Lurching right
A blog or two ago I mocked the spinning of comments made at the political Cabinet about the Tory leader lurching to the right. This morning it finally dawned on me that it is Brown not Cameron who has - to use a phrase bequeathed to British politics by Alastair Campbell - "lurched to the right". In terms of political strategy it's brilliant and accounts for many of the Tories problems.
First, Brown lurched to the right by posing in front of a Union Jack and a slogan "Brown for Britain".
Then he did so by hiring the former head of the CBI and a former head of the Navy for his "government of all the talents".
Next he did so on gambling, followed by cannabis. All, as I have written before, calculated to provoke purrs of approval from the Daily Mail.
Today about deporting foreign prisoners (a reheat, I'm told, of an announcement made by officials some weeks before he became PM) and terror laws. What's more, there's an intriguing hint in The Sun about him announcing a border police force today. If true, that would presumably be the one proposed by Michael Howard and, er, David Cameron.
Brown has moved to occupy ground left free by Cameron's efforts to prove that the Tories have changed. He's done it in a way that maximises destabilising pressure from Tory MPs and what we used to call the Tory press to, you've guessed it, "lurch to the right". And he's made each of his announcements on the one day of the week when the Tory leader used to be able to count on setting the agenda - PMQs day.
The left meanwhile have been given very little to celebrate save for a man they trust replacing a man they'd come to loathe.
Clever isn't it?
Update 12:28 PM: Well well. David Cameron had a choice at PMQs - to defy his critics or to woo them. He chose the latter by "banging on about" (his phrase not mine) Europe and thus allowing Labour to say that he's, you've guessed it, "lurching to the right". He must be very worried.
Update 12:39 PM: So there you have it. Gordon Brown has just announced not a National Border Police Force (the Tories' idea). Deary me, no. He has instead announced his backing for something he's calling a Unified Border Force who will wear uniforms. Imitation is the......
I'm 
Comments
Clever doesn't come close to describing Mr Brown and his political skill. I've, personally, been taken by suprise, and I'm sure I'm not the only Tory who has been. Knocked off my political feet by a big clunking fist some might say.
I'll be keeping an eye on how well public opinion carries through the summer break, because there are only so many policies one man can steal and issues he can flip-flop on before making a mistake.
The Brown machine is impressive, but will suffer the same fate as Cameron. It'll stall. I just hope he doesn't call an election before that happens.
Nick,
What is clever is how Brown has got you in the media reporting his spin without being even a little bit critical. If you actually asked some difficult questions, like why did the Walham substation have no flood defences, or how many flood victims did Brown actually met when he went of his flying over, then perhaps he wouldn't seem so 'clever'.
I was a little surprised to see Brown and yourself being quite so cosy last night on the Ten O Clock news. This seems to be an interesting move on the PM's part. I understand that it is important to get the message out, but I got the impression that you were a little puppet like...
I've always known Brown to be an extremely good politician and strategist. If there is one person in labour I can actually respect, it's brown (doesn't mean I like everything he's doing though).
Border Police: Yes.
Deport Crooks: Yes.
Illegal imprisonment i.e. imprisonment without charge for increasing lengths of time: No way. Isn't that what dictatorships and police states are notorious for?
On issues like unity, order, and performance, I'm as hard right as it gets. On investing in the bottom, integrity, and consideration, I'm as hard left as it gets. In fact, I could be hard left or hard right on work and society depending on which way you prefer it. Personally, I prefer to favour neither right nor left but what is appropriate to the moment.
Gordon Brown is good but there's little or nothing he's doing that I can't dig up an email to my MP about. He's made some good moves and had some luck on his side. The difference is Gordon Brown is in charge and I'm not. Big deal. If a leader is doing things I'm happy about there's not much need for chest beating. Best do something useful instead.
In one of my comments that never made it through moderation, I suggest that Britain has effectively become a one party state and that the Liberal Democrats and Conservatives have become mere parties of influence, or the protest group and charity of state. I'm not especially worried as too much freedom and democracy has become a problem.
I didn't watch the news or vote because neither were fit for purpose. Now, I'm becoming inclined not to watch the news or vote because they're heading in the right direction. Stuff happens, things change, life goes on. "Doing nothing" is a Daoist concept and can be a little tricky to grasp but quiet effective. Campbell and Cameron might like to give it a go.
The big thing in politics is positioning and marketing, or setting the agenda and staying in touch with focus groups. This emerged out of consumerism and has been adapted from business by politicians. It's effective as it fakes the "hero" personality but where reality doesn't match rhetoric it causes problems. All that glitters is not gold, etcetera.
Some advice I had from my mother years ago, that I wilfully ignored, was keep your mouth shut and pay attention to your own duties. Yeah, I can see that now. It's more frivolous Daoist equivalent is smile and pretend you enjoy it. It's not the barn storming and flashing of swords that Gordon Brown is inviting but bending like a blade of grass in the wind, or being alert and open to opportunity.
Wake up. Be happy. Succeed. It doesn't get any easier, and if Campbell, Cameron, and assorted back benchers get their head around this, improvements in quality, positive consensus, and wellbeing should occur of their own accord. Fighting just gets everyone annoyed, works up a sweat, and drags everything down, so why do it? Do nothing.
An helps illuminate this point.
Wasn't there something about things being announced in parliament before they were announced in the news and papers?
That didn't last very long did it? Couple of weeks and we are back to the same old 7am announcments of the the PM is think of announcing today.
And as for why did walham substation have no flood defences? Was it built under New Labour? and has the area flooded before? Don't think we can blame that one on Gordon. Much as most people would like to.
Do you really think his strategy is 'brilliant', Nick? Some of us would call it 'cynical and manipulative'. And the sad thing is that it is what we have come to expect from our politicians.
The 10 o'clock news bordered on propaganda last night - Brown as the country's savious and statesman. A bad editorial decision.
Cameron needs to come out with 3 or 4 main policies to provide a USP. He then needs to find 4 or 5 front bench spokesman who don't look and sound like chinless wonders. Osbourne might be clever but he's not exactly voter friendly. Only Hague cuts it - they should tempt Clegg and Laws from the Lib Dems. People need to have some idea of what is going to happen if the Tories win and know who's going to make it happen. Once that is done to natural inertia to stop trusting the devil you know will dissipate. Brown's current bounce is irrelevant all this - most people have no interest in these sort of announcements.
Clever perhaps, but is this really in the best interests of the country? The public are getting less and less to choose from at elections, as both parties continue to squabble over the same ground. It seems to me that our first past the post electoral system encourages this, and is in need of reform.
Interesting how it is Labour lurching to the right... imitation is the sincerest form of flattery?
What is clever about Brown is how he has got the 大象传媒 on-side. The News at 10 and newsnight present what are basically puff-pieces on Brown at the moment. My stomach turns whenever the piece kicks off.
Last nights news at 10, in which frankly you were highly complicit was for about half it's running time, basically a Labour party political broadcast. Cue camera focusing on Palmerston (I think it was anyway, I'm sure you can correct!) then cutting to Brown...sub-text - a strong PM defending Britain's interests and facing down our foes.
You asked Brown about cutting spending on flood defences and he gave a highly deceitful answer around doubling the budget on flood defences (note: the line has now changed to 艁300M in 1997 now 艁800M - but you have to check what's included!). This time last year the (as was) DEFRA budget was cut with a knock on cut in Flood defences. It's hard to see how much was cut as the numbers are very opaque, but to answer as Brown did was highly deceitful. And you barely murmured in protest.
I'm sure the 大象传媒 won't publish this comment.
Sorry Nick, but your article is a bit too sycophantic for me, are you now working for Browns Broadcasting Corporation I wonder? But let us look at Browns brilliant strategy with a bit more of a critical eye:
Firstly, never trust a man who wraps himself in the Union Flag, especially a man who is doing it just to detract voters from his West Lothian Status and who wants to surrender Britain to the EU.
Secondly, as far as gambling and cannabis are concerned, he is simply doing what common sense tells him. No doubt he will next turn his attentions to the alcohol abuse resulting from our overly liberalistic licensing laws.
Thirdly, by telling Sun Readers what they want to hear about foreign prisoners, terror laws and a border police, Brown is simply acknowledging that a lot of what Michael Howard argued for in 2005 and was criticised for, was in fact correct all along.
So if a brilliant political strategy involves superficial spin, tackling problems your own party have created and stealing the policies of your opponents because you realise they are better than your own, whilst also upsetting many on your own side, then yes Brown is doing fine.
I would agree with Tom Bardwell. Your piece in Number 10 last night must have had Gordon Brown punching the air. He knows David Cameron is looking uncomfortable in Rwanda, so what does he do? He invites you in to Number 10, where he can look in command and prime ministerial, while also appearing respectful to his ministers and he makes sure that he slips in the bit about being in briefings about Wallam substation until 11pm. I'm not saying it was entirely cynical but it was good PR and quite canny. A separate clip about previous civil engineering recommendations for flood defences after the floods in 2000 barely got airtime.
i agree nick its not cameron's finest hour and i am a huge supporter. PMQs showed today cameron trying to please his right wingers while at the same time leaving brown for a field day on the tory troubles
but i gotta say the media is becoming somewhat blind by brown and giving him a free ride as to say his the new kid of the block when its the same person who's been sharing power with blair for the past 10 years.
cameron's needs some credit given the statement on terror laws just now.
alot of what brown has said including the border police force is tory policy but i spose cameron can't keep saying hey these were mine not yours
I am getting the impression that you have already forgotten Brown's first words as PM, Nick.
LET THE CHANGE BEGIN. Does that not mean, that one has to STOP living in the past?
Regarding Cameron, us ex tories, have already shown our opinion about this guy. Sack him now or we will be in oblivion for another 15 years.
Nonsensical to characterise the policies referred to as left or right unless you live in the cartoon world of so many political commentators.
Permitting vast gambling dens strikes me as liberal (right wing?) economics - deregulation is supposedly right wing, isn't it?
No party has a monopoly on the union flag; se George Orwell for, perhaps, the most famous British Patriot socialist.
If he seeks to employ talented people of various views and from various backgrounds is that really right wing? Strikes me as pragmatic, a word usually asociated with the late Harold Wilson, usually characterised as left wing.
Calls for legalisation of cannabis come from left right and centre, so how is reclassification in the light of yet greater strengths of the drug being on the illegal market a left - right issue?
The most effective border police I have come across were in Cuba, this again is hardly anything more than a practical matter.
Gordon Brown is remarkable, perhaps not left wing, or right wing, but, as Bob Dylan wrote prophetically, upwing.
MacCamaroon will weep.
It is clever of the Government to occupy Tory ground after having forced the Tories themselves to concede some of it through accusations of one sort of another. But the problem with such politiking is this: if the policies the Government are proposing is simply clever posturing to win votes they they will fail and will have wasted valuable time, opportunities and money along with it. One needs to buy into the philosophical belief underpinning policies on controlled immigration and drugs for them to succeed and I don't believe the Government is at that point. And anyway, it really is starting to get a bit rich, that after so much wasted time and money the Government is starting to propose doing things the Tories were going on about - and were being criticised heavily for - years ago. A wasted decade.
Update:
No idea if my post got through the moderation but Jonathan Freedland gives a good comment on , and Simon Jenkins echoes my own comments by exploring . Taken as a whole they both form an interesting insight into the yin and yang of leadership. Recommended reading.
Normally greatly admiring of your performance, I agree with other correspondents about your sheep-like following of the PM around Downing Street listening to him mouthing meaningless sentences without a single searching question about the conduct of the public response to the floods.
What was the deal?
Shame on you for failing to mention the not-insignificant fact that Brown still wants to waste six billion pounds on identity cards, while the Conservatives strongly oppose them.
hmmm, i'm not sure if its quite as simple as Brown employing 'rightwing' policies. casinos and reclassification of weed are 'moral' issues, not straight left/right ones. many people on the left have considerable concern over super casinos (i include myself), libertarians on the right might support them. i think Brown has moved to tackle issues that people feel uncomfortable with, without having to actually change much. its political genius though and leaves the tories floundering.
It's a pity that so much energy is wasted on the political manoeuvres and so little informative detail produced. Instead of analysis of substantive issues (eg what makes a border police a right wing idea, or what are the detailed objections to ID cards, or what are all the differences between sharia law and our law, or as above, why are flood defences insufficient), we get an interesting though rather limiting discourse about "spin". It's no good anyone blaming Labour for starting it, it doesn't absolve us from informing our debate with factual detail. Can we start a campaign for the provision of information? Is that in the remit of the 大象传媒?
So Brown in his 'lurch to the right' is to undo some of the Blairite 'policies' and try some Tory ones on for size?
So much for his principled stand or clear Labour policies, it begs the question what was he doing as Chancellor? Why didn't he oppose these 'Blairite' policies then?
It smacks to me of opportunism and I'm amazed that not one objective single media journalist has picked up on that.
Little puppet? Rabbit in headlights more like....
As for a lurch right, that's alien territory to a man traditionally and instinctively on the left. And any armchair general knows, you can't fight effectively on two diametrically opposed fronts.
Its funny, we still hear about politics of the right and left and this has always left me cold. Any sane person can see advantages of policies from both sides and surely a mix of traditionaly left and traditionaly right wing politics is what we have had for 10 years and will need for the next.
PS: Too Nick who says' Why did the Walham substation have no flood defences' does he seriously want to lay that one on Brown? I am sure many facilities are now in need of defences, it doesnt mean they did before. The people suffering surely dont need a blame culture now, they need support!
William
Frankly, I despise the political game Gordon Brown is playing.
The 2005 manifesto of the labour party promised a European referendum, now he does a 'U-turn'.
Michael Howard considers border police at the last election with Gordon Brown cunningly spreading a feeling of racism on Howards part. Now, Brown adopts the policy.
David Cameron suggests, through one of his many task forces that cannabis should be reclassified. Now, Brown and that loathsome cretin the home secretary, Jacqui lait, are considering putting it forward.
Its clear to me why Cameron doesn''t outline any firm policies, it's because Gordon 'clunking fist and clunking appearance' Brown and the rest of that sycophantic cabinet steal them all!
Why? Because Camerons suggestions are brilliant. Thats why!
This is nothing new. Labour have been stealing Conservative policies since 1994 - it's the only way they'll ever be electable.
For what seems like forever we have been told that Brown possesses one of the finest brains in politics, that he is a great strategic thinker and that unlike Blair he is driven by a coherent political philosophy.
The commentator above who was "taken by surprise" must be in a very small minority.
I also was surprised about what an easy ride you and the rest of the media are giving Brown. No questions about cuts in the environment agency budget last year, no questions about inadequate flood defences. He has been allowed to spout of pre prepared reheated lines about how great he is. Please a little more analysis rather than just acting as his mouthpiece
Your rose-tinted glasses are a disgrace to what is supposed to be an unbiased media corporation that should (and used to) be the pinnicle of journalism.
You obviously didn't see the Daily Politics poll today showing how well Dave's points on Europe resonated with the general public. Oh, and you fail to mention that Gordon did not read out the whole paragraph on Europe; instead choosing to miss out the section that outlines that the word constitution is gone but little else.
Start reporting the news Nick, not making it up to help out your pal Gordo.
Ralph (11.21am),
The media could ask those questions but they would be stupid, pointless questions.
The Prime Minister isn't responsible for the flood defense around some particular sub-station nor does his immediate presense in a flood hit area matter a damn.
His responsibility is the flood defence budget which is up from 300m pounds in 1997 to 800m pounds now.
He's also responsible for sending fireman and emergency workers to disaster hit areas first and foremost before going there with an entourage himself to cause a nuisance.
Have to speak from comparative ignorance of Brown's PMQs. Gone downhill recently. Thank God it's only once a week!
Watching Brown (well, for as long as I can stand it) - his bank manager tones irritate me. His disloyalty and plotting against Blair infuriated me. His hiding behind others as he launched the treacherous 'coup' was cowardly. His invisibility in moments of crisis was weak & the so-called 'dumping' of Blair's policies is expedient.
But now he's Prime Minister and things have moved on.
Blair always said that Brown is a great strategist. He seems to have been right. Then again Brown has had about 15 years to work out all the tactics of the Great Strategy. Blair had to think on his feet for much of the last 15 to avoid releasing the muffled fulminating threats underlying the Bank Manager's gentle, prudent tones.
Enough of this. You can see how I feel.
But Cameron seems to have lost the plot, if he ever wrote his own in the first place. Modeling himself on Blair at the end of Blair's years in power was, well, not all that wise.
And anyway, a bit like the Lib Dems, who needs the Tories, now that Labour is "all things to all men"?
I'm sure I've heard that phrase somewhere before.
Not that it helps me - I'm suddenly disenfranchised. Leadership counts.
Nick
I'm afraid that for once the general tenor of these comments is right and you are wrong. You are giving GB too easy a ride.
No mention of the vindictive and short-sighted cuts in Environment Agency budget to cover the shortfall arising from the Rural Payments Agency fiasco. No mention of the ludicrous determination to press ahead with identity cards.
And Gordy didn't need to lurch to the right anyway. He's always been there.
Gordon Brown was at the right hand seat of power in cabinet when all the policies that he is now so publicly ditching were formulated. Did he object to them publicly? Did he resign in protest? Of course not. Maybe his moral compass was off line, but I think he is just showing what a political opportunist he really is. Anything to get and hold the top job.
Either he agreed with super casinos, 24 hour drinking, cannabis downgrading, or he didn't and simply kept quite. Either he agreed with the tories when they called for a border police force and opposed them for political gain, or he doesn't agree but senses the public mood now so will introduce one. Either way it just goes to show that everything with him is an act and he is not to be trusted. The sooner the media start to highlight all his inconsistencies the better. Same old Brown, same old spin.
Sorry Nick but I have to agree with those saying last night's News at Ten was virtually a Party Political Broadcast for Labour. Is this sycophancy to Brown really what we pay our licence fee for?
Today we've got Nick Assinder telling us that Brown won PMQ's. Really? I don't think many who watched Brown not even try to answer the Referendum question will have considered it a victory. The crass behaviour of Labour MPs won't have impressed many either.
If we don't get more balance from 大象传媒 I shall have to watch ITV instead.
William: 'I am sure many facilities are now in need of defences, it doesnt mean they did before.'
The substation is at flood risk according to the Environment Agency's website, and the site has flooded before.
Tony: 'The Prime Minister isn't responsible for the flood defense around some particular sub-station'
A government department DEFRA, through the Environment Agency, is responsible for flood defences, so the buck stops with Brown.
Who else is responsible for the flood defences of major bits of national infrastructure, the Gloucester WI?
We thought we were getting Stalin, and we've ended up getting Cassius Clay. Pure genius, to many people's surprise, including my own.
Speaking as a lefty, my only real issue is that I kind of liked Cameron. I want a 'one nation' Tory party in opposition, not a bunch of reactionary 'on-yer-bike' Daily Mail reading old men. If Brown hits Cameron too hard, he risks a revolution that will put students of Tebbitt in the driving seat.
That will be good for Brown electorally, as it will make it easy for him to win. That will be bad for UK politics, as I felt we'd been getting somewhere...
Has Gordon Brown got everyone in his pocket? The sun, ITV ,大象传媒 all reported Cameron was in trouble he isn't . He has been out manoeuvred but Brown will slip up big time soon.Remember the 75p for pensioners.
And he talks of border controls and checks on immigrants after letting 2.5 million people in.Stable doors come to mind
Nick, while I am not suggesting you are wrong on this, I am slightly concerned that everything in politics today has to be interpreted purely in strategic terms.
For example, Brown's review of the 'super-casino', you say, was calculated to appease the Daily Mail. Perhaps, but it could also be that he really does believe in the 'Christian values' of his clergy father...in short, you seem to treat everything as a strategic game between politicians and the press where the only aim is power.
Naturally, politicians want the press on their side, but it doesn't mean that's the only basis on which they make their decisions.
Nick, I disagree with the argument that Brown has done nothing for the left. The campaign to allow councils to build houses and keep the revenue from sales has been a massive campaign for the left, and lets not forget University grants, parliamentary approval for armed conflict etc. etc.
It is small wonder that the Tories are doing so badly, and have been for a very long time when their thoughts fly so fiercely in the face of reality.
And the 大象传媒 and Nick Robinson take cognisance of their strange bias. So we often her "On the ne hand the Government says sensible, but many people will take an entirely different view . ."
Hutton is hardly recognised in this lexicon, Blair is war criminal or liar or devilspawn . . .
The CPS report, based al ALL the evidence a 艁1m and a years worth of Yates and his colleagues' time and prepared by an independant legal expert whom they dare not libel is disregarded.
And Brown? The joint architect, probably the first and more senior architec of the project to modernise Britain is - horrors! - boring (he is aplitician), ditching all (all?) the policies of the past 10 years, stealing the idea of a new border control force (what a brilliant and original concept! - Howard must get a Nobel prize for such originality!), and he is playing a "POLITICAL" game!
These people seem to lack nous.
The Tories' cry? "Ten more leaders! Ten more leaders!".
Probably.
Nick,
Its only clever as you have been persuaded report it the way Brown wants you too. If perchance you took the time to look at with a dispassionate eye, you would see it for what it was ..spin....
Have Labour been in power that long that you can't see the wood thro the trees???
Nick, I'm a Labour party member but even I have to admit that you (and it seems most of the media) have been giving Brown an easy time of it lately and it does the country's democracy no good.
Don't assume that all Labour members / voters are happy with Brown. To be frank, I am disgusted that Brown has taken this moralising stance on gambling, cannabis, what he calls 'obscene' pornography (which he wants to criminalise in the Criminal Justice Bill) and now the 'review' of the liberalised drinking laws which treated adults like adults for once.
Most Labour members did not join the party to be social conservatives or to see our leader suck up the Daily Mail.
Brown at the moment, seems hell-bent on destroying all the tolerance and liberal social values we built up over the past 10 years.
And yet the media and the Parliamentary Labour Party seem to completely ignore all of that and can't seem to stop telling us how wonderful Brown is.
Personally speaking as a Labour member who thought highly of Blair, I'll be glad to see the back of him.
Gordon Brown doesn't do left or right. He just does WHAT IS right.
This is why he's the best person for the job. Just look at the competition:
David Cameron = scraps Tory principles for power, bangs on about global warming then FLIES to Africa to check out the terrible dorught when his own constituency is suffering the worst floods in modern history. 4 out of 5 Rwandan MP's fail to turn up to his speech because no one really cares what he has to say. Comes back. Returns to the one subject which destroyed the Tories in 1997 - Europe. Obviously totally oblivious to the lessons of the past.
In short, the man is a joke. But the Tories don't need to turn the lights out on this one - from what I've seen, this has already been done for them in Rwanda.
Ming = Nice man. Doesn't have a clue about governance. When offered a bit of power turns it down. Consistently scratches his glasses with his hands while asking questions at PMQ's. Needs Paddy Ashdown at bi elections.
So, there you have it. Vote Labour. Keep Brown. Help Britain.
It appears that those who are more interested in their political prejudices than the welfare of us all are frightened that Gordon Brown will pick out any attractive Tory proposals and actually implement them.
David Cameron certainly has a problem. Get the support he needs by putting forward vote catching ideas that many realise he has no intention of using, although just the thought of these ideas alienates most of his party.
The Tories are paying the penalty for educating so many voters in the meaning of "spin".
Has Gordon Brown's Governement of All Talents extended to recruiting Hattie Hayridge (aka Holly from Red Dwarf) as Home Secretary?
Whilst listening to her on the news tonight, discussing 56 day detention, I half expected the next camera shot to be Rimmer outside number 10.
If you are going to bother having an 'Opposition' then they should be asking some awkward questions.
Possibly the most prominent, going by the volume of responses on Nicks blog over the last few months, is the mooted 'destruction' of pensions, allegdedly by Gordon Browns withdrawal of tax breaks.
Brown himself has only, to my knowledge, ever defended this in the most grandiose terms i.e. 'It was good for Britain, good for the economy, good for blah blah'.
It may well be the case that a coherent arguement could be put forward to defend the withdrawal of tax credits on pension funds but the official Opposition have never pressed for an explanation.
This puzzled me for a while until one day the penny dropped ... MP's have configured for themselves the most generous pension scheme in the land, so they are ALL compromised.
Hence their silence on a subject that profoundly affects many of their constituents.
This is a glaring failure of the democratic process and there is nothing 'honourable' about the vast majority of MP's who, by their silence, betray their constitutents on this subject.
The true "King of Spin" these past 10 years was never Blair. He was too obvious and your average Joe could easily recognise a Blair spin story in the media.
Gordon Brown is the exemplar King of Spin with year after year of Budgets that repackaged old money as new promises, taxes that covertly raided our pensions and the longest running (10 yr+) leadership campaign that apparently wasn't going on.
Nick - Give him his correct title it is richly deserved.
Nick,
I watch night after night, cabinet ministers being questioned, where the interviewers are so close to the political establishment they fail to see the obvious question most people ask themselves. 鈥淲hat capabilities do you Minister have, which make you the best candidate to deliver on these promises?鈥
We have a former postman, whose claim to fame is leading a postal strike in the 1990鈥檚, running the NHS. We have a clutch of ministers who are fresh out of University with literally no real commercial experience running housing, the foreign office, the cabinet office etc. How on earth are they going to make a real difference?
It is not the promises and good intentions which I doubt. It is their experience and ability to deliver that I think is worth probing, not their political posturing.
Nick
As seen through the lens of politics, Gordon Brown has been clever indeed.
It seems that for him the main aim is to stay in office and that there are no means to which he will not stoop to achieve that end. For Brown read Blair - same story.
Perhaps they share a moral compass?
It seems reasonable to expect a journalist to be accurate. If you have printed the correct and unaltered photograph it says "Gordon Brown for Britain" not "Brown for Britain"膹偶藵. Then "posing": have you some evidence for that?
This seems to typify the arrogant attitude of much of today's media. Courtesy costs nothing. Mr Brown or Gordon Brown (and similarly to anyone else) is appropriate in my world; or do we have to accept the standards of what one person, of considerable experience, described as the "feral" media.
Would Robinson care to comment?
.
Where were Blair and Brown during the Sheffield and Doncaster floods?
There seem to be an awful lot of unnerved Tories here!
I really don't accept your analysis Nick. Sure, there will have been strategic thinking and party politicking in Brown's recent moves, but maybe he's also doing well because the public perceives that he might actually have the making of a good PM.?
Some of the decisions you describe as a lurch to the right could more accurately be seen as clearing away the worst aspects of Blair's final years -super casinos being the most obvious. this could well chime with a public desire for a quieter, less money-crazed country.
But there are other, less tabloid-grabbing things going on which you fail to mention,for example in the re-thinking of targets in the NHS, testing in schools, the grappling towards a 'hearts and minds' strategy with young British muslims, which just might promise a more liberal, even left-ish government.
I hate to add to the heap of criticisms of you here from said unnerved Tory posters, but I am confused sometimes by your remit - as political correspondent, are you supposed to focus only on the immediate, Westminster view? - I look sometimes for a calmer, more but important detail of policy-making.
Re: Update 12:39
I would be happier if Gordon Brown said "The Tories have got something with the border police - not perfect but worth working on." And THEN stole it. Perhaps even get which ever Tory had the idea to come and work on it.
That would test two things:
1. The First Lords commitment to his using talented people idea.
2. Whether the Tories really want to solve problems in the country, or just win votes.
You see, cynical me, but I have a suspicion that for MPs, the politics ALWAYS comes ahead of conviction. And I think the media is not only letting them get away with it, but supporting that stance.
So, Lord Robinson of College Green, please do me a favour:
Next time you interview IDS, ask him if he thinks his social policies are so important, so vital and so urgent, would he take them to Gordon Brown?
If the answer is no, then we would have to question whether he really does believe in all that he has been earnestly saying, since keeping them to himself could add 3 years at least to them being considered.
Likewise, ask GB which Tory policies, or even Lib Dem Policies, he thinks should be looked at and worked through.
I think it is about time MPs were TRULY tested.
The Tories need to pull their finger out if they want any hope of return to Government. Every turn, Labour manage to upstage them, normally by utilising their policies. I cannot see David Cameron having any effect on Gordon Brown.
Someone needs to tackle GB on his silent agreement to many of the decisions made while TB was still in charge.
My friend Smirnoff, clearly drunk, says he is very confused by which party is which. I explained to him that he needed to sober up because its obvious that Gordon Brown is rightly proud of being Stalin and when nobody is left he can collect his four million pound Prime Ministers pension and retire to a black sea resort with Mr Putin. You must be mad said Sminoff and promptly nodded off.
what happened to gordons top priority of the health service he announced on his 1st day?
hospitals still dirty, waiting stats are corrupt, nurses being used instead of doctors, impossible to see a GP, etc
lots of spin not much substance
All the innuendo at PMQs about Cameron not being in his flooded constituency probably came from those who were too busy scoffing Sunday lunch last weekend to notice TV coverage of Dave wading through his West Oxfordshire patch being briefed by officials long before Brown and Co woke up to the photo op. DC even fitted in a trip to Ruanda as others were trying to grab the flood headlines.
Nick,
I think your analysis is quite succinct, I worry just how well the Tories will battle against Brown's "theft" of their clothes, if Cameroon isn't too careful he will be forced to go into the next election !
I've argued for too long now that we already have two parties occupying the centre left, there is no requirement for a third to pitch camp there also, the British public need a clear choice between Brown's top down state controlled solutions and a libertarian democratic alternative from the centre right.
Is the root of this not that, despite his leftish politics, Brown is not a social liberal? The great tradition of social democracy fuses socially liberal policies, with a strong state - but Brown, even more than Blair is socially conservative.
He shows little or no enthusiasm for gay rights, drug liberalisation, civil liberites or the relaxation of gambling laws. 40 years ago the Labour government correctly decriminalised homosexuality and allowed the legalisation of abortion, ultimately, will Brown be remembered in 40 years for taking more power and taking away more rights?
Nick,
You seem to be getting very selective regards which of my comments you publish.
I freely admit (even bask) in the fact that I am a one man anti-Tory propoganda machine but I don't see why this should deem some of my posts unpublishable. Like you, I merely wish to inform.
Agree with those who think that the 大象传媒 is offering the Labour party lots of favourable air time. I see the Campbell diaries are already being repeated on 大象传媒1 in the early hours.
At election time television companies must offer all parties even coverage. On the basis of fairness, will we now see programs on the 大象传媒 with equally favourable messages from other parties?
Yet more of the same from Andrew Neil on News 24.
When the Tory shadow minister for sport says how heartening it is that the contingency for the Olympics is so large he is shut up.
Complaining tory right wingers have whinged suppsedly unbiased commentators to the right.
A clear majority on Nick Robinson's blog commenters, a tiny minority in the country according to the polls and votes cast also.
Nick,
I was only pulling your leg about "(Gordon)Brown for Britain" and "posing".
I hope that you have not gone all coy.
Brown seems more comfortable than Cameron in chasing the BNP vote.
Brown in his first few weeks as Prime Minister has been very good. He handled the failed terrorist attacks very well, and has made some big policy anouncements such as the conversion from "top-down" central government. The gaping nine point poll hole between Labour and the Tories was not created in these four weeks however. It was created early this year and at the end of last year, when Labour were in limbo and the toriesshould have cut mortal wounds in to the Labour Party. Instead, the tories were flimsy over this period, did not capatalise, and hence the power vaccum earlier this year in the Labour Party has been sucked up by the hoover-esque Brown. He hasn't been great in the house of Commons, but has used his honeymoon period to set out a number of important policies that could be hugely beneficial, rejuvinated hiss party, and slaughtered the tories and Lib Dems in middle England. this is not permanent, but it has shown a serious lack of confidence and almost fear of Brown from the two other parites. They have allowed Brown to swallow up all the centre ground policies, and now DC is desperately holding on to the EU "constitution or "referendum", whatever your viewpoint. DC is going in the right direction to make his party electable, it i just a shame that the rest of his party is going the other way.
The best comparative tests of social conservatism/liberalism of Blair and Brown may be in the field of religious education, except we may expect Brown's cabinet to have a bigger say than Blair's did.
"We, gathered as the Scottish Constitutional Convention, do hereby acknowledge the sovereign right of the Scottish people to determine the form of Government best suited to their needs, and do hereby declare and pledge that in all our deliberations their interests shall be paramount."
Is that what No Mandate Brown means by "Brown for Britain"? I thought it was only England that was referred to as Britain.
Gordon Brown has had a ball recently, being courted by the media, in print, sound and pictures. If you give all that favourable coverage to anyone they would look a winner, especialy against a background of hyper-critical reporting on D Cameron. No one noticed that D Cameron found his wellies and time to visit the flood areas BEFORE his trip to Africa, and afterwards. G Brown is the biggest spinner yet, this is the man that writes budgets that take days to decipher, regurgitates figures, making it all sound great, wait til next April when the new tax levels hit us. Funny how he couldn't trust the new chancellor to set the rate? We must all be delighted that the bonuses came through for the directors of the Enviornment Agency, didn't notice that being reported last week? G Brown is clever, but so are the British public, and you can't fool them all of the time, but please could we have some accurate reporting and finish with this Brown fest?
Nick,
It would help the debate if you highlighted the areas where Brown is to the right of the Conservatives, not just those that he has 'apparently' stolen from them.
The key issues that you need to draw out in more detail pertain to his unjustified desire to extend the period of detention before charging, and, more importantly, his ludicrous plan to hold biometric details on every UK citizen. Not only is he a control freak but he is also establishing a system that could be used to monitor and manipulate ordinary citizens for any given purpose. I can't imagine the press / media being so acquiescent if it were a right of centre government putting these plans into action.
It is the duty of the 大象传媒 to hold the government to account on behalf of us all, not merely act as their cheerleader.
Yet more nonsensical claims of left wing bias at 大象传媒 which is characterising Labour's Poll lead as a "bounce."
In years gone by they would have merely remarked that, if carried over into a General Election, the Government's lead would result in a landslide of some extraordinarily large number of seats.
It may be claimed that they are merely copying the tory rags, however they are seeking to diminish the importance of this swing, and its "bandwaggon effect," an issue which has not seen the light of day.