From the write up in The Times of the latest Populus poll: “Almost half of voters think that anyone would do a better job than Gordon Brown as Labour leader. Nine months at most from a general election, a Populus poll for The Times suggests that 48 per cent of voters believe that “literally anyone” from Labour’s ranks could do better, without naming alternatives.
I did Lord Myners a disservice by suggesting he’d gone off message by saying that spending would continue until recovery was “firmly rooted”. Peter Mandelson’s cuts speech yesterday supported that line, renewing the cuts versus investment dividing line. Steve Richards argues that the government’s approach is correct and Tory policy is a recipe for disaster. He writes: ‘He (Cameron) is now pledged to a revolutionary shrinking of the state without being able to specify how he will go about making the big changes. His speech last week about cutting the subsidies on meals in parliament was beyond parody. Yesterday Mandelson made use of the space that has opened up in policy terms by highlighting the differences.
The Daily Telegraph reports today that Cherie Blair will campaign for Gordon Brown at the next election. She told Tim Walker that "I will personally get involved in the electoral campaign". The idea of Cherie campaigning for Gordon is rather comic. Relations between the two were famously tense. At Tony Blair’s last conference as Labour leader, Cherie was heard to say ‘that’s a lie’ when Brown said how much of a privilege he had found it to work with Tony. As Tony Blair quipped in his speech, he never had to worry about Cherie “running off with the bloke next door”. Personally, I’m intrigued by how much campaigning the other Blair will do.
Scoopmeister Paul Waugh has a cracking developing story over at his blog. He revealed earlier that Harriet Harman's people have been canvassing Labour party members with questions like: "Who do you think is the best person to sell the Labour party?" "On a scale of 0 to 5, how do you rate Harriet Harman?" But, now, it turns out that there was another question on the list: "On a scale of 0 to 5, how do you rate Gordon Brown?" Smells fishy, doesn't it? Team Harman are claiming that she's just trying to keep in touch with the Labour grassroots, but it's very difficult not to see this as leadership positioning on her part.
I suspect that union leaders have always believed that they ought to drive the Labour party’s agenda. But now, after a year of economic misery and electoral disasters for the centre-left party leadership, the old left’s confidence is back and ought implies can. In a blatant assault on Blairism, rabble-rouser-in-chief Derek Simpson branded Peter Mandelson, David Miliband and James Purnell as “thick” and “Tories”. I can’t imagine Arthur Scargill, even when completely carried away, denouncing Roy Jenkins or David Owen in such terms, and it speaks volumes about the unions’ expectations of an imminent lurch to the left. Alistair Campbell has attempted to pooh-pooh Simpson’s provocation.
How worried should we be about national debt? I just had a rather enjoyable spat with Will Hutton on Simon Mayo's Five Live programme. The situation is atrocious, I said. And that set him off: why did I use such a word? I replied that we are spending more in debt interest than educating our children or defending the realm. That is a dismal state of affairs, and will soon become even worse. Forget about the economics, it is a moral failure to blithly keep spending now and knowingly saddle the next generation with billions upon billions of our debt to pay off. Hutton said all this was hysterical, that an 80 percent debt ratio has been managed before and will be managed again. But last time, I said, the debt was the price of winning a war.
Peter Mandelson got rather badly caught out on the Today Programme this morning. Mandelson tried to deny that the Labour line was shifting, saying: “You know, I did ask [Robinson] recently when exactly the prime minister had defined this simply and crudely as Labour investment versus Tory cuts, and Nick was unable to [put] his finger on such a quote.” The problem, as Nick Robinson rapidly pointed out, was that Gordon Brown has repeatedly put it that crudely. As for Mandelson’s wise spender line, that’s not particularly new. Gordon Brown told the Labour conference in 1995, “'We want wise spending rather than big spending. We put value-for-money first, and before more money.” If only he had followed his own dictum.
Derek Simpson’s complaint that Labour has failed to keep in touch with its core vote and his half-threat to withdraw Unite’s support over cuts feature prominently across the papers this morning. Simpson’s observation concurs with the consensus that Labour’s disastrous showing in June’s local and European elections and the Norwich by-election was the consequence of its core vote abstaining or defecting to fringe parties; the party’s continued poll freefall is also explained in these terms. So, how to woo the working class and the unions whilst selling divisive public service cuts?
Alsadair Palmer neatly sums up the absurdity of the government’s new child protection plans in the Telegraph: “Once it receives your application, the ISA will invite people to submit information about you. The ISA’s officials will be looking for any claim to the effect that you have done something which might have caused “physical, emotional, financial or developmental harm” to a child. Don’t ask for a definition of such “harm”, for there is none – the term will be interpreted in any way the Government’s assessors choose. Those assessors will not be required to ascertain whether or not “harm” actually took place, nor whether you were in fact the cause of it.
Perhaps Lord Myners hasn’t seen the cuts memo because he appeared on Sky News this morning trying to convince the world that Britain can and must maintain its current spending levels. Despite concerns over the budget deficit, a reality that even the Prime Minister acknowledges, Lord Myners said: "We're keeping people in their jobs we're keeping people in their houses we're being sensitive to the needs of the community. That programme must not stop until the recovery is firmly rooted. "We can afford to do it and it's quite evident from the fact that we are able to raise money in international bond market. The willingness to support us is there.
The question of Gordon Brown’s leadership won’t go away, but there’s a feeling that nothing will happen for a while yet. Andrew Grice writes in The Independent today that the coup might come in December: “Labour's hard left and the trade unions are the dogs that have not barked. The assumption is that they stick with him for fear of something worse, and calculate that their best hope would be to exploit a backlash against New Labour after an election defeat. I am told that their mood is now changing. Some left-wing MPs and union bosses are coming round to the view that they would have an overriding duty to avoid a massacre that could keep the party out of power for a generation.
Communities Secretary John Denham has compared the English Defence League (EDL), the group that has organised protests against what it describes as the ‘Islamification of Britain’, to Oswald Mosley’s Union of British Fascists. Whilst announcing that the government plans to re-engage predominantly white working class voters who are being seduced by the BNP, Denham said: “You could go back to the 1930s if you wanted to - Cable Street and all of those types of things. The tactic of trying to provoke a response in the hope of causing wider violence and mayhem is long established on the far-right and among extremist groups.
That the news that the government wants everyone who gives children a lift anywhere to be CRB checked broke on the same day that it emerged that Haringey council had sent a child to live with the ringleader of the airline bomb plotters is beyond satire. How have we got to a state where parents can’t team up to do a run to Cubs together without the state vetting them while simultaneously a council is sending a child off to be fostered by terrorists? As Mary has argued, CRB checks are one of the big obstacles to volunteering. If the Conservatives really do want to roll forward society, then they are going to have to deal with this CRB craziness and instead apply a bit of a common sense.
"What did he mean by that?" is the question one is left with after reading Derek Simpson’s interview with the Mirror. Simpson tells the paper that New Labour is dead and that "if you could convince me there is somebody who could take over and go down the Old Labour route without hesitation I'd share the view that if Gordon is not prepared to do it he should stand aside and let that person do it. That could save the Labour government.” This is, to put it mildly, rather off message and Unite have rushed out a statement this morning saying that Brown has Simpson’s “full support” and is the “only choice” to lead Labour into the election. But it doesn’t deny what Simpson said.
A neat little anecdote in Steve Richards' column this morning: "When David Cameron bumped into Charles Clarke at the end of the summer, the former Cabinet minister told the Tory leader in relation to the attempted coup: 'Don't worry... we'll be back'. Cameron replied to him only half jokingly: 'That's exactly what I am worried about'.
Charles Clarke has sounded off so often during the Brown premiership that it is tempting not to pay too much attention when he does. But his latest broadside is interesting in that Clarke is having a go at Brown as much from the left as from the right. He again attacks the abolition of the 10p rate and calls for Trident not to be renewed, two things that please the left. But he follows up with two new criticisms of Brown that will play well with the left. He says that Brown’s “toleration of UK tax havens has been a disgrace” and calls for "genuinely fair" corporate taxation. The plot to oust Brown failed because it did not attract enough support from the soft left of the party.
Peter Mandelson’s warning of a double-dip recession is in pretty much all the papers today. There’s no doubt that there is a risk the recession could turn into a W shaped one because the underlying problems in the financial sector have not been properly dealt with. But it also plays into Labour’s political strategy which is to argue that the situation is still so serious that it remains no time for a novice. ‘Don’t let the Tories ruin it’ or ‘Don’t let the Tories throw it away’ are both being mooted as possible Labour election lines. Brown apparently believes that Churchill’s fate shows that the people must not think the danger has passed if he is to win re-election.
So the Daily Mail has another anti-Brown plot rumour for the collection; this one based around the idea that a "Gordon must go" candidate could run for a seat on the PLP's Parliamentary Committee: "Rebels are planning to put up a candidate for the Parliamentary Committee, a panel of senior backbenchers which meets once a week with the Prime Minister, when MPs return to Westminster next month. The 'coup candidate' will run on a single platform - a call for Mr Brown to stand aside and let someone else lead Labour into the General Election... ...MPs will then be able to vote in secret for Mr Brown to stand down, without needing to go public with their views.
Over at his essential blog, Benedict Brogan says that Dave 'n' George deserve some praise for Moody's decision to retain the UK's AAA credit-rating. His thinking: that because Messrs Cameron and Osborne have been going on about debt and the need to cut spending, investors - anticipating a Tory government - are more confident about Things to Come. A similar point is made by Edmund Conway in a comment piece for the Telegraph today: "Part of the reason the debt markets have remained relatively sanguine in the face of a staggering collapse in tax revenues and increase in the deficit is that they are assuming a Conservative victory: when the prospect of an Alan Johnson leadership challenge briefly made a hung parliament more likely, they panicked.
Kevin Maguire, who is keyed into Team Brown more than most journalists, writes that it's looking more and more likely the PM will participate in a televised party leader debate: "Talking to people in and around Downing Street I reckon the odds are shortening (if you can get odds) on Brown agreeing to a TV election debate. It's a no-brainer for a Prime Minister well behind in the polls. There's a touch of the stunt about the Sky News empty chair threat but the channel deserves credit for helping focus minds. Brown's view, I'm told, is now isn't the moment to decide or announce what he'll do in the campaign and, from where he sits, he's probably right. To say Yes would risk triggering another dose of election fever while to say No would look chicken.