Who's who in the campaign line-ups
We're told that Prime Minister Gordon Brown will go to tonight's meeting of the Parliamentary Labour Party flanked by his three big general election chiefs - Peter Mandelson, Douglas Alexander and Harriet Harman.
So what's new in this?
We've long known that this trio would be key figures in the election. Ms Harman was bound to have some role when Mr Brown appointed her party chairman (in addition to being deputy leader) when he was elected leader in 2007.
Mr Alexander became "election co-ordinator" at the same time. And ever since Lord Mandelson returned to government it has been assumed that Mandy would play a key election role, as he has in so many previous campaigns.
The big question is not their titles, but who does what, and balancing the egos and ambitions of the three individuals, not to mention Ed Balls, who would clearly like a say in how election strategy is run.
A huge problem for Mr Brown, which I suspect he'll never resolve satisfactorily.
But David Cameron has a similiar problem, of course. Who will run the Conservatives' campaign?
George Osborne, who is in overall charge of strategy? Or Eric Pickles, the party chairman? Or Lord Ashcroft, who runs the operation to finance and win target seats?
The answer, I suppose, somewhat clearer than with Labour, is it will be Mr Osborne.
Mr Osborne's problem, though, is that he can't be seen to devote too much time to political strategy when there are still so many in the City, and elsewhere, who think he's doing a pretty lightweight job as shadow chancellor.
Hence the interesting development before Christmas, when Mr Osborne appointed George Bridges as his many strategy sidekick.
Mr Bridges is a canny and highly-respected campaign brain who has experience of Tory campaigns dating back to the John Major years.
What makes the set-up especially is that for many years Mr Bridges and Lord Ashcroft were not the best of friends, and in his book Lord Ashcroft accused Mr Bridges of encouraging The Times newspaper to run the campaign against him which led to Lord Ashcroft taking libel action against the paper.
I'm Michael Crick, and I'm Newsnight's political editor. My guiding rule is that in any story there's usually something the politicians would prefer the world not to know. My job is to find that out. Follow me on
Comment number 1.
At 11th Jan 2010, Phillip wrote:Despite your cheeky efforts to the contrary, the Tories have a very solid and united campaign team. They can have a clear objective and know that an argumentative and divided party will not win.
The issue for the Tories is not the election team. It is those dodgy backbenchers who are leaving at the next election because of their role in the expenses scandal. Many i suspect are bitter at losing their income and money making position as an MP. They have nothing to lose ...
Complain about this comment (Comment number 1)
Comment number 2.
At 11th Jan 2010, barriesingleton wrote:'TEAM SOLID' (#1)
Do you just ignore the clear fact that 'The Team' saw fit to alter the APPEARANCE of their leader for a massive poster campaign, Phillip?
Surely this indicates that Cameron's APPEARANCE is regarded as (a) unappealing and (b) a factor in winning. Any party that thinks in this way (tacitly endorsed by the man himself!) should disqualify itself from any part of government. This country ('our country') DESPERATELY needs a CHANGE from OK, Hello, X-Factor campaigning. We need INTEGRITY (indeed: INTEGRITY INTEGRITY INTEGRITY) in our politicians. That the Tory's have a 'team' of Machiavellian manipulators, who are prepared to alter the face of the leader, to an 'acceptable face of politics', to my mind, speaks volumes of the rot and decay of the Westminster ethos. I simply stinks.
Can you counter the points I make Phillip? What don't I understand?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 2)