirement. Palace officials understand the importance of getting a grip – and of being seen to get a grip – on the helm after the most turbulent royal year in more than two decades.”

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––For a weekly round-up of the best articles and columns from the UK and abroad, try The Week magazine. Start your trial subscription today –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

4. Bret Stephens in The New York Times

on a two-state solution in the Middle East

One thing Trump gets right

“The core problem with the past half-century of failed peacemaking efforts has been the facile assumption that meeting the need for two states would ultimately fulfill the requirement for security. The lesson of experience has been the opposite. The failure of Palestinians and their international enablers to satisfy that requirement — or even feign concern for it — has only made the need seem like little more than a remote abstraction to most Israelis.”

5. Jenni Russell in The Times

on digital dystopia

Our addiction to tech is tearing us apart

“The price of living online is not just isolation, as many of us retreat from vulnerability, real trust and the possibility of being understood and known; it is also that, in the cause of the efficiency technology delivers we are being mastered by the machines and the corporations we believe are serving us. We’re becoming disconnected from the real people around us, with the result that both we and they are losing the power to make critical decisions. We’re helpless on the occasions when computer-driven systems suddenly turn against us, morphing from smooth enablers to impenetrable, indifferent granite walls.”

The Week’s daily round-up highlights the five best opinion pieces from across the British and international media, with excerpts from each.

1. Rachel Sylvester in The Times

on the Brexit Party chucking a spanner in the works

Nigel Farage’s move is a mixed blessing for Tories

“The prime minister’s electoral strategy is not based on surfing a ‘blue wave’ to victory - it depends on breaking through the ‘red wall’, winning over a swathe of Leave-voting seats in the north and the Midlands to make up for the losses he expects to suffer in Remain-supporting areas in the south. These are precisely the constituencies that the Brexit Party is now going to throw all its energy into targeting, meaning the Leave vote will be divided in the very places Mr Johnson needs to capture from Labour.”

2. John Rentoul in The Independent

on the reliability of opinion polling

Opinion polls are important, but letting them dictate election coverage is a dangerous game

“In the 1992 election... Labour policies were scrutinised closely not just for themselves but for their acceptability to the Liberal Democrats; there were endless discussions of the mechanics and possible horse-trading of a hung parliament, and in the final week, a huge fuss about electoral reform. Similar things happened in the 2015 election, the 2016 referendum and the 2017 election. In no case were the opinion polls very wrong, but in each case the assumptions built on them coloured the reporting of the campaign, and the result came as a surprise.”

3. Frida Ghitis on CNN

on politicians sleepwalking their way towards removal

Bolivia’s blunt message to leaders drunk on power

“In a perfect situation, Bolivia would have a fuller investigation and a new election with credible results. Instead, Morales has been forced from power by the actions of the military. He and his backers are emphatic that this was a coup. His critics claim his removal saves Bolivian democracy. The coming days will show whether the country can return to peace and a democratic path, or if darker days lie ahead.”

4. Michael Tomasky in The New York Times

on billionaires burying their heads in the sand

Bill Gates, I implore you to connect some dots

“The 400 richest Americans - the top .00025 percent of the population - now own more of the country’s riches than the 150 million adults in the bottom 60 percent of wealth distribution. The 400’s share has tripled since the 1980s. This is carnage, plain and simple. No democratic society can let that keep happening and expect to stay a democracy. It will produce middle and working classes with no sense of security, and when people have no sense that the system is providing them with basic security, they’ll make some odd and desperate choices.”

5. Borisa Falatar in The Guardian

on Europe’s troubling Balkan bluster

Bosnia’s politics are in crisis. But that is reason for the EU to help, not shut us out

“Business as usual will lead to Bosnia’s leadership pivoting to the Gulf states, China and Russia, which will further jeopardise the country’s cohesiveness and its EU future, especially now, when the only national consensus that existed – the hope of EU integration – appears to be indefinitely postponed. It will become ever harder for Bosnia to avoid becoming a testing ground in a new cold war. The European council and the new commission should be braver and more ambitious. Our common values and stability are at stake. Otherwise, all we may be left with is a failed state on the EU’s doorstep and EU flags on humanitarian relief items – sad reminders of a never-realised dream.”

The Week’s daily round-up highlights the five best opinion pieces from across the British and international media, with excerpts from each.

1. David Edgerton in The Guardian

on a very British wake up call

Brexit is a necessary crisis – it reveals Britain’s true place in the world

“But the real story is something much bigger. What is interesting is not so much the connections between capital and the Tory party but their increasing disconnection. Today much of the capital in Britain is not British and not linked to the Conservative party – where for most of the 20th century things looked very different. Once, great capitalists with national, imperial and global interests sat in the Commons and the Lords as Liberals or Conservatives. Between the wars, the Conservatives emerged as the one party of capital, led by great British manufacturers such as Stanley Baldwin and Neville Chamberlain. The Commons and the Lords were soon fuller than ever of Tory businessmen, from the owner of Meccano toys to that of Lyons Corner Houses.”

2. Roger Boyes in The Times

on bubbling unrest in the Middle East

Another Arab Spring threatens to break out

“Across the region regimes are on the hunt for fall guys. Turkey, Qatar and the Muslim Brotherhood are the usual suspects. But the problems are overwhelmingly homemade and government solutions overwhelmingly brutal, just like (or worse than) the bad old days. The countries that today celebrate themselves for beating back Isis may through their misgovernance be simultaneously creating the circumstances for an Isis 2.0. Instead of building the authority of robust state institutions, too many politicians have been focused on building palaces. The real challenge facing these regimes is how to create a political order deriving authority from a sense of genuine citizenship. Until leaders make that leap they will preside over ever weaker, permanently unstable states that stumble into conflict.”

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––For a weekly round-up of the best articles and columns from the UK and abroad, try The Week magazine. Get your first six issues free–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

3. Allison Pearson in The Telegraph

on defections and principles

Heidi Allen was always a fake Tory - it’s no surprise she’s joined the Lib Dem banana republic

“How dare she appropriate the term One Nation Conservative for her sly, self-serving purposes. The nation voted for a Conservative manifesto which, quite specifically, said it would deliver the result of the referendum. Attempting to brand Boris Johnson and other Tories who are fighting to keep that promise as ‘far Right’ is despicable, quite frankly. A clear majority of Conservatives voted to leave the EU; we are not the extremists. And most Tories who voted Remain now fully accept that the party must honour its commitment. Heidi Allen and her disloyal ilk were always fake Tories – let’s call them the All Mod Cons. It suited them to pretend to be Conservatives and they didn’t care how many people’s trust they betrayed so long as it advanced their career.”

4. Jill Filipovic in CNN

on a make-or-break moment for the American right

Even Republicans know that Trump can’t do the job of president

“Which brings us to the sudden stiffening of Republican spines. It’s great that the GOP hawks are criticizing Trump’s foreign policy when it puts US interests and our allies’ lives at risk (although their own taste for forever war, and the military industrial complex dollars it drives, is an enduring and repugnant motive). But it’s telling that Republicans are willing to criticize the President on an issue that hasn’t and likely won’t draw a torrent of disparaging and damaging tweets from the President, and hence likely won’t cost them with voters - very few Americans vote primarily on foreign policy, and the question of whether we abandon the Kurds won’t drive many people to or from the ballot box.”

5. Matthias von Hein in Deutsche Welle

on the “betrayal” of a key ally

The Kurds lose out again

“Human rights organizations decried the systematic destruction of livelihoods, in which Kurdish houses were plundered and, ultimately, Syrian Arabs were settled in the area. Now Erdogan is openly plotting a similar course. He claims he wants to create space for more than three million Syrian refugees who are no longer welcome in Turkey. In the end, that means Erdogan is planning ethnic cleansing to enable the relocation of refugees along the Turkish-Syrian border.”

The Week’s daily round-up highlights the five best opinion pieces from across the British and international media, with excerpts from each.

1. Sean Kemp in The Guardian

on the allure of the centre

The Lib Dems’ by-election victory offers a route to their resurgence

“This is the importance of last night’s result, not as a pseudo opinion poll or a straight indicator of how the parties would fare in an election, but as the latest sign that the Liberal Democrats are a valid option for the many people opposed to Brexit and for those worried by a Conservative party that has decided it doesn’t need their votes. For a party that didn’t have enough MPs for a game of five-a-side football a couple of years ago and was still being written off as practically finished as late as this spring, the last few months and the possible opportunities ahead have felt like rain after a very long drought.”

2. Former Tory MP Rob Wilson in The Daily Telegraph

on a different interpretation of last night’s result

The Tories may have lost, but the Brecon by-election bodes well for Boris Johnson

“This was an election that the Lib Dems threw the kitchen sink at and should have been a shoo-in for them. The fact that it wasn’t and that the Conservatives finished a close second, suggests Boris Johnson has got the Conservatives back into play electorally in what is a high risk winner takes all general election strategy. All the same, nothing in this result suggests anything other than ongoing voter unpredictability.”

3. Ed Conway in The Times

on the underlying problem with economics

You can’t always put a price on what matters

“All too often the market price doesn’t reflect real, underlying value. The classic example is the diamond and water paradox. We would all die without water while diamonds are simply sparkling lumps of carbon, so why is water much cheaper? The answer is that diamonds are scarce and people seem to like them a lot; water, on the other hand, is relatively abundant. Then again, for someone lost in the middle of the Sahara water might well be worth more than a diamond, which underlines another important lesson: price is in the eye of the beholder. The idea that prices are subjective rather than absolute is at the heart of modern economics but it wasn’t always so. Adam Smith and Karl Marx both believed it was possible to work out an objective value for everything from a diamond to a pin manufactured in a factory. That idea went out of fashion about 150 years ago when neoclassical economists decided that what really mattered were the choices we made and the prices we were willing to pay.”

4. Sean O-Grady in The Independent

on the war on plastics

Recycling isn’t going to save the planet – we need to get tough and punish people for using plastic

“We should always be clear; recycling is not going to save the planet. It will merely delay its inevitable demise, and by a relatively insignificant amount in the great cosmic scheme of things. The real problem is our vast over-consumption of everything, and, of course, in such an unsustainable way. So we need to do much, much more to live greener lives, and for that we need more financial incentives (and penalties).”

5. Anna Leszkiewicz in the New Statesman

on how entertainment portrays real-life issues

TV’s climate change problem

“Supernatural or dystopian stories, despite their parallels with reality, often depict environmental apocalypse as spontaneous or unavoidable, or instigated by inscrutable evil. Zombie apocalypses, unexplained toxins and divine intervention are sexier and less discomfiting villains than sheer human arrogance and indifference. But there are ready-made villains for climate narratives, and they look a lot like you and me.”

The Week’s daily round-up highlights the five best opinion pieces from across the British and international media, with excerpts from each.

1. Martha Gill in The Guardian

on Theresa May’s legacy

Theresa May’s positive legacy? She’s a feminist champion

“How history judges the UK’s second female prime minister depends on whether her successor messes up Brexit even more spectacularly than she has done. But she already has one positive legacy despite the fact the battle to be her successor is being fought by two men. She has made the Tory party more female.”

2. Chris Deerin in the New Statesman

on the resurgence of centre politics in Britain

Can the Liberal Democrats save the United Kingdom?

“What, then, is the Lib Dem offer in 2019? It’s clear that Britain’s institutions are in a process of upheaval and in need of reform, that many of its political conventions are being uprooted, and that traditional party affiliations are breaking down. This is all classic Lib Dem territory — constitutional reform, as it affects devolution, the Lords and the voting system, are long-term party passions. Their internationalism, at a time when Britain’s global reputation is taking a self-inflicted battering, is a positive. Given a fair wind, their record as David Cameron’s coalition partner stands up well.”

3. Charles M. Blow in The New York Times

on Donald Trump’s latest twitter outburst

Trump’s Tweets Prove That He Is a Raging Racist

“There can be no more discussion or debate about whether or not Trump is a racist. He is. There can be no more rhetorical juggling about not knowing what’s in his heart. We see what flows out of it. White people and whiteness are the center of the Trump presidency. His primary concern is to defend, protect and promote it. All that threatens it must be attacked and assaulted. Trump is bringing the force of the American presidency to the rescue of white supremacy. And, self-identified Republicans absolutely love him for it.”

4. Edward Lucas in The Times

on disclosing official secrets

Police should be targeting leakers, not editors

“Our ludicrously overzealous system of classification means that even the most anodyne material is technically an official secret. In fact, decision-makers leak all the time, sometimes out of political self-interest, sometimes through gullibility, sometimes for reasons of news management. These rule breaches are the workings of a free society, not crimes. Material that at most embarrasses the government is in a different category from truly secret information that deserves the most ferocious protection of the law.”

5. Tanya Gold in UnHerd

on Prince Charles’ brand

Introducing Charles III

“Brexit is a response, however cracked, to the loss of British glory; or rather the idea of it, for I doubt the profits were distributed as fairly as we like to pretend. Since monarchy is likewise dishonest – it is not apolitical but predicated on its own survival – I suggest that Charles fuse his myth to that of Brexit, and become, at least outwardly, a glorious king of England. He has the golden tools and he should use them; it would be better if he didn’t say too much. He could build an ideal palace – a vast Poundbury – and crown his scatty wife under a mountain of diamonds. That is a solution to Charles III, who is temperamentally unsuited to his future: let the crown wear him.”

BBC One’s A Very English Scandal concluded last night, just as police have been revisiting the case in real life.

The dramatic retelling of the 1970s scandal involving former Liberal leader Jeremy Thorpe was described by The Daily Telegraph as the “best drama of the year so far”.

Hugh Grant gives a “career-defining performance” as the politician accused of conspiring to murder his former lover Norman Scott, says the newspaper.

There were “fabulous performances all round” as Thorpe finally came to trial in the finale “in a sea of hypocrisy, prejudice, ghastly snobbery, injustice and a chorus of tittering from the public gallery”, says The Guardian.

The three-part drama, written by Russell T. Davies and directed by Stephen Frears, was “lively and funny and joyously irreverent, a thumbed nose to propriety that delights in showing the old boys’ club with its knickers down”, says Den of Geek.

But the story has not been confined to the realms of period drama.

A re-investigation into the attempted murder was closed last year, with police under the impression that Andrew Newton, who claimed he was paid to kill Scott, was dead.

In the past week, police admitted that Newton might still be alive and have apparently tracked him down to a house in Surrey living under a new name.

Here's what you need to know about the scandal:

Who was Jeremy Thorpe?

Thorpe was an MP for North Devon from 1959 to 1979 and became leader of the Liberal Party in 1967, aged 37, making him the youngest head of a UK political party in 100 years.

Thorpe had shades of his much-later successor, Nick Clegg, as he was ”the beguiling, charismatic leader of a minority party that was developing interesting, radical ideas about what politics was for”, says The Guardian’s Anne Perkins.

The Liberal party improved its standing in parliament throughout his leadership and, by 1974, “he seemed on the brink of power”, says The Independent. The party garnered 20% of the vote in that year’s election but, more importantly, ”Thorpe was the most popular party leader, and (then PM Edward) Heath seemed willing to offer him a power-sharing coalition”.

But in a biography that had to wait until Thorpe’s death before it could be published, Bloch characterised him as a politician who thought the rules were for little people - a bisexual man, who “loved illicit sex for both the immediate excitement, and the later thrill of being able to extricate himself from any potential scandal”.

Though Thorpe was acquitted in 1979, his career never recovered. He died in 2014, aged 85, after a long battle with Parkinson’s.

How did the scandal start?

It arose from allegations by Norman Scott, that he and Thorpe had shared a homosexual relationship in the early 1960s.

Thorpe denied any such relationship, while admitting that the two had been friends. With help from those within the political establishment, he was able to ensure that rumours of misconduct went unreported for more than a decade.

During this time though, “the paths of the two men crossed and recrossed, Thorpe’s career advancing as Scott, suffering from recurring mental illness, struggled”, says Perkins.

Eventually, ”Thorpe and his small gang of cronies concluded Scott was a threat to Thorpe and the party”, Perkins adds.

It was the shooting of Scott’s dog, Rinka, in a layby in Exmoor on 23 October 1975 that “set in motion a chain of events that finally exposed a scandal that might otherwise have lain dormant”, says The Independent.

In May 1976, newspaper revelations prompted by the shooting meant Thorpe was forced to resign as leader. And in 1979 he was tried at the Old Bailey in London for having conspired to murder Scott, with the prosecution alleging the gunman in Exmoor, Andrew Newton, had been paid to shoot Scott.

Before the case came to trial, Thorpe lost his parliamentary seat in the May 1979 general election.

Why is the story still relevant today?

Thorpe’s legacy is a “disfigured memorial to the way the establishment could still look after its own even as the forces of modernity slowly washed away at its foundations”, says Perkins.

Indeed, much of the emphasis now is on “the way the ruling class sheltered Thorpe as long as possible”, says the Financial Times’s Robert Shrimsley. Thorpe, educated at Eton and Oxford, the son and grandson of Tory MPs, was “establishment to the core”.

At his trial, judge Sir Joseph Cantley’s summary was virtually a speech for the defence, famously saying of Thorpe’s chief accuser: “He is a crook, a fraud, a sponger, a whiner and a parasite . . . But, of course, he could still be telling the truth.”

This was because homosexuality may have been legal by the 1970s “but it was barely tolerated”, says Shrimsley.

“Revulsion, mockery or pity were the only acceptable responses,” he says, noting that the Private Eye cover bore the words “buggers can’t be losers” following Thorpe’s acquittal in 1979.

Indeed the judge’s “summing up was so comically biased it became the basis of a famous sketch by Peter Cook”, adds The Independent.

The real story of the Thorpe affair, then, “is the state-sanctioned climate of hostility in which gay men understood that exposure meant ruin”, Shrimsley adds. “We have travelled so far and so fast that it now seems astonishing to recall how bad things were so recently”.