´óÏó´«Ã½

The date of Mr Blair's departure date will be determined by Mrs Blair. It will be a financial decision.

She will assess financial aspects including taking advice on the pension value of each extra year's service. It is she who will be dragged kicking and screaming from No 10.

what a load of old tosh and pathetic nonsense!

I am trying to think of a Premiership manager who said back in September: 'I'm packing it in some time before the end of the season, lads. Can't say exactly when. But I shall allow my successor plenty of time to find his feet. And I am sure that, whoever takes my place, the team will go on to win the championship.'

No, can't think of one.

PMQ's today felt very different: totally flat on the Labour side. There was a moment when Blair started on his weekly recital about how many millions had been spent in health and education (usually met by loyal cheers on his own side) and there was not even a whimper. He even glanced behind, presumably to check everyone was still there. I suppose the parliamentary party has to make a calculation now. Is it better to let the Conservatives square up to Brown well before a 2009 election and risk Brown becoming unpopular or let this situation rumble on and risk disunity and Labour sliding further in the polls?

"one of Tony Blair's normally loyal Cabinet colleagues who I've spoken to agrees"

Why can't you reveal the source Nick? It means nothing if you don't reveal the souce because you could be making it up.

In a way this last week could prove to be extreamly benficial to Labour. Yes it looks bad now, but the summer break and the world cup should remove it all from the forefronts of peoples minds.

If this week means that Labour aviods going down the route the tories did with Thatcher in 1990. I would imagine that Labour will be very greatful. Afterall it is only in the last 6 months can it be said the tories have finally decided to bury old wounds.

Are they also wondering if GB is a sufficiently appealing and effective communicator to actually retain sufficient middle ground voters? I understand the disatisfaction with TB's lack of value for money delivery ( can anyone identify a substantial government project in IT , Transport, Military or General Infrastructure that has been delivered on time, on budget and to the published quality standards?)but is there any reason to believe Brown will be better? His period as chancellor isn't actually covered in glory when you look at the failure of many of the "money go round" tax and then rebate schemes he has spawned. He seems a man incapable of avoiding complexity, either in action or expression , when simplicity and clarity are called for. He barely gets away with it in his current role and could well appear totally maladroit in the more empathetic areas required of a modern PM. The prospect of a battle of wits and wit with him fronting PMQs must fill many Labour back benchers with dread. Is this why I can never remember him being asked to stand in for TB?

Do footballers still get paid after they have stopped playing? Or is that just deputy Prime Ministers?

The detail of your facts and speculation may be right, but the overall tone isn’t something I would care to be buried under. Like an old friend that's fallen into a rut, I think, a little dash of sunlight in Westminster village would raise your spirits. Who knows, the improvement in morale and playful exploration might illuminate some previously unseen opportunities for joy and celebration.

Hate to see a chap trapped by cynicism. Bad for morale.

I certainly appreciate the analogy to football and for the most part it fits perfectly.
Having watched PMQs today there was a definate lack of support from the Labour benches whereas David Cameron enjoyed far more.
As a current "floating voter" I am feeling rather put off that the successor to Mr Blair is being thrust upon the electorate as a whole and the Labour party in particular, without even a semblance of a proper election.
It also seems that some of the labour party feel the same.
Here's to a fair and real election for the labour leadership otherwise the party may find their election chances severely dented. I certainly would not vote for them otherwise.

My prediction:

When the Prime Minister leaves Downing Street, I think it will be the norm for people to come out and show support for him. His resilience will, I am sure be talked in business conferences across London.

Mr Clinton is right to show support for a man that has had a positive impact on our standard of living. If the Tories had been governing, NHS would not be like it is. If Gordon Brown was governing, I am sure the economy would not be where it is.

The strength of character Mr Blair has shown will only be appreciated once he leaves (and rightly so).

There you go again Robinson.Anonymous sources-your meal ticket! If a 'normally loyal minister' talked to you,tell us who he is.We don't elect anonymous politicians.If you don't,why should we believe you?Apparently Blair/Brown have been at it for years,but I've never heard them say a bad word about each other-it's all down to anonymous sources.Go on name names-let's all have fun!

Tony Blair is always saying such things, Nick; you know that well enough 'cos you tell us about them! :)
He keeps saying he will listen to the people, but he never actually has which is why he has to keep promising too - if he did once then he wouldn't have to again would he? - prefering to believe that he is always right and everyone else is wrong even when his own MP's give him a bloody nose. If he will listen to neither voters nor his own party on matters such as education and so forth, why should he listen now?

I've just been reading about Lord Goldsmith's call for Guantanamo Bay to be closed down. Surely no one in this Government has the courage make such a provocative statement unless they knew that the US has already decided to close it. In which case why has this cherry been given to Goldsmith instead of to one of the more beleaguered ministers? Or maybe that would just be too obvious a stitch-up.

What I don't like is when Brown becomes PM. He will become PM and leader of our country without having been elected and approved by the electorate, which in my view is wrong. There should be a General Election instead.

He hears? but ignores as always!

Just a quick one having just read Nick Robinson's latest web log; Fair play to Robbo (football manager analogies seem to be all the rage at the moment) for bringing a new exciting reporting style to the Beeb's political coverage, just one thought though, As much as it's hard to dislike Robbo's conversational style and trendy spectacles I'm a little dis-heartened by the constant focus on personalities, I'm bored by Gordon and Tony the soap opera. Will they/won't they WHO CARES? Answer Robbo quite a lot - in fact at least five nights a week at the moment. Can we get back to debates about policy? Last time I checked we didn't have a President and personalities came after policy. My take from PMQ's today was that good old Dave Cameron said very little about policy and government business and a lot about the Labour party's favourite soap opera. Less than half the electorate turned out to vote last week and little more than half vote in general elections, small wonder when Robbo's web log’s and reports are fascinated by a melodrama that would put any normal human being right off. Of course Nick Robinson's just one of a host of journalists who dabble in this soap opera script speculation, but with twenty first century reporting styles and what would seem a twenty first century man reporting, Robbo needs to lead the attack with Twenty First Century reports on things that matter to us, the licence fee payer.

Blair has certainly lost control of the dressing room. The linkage with football is very interesting, often when managers announce they are leaving they lose their authority as the players know they are off soon and so they feel they can push the manager further and any repurcussions will not be lasting ones.

John Reid has publically said he wishes Blair had not said he was leaving and I think he is referring to this effect.

This has happened in the past to Alex Ferguson, Gordon Strachan and Sven Goran-Eriksson (at Lazio not England). It now appears to be happening to Blair.

A catalogue of mishaps and no direction has left Tony Blair with no other hope but to hang up his boots now and take an early shower. It is obviously clear that he has spent his time and his once enthusiatsic Blair loving supporters are jumping ship or shouting for change. But is Brown the answer? or do we need a new PM with new politics from another party? YouGov cite a 6% lead in opinion polls for the Tories - is this the answer we have been waiting for?

A catalogue of mishaps and no direction has left Tony Blair with no other hope but to hang up his boots now and take an early shower. It is obviously clear that he has spent his time and his once enthusiatsic Blair loving supporters are jumping ship or shouting for change. But is Brown the answer? or do we need a new PM with new politics from another party? YouGov cite a 6% lead in opinion polls for the Tories - is this the answer we have been waiting for?

Were will it end?
Were will it end?

Tony Blair is a supporter of Newcastle United and parallels can be seen with both his teams, the football one and the political one. When Graham Souness was appointed as manager of Newcastle he had some success but eventually it was clear that the team was not making any further progress and needed some new direction. Glen Roeder, took over and lead the team from the near Premiership relegation to a strong league position. Tony Blair should look at his labour team and realise that he has taken them as far as he is able and a "Glen Roeder" is what is needed to turn things around.

Interesting that you mention the large amount of current Labour MPs who only became MPs in 1997 or afterwards - they seem to have forgotten who they can thank that they are there in the first instance. A little more respect for Tony please, without whom many of them would be nothing.

I'm afraid the football analogy won't get us far. Tony Blair is certainly not a football fan, and has no interest whatsoever in sport except where he can jump on a bandwagon or bask in reflected glory. This is also true of every Government with the possible exception of John Major's in the past 30 years.

Blair might be losing his grip on the leadership of his team and to lose the ability to communicate the way forward, but is that totally his fault? What responsibility do Labour peers have with this and in particular Brown (who would be a disaster as leader of Labour)? Man Utd lost leadership in the Premiership partly because they didn't plan for leadership in the future and didn't watch what their rivals were doing. Labour are doing the same.

Labour survived for many years in the 90s in the same way Tories did in the 80s - due to a lack of opposition. A whisper of good fortune (justified or not) in Tory ranks appears to have escalated the negative chants from within Labour.

Similarly within a year or two of being the best team in the land, Man Utd fans soon forgot what it was like to be the losers and complained how bad things were forgetting previous years of pain.

But if Britain don't want Blair, then the US will take him. They love him! But substance over form isn't what they go for anyways.

Nick,

I don't think that anything "fundamental" has changed, but we might have reached a tipping point when careful politicians such as John Denham speak out. Someone with a history of being willing to risk a career in appropriate circumstances, but otherwise very circumspect.

But I also think that this drama has a way to run...so, please, not every day. How's Tessa's hubby ?

Anything but this (every day) !

kim

I bet you're wishing you hadn't mentioned football now Mr Robinson! I'm all for the football chat but let's keep it in the pub eh?

I WISH the ´óÏó´«Ã½ would show PMQ's in the evening (perhaps edited down to the Tory/Lib Dem leaders' questions) and then have a 60 second analysis about what significance it has for policy the electorate and the leaders authority. Put it on at 10pm for 15 minutes and I'm sure all the usual 'Question Time' audience will rush to their tellies like David Cameron rushing to a new whimsical media-orientated initiative.

after your discription of todays PMQ's
i wanted to see it for myself on the parliament re-run at 1.30am listing.

i,m looking at 9th may HOL.

so why did the bbc take off the PMQ repeats tonight to be replaced by HOL ?.

Why have Brown in the English league, when there is a Scottish league? I say relegate him North.
Tony has been a good leader, even though he is in the wrong party.

I think that Tony's analogy of football manager is accurate except for one thing; it is not a group of premier league players that he is managing but a load of school kids used to a kick around the playground. Is it me or is his party acting like a load of children? Kicking hissy fits because they want someone else to look after them. I think it is about time that they should all look at what is best for the party, which is for them all to get behind their leader, in order to make sure that they have a party left which Gorden Brown would actually want to inherit. Nothing destroys a party's public credibility than a party which cannot unify itself.

And on another note, Russel sugested you didn't really have a source and that you were making it up. I would actually love it if that was true; the notion of Nick Robinson the maverick pot stirrer, I love it!

Firstly thank you Nick Robinson for a most excellent page. Surely the issue is one of attitude and perception which are both based on time. Tony Blair's attitude changed after the last election win to one of invincibility which did not match the public perception nor that in the party. Maybe the US have it right, two terms of four years is the check and balance we need and enough for/of any man! Game over by Christmas.

I would imagine that Tony Blair cannot even think of resigning. Afterall, he has tenants in his own house and must wait until their tenancy ends. It would be interesting to know if they have been notice to quit.

Surely the time is now ripe for our Tony to throw it all in and announce his availablility for the England Football manager.

Everything has been set in place for a big fight night.
Gordon has had his friend, Ed Balls brought in off the bench and John(no surrender)Reid has the brief to secure the Country and legacy.
On the back burner is Alan Johnson and Blair babe Milliband.

I can't wait for this 12 rounder.One thing is for certain though, it will be the Labour membership who decide who will lead and enter No.10 not the press or a few pathological Blair hating rebels.

Gary

The most remarkable moment in PMQs yesterday for me was when Blair defended Prescott, following that brilliant question from the Tories - ie. better to pay Prescott not to run a department. All Blair could come up with to justify Prescott's existence was that he'd been in the Deputy PM post for Labour's 3 victories, whereas Heseltine was in post at the Tory defeat in 1997.

Two thngs to note: Blair couldn't suggest one achievement from Prescott in all that time. And, second, it appears Prescott's role is to win elections. Shouldn't he have been paid by the Labour Party then, not the taxpayer?

Nice turnaround with the football analogy, I had hoped you would do it at the time he flippantly tossed it out as a rejoinder.

I see a lonely man these days in the Prime Minister, isolated and entrenched. Fixated by his desperate grip on power and with no relief in sight. Any self respecting, intelligent person with an air for altruism would go. I can only surmise than Tony Blair is none of these things.

A couple of points of information concerning things which have been bugging me:

1. Tony Blair has never been elected by the people as Prime Minister. Our head of state is the Queen, and Tony Blair exercises the royal prerogative in an unelected capacity. He was elected as MP for his constituency; his party elected him as leader. That's the British system, like it or not.

2. So far as having a mandate from the people to serve his third term, I refer to my previous point - but also to the fact that, again as a result of our unique constitution, the Labour party (not TB personally) received well under 50% of the popular vote.

Meanwhile, I think the most interesting thread in these comments is that relating to unnamed sources. I'm glad to know I'm not the only member of the public who has a sense of unreality about the Blair/Brown feud and a feeling that I live in a different world from political journalists. I'd love to see Nick Robinson engage with these questions in good blogging spirit.

I am getting more than a little fed up with the expectation that Gordon will follow Tony.

As a Labour party member I want to have a proper, democratic process with more than one candidate and hustings etc etc

If (more likly when) Gordon wins this process it will only enhance his status as PM and with the electorate.

Nick, why are you and your colleagues not asking questions about this?

i think it is quite obvious that your commentators are getting really fed up with your constant harping on the blair issue.

what i am getting fed up with is the martyred look your face ie when is he going to go and i am going to be proved right - predicting the toppling of a pm

but thats why you are a journalist and not pm

like others have said more on policy please

and anyway if anyone doesnt realise that blair and brown have sorted out the date of handover a long time ago in fact probably before either took office then i am afraid you dont understand the underlying rationale of either of these men

Not sure if anyone has already noticed, but since Nick's previous criticism of the edited transcripts of Tony Blair's press conferences on the , they now seem to have changed policy.

Missing sections are now marked as "(party political content)".

Nick

I note that, of late, many of the leading financial journalists have not been very complimentary about GB's handling of our money.
Such epithets as "pathetis", "not fit to run a whelk stall" etc etc.
Why should we trust him next door?

Dave Camerons displays are becoming more ridiculous by the week. He fails to score points on policy, but goes for the cheap and rehearsed jokes, that have little Willy Hague in stitches. ordon Browns hair does. Maybe they should have gone for Bernard Manning if the point of opposition is to poke fun and make crass comments. Chameleon, comedian... wont be long before he realises that the jokes wear thin before Gordon Browns hair does - yah, yah, yah, yah!!!! ( he says it every week, is it posh for yes??)

But, Nick, this is no football team. This is a government who has failed to protect its people and our values.

There are SO many examples....

As a nurse I feel this acutely. Will I be the next orange, having been peeled, to be thrown on a scrap heap?

Where is your outrage?

Perhaps as Sven is now free he can take over the job of PM when Tony leaves.

What utter rubbish. I agree with the above comments.

A true "blogger" would cite his sources. Mr Robinson, you are an unelected and unaccountable hack - just why are you granted so much air time to speculate your own transparently partisan views at the license payers' expense?

I'd rather listen to my mates' political banter down the local - infinitely more incisive and thought provoking.

If I were Labour, I'd be doing everything I could to fulfil one of my earlier manifesto commitments and introduce some form of proportional representation to the House of Commons. Simply put, it will take a miracle at this point for Labour to get elected again (unless they get a tiny majority and hang on for four years like the Conservatives did, which will really put paid to them). Another 15 years of David "Antichrist" Cameron? No thanks. Give up power in order to hang on to some of it, that's what I advise.

Nick - am I on my own, or do I view Gordon Brown as Prime Minister with unmitigated gloom... NO fan of Tony Blair I have to say - but GB is boring to the point of brain seizure; his record as chancellor is not nearly as wonderful as we are made to believe - and such tv performances as I have managed to stay awake through talk about 'What we want to see/achieve...etc' - so once more its - 'We've had nine years in power, but still have to come out with platitiudes about how wonderful everything is going to be tomorrow...'

Thanks to Ming, Blair got back some of his surety after a better than average Cameron performance. Not much in the news about Blair's demise today (Friday) though. Was it just a squall or is this merely a lull?

I guess the PM will be hoping that England has a fantastic World Cup and thus the media will be diverted from Politics. Or the PM could go and start a war like Francis Urquhart did in the final series of House of Cards. He will also be hoping that the Liberal Democrats woes continue to worsen under their new leader. Also I imagine he will have his fingers crossed that Cameron's A-list candidate business will cause a rebel in the Tory party.

Does Nick think Labour will have a seminal moment like when Geoffrey Howe resigned from the Cabinet in the Thatcher years and delivered a devastating resignation speech? Is there anyone in the current Labour Cabinet who could have that impact?

It's strange. When John Major became Prime Minister wihtout winning a General Election, I don't remember everybody demanding a General Election to give him a mandate.

It's the way our political system works. It's not fair, but that's the way it is until enough people are bothered enough for it to change.

Yes, the scenario (Blair in power, Brownies sniping away to the jornos, Gordy skulking around in the shadows), has worn a bit thin.

Let's look forward to the new scenario : Brown in power, surrounded by that strange collection of nerds, weirdos and professional Scotsmen, known as "the Brownites"....
..... beleaguered by constant leaks and sniping from a (still young, and resentful) Blair, and his gang of severely disappointed groupies. (Imagine what Mandelson, released from duty in Brussels, and with time on his hands, can do).

Should give Nick plenty of new material.

Your cred has been shot to pieces you are now the subject of debate not
the informer like Marr you are being lampooned by Rory Bremner for talking in cliches and hunches. You are now one of them a Blair fave
word is he likes and knows you so bats off your barbed comments.John Oakley was the last ´óÏó´«Ã½ Editor whom was respected and not lampooned because he gave a story without his
personanlity getting in the way.
Your cartoon seen recently odd glasses your delivery etc make us watch you not hear your message
bring back John Sergeant.

Friday's 'Today' programme on Radio 4 reported that the services of Lord Kinnock would probably be called upon to broker a deal between Messrs Blair and Brown in order to effect an orderly transition in the leadership of New Labour.

If Lord Kinnock's track record is anything to go by don't hold out any hopes Gordon.

Deliberately or otherwise, do the personal views and agendas of journalists and editors play a large part in deciding what is reported as news and the emphasis/tone that is placed upon it? Also, once a particular theme has set in within mainstream media, does this help to perpetuate and reinforce that view, with journalists continually looking for the next major story to further the agenda?

I ask this as it seems as if all the revelations about ministers and their failings were very well timed in terms of coming just before the local elections. It just seems as if a cyclical pattern is being followed, where an unpopular government is swept out, with the incoming administration receiving general support which will be eroded over time. This will eventually result in the kind of infighting and back stabbing that seems to be common in parties that have been in power for a while. At the same time, the new opposition will slowly rebuild support and eventually return to power after the new government falls apart.

Having said that, I don’t have anything against these stories being reported, it’s just that I find the timing and continued search for further revelations to be an interesting entertainment. Personally, I am no supporter of Tony Blair and would be interested to see how long David Cameron would be able to hold things together if he won the next election.

At this stage of the game getting rid of the manager (Blair) won't reverse the party's fortunes unless the party realises the changes it needs to make.

The Tory's are pushing engagement and, worse still, being innovative (as far as british politics goes anyway). Their MPs are looking comfortable on the Telly and Radio, talking as if they regularly spend afternoons in voters lounges discussing issues. If Labour aren't going to lose the populist touch further then they are going to have to take to the streets and reinvigorate the electorate's appetite for what Labour's selling.

That's why today's news, even as a Labour supporrter, is so annoying and, frankly, disgusting.

It sounds as if this 'Let's Talk' initiative, weak as it sounds, has been hijacked by No10 and Blair has is to once again focus on Criminal Justice. That's arguably what he's been doing for the last five years! Everytime he wants to exert personal control, he head straight for the Home Office.

What's worse is that, if the reports are to be believe, deliver a sermon that only he knows what kind of criminal justice system the public are crying for. For a political leader that is being attacked for not being in touch with the public wants and views...even I can't quite swallow it.

I thought Blears'`job as Chairperson of the Labour Party was to position the party so that it could properly rengage with the electorate and reinvigate the party's structure - making it 'fit for purpose'? I didn't know that she was simply setting the stage for Blair to fire a knee-jerk sized hole into Human Rights.

If he's going to try and 'fix' the human rights act I say he think it over with a very long holiday and maybe a lecture tour...possibly take Prescott with him.

Right...rant over!

Politics being a dirty game, is there a developing situation ref cash for honours where cronies on the House of Commons committee will call evidence from the same people the police wish to question ?
The objective of this being that any future court case (if such is the result) will fail because the defendants will claim that they cannot get a fair hearing.
One nil to the New Labour spin doctors again !
Don't forget - this one is very close to TB - so No 10 is probably in overdrive on it.
No wonder government of the country has taken a back seat !