Political management has had a bad name. ‘Control-freakery’, ‘Spin’, ‘Stalinism’. I know, I know – I don’t get, they’re not insults to me either, but they have been to the political classes at large. It was one of David Cameron’s oddest ambitions to be both the ‘heir to Blair’ but also the ‘anti-Blair’. Perversely for a Conservative prime minister his success has been cast by him in terms of how much he has continued Tony Blair’s legacy (designed to annoy the Labur left) and how much he had to change because of Blair’s mismanagement (designed to annoy Blairites). In the mix he missed the point – he should have learned from Blair how to lead, not what to do.

In difficult times the word that came most often to Tony’s lips was ‘grip’. Complex, difficult, controversial issues had to be gripped – controlled and actively managed. This is the point. Political management is for a purpose – not the suppression of dissent but the maintenance of the course you are on.

Every government will be buffetted by events, it is unavoidable. The question is how you respond to them. A strong overarching strategy gives you something to steer back to. An effective political operation gives you the ability to get back on track quickly.

The Maria Miller scandal reinforces what we know already know about Downing Street – it is neither respected nor feared within the Tory party. Indeed, Miller believed she could ignore No 10’s advice and still be backed by the prime minister. And she was right – Cameron stuck with her, even after the contemptuous apology. Less noticed than the abject failure of political management over the last week has been what it highlights about the Tory strategy in government. Or rather the lack of it. Nye Bevan said that socialism was what Labour governments do. Apparently Cameron is – in this regard – a Bevanite. Conservatism is whatever he chooses to do. And it is indeed what he chooses. Notoriously the prime minister is his own main adviser. They say a criminal who defends himself in court has a fool for a client, so a leader who brooks no advice but his own is ill-advised.

But it is not enough for our enemies to fail – our friends must also succeed. In just over a year Ed Miliband will be prime minister. How would he handle a political crisis? So far he has only had one internal one – Falkirk – and that was small beer. Prospective candidates recruit supporters? OMG.  It is what candidates do. In Australia it has its own verb – ‘branch-stacking’. Otherwise Ed has enjoyed a loyalty he has earned. Tough times are, though, what reveals. So far, so good. Internal advisers – like Greg Beales, Bob Roberts and Tom Baldwin – are as good as they get. External voices – like Stewart Wood and Jon Cruddas – are as challenging as you need. But when the rubber hits the road? When, in Hunter S Thompson’s words, the going gets weird. Well, we know Ed Miliband is ruthless – and that’s a start. But will he have an office that, as we used to say at school, ‘kicks to kill’? We shall see.

—

One of the by-products of the Maria Miller scandal has been a resurgence in people arguing for recall of MPs. To be honest, I have not come across a dafter idea in politics in my life. (At least nationalising the top 100 companies had some logic.)

The objections are threefold. First, this is a solution in search of a problem. MPs tied up in genuine scandals lose their jobs and lose their seats. Second, as the contortions Nick Clegg went into with his white paper show, it is really hard to make this a power focused on abuse of office. Which leads to the third objection – it is a licence for vexatious recall. Imagine what mischief Tom Watson and I, backed with Unite money, could cause for marginal seat MPs opposing a Labour government … Hang on, maybe there is something smart about Total Recall.

—

Finally, Ukip. It is a pleasant irony that, while they do not come to the expenses story with entirely clean hands, they can now use it to such advantage against the Tories. There is nothing more pleasant to a progressive than a split in the centre-right – unless that is a split in the hard-left.

Anyway, there is an interesting contrarian position developing that Ukip is a bigger threat to the Labour party than to the Tory party. Yes, that is the same party who gave Labour a 60-seat majority in 2005 by taking 1,500 votes off every Tory in England. So this proposition is not just counterintuitive but counterfactual.

It comes, though, from two of the brightest young academics in the country – Rob Ford and Matthew Goodwin. Their book ‘Revolt on the Right’ is a must read. An in-depth, and at times, intimate study of Ukip’s leadership, membership, organisation, activists and supporters.

It is exemplary in every way. Apart from the utterly barking view that Ukip is – in the end – a big threat to Labour. Their proof? That a Ukip surge will place them second in a huge range of Labour seats. Sounds worrying until you read the detail. We are talking about Ukip replacing the Tories as the ‘challenger’ in Ebbw Vale, Blaenau Gwent … Need I go on? The revolt on the right remains a crisis of the right.

———————————

John McTernan is former political secretary at 10 Downing Street and was director of communications for former prime minister of Australia Julia Gillard. He writes The Last Word column on Progress and tweets @johnmcternan

———————————

Photo: Alan in Belfast