Labour party

It's all very well and good getting excited about the American elections. But let's face it, they were but the appetiser before today's Westminster by-election in Glenrothes. The Kingdom of Fife is a strange place indeed, a sentiment confirmed by the whispers we now hear that Labour have managed to hold the seat. On the face of it, defending a seat against the 14 point swing needed for you to lose is no great triumph. And yet on this occasion it is, in fact, a rather spectacular victory for Gordon Brown. True, it's his back yard (he represents the neighbouring constituency) and both he and his wife have campaigned in Glenrothes. In such circumstances it would be highly embarrassing for Labour to lose.

I'm glad Trixy reminded me about the startlingly daft speech Hazel Blears, the Communities Minister (whatever that means), gave to the Hansard Society the other day. Though the irrepressible Mrs Blears was correct to bemoan the rise of a political class with no hinterland beyond Westminster (this also applies to the media classes, of course), it was her comments about blogs that were the purest Class A piffle. Apparently: Until political blogging 'adds value' to our political culture, by allowing new voices, ideas and legitimate protest and challenge, and until the mainstream media reports politics in a calmer, more responsible manner, it will continue to fuel a culture of cynicism and despair.

Campaigning is underway in the Glenrothes by-election. Yesterday Sarah Brown, the Prime Minister's wife, made her election debut, knocking on doors in, of all places, bonny Cardenden. How did that go? Not so well, it seems. My friend Stephen McGinty has a fine, entertaining account in today's Scotsman: SHE was supposed to be Labour's secret weapon, but Sarah Brown ended up being so "secret" yesterday that no-one from the press was allowed to ask her any questions. It was clear from the moment she arrived in Cardenden to campaign on behalf of the Labour Party that she was not there to speak to the ordinary members of the public. The Prime Minister's wife was instead there to be seen to speak to ordinary members of the public...

Peers reject the notion that it's fine to lock people up for six weeks without even telling them why and how does the Home Secretary respond? Well, yet again, by impugning the motives of those opposed to granting the state these extraordinary powers: "I deeply regret that some have been prepared to ignore the terrorist threat, for fear of taking a tough but necessary decision." And so the Labour party adopts the bullying thuggery that characterises much of the modern Republican party's approach to security issues. Power corrupts, of course and Jacqui Smith should be ashamed of herself. Curiously, those ignoring the terrorist threat included not one but two former heads of MI5, the domestic security service, who, now appointed to the House of Lords, voted against the government.

The issue of whether the state can lock-you up indefinitely  for up to 42 days without even the courtesy of telling you why is back. Happily, the House of Lords seems certain to reject the government's plans, sending them back to the Commons where, again hopefully, they will finally die. Here's Labour MP Tom Harris, however, explaining that if you opposed giving the state these powers you're a "civil liberties" (feel the sneer with which he writes these words!) nutcase and if there's another terrorist attack on Britain, it will be your fault... It’s no secret that, along with the great, wise majority of our nation, I support a radical extension of the length of time the police can detain terrorist suspects without trial.

As expected, David Cameron's speech has been well received. In the Telegraph, Iain Martin says this was the moment Cameron "came out as a Conservative".  Indeed so. But amidst the sobriety and the resolution, there were moments of populist blue meat too. The BBC's mini-focus group particularly loved this passage: For Labour there is only the state and the individual, nothing in between. No family to rely on, no friend to depend on, no community to call on. No neighbourhood to grow in, no faith to share in, no charities to work in. No-one but the Minister, nowhere but Whitehall, no such thing as society - just them, and their laws, and their rules, and their arrogance. You cannot run our country like this.

Jackie Ashley argues that Gordon Brown deserves the extra time she thinks he bought with his speech yesterday, even though she concedes it won't be nearly enough to save him in the long run. But I was also struck by this: His wife Sarah's appearance was touching and starry: she is truly his greatest asset. Iron rule of politics: anytime hacks start referring to the leader's spouse as his/her "greatest asset" it's time for sentient folk to head for the lifeboats. cf,  Laura Bush. A good wife (or husband) is not enough. Sarah Brown's appearance introducing the Prime Minister was a) obviously borrowed from American politica and, more importantly, b) a sign of weakness not strength. She was there as a sort of human shield to protect Gordon from the nasties who want to do him in.

So, Gordon Brown's speech to the Labour party conferene wasn't terrible. By which I mean that it clearly pleased his audience. And his "This is no time for a novice" line was an entertaining slap aimed at both David Cameron and David Miliband. But that carries danger too: Brown is trying to make the case that only he can be trusted to implement necessary reforms. He is betting that, come the election, voters will choose "experience" over "change". Does that sound familiar? Well, it didn't work for Hillary Clinton did it? And I'm not sure it's going to work for John McCain either. Nor does Brown have the luxury of running against an ncumbent the way McCain can try to leverage his differences with George W Bush or Nicolas Sarkozy was able to run against Jacques Chirac.

How will Lbour fight the next election? Stupidly, it seems. According to a briefing paper obtained by the Guardian, Labour "has decided to attack the Conservatives at the next election as an unreconstructed, dangerous rightwing party that is only masking its true instincts behind slick positioning." Oh dear. Labour argue that: "Occasionally the mask slips and we see the dangerous, old- fashioned Tory rightwing instincts hidden underneath. They believe in unfettered free markets, cuts in public services to fund tax cuts for the richest, and a smaller, less effective government. David Cameron believes Britain would be stronger if we stand alone, rather than come together.

Meanwhile, back in Blighty, former Home Secretary Charles Clarke says Gordon Brown is toast and the PM should "stand down with honour". Just what Labour needed as the conference season looms! Iain Martin's column in the Telegraph today is an entertaining survey of the current, hapless state of the Labour Party: adrift on the high seas, all faith in the skipper lost, but no idea how to organise a mutiny, let alone brave the consequences of such an insurrection: In their plotting, the PM's internal enemies have adopted one of their target's worst traits: procrastination. If Brown declines the opportunity to resign with honour, then Clarke promises that "we" - a group presumed to include former cabinet ministers such as Alan Milburn and Stephen Byers - will take action as yet unspecified.

I read Polly Toynbee today and assumed it had to have been written by some pluck-faced intern charged with writing nonsense in the style of La Toynbee while she gets away from it all at her Tuscan villa. But apparently not. It is not a spoof or a parody. Anyway: Gordon is dead, long live the boy Dave! Seriously. Even so, it's worth noting that even Brown's most deluded defenders are now switching sides. Suddenly everything changed. The burst of optimism was so startling it dazzled those too long trapped deep in a dungeon. In that one moment it was all over for the old leader who had plunged them into these depths. Suddenly here was the chance of escape everyone was waiting for.

Since Camilla Cavendish makes some points in her Times column today that are similar to some I made about David Miliband's leadership challenge yesterday, I obviously think she's written a fine, penetrating piece. As she says, In policy terms, it is the Conservatives who have so far seemed optimistic about the ability of people to make decisions for themselves, and Labour that has made devolving power to a few hospitals and headteachers look like an am-dram production, involving more histrionics and agonising than Racine. The irony is that where it has devolved most power - to Scotland and Wales - it has let nationalists hollow out its core vote. This last point - about devolution - is not quite right.