Comment Central - Times Online - WBLG

PMQs, Stan Greenberg and that Eton jibe

If you want to understand yesterday's PMQs you might be well advised to read Stan Greenberg's book Dispatches from the War Room.

Greenberg tells of his experience as Labour's pollster and Gordon Brown's long attachment to the idea of labelling the Tories as the party of "the few".

I summarised Greenberg's story, if you're interested, in a column just before the Budget. Here is my conclusion:

Reading these passages [in Greenberg's book], I think I understand Gordon Brown's next move. He will, because he always does, fight the election around a dividing line. He cannot (successfully) use the “Tory cuts versus Labour investment” on which, after all the internal wrangling, the party's exhausted strategists fell back in 2001 and 2005.

The public finances won't let him.

Nor can he really fight it as the “more of the same” portion of a “change versus more of the same” election. His “no time for a novice” gibe suggests he was attracted. But once the threat of a future economic crisis has passed, “more of the same” is simply the wrong side of the election argument, as any pollster will quickly tell him.

So he is left with his first love - a “many versus the few” campaign.

This will drive the PBR and then the campaign. The Eton jibe is just the beginning.

Brown turns his hand to rapping...

... Well, almost.

Best line: "I'll get your vote/I've got no moat/ Because I'm a son of the manse."

Or, maybe: "When I’ve spent like I’ve planned/ aint a tax penny left/ I’ll go cap in my hand to the I to the M to the F."

Does Gordon deserve sympathy for his spelling?

Everyone makes mistakes.

So I understand the sympathy for Gordon Brown that forms a major strand of the comments on The Times website.

In any case, newspapers, which are prone to misspelling names, should be careful about being too critical.

One of the main points made in Mr Brown's defence, however, benefits from a further piece of information.

Mr Brown, argue his defenders, was good to write in the first place. Had he not troubled to send a handwritten missive, he would not have made the mistake.

Yet sending handwritten letters of such a kind is standard practice. All Prime Ministers have done it, at least since Mrs Thatcher and the Falklands.

Exchange: New Labour's union relations

 
  From: Daniel Finkelstein

To: Philip Collins

Phil, explain something to me about the Labour party at the top level. What will their attitude be to the Post Office strike? Will they be pleased at the chance to show that old Labour is gone forever and they can be tough? Or will they be worried that close allies in the union movement are now offside? What now is the relationship between Labour and the unions?

From: Philip Collins

To: Daniel Finkelstein

It's possible to believe both things at once, of course. The desire to prove New Labour credentials is a bit weather-beaten and turn-of-the-century. I suppose you could construct an argument that industrial unrest would raise the ghosts of 1978 but that's not likely. The main thought will be that the strike is an irritating affront to common sense. But of course there is another element now. The Labour party is deeply dependent on trade union money. It's not dependent on the CWU specifically but if the other unions took umbrage too the Labour party is in a weak position to object.

From: Daniel Finkelstein

To: Philip Collins

What is Gordon Brown's attitude to union relations, though? He clearly needed them during the long years when he was rowing with your boy. But I wonder what his view is now. Do you think he has deep personal relationships with the union leaders?
And finally, what about Alan Johnson? Couldn't he put a stop to this nonsense? Or is he really still a union leader at heart?

From: Philip Collins

To: Daniel Finkelstein

One of the tragedies of the Brown period in government has been the inability to get out of opposition mode. Fixing the country isn't the same as fixing the Labour party. So the relationships will not be as deep now their purposes have been served. I doubt Johnson could end it, but for the opposite reason to the one you imply. The leadership of the postal workers has changed ideologically and I doubt they're very interested in listening to someone who, since he left their employ, has so clearly, in their view, gone down in the world.

The "Predecessor to Cameron" Strategy

Someone I know who worked on Tony Blair's speeches has been in touch (by leaning across from the desk opposite mine).

Having heard the Cameron speech, and all the criticism from the left and praise from the right for his theme, Phil my contact suddenly recalled Tony Blair's 2004 speech on the modernisation of the civil service.

Here is the "money" quote:

I do not believe in a minimalist state. But I don’t believe in Big Government either.

You can read the rest of his "Predecessor to Cameron" speech here.

I think it would be interesting to put this to Labour critics of Cameron's argument as well as to Conservative enthusiasts.

Make your own conference speech

Paul Waugh has taken a helpful - if hazy - photo of one of the little gifts presented to media representatives in this year’s conference goodie bag...

“Make your own Gordon Brown Speech Fridge Magnets”.

Ahem... What can you make with the following words? “fault” “not” “it’s” “my” “me” “voted” "for" and “no-one”.

Any other words you could recommend for inclusion? Or for a David Cameron version for that matter?

What song should Brown have chosen?

Just how hard is it to choose appropriate music to get you on and off stage at conference?

When it comes to Gordon Brown, pretty hard indeed.

While Guido questions the intelligence of choosing 'Sit Down'* as your entering number, Dizzy points out that his parting tune dates him by a decade.

Of course, Brown could have taken a leaf out of Obama's book and gone with 'Signed, Sealed, Delivered.' Then again, perhaps not.

Any other suggestions?

*Those who find themselves ridiculous etc...

Gordon's great dividing lines

James Forsyth has picked up on Gordon Brown's attempt in the FT to establish new dividing lines.

Brown's answer is rambling and boring. I only post a small part of it here because otherwise you will lose the will to live. But I am not sure it is as muddled as it at first appears:

The great thing that Britain’s got to offer is if you look at these high technology and creative industries, we are well placed.

So the question is, which party or which government has the right policies for taking our economy forward to the next stage? Who is able to invest in the education talents and creative potential of our country? And who has a sense of how we can actually be successful in this new age?

That was the question of the previous two elections, and more so because we’re at a very important point in the development of the global economy, this is the question for our time: which policies will take us through to the next stage?

I believe that we’re going to be able to show that we can both develop and harness the creative potential of this country, while at the same time making sure that that talent can come through, through proper investment in education.”

I think I see where Brown is going with this.

The Tories have agreed to protect the NHS budget. They have not made the same promise about schools and universities.

Brown may now work on the figures to allow Labour to contrast their spending on education with Tory cuts. rambling it may have been, but in the end all this waffle will come back to investment v cuts with education rather than health as the focus.

Gordon's mobile phone empties...

Peter Hoskin is right. This excerpt from Ben Brogan’s column in The Telegraph this morning is too good not to flag up:

"[Gordon']s advisers have been known to protect their own holidays by surreptitiously deleting their numbers from his mobile."

Happy holidays.

Is Gordon stuck in 1992?

PoliticsHome put their indefatigable team of 100 experts to work again today, asking them to assess the theory put forward by Daniel in this morning’s paper.

‘'The central ideas that make up Gordon Brown's policy, political strategy and day-to-day tactics were all developed between 1992 and 1994. He hasn't had an important idea since. Nor has he discarded an important idea since then, remaining doggedly faithful to every last one."

Well, the results are in…