Words and deeds
The Guildhall:
(From the balcony overlooking the Lord Mayor's Banquet)
Hard-headed internationalism. That, Gordon Brown told us tonight, is what sums up his foreign policy.
What does it mean? It's more revealing to look at what it doesn't mean.
"Internationalism" - means NOT unilateralism or isolationism - i.e. not what Bush and Blair are accused of in Iraq, and not what Brown hints David Cameron may mean. It is also not another word Brown could have used - "multilateralism" - which could be taken to be a commitment to work only through the UN. This brings us on to...
"Hard headed" - by which Brown means NOT soft or naïve - in other words, not believing that what's right is whatever the United Nations agrees. A key, though heavy, part of Brown's speech tonight focuses on the need to reform international institutions - the UN, the G8, World Bank and the IMF.
The words will be endlessly analysed as were all such phrases uttered over the years at the Lord Mayor's Banquet - particularly those uttered by new prime ministers.
I have just dug out Tony Blair's 1997 speech. The headlines were about Europe but just look at this:
- "This Government's determination to stand firm against a still dangerous dictator is unshakeable. We want to see a diplomatic solution and will work with others to achieve this in the next few days. But Saddam should not take as a sign of weakness the international community's desire to find a peaceful way forward if possible. He has made this fatal miscalculation before. For his sake, I hope he will not make it again."
Proof, if any were needed, that words matter - but it's deeds in response to events that count most.
PS: As memorable as the speech is the sight of Gordon "Where there is Greed" * Brown sitting in a gold throne, dressed in white tie being introduced by a trumpet fanfare. Who, I wonder, will have the last laugh - him or his hosts in the City of London?
* "Where there is Greed" was the title of a polemic written by Brown in the 1980s.
I'm 
Comments
So, Gordon Brown reads Lewis Carroll as a guide to speech writing!
'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone,' it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.'
'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.'
'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master - that's all.'
Alice was too much puzzled to say anything; so after a minute Humpty Dumpty began again. 'They've a temper, some of them - particularly verbs: they're the proudest - adjectives you can do anything with, but not verbs - however, I can manage the whole lot of them! Impenetrability! That's what I say!'
On the latter quote, I repeat:
"You can say what you like about Tony Blair, at least he was decisive."
- David Cameron, last week.
I think Gordon's just getting jealous having watched Sarky's trip to Washington.
One day the majority of the members of the UN will be democracies, which certainly is not the case at present.
In fact, genuine democracies are pretty thin on the ground in this world.
Anyway, when that day arrives, I hope that the 'democratic' majority in the UN sanction military action, if necessary, against regimes such as that in Burma, who are patently crushing the democratic will of the people.
Obviously a different tack will have to be taken with the Chinese, who have raped Tibet for decades.
By the time that day arrives, I expect the politicians of England, which by then should have regained its political identity, will be working as part of a powerful EU to leverage democracy throughout the world.
And we will no longer have to imagine.
When we have to start speculating on what a Prime Minister meant by his choice of words in such an important speech then he is clearly a poor communicator. And it happens all the time!
Nick
With your description of GB sitting on a throne does this mean that the status quo continues? In other words business as usual
Here, ten thousand miles from 10 Downing, it is a pleasure not to have to constantly be annoyed by the yapping of the previous pop star living there. Gordon Brown is a breath of fresh British air, a Gregorian chant, one might say, in a stadium full of electric guitars.
Des Currie
Thanks for another informative comment, Nick. You identified the key issues of policy and communication, and fleshed out the substance while keeping use mindful of delivery. The speech is as philosophically sound as I expect from the Prime Minister and your own accurate and unhurried reporting is solid and well paced. As much as I support the unfolding vision of the Prime Minister's, it's great to have you around as a reality check.
Aiiiieee. Blessed Leader and Court Joker are burning some rubber…
Brown and Labour are tarred with the same US-poodle brush as Blair. Weasle words don't change a thing.
So what happened to SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP
I heard David Miliband (I think it was him but it could been Glen or Steve!) on radio 4 this morning saying that 'hard headed internationalism' meant that, as far as Iraq/the middle east was concerned, THEY would have done everything exactly the same as THEY did when THEY did it the first time if THEY had to do it all over again... something like that anyway! So, really, Brown didn't actually say anything!
Yes....'his'.. foreign policy.
Extraordinary that the leader of this country was never elected by the people nor by his party. Consequently, he's there by default and so is 'our' foreign policy.
I have become resigned to Brown never saying anything of any importance so I don't bother to listen.
That said, I believe what Brown meant by hard headed internationalism was that we would still fight hard to get the best price for every company we sell off to foreign buyers.
Gordon Brown is "a Gregorian chant, one might say, in a stadium full of electric guitars" says Des Currie.
More like a dirge of soggy bagpipes.
Why on earth would you think that the words mean anything at all? Brown is a politician: he uses words because he thinks people will be impressed by them, not because he means anything by them.
I might take this journalist seriously if he wasn't so smug.
You don't have a choice, Nick - you HAVE to listen to Gordon Brown's speeches. I've given up. It's now gotten to the Blair stage, as soon as he starts to speak I switch off - and many others I know, not a good sign for a politician wanting to get his 'message across'.
The problem is he talks a lot but doesn't say anything - apart from what he's said before. It's as if the lawyers have been though his speech and taken out anything that ordinary people would understand. We get the same old spin "every child in the country should have the best possible opportunity", (would anyone argue they shouldn't?) or the bordering-on-racism "British jobs for British workers". Why not go all the way and say "English jobs for English workers"? But then that would exclude Mr Brown.
I hate to kick a man when he's down but it's his own fault. As Vince Cable pointed out, he's had 10 years to polish his 'vision for Britain' and what has he come up with? More homes, which should have been built during his time as holder of the government purse. Keeping young people at school until they are 18 (I don't remember any 'consultation' with the public on this, as was promised as the new style of government and it's back to the one-size-fits-all decisions made at Whitehall.)
He wants to lock people up for longer without trial, make us all carry ID cards and provide the state with yet more of our personal information. Did someone mention police state? He's in favour of nuclear power, keeping Trident and allowing the US to develop it's 'Star Wars' technology on British soil - and consequently upsetting the nuclear balance of power. Have I missed anything out?
Basically, he's 'fiddler'. He hasn't got any new clothes, he's just tipping his hat to the left or right a bit. None of what he's announced would have caused any eyebrows to raise were Tony Blair still PM. It's more of the same. It reminds me of the adage 'be careful of what you ask for, you might get it'. Gordon has got it but now he doesn't know what to do with it and he's treating the public like fools.
Its obvious what his speech means. Its a prelude to reorganisation. Now the EU has its constitution all will be answerable or dealing with Brussels now.
This is the beginning of the end of democracy Powers transferred new bosses etc as a dictatorship organisation takes control.
Its simple really we know the EU effectively has its constitution We know everyone will be dealing more and more with Brussels about UK matters because the EU has its constitution SO we can expect the government to start very carefully telling us what to expect in order to prepare us more gently for the transfer of power and to play down the loss of democracy and government powers and to implement slowly carefully and quietly. Even subconsciusly. How do I know that? Because the EU constitution demands it.
I'm very glad he focused on "the need to reform international institutions" - this is indeed essential!
It's a good thing to collaborate with other countries, and it's a good thing to not be naïve, so this osunds like a reasonably ballanced approach!
Sound bites are not a sound basis of foreign policy. Brown's commitment hard headed internationalism will be tested if the Iranians were to step closer to making an atomic bomb.
The Prime Minister is a strategic thinker. This is why he can seem a bit vague and not connect too well at times. Working out the detail and emotional component isn't his strength but if he can learn to focus more on the detail of delivery and wooing audiences this should balance out.
I wouldn't call the Prime Minister a fiddler. I'd say he keeps the bulk of himself private and that he'd like to see more engagement from others. As results begin to flow in and trust builds this is likely to change but pushing too hard or taking advantage pushes this back.
I'm hoping the Prime Minister can learn too calm down and relax more. and are similar character types. If he can develop projecting personality and technicalities as well as they do he should find improvement fairly easy.
Bryan James hits the mark with his entry.
GB has had 10 years to get his vision thing sorted out.
I saw the live broadcast and it was uncomfortable viewing - I started to feel embarrassed for him - then just turned over. The content was dense (verging on incomprehensible), the delivery was poor - sentences ran into each other - there was just no sense of what what this all meant.
Now we all know that TB was a showman, and I'm not in favour of things being 'dumbed down'. But this was simply uninspiring.
GB cancelled the election citing his desire to to set out his vision - I think he's dug himself a massive hole.
On last night's performance he simply can't do it...
GB "Hard headed" - by which means NOT soft or naïve - cites the failure to act to prevent the genocide in Rwanda for example. Rwanda is a rural country with about 90% of the population engaged in (mainly subsistence) agriculture. It is landlocked with few natural resources, minimal industry and NO oil.
GB obviously thinks we are soft or naïve.
GB sitting in a gold throne, dressed in white tie being introduced by a trumpet fanfare reminds me of Animal Farm. "Do not imagine, comrades, that leadership is a pleasure. On the contrary, it is a deep and heavy responsibility. No one believes more firmly than Comrade Napoleon that all animals are equal. He would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves. But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?"
At the Guildhall too perhaps!
'Hard-headed internationalism'
What a vacuous phrase to use to sum up an entire foreign policy. The fact that you have to analyse what it does not mean says it all.
It's typical of new Labour sound bites - on initial acquaintance it sounds sensible, but on further thought you realise it tells you nothing.
Gordon Brown's vision will be further on its way to fruition come the next election amd demonstrably so.
Bryan James and GH will be nearly two years older, as related as they are now most likely, and still wrong.
Gordon Brown's political vision has been longer in the making than 10 years, and it is worth remembering that New Labour was at least as much his brainchild as Tony Blair's.
I suppose peope only learn their modern history from Tory newspapers and the media which take from these?
Please please can we have our election and vote this pretender out? Time for change ring the bells of Westminster! People in the city must grin into their Claret listening to this plonker!