Comment: So much for Brown’s holiday
If Gordon Brown thought he was going to be able to relax on his holiday this year he has been sorely disabused of such a fanciful notion this morning.
David Miliband’s article in today’s Guardian newspaper has put paid to any relaxation the prime minister can hope to experience more definitely than protestors camped near to his holiday cottage in Suffolk or any photo call with the Conservative leader David Cameron.
The article by the foreign secretary is not just his vision for the Labour party, as he is most likely to say in its defence. It is a direct challenge by him to Mr Brown to sack him over his remarks. It makes clear that Mr Miliband believes he has the vision, ideas and ability to take on and best David Cameron in a general election. And it is nothing short of a challenge to Mr Brown to, at the very least, include him in the development of policy for the government.
He must clearly feel he is in a strong position to be able to make such a move. He was spotted drinking late into the night with union bosses on Friday last week – he is neither a big drinker nor famed for the number of friends he has within the unions – and his appearance at the Labour party’s policy forum in Warwick was considered somewhat unusual, given he has been kept away from direct involvement in the formation of policy by Mr Brown.
His comments that the government must turn away from “exaggerated claims either about failure or success” because this has made the electorate “switch off” are certainly likely to be interpreted as a direct assault on Mr Brown and his style of politics, despite the fact that Mr Miliband never once points the finger of blame at his party leader – although he never once says Mr Brown is the only person to lead the party at this time either.
And with rumours flying around that ten junior Cabinet ministers are threatening to resign while other Cabinet big hitters are believed to be positioning themselves just in case, it was hardly likely that Mr Miliband would stay quiet for long. After all, he took some considerable persuading not to run against Mr Brown in last year’s leadership contest and part of the reason for this was the clear lack of support he had among the unions – time for late night drinking sessions on a Friday night with union bosses perhaps?
There may be little the PM can do here. His style of leadership is clearly failing but what could he achieve with a Cabinet reshuffle? That’s something now being touted as a likely possibility should the ten Cabinet ministers continue their threats of resigning en masse.
Peter Riddell suggests in today’s Times one of the few possibilities open to the prime minister would be to swap Alistair Darling and Mr Miliband from their current positions in the Cabinet. He could introduce, or even re-introduce, some Blairites in an attempt to show he is willing to relinquish some power and unite a party that is becoming increasingly divided.
What the prime minister certainly failed to do was rally the troops after the catastrophic Glasgow East by-election less that a week ago. Ever since he has had the air of a dead man walking with commentators suggesting it could be anything between two weeks and two months before he is ousted. The political betting on such an outcome must be at fever pitch at present.
A number of questions remain, however. First, can Mr Brown rise like Lazarus from the dead to take on his challengers and unite the party behind him at the party conference? Second, can he survive that long? Third, what does Mr Miliband want and can he be bought? Fourth, if not, will he challenge for the leadership?
The first three are unanswerable. It may be impossible for Mr Brown to recover from his current position both in the opinion polls and within his own party. And Labour certainly seems ready to destroy itself with MPs unwilling to support each other enough to stay in office. This, in itself, is the first warning sign that a government is heading for the exit. While the Conservatives split over Europe in the 1990s, Labour seems ready to split on something much more fundamental: its general direction.
The Labour party has been split into two camps for years: Blairites making up one half of the party, Brownites the other. The press has always spoken in esoteric terms about these two groups but they have cemented over the years and both sides want to take Labour in different directions. And the Blairite side is winning the battle because the Brownites expected more of their leader and he has failed to deliver. Michael White, political editor of the Guardian, may not appreciate my paraphrasing to death his recent speech to the Fabian Society’s summer reception in the House of Commons but it went something along the lines of: “We pretty much know Labour is going to lose the next election. The question is how badly you lose it and whether you can come back quickly from it.”
Which leads us to what Mr Miliband wants. He certainly doesn’t want to be leader. Not yet, anyway. That’s not what the article was about. Instead it is likely to have two aims. One to get concessions from Mr Brown before the party conference and two and more importantly in all likelihood, to say he was ready to lead the Labour party when it loses the next election and that he now had enough support to do so. It may be a dead cert that Labour will lose the next election, but Mr Miliband has staked his claim to being the best candidate to take on Mr Cameron at the election after. Unless Mr Brown can, of course, work a miracle.
Matt West
