Wednesday
10May2006
Has Brown got any balls?
Wednesday, May 10, 2006 at 3:23PM
If Gordie Brown doesn’t make a move to usurp Princess Tony in the next few weeks, the papers will successfully paint the prospective future PM as politically indecisive, and lacking the killer instinct needed to lead the government.
If there were ever a chance for Brown to play his hand, it would have been the morning after the local election. Blair has never been weaker, his position never more untenable, yet still the brooding Scot hesitates.
What happened to the “Iron Chancellor?†The mask has slipped to reveal an impotent and diffident politician, lacking the bravery to commit the necessary regicide. Blair is addicted to power and obsessed with his legacy, both of which are spiralling out of control, but does the odorous Scot act? Of course not, Brown waits, releasing more of his servile flying-monkeys, who whisper into the ears of fleet-street hacks. “The chancellor is fuming,†they hush, “the party is split,†they murmur, but for all the Machiavellian, oral subterfuge, the resolve to take action is absent.
Are we safe to assume the Chancellor’s lack of confidence is endemic of a personal weakness, or, is Brown privy to knowledge that his position within the party, is not as buttressed, as we are led to believe?
Of course being a mischievous blogger, I wouldn’t know, but I’m inclined to bet that the Blairites are more powerful than we appreciate. Many in the party see Brown as more autocratic and stubborn than Blair; and in a party that supposedly champions egalitarianism and opportunity, Brown appears to be anathematic to these principles. The communists and bed-wetters on the backbenchers are tired of being led by Blair, but it’s unclear, that the consensus wants Gordie.
There are leading lights within the party. Young-guns such as Alan Johnson promise an alternative, and until his recent idiocy, Charles Clarke was considered a possible candidate.
Blair has also raised the stakes. Until recently, the preposterous notion of a duel-premiership was mooted, and Brown was increasingly speaking on wider issues, beyond his usual Treasury brief. But as the waters became stormier, Brown jumped, leaving Blair with a sinking ship, a knackered bucket, and a bunch of feckless ministers. Blair navigated the tempest, stumbled through the elections, and was allowed to consolidate with a reshuffle, on which, we’re led to believe, he didn’t consult Gordie.
Naturally Brown has descended into one of his übersulks, and has began sniping cowardly from his lair; wouldn’t it have been better for everyone, if he’d just forced Blair’s hand and resigned? The current pseudo-civil war within the party, is achieving little beyond pissing-off the electorate, and making Cameron’s tieless Tories appear united.
There will be blood on the carpet, it won’t be a smooth handover, so cut the pantomime, and procure yourself a pair of balls Mr. Brown.
If there were ever a chance for Brown to play his hand, it would have been the morning after the local election. Blair has never been weaker, his position never more untenable, yet still the brooding Scot hesitates.
What happened to the “Iron Chancellor?†The mask has slipped to reveal an impotent and diffident politician, lacking the bravery to commit the necessary regicide. Blair is addicted to power and obsessed with his legacy, both of which are spiralling out of control, but does the odorous Scot act? Of course not, Brown waits, releasing more of his servile flying-monkeys, who whisper into the ears of fleet-street hacks. “The chancellor is fuming,†they hush, “the party is split,†they murmur, but for all the Machiavellian, oral subterfuge, the resolve to take action is absent.
Are we safe to assume the Chancellor’s lack of confidence is endemic of a personal weakness, or, is Brown privy to knowledge that his position within the party, is not as buttressed, as we are led to believe?
Of course being a mischievous blogger, I wouldn’t know, but I’m inclined to bet that the Blairites are more powerful than we appreciate. Many in the party see Brown as more autocratic and stubborn than Blair; and in a party that supposedly champions egalitarianism and opportunity, Brown appears to be anathematic to these principles. The communists and bed-wetters on the backbenchers are tired of being led by Blair, but it’s unclear, that the consensus wants Gordie.
There are leading lights within the party. Young-guns such as Alan Johnson promise an alternative, and until his recent idiocy, Charles Clarke was considered a possible candidate.
Blair has also raised the stakes. Until recently, the preposterous notion of a duel-premiership was mooted, and Brown was increasingly speaking on wider issues, beyond his usual Treasury brief. But as the waters became stormier, Brown jumped, leaving Blair with a sinking ship, a knackered bucket, and a bunch of feckless ministers. Blair navigated the tempest, stumbled through the elections, and was allowed to consolidate with a reshuffle, on which, we’re led to believe, he didn’t consult Gordie.
Naturally Brown has descended into one of his übersulks, and has began sniping cowardly from his lair; wouldn’t it have been better for everyone, if he’d just forced Blair’s hand and resigned? The current pseudo-civil war within the party, is achieving little beyond pissing-off the electorate, and making Cameron’s tieless Tories appear united.
There will be blood on the carpet, it won’t be a smooth handover, so cut the pantomime, and procure yourself a pair of balls Mr. Brown.
Reader Comments (3)
I think you´re getting caught up in all the hype, which may or may not blow over. Blair seemed to panic in firing Clarke and allowing the increasingly hapless Bush to fire Straw, but it makes sense for Blair to hang on till 2007, do his ten years, and weather the potential rail strikes etc.
It´s foolish for Brown to be tainted with any of the negative stories around at the moment, none of which are actually even remotely serious, it´s all just hot air, but hot air can cause a nasty scald, and Brown needs to be seen as fresh and new when he eventually takes over.
Also, if he were to rush in and plunge the knife, not only would he anger much of the party, but he´d be seen as more interested in his own position rather than party or country.
The best scenario for Blair AND Brown is for Tony to hang on till next Spring, and hand over when the current news nonsense has died down - with a decent run in the World Cup and a good summer test series, there´s a reasonable chance of that happening.
I make no excuses for this!
How true, of course 90% of the current debacle is a media/political construct. But ministers should be savvy enough to know two things.
1. If you stray, it will come out in the wash
2. If you've screwed up, tell the truth, the whole truth
Blair should stay, if only to spare us Brown.
My belief is that whatever happens Blair will drag Brown with him.
From what I have been able to see Labour is losing height but not because Conservatives are gaining height but because electors have preferred to remain home and leave it to chance, a really bad political sign.
We must always try and defend ideologies, otherwise we are lost and we must always feel the duty to vote for that ideology.To fail this duty might be our misfortune, and politicians on one side or other of the fence must know that we are always watching what they do.
Abstention will only weaken democracy. Of course we must always be sure whom we choose.