麻豆约拍

麻豆约拍.co.uk

Talk about Newsnight

Big Fat Politics Blog

Partisan excitement no friend of cool calculation

  • Newsnight
  • 8 Oct 07, 11:59 AM

As non-election fever dies down, Psephologist Professor John Curtice offers a few observations about the outcome of the past couple of weeks.

Labour's early election project always looked a rather dubious enterprise. On average the party's lead over the Conservatives since Mr Brown became leader was running at around six points. That could well have been enough for a three figure majority. But it was not sufficiently far above the four point lead Mr Brown needed to be sure of emulating the 66 majority Mr Blair won in 2005. Just a percentage point swing or so to the Conservatives over the course of the campaign could have dashed Mr Brown's hopes of securing a 鈥減ersonal mandate鈥.

Yet keeping open the prospect of going to the country proved too tempting - and especially so when Labour's lead had stretched to eleven points by the end of its party conference. Now a November election looked like a golden opportunity to put the Tories out of business for a generation.

However, partisan excitement is no friend of cool rational calculation. And miscalculate is precisely what Labour did.

Above all, they underestimated the political acumen of the political foes they were so keen to crush. The Tories kept their discipline, came up with arresting ideas on tax, and provided a platform for Mr Cameron to demonstrate his coolness and charisma. Labour's lead was not just pegged back, it disappeared entirely! By Saturday Mr Brown finally saw for himself the folly of going to the country.

But has he realised too late? Far from being a strong Prime Minister who can handle an unexpected crisis he now looks like a man who dithered in a crisis of his own creation. Instead of being a statesman who reaches out across the party divide, he now seems like a politician willing to call an election purely to achieve partisan ends. Far from crushing the Tories he has given Mr Cameron a second chance to persuade the country that he and his party are ready to govern.

You never know, but perhaps Mr Brown will receive a private note from Mr Cameron this week saying, 鈥淭he party's back in fine fettle once again; thanks for your enormous help鈥.

John Curtice is Professor of Politics, Strathclyde University

Comments  Post your comment

BOTTLER BROWN!

So we were all wrong! I, at least, added the caveat that it would ultimately depend on the opinion polls; and that is exactly what happened.

But, despite the views of the pundits, the change was not due to a storming performance by Cameron, he was good but not prime-ministerial, or to Osborne鈥檚 鈥榤illionaires鈥 inheritance tax鈥. In fact the latter was potentially an own goal - in terms of the vague funding for it but especially in terms of a return to being the party of the rich, and image which has long bedeviled the Tories 鈥 as Brown鈥檚 considered answers now show.

What I had not expected was that Gordon Brown would get his strategy so wrong, going for political overkill when he already had the election in his grasp. As I hinted, in my earlier entry to this blog, Brown鈥檚 new found popularity had resulted from him hiding his true nature. The new, reformed, Brown was a 鈥榞ood guy鈥. The electorate liked what they saw; and forgot the old Brown who had spent so many months destabilizing his predecessor鈥檚 government. In that earlier blog I wondered just how long, after winning the election, it would be before the old Brown rose from the grave.

Of course the answer was that the zombie just couldn鈥檛 wait. He rose from the dead, far too early, after the very successful Labour conference; where Brown had acted out his new persona perfectly 鈥 no knockabout at all, just seriously running the country.

Then, far too early, came his trickery. He just couldn鈥檛 resist putting the knife into the Tories, but it rebounded with a vengeance:

1. Election Rumours: Using his old techniques, so effective in destabilizing Blair, his carefully distanced henchmen 鈥 seemingly led as always by Ed Ball 鈥 started the rumours about the snap election. Designed, no doubt, to unnerve Cameron they failed and he held his nerve in a bravura (if hollow) performance. More important they forced the Tories to band together, to fight the upcoming election. All the back-stabbing which was due to happen was overtaken by self-preservation; and a a result the Tories were able to claim a good conference (where any lack of backstabbing is now seen as a success).
2. Visitation in Iraq: It must have been seen, by Brown and his advisers, that this visit 鈥 and the accompanying announcement 鈥 would derail coverage of the Tories鈥 conference. Of course it did, but for all the wrong reasons. It was correctly seen as the worst sort of spin, not helped by dressing up existing troop withdrawals as new ones. It was an unnecessary failure of judgment; for he had no need to go there, and his announcement should have been made 鈥 as he had promised 鈥 to parliament. Worse still he was seen as guilty of using our brave lads out there for political purposes.
3. Taking His Eye Off The Ball: A less obvious consequence was that, so busy spinning their Iraq story, his strategists failed to see 鈥 let alone answer 鈥 George Osborne鈥檚 inheritance tax goal. Tony Blair set up his war-room to handle such 鈥榚mergencies鈥, but where has that gone under Brown? In fact this goal needn鈥檛 have been a game winner. There were obvious problems, open to a well thought out answer, not least with the very vague funding of this obvious give-away. Above all, though, it should have been presented by Labour as the Tories returning to be the party of the rich. Blair would have had them pinned to the ropes within a matter of hours. But Brown鈥檚 Labour 鈥 almost mesmerized by their own cleverness - carried on with its spin of the Iraq trip; and allowed the Tories to win the argument by default.
4. Digging An Ever Deeper Hole: Not recognizing even then what was happening, the Labour spin doctors clearly put its projected election victory above the national good 鈥 by bringing forward a whole range of what it thought would be election winning events. And, behind the scenes but in front of the media, it boasted about how clever it was. Of course Brown was always out of sight; but, by then, we all knew (not least from the way Blair was stabbed in the back) that he always used his henchmen to do his dirty work. The scene was set for everyone to recognize who the real Brown still was: the devious, scheming, self-centred 鈥榥asty鈥 鈥 who was totally untrustworthy.
5. Bottler: Then he bottled out, losing the last positive element of his image. He was no longer a strong, decisive decision-maker.
6. Spinning the Bottle: Compounding his mistakes, he then chose to 鈥榗ancel the election鈥 in the favourable environment of a hastily arranged interview with Andrew Marr. When that too backfired, he scrambled to arrange another press conference; at which, however he claimed that he had always wanted to continue and put forward his policies; the result of the opinion polls were not in any way decisive. He carefully distanced himself from the spinning of his henchmen.

As a historical precedent, Henry II eventually did attend Thomas Becket鈥檚 shrine in sackcloth and ashes to accept that his request to his own henchmen, 鈥渨ill nobody rid me of this turbulent priest鈥, made him equally guilty. Brown, however, genuinely seems to think that his similar communications with 鈥 mixing metaphors 鈥 his own opprichniki absolves him from any association with the seamier side of politics.

His tragedy is that, while two weeks ago Brown was heading for a famous victory, by letting his true self overtake his political judgment he is now a loser due to follow James Calaghan, who was at least a genuinely nice guy, into Labour鈥檚 hall of infamy. He has two or more years to recover, and David Cameron is an ideal light-weight opponent, but will anyone ever trust him; let alone like him!

Brown will no doubt hang on by his fingertips, lurching from one crisis of confidence to the next; much as those he subjected Blair to. Of course he won鈥檛 give up power. He has already spent a decade and a half selling his soul to be PM, and nobody in New Labour will dare challenge him. Come back Tony, all is forgiven!

Similarly Cameron, saved this time by the incompetence of Brown, will stagger from one crisis to the next, fending off the challenge of George Osborne; who is increasingly seen as the champion of Labour鈥檚 defeat. But, not knowing when the election will be due (Brown鈥檚 one remaining trump card), the Tories will not be able to shake off his boyish charm, but fatal lack of strategic decision-making.

The Liberals are possibly the ones with the best chance of a recovery. I have long admired Ming, having respected (and almost hero worshipped) his judgment on each of the occasions I have had any extended time with him, but he now needs to pass the baton on to the new youngsters who have emerged untainted by the party鈥檚 past. He has, very successfully, pulled the party together and, more important, given it a coherent set of potentially election-winning policies. Now he needs a young turk who can take forward the battle cry of destroying the cosy Labour/Conservative consensus. I, for one, hope he succeeds in this. We electors need a real choice, not spin, in the government we hope for.

  • 2.
  • At 11:50 AM on 09 Oct 2007,
  • Conor wrote:

Well I absolutly loved that. What an exhilarating read about Gordon and his self believe that he has the right to power. I reckon that Gordon will crush his own party by inept abilty of reading critical situations.

  • 3.
  • At 01:16 AM on 10 Oct 2007,
  • newsnightjunkie wrote:


No Brown did not bottle it - I am sure it was part of a carefully thought out plan to make the Tories reveal at least the policies they would use as election sweeteners.
And it worked!

Darling was able to do the Treasury calculations and put forward modified versions of these.

I look forward with interest to what will happen come the Budget proper!!

  • 4.
  • At 01:20 PM on 11 Oct 2007,
  • Matthew Scott wrote:

I have to admit to being disappointed about the election u-turn. I understand that in our democracy the mandate is granted to the party, not the individual, and that is how it should be, in order to prevent the 'cult of personality' we see in other countries (despite what anyone says, it was new ideas and a lack of opposition that placed and have kept Labour in power). Therefore I understand that a change in leader of the ruling party should be of no major concern to the electorate. However, when this new leader is willing to change the direction his party is moving, then surely it is now the person and not the party with the mandate? This in itself would, for me, be reason enough for an election, especially when this person so has so obviously coveted power for so long.

I hope the wonderful 'Why Democracy?' season concludes with an episode on this latest run of events.

  • 5.
  • At 03:46 PM on 11 Oct 2007,
  • JimmyMac wrote:

Want to make a few points here

A)the non-election and the world

B) Political Poker and Damage Limitation

C)Brown image and reconstructing it

Point A

could it be that there are too many elections just about to occur (as is likely in Australia mostly likely this side of the new year and in the US next year).

while i grant Australia isn't as important as the US in terms of political situations, nevertheless Brown will want to see what he has 'got to work with' in terms of issues such as Iraq and troop withdrawal.

Also people complain about Brown not calling an election, same thing is happening in Australia where Rudd (ALP)has asked Howard to 'call the federal election'

ultimately its the PM's choice and if we are all being honest (and i know its asking a lot), if we where in Browns shoes we wouldn't call an election if we felt we couldn't get the best election result possible.

Then again all the Tories can do(and the situation ALP are in, in Australia) is count down the days till the next election and in the meantime try and show some signs of getting out of the wilderness they found themselves in.

every time i see Cameron challenging GB to call an election it reminds me somewhat of those car journeys where kids ask 'are we there yet, are we there yet?'

to which the parents after hearing for this again have the courage to say 'look. well get there when we do. Till then just be quiet'

Point B

could Brown be planning a good game of political poker. he under no illusion polls go up and down.

Is he hoping that Cameron will crash and burn?

Is Browns just letting Cameron carry this 'election baton' and the moment where it gets too much, goes thanks very much and calls the election.

BROWN HAS GOT THE TIME BUT HAS TO STILL PROVE

CAMERONS GOT TO PROVE but HAS THE DISADANTAGE OF NOT HAVING AN EXACT DATE FOR AN ELECTION

ADVANTAGE GORDON?

Point C

We have all seen Brown playing No2 to Blair (remember him?) - between the two of them. what Brown wants is his chance to be shoulder-to-shoulder to Blair but as No1 in the same picture frame.

best chance of that happening....

(any answers)...

...and the answer is ..

London Olympics 2012.

yep love 'em or hate them its happening.

and yep you can hear the commentator now....

'well and there we see in the crowd for the opening ceremony the former Prime Minister who made it happen (cut to Blair) and the current Prime Minister Gordon Brown'

is that the only chance Brown will have in the limelight not only to prove to the UK but the world.

and of course he will do everything to make it happen (ie delaying date of first election).


suggestions?

  • 6.
  • At 08:10 PM on 11 Oct 2007,
  • Richard Calhoun wrote:

I don't think he looked like a strong Prime Minister as claimed by the Media.

He was constantly issuing soundbites, avoiding direct questions and resorting to statements without questions instead.

His actions in the last 2 weeks have simply brought forward the day when he was rumbled as a shallow bureaucrat with not a single original idea.

Its good the election never happened, he is now going to face increasingly bad news over the next 2 years and when it comes to the election this Socialist government will be so discredited that it will finally banish Socialism from our society.

It will be looked upon like communism is now, a political ideal that was fatally flawed and consigned to bin where it belongs.

This is all very well and I'm a big Newsnight fan but where is the input from us lesser mortals, the public?

  • 8.
  • At 01:08 AM on 13 Oct 2007,
  • Amadou Koora wrote:


The British people and the media need to understand and know that Mr Gordon Brown by nature is a very calculated man and thus would take unncesarry risk. The last thing any sane and responsible would do is to dig his own grave. There is no way brown can win elections under the present political circumstances as obtain in the Uk. As he is legally mandated to fix a date for the elections, he was within the law to define it to a time he feels he could win the poll.

Thanks


Bryan (7) - we're very keen to have input from the public on this site, in fact there's plenty here already.

Peter

This post is closed to new comments.

The 麻豆约拍 is not responsible for the content of external internet sites