Gordon brown

1404, PH: We'll be live-blogging Brown's conference speech from 1415 onwards.  In the meantime, CoffeeHousers, your thoughts on how our PM will kick things off.  Last year, of course, he got Sarah Brown to introduce him.  Will he repeat the trick this year?  Or will he get someone else?  Mandelson, perhaps?  Or someone off X-Factor?  Or will it be nothing flash, just Gordon?  Your predictions, please... 1405, PH: Brother Massie is also live-blogging the speech here. 1410, PH: Oh, and you can watch the speech here. 1416, PH: So what will Brown actually say?  Well, his announcements on anti-social behaviour and childcare have been heavily trailed.

Tom Watson has told the Times that Tony Blair should hit the campaign trail "if he fancies it". There have been rumours that both Blairs will campaign at the next election, but this is the first time, to my knowledge, that a Brownite has publicly implored the former PM to return to the fold, and perhaps it's a measure of the Brown camp's increasing desperation that they are prepared to bury the hatchet. I've no doubt that Blair will answer the call, he would have done so had no call come. His input will be valued by a party that grew accustomed to victory under his leadership, even if he only inspires false self-confidence. But, after 12 years of government and the catastrophic Brown premiership, I doubt whether even Blair can avert the inevitable.

Andrew Marr asking Gordon Brown if he was on anti-depressants was a real surprise. When I first heard that Marr had put this question to Brown, I thought there was a possibility that Labour aides had let it be known that the Prime Minister would like the chance to shoot down these rumours. But Brown’s reaction, suggests he wasn’t expecting the question. One can see why Marr asked the question: if Brown was on anti-depressants that could affect his judgement then the public has a right to know. It wasn’t in the public interest, as Andrew Marr seemed to acknowledge in his interview with George Osborne, that the BBC sat on the story of Charles Kennedy’s drinking. Also, one can argue that once the rumour is out there it needs to be dealt with.

Today’s papers give us an idea of what Labour’s new dividing line with the Tories is going to be. Labour will find money for eye-catching but not too costly initiatives such as the cancer pledge that the papers have reported on this morning. These pledges will be financed by taking money from the less sexy parts of departmental budgets. Labour will then ask, as Pete noted Ed Balls doing today, how the Tories can match this spending when they are committed to paying down the deficit faster than the government and to reversing several of Labour’s tax rises.

It's the question that won't go away for Gordon Brown: should he - will he -  take part in a televised leaders' debate?  On this weekend's Straight Talk, Andrew Neil takes the opportunity to quiz Ben Bradshaw about his views on the matter.  Here's how the Culture Secretary responds: "I don’t think [Brown]’s got anything to lose by doing that ....  My advice to him would say, I think you’ve got the arguments, you’ve made the right decisions, you could demolish that guy." Like Mandelson's interventions before now, Bradshaw's advice will slightly raise the pressure on Brown to take part in a debate.  But the first half of it also chimes with what a lot of Labour folk are saying around Westminster.

The news that Max Clifford is now involved in publicising the story of Baroness Scotland and the illegal cleaner is another blow to an already bruised Labour party. One of the last things that it needs is the beginning of its conference being overshadowed by a story that combines the two toxic issues of political hypocrisy and immigration violations.