Mr Brown will now show Mr Blair the door

The Sunday Telegraph ^ | May 8, 2005 | Robert Peston

[MadIvan]

It looks like business as usual. Gordon Brown was back at the Treasury on Friday, squirming as a great gaggle of officials cheered his return. And Tony Blair once again balked at reconstructing the cabinet in his own image - despite promising his closest allies he would do just that only a few weeks ago - for fear of alienating his Chancellor.

Mr Blair did not invite Mr Brown to shape his cabinet, but there was not a single appointment that could be interpreted by the Chancellor as an act of provocation. No Blairite cheerleader has been appointed to any of the posts that matter to him - although the Treasury rates the new health secretary, Patricia Hewitt, as a gamma minus for general competence.

And there will be jostling between Mr Brown and David Blunkett - newly returned from exile to be Secretary of State for Work and Pensions - over future measures to make us all save more for retirement. As for the new chief secretary to the Treasury, Des Browne, he's regarded by the Chancellor as "OK" - high praise!

So the uneasy entente in Downing Street, with Mr Brown holding sway over most of the domestic agenda, persists. The terms of his engagement with the Prime Minister (or, more properly, of their dysfunctionality) remain largely the same as in 1997. That said, Mr Brown feels more powerful than ever. I am sure there has been no softening of his contempt for the Prime Minister, which - as my recent book, Brown's Britain, describes - has been engendered over many years of betrayal by Mr Blair.

All the evidence suggests that it was he who won the election for Labour. Before Mr Brown magnanimously agreed to throw himself into the battle at the beginning of April, his party was heading for a hung parliament, such is the degree to which Mr Blair is loathed by voters. But Mr Brown put all his antipathy towards the PM to one side and gave him many public hugs, even professing - utterly disingenuously - that he didn't have any doubt that Mr Blair had behaved properly in the way he took the country to war in Iraq.

To use a City expression, Mr Brown leveraged his personal brand to save Mr Blair and Labour. And he did it because it was his duty to the party - oh, and there was the small personal reward of seeing Mr Blair humiliating himself by asking for help from the man he'd recently vowed to defenestrate.

However, Mr Brown asked for nothing in return. There is no deal with Mr Blair because the Chancellor won't demean himself by ever again asking for anything of importance from his erstwhile friend. Having been manipulated by Mr Blair in the crudest possible way when he promised that he would quit in the autumn of 2004 and then withdrew the offer, all trust has been incinerated.

So how on earth is Mr Brown going to achieve his near lifelong ambition of becoming prime minister? This is supposed to be his time. His stock is high. There is no Labour politician who would come within a mile of him if there were a contest for the leadership tomorrow. And Mr Blair has made a public promise to stand down during this Parliament. But, and this is what will be eating away at Mr Brown's soul, Mr Blair has not said precisely when he will quit, other than that he will serve a "full" term. Mr Brown must fear that the PM will cling on to the last possible moment, unless he can be forced out.

So is there anything that Mr Brown can do to persuade Mr Blair to leave now with dignity? Well, the Chancellor has been helped by the education Labour MPs received during the election, when they discovered the extent to which voters hate Mr Blair: many want to see honoured the subliminal message of Labour's campaign: "Vote Blair, Get Brown" - and fast.

In this context, Michael Howard has done Mr Brown a very good turn. Like the Prime Minister, Mr Howard has concluded that it would be wrong to fight another election. Unlike Mr Blair, he has set in train a process - albeit a lengthy one - to find a replacement. Mr Howard's decision to put his party before personal vanity will be highlighted in coming days by Brown supporters.

Yet short of simply flouncing off to the backbenches - an act of petulance that would fatally damage him as much as Mr Blair - there is little Mr Brown can do in the short term to speed his rival's departure. There may, however, be a looming opportunity. I put it in the conditional, because it all depends on whether the French vote Yes in the European referendum later this month and whether there is therefore a plebiscite in the UK next year.

Mr Brown will have concluded from the election result that there is not the faintest chance of Labour winning that vote. So, for the good of the party, he would urge Mr Blair to abandon plans for a referendum. Because they talk so rarely, I am certain that Mr Brown will not yet have told Mr Blair that his final dream - of bowing out as the man who turned the tide of British Euroscepticism - will go unfulfilled.

It will be a shattering conversation for Mr Blair. And I'm sure that even though Mr Brown is a good European and would campaign alongside Mr Blair if he insists on holding the vote, his heart would not be in it. Mr Brown does not want to be leader of a party heading for opposition. And yet that is just what Mr Blair's desire to hold an EU referendum promises for him and Labour.

And perhaps if Mr Blair abandons the referendum plan, he will notice that he already has his Guinness Book of Records entry as the only Labour leader to win three successive victories - and would depart as hero were he to go while the triumph is still fresh.

[MadIvan]

I am not crazy about Brown, but at least he is much more Eurosceptic than Blair.

Regards, Ivan

[MadIvan]

Ping!

[Malesherbes]

Ivan's comment about Brown's euroscepticism is very interesting. I would have guessed that Brown would be right in line with the EU's socialist agenda, but perhaps he is sufficiently pragmatic to see through it. I hope so.

[Brian Allen]

And once-great britain returns to office the fasciSSocialist government it both desires and deserves -- and that best reflects its predominately ingrate and hesperophobic voters "feelings" toward those who, along with the execrable, Cli'tonesque, Blair, look favorably to their Superiors in the First-World West!

[Tribune7]

Blair should be concerned

[Tribune7]

Or maybe not

[MikeGranby]

Brown is an old-style socialist with a huge chip on his shoulder. If he's ever in charge, God help England. I can only be thankful that I don't live their anymore.

[Canard]

You shouldn't automatically assume that right wing = eurosceptic, left wing = euro enthusiast.

There's a few unreconstructed socialists on the Labour left who have been consistently eurosceptic for a lot longer than the Conservative party mainstream has.

It's widely believed that Gordon Brown's influence deterred Tony Blair from seeking early entry to the Euro.

[baseballmom]

Because they talk so rarely, I am certain that Mr Brown will not yet have told Mr Blair that his final dream - of bowing out as the man who turned the tide of British Euroscepticism - will go unfulfilled.

It reads to me that Brown has not yet told Tony, that Tony's dream of changing the mind of England's Eurosceptic citizenry, will not be fulfilled.

From what I have read,Tony wants to join the EU as does Brown. Many in England are very skeptical and want England to remain sovereign. Am I correct in my premise, Mad Ivan?

[MJY1288]

I was looking forward to this Ping, I'm glad you reconsidered leaving FR my friend. Free Republic wouldn't be the same without ya.

Cheers,
Mike

[MadIvan]

Blair is pro EU, Brown is not - he has been against the Euro as well. I don't like Brown, as his instincts are more socialist than Blair's, but he at least recognises the stupidity of the EU.

Regards, Ivan

[Cicero]

Do I take it, then, that if Brown cancels the referendum on the EU it means that the U.K. will not be joining?

I ask because I gather Schroeder plans to push Germany into the EU without even bothering to hold a referendum.

I was seriously annoyed with the Conservatives for not making more of this issue than they did.

[snugs]

Very true I can remember when I was a teenager the Labour Party was always considered the anti EC Party and the Conservative Party apart from a few dissenters such as Enoch Powell were pro EC.

In fact that is how the Social Democratic Party was formed from Labour MPs who were pro EC and considered themselves less left wing. Later that party amalgamated with our old Liberal Party to form the Lib Dems.

The Labour Party has metamorphosed into "New Labour" and IMHO the majority now are moderate and pro EC really the same as the original SDP were. IMHO Kennedy has sent the Lib Dems further left simply to pick up support that has left the Labour Party. Of course the Labour Party still has some left wing anti EC/EU members.

I still find it difficult to equate Labour pro EU and Conservative more skeptical as this was always one thing that I was out of step with my party on. That however would not have ever encouraged me to go to Labour I am and always have been a right wing Conservative.

[GVnana]

defenestrate
My word of the day.

Blair is sometimes seen as making a mark for himself by positioning Britain as a -- what would you say -- transition, or buffer between the US and the EU. I wonder if he gets this in Britain, or if it's just a US conceit.

[MadIvan]

Yes, if Brown cancels it, we won't be joining. Brown has no love for the EU.

Regards, Ivan

[baseballmom]

Thanks for the clarification, MadIvan. Glad you're here.

PS, What in the world is the thought process that Blair thinks it's a good thing to be part of the EU?

[.cnI redruM]

So what happens to the British Parliament if they have a 'lame duck' PM? Does the cabinet pretty much run things on there own?

[datura]

Because Blair is the elected President of the Socialist Internationale - the world's socialist party. That is independent of his duties as Prime Minister of Britain. As President of the socialists, his 'bridge' to the US is as a Trojan Horse.

Note the months spent trying to get his full approval of our invasion. The number of times he wanted to go back to the UN. All until the WMD were safely out of country, then we could go in. Why?

Simple: The Baath Party is SOCIALIST.

Name the American Chapter of the Socialist Internationale: The Democratic Socialists of America. If they have a (D) behind their name, and use the term "progressive", they belong to the DSA. 70+ members in Congress.

Does this tie anything together for anyone? The last thing that Blair is would be a true friend of the US. He's managed to become the socialist mole at the highest levels of government. Less so under president Bush, but still alarmingly well liked and respected. Probably due to the president's globalist nature.

[PhiKapMom]

Thank you for pointing that out -- I have been taking hits on the fact I don't trust Blair for months and months. I cannot understand people that don't get it about Blair -- he is a socialist but they won't admit it and a lot of on here wanted the Labour Party and Blair to win.

[Cicero]

Thanks, and glad to see you back.