05 September 2003
Politicians take up their cudgels again on September 8 after their lengthy summer break, and this autumn the fighting is likely to be fiercer than usual.
Unusually, however, the chief adversaries of Tony Blair and his Labour government, now officially the longest serving in history, are his own backbench MPs.
On a range of issues, the prime minister will need to win over his rank-and-file troops just as much as the country at large.
The brave new world of ID cards and, hottest of political hot potatoes, the introduction of top-up university tuition fees, are sure to provoke mutiny on the government's benches in the House of Commons, if, as expected, they feature in November's Queen's Speech.
Along the corridor, meanwhile, the ermine-clad residents of the House of Lords are limbering up for a confrontation or two of their own. It is they who will get the first chance to hobble the government.
When peers return to complete the current Parliamentary session, they will be asked to approve the government's plans to restrict the right to trial by jury, as set out in the Criminal Justice Bill. They are likely to decline.
They will once again vote on the Hunting Bill and, if Labour's Baroness Mallalieu gets her way, will once again throw it out.
Peers will also have to approve the controversial plans for foundation hospitals and on this the fur is sure to fly.
The elder statesmen and women of the upper house can, ultimately, be overruled by means of the Parliament Act, but Labour MPs are another matter.
When the Queen announces the legislative programme for 2003/04, the rank and file will be looking for evidence that ministers are listening to them. Education Secretary Charles Clarke, for one, is likely to disappoint them.
More than 170 Labour MPs have signed a Commons early day motion on top-up fees, warning against the creation of a 'two-tier university system' and beseeching the government to 'adhere to its policy of ruling out such extra charges in this and successive future Parliaments'.
On this issue the opposition goes beyond the Westminster village: many MPs feel queasy at selling the policy to the public because they know they will incur the wrath of middle-class voters.
Additionally, anger within the university sector is widespread: the Association of University Teachers has submitted a motion to the Trades Union Congress's annual conference stating its 'fundamental opposition' to the policy. It is bound to win widespread support.
The motion states: 'Students will end up owing vast sums of money when they graduate and the prospect of such debt levels will undoubtedly deter many working-class students and under-represented groups from going to university.'
But Clarke, for the moment at least, is determined to take on his critics (173 of them at the last count).
He told a conference of Commonwealth universities on September 2: 'At a time of growing pressure on public budgets, it is simply no longer feasible to pay for higher education for all. In England, closing the funding gap entirely through taxpayers' contributions won't happen.'
If, as has been suggested, the government is willing to make substantial concessions to win support for the policy, it seems that nobody has told Clarke.
Perhaps he is drawing inspiration from David Blunkett. The home secretary is apparently intent on introducing ID cards and a Bill is expected to be included in next year's legislative programme.
The opposition on this issue has yet to be quantified, but the Cabinet is rumoured to have given the idea a cool reception, and no doubt before long an obliging backbencher will lay down a critical early day motion to produce a head count.
As if all this was not enough, the prime minister will also have to deal with a stormy conference season, the publication of the Hutton inquiry report, and the lingering suspicion that the war against Iraq was launched on spurious grounds.
He is in for a busy autumn.
PFsep2003
