Monday, April 23, 2007
Why Miliband has made the right decision
We have become accustomed in this country to politicians who make mealy-mouthed statements which don't actually mean what they say and which allow them just enough leeway to wriggle out of.
I suppose the most famous example was Michael Heseltine's declaration that he "could not foresee the circumstances" in which he would challenge Margaret Thatcher, allowing him to launch just such a challenge when the previously unforseeable circumstances actually came about.
So I applaud David Miliband's decision this weekend to deliver an unequivocal statement that he will not challenge Gordon Brown for the Labour leadership.
It's no less than confirmation of what he has always said, but it represents a victory for political plain speaking that Brown himself would do well to take note of. More on this theme later....
That apart, I have no doubt that Miliband has made the right decision, and I explained why in my weekend column and acompanying podcast.
If you can't be bothered to read or listen to it all the way through, a potted summary might read:
He's too young, too inexperienced, and too lacking in gravitas.
He doesn't need the leadership at this stage of his career, and will get a big job under Gordon anyway.
A Miliband-Brown contest would have split the party and perpetuated the Blair-Brown feud into the next generation.
Brown is the best leader to take on the shallow PR man Cameron.
Today's Guardian speculates that either one of Reid or Clarke will still stand, and I share that judgement. Reid v Brown in particular would be a good contest between two men of genuine Prime Ministerial calibre. But neither he nor Clarke can win.
All of which suggests that it's all over bar the shouting.
I suppose the most famous example was Michael Heseltine's declaration that he "could not foresee the circumstances" in which he would challenge Margaret Thatcher, allowing him to launch just such a challenge when the previously unforseeable circumstances actually came about.
So I applaud David Miliband's decision this weekend to deliver an unequivocal statement that he will not challenge Gordon Brown for the Labour leadership.
It's no less than confirmation of what he has always said, but it represents a victory for political plain speaking that Brown himself would do well to take note of. More on this theme later....
That apart, I have no doubt that Miliband has made the right decision, and I explained why in my weekend column and acompanying podcast.
If you can't be bothered to read or listen to it all the way through, a potted summary might read:
Today's Guardian speculates that either one of Reid or Clarke will still stand, and I share that judgement. Reid v Brown in particular would be a good contest between two men of genuine Prime Ministerial calibre. But neither he nor Clarke can win.
All of which suggests that it's all over bar the shouting.
Friday, April 20, 2007
Who would be First Minister of an English Parliament?
With the Scottish and Welsh elections coming up, indefatigable Anglo blogger Gareth Young is currently carrying out this survey on how people would vote in an election for an English Parliament. It's a great idea so I heartily recommend you to take part.
Among the questions asked is who should be First Minister of such a body. There are no prompts, and you have to write in your answer, so doubtless there will be some wiseacres who respond "Gordon Brown" as a wind-up.
Actually it's quite a good question, and not one I can remember being posed before in the MSM. I suppose the answers, particularly in the case of the Tory candidate, would depend on whether the EP was an entirely separate body along the lines of the Scottish Parliament, or whether it was merely English MPs sitting without the Welsh and Scots.
Assuming the former (because it makes more sense apart from anything else) my favourites to become candidates for English First Minister in their respective parties would be William Hague for the Tories, Alan Johnson for Labour, and Chris Huhne for the Liberal Democrats.
Among the questions asked is who should be First Minister of such a body. There are no prompts, and you have to write in your answer, so doubtless there will be some wiseacres who respond "Gordon Brown" as a wind-up.
Actually it's quite a good question, and not one I can remember being posed before in the MSM. I suppose the answers, particularly in the case of the Tory candidate, would depend on whether the EP was an entirely separate body along the lines of the Scottish Parliament, or whether it was merely English MPs sitting without the Welsh and Scots.
Assuming the former (because it makes more sense apart from anything else) my favourites to become candidates for English First Minister in their respective parties would be William Hague for the Tories, Alan Johnson for Labour, and Chris Huhne for the Liberal Democrats.
Those Top 10 speeches again....
Tomorrow's Guardian is beginning a series on the greatest speeches of the 20th century. Polly Toynbee was on the Today Programme this morning justifying the paper's choice which apparently doesn't include Neil Kinnock's "grotesque chaos" speech to the 1985 Labour Conference.
Kinnock's militant-bashing epic was of course No 1 on my own list published on this blog last year. You can find it HERE.
Kinnock's militant-bashing epic was of course No 1 on my own list published on this blog last year. You can find it HERE.
Thursday, April 19, 2007
The Portillo Myth
A propos of whether David Miliband should challenge Gordon Brown for the leadership of the Labour Party, there has been much discussion of late over whether there are tides in a politician's life which if taken at the flood lead on to fortune, etc, and whether, in apparently passing-up this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, Miliband is kissing goodbye to his chance of the premiership forever.
This point of view was exemplified by a supremely egotistical article in last weekend's Sunday Times by Michael Portillo, whose position in the 1995 Tory leadership crisis is seen by some (including himself) as analagous to Miliband's now.
Portillo wrote: "The premiership of the United Kingdom is almost within Miliband’s grasp, as it was for me in 1995. Unlike Cameron, Miliband could be prime minister without winning a general election, without even having to wait. He could be in No 10 by the end of June.
"If he does not grab it now, the opportunity may never recur. Brown will become leader, might lose the general election and condemn Labour to a decade in opposition. By which time Miliband will be a has-been, his best years spent fruitlessly harassing the Cameron government, for ever marked by his failure to seize the day, consigned to history as a vacillator. I can tell Miliband that this does not feel good."
Leaving aside the question of whether Portillo is over-estimating Miliband's current prospects, is he also over-estimating the strength of his own position back in that balmy summer of '95, forever etched on my memory as it was my first year in the Lobby?
I think he is. Over the years, a myth has grown up that if only Portillo had had the balls to challenge Major himself instead of letting John Redwood run as a stalking horse, he would have succeeded in dislodging the Prime Minister in the first ballot and gone on to defeat all-comers in the second.
It's a seductive theory, but it's not how I remember things. I recall a Tory Party that was split moreorless three ways - between those who wanted Michael Portillo to be Prime Minister, those who wanted Michael Heseltine to be, and those who couldn't care less who it was so long as it wasn't either of those two.
It followed that the only way either Heseltine or Portillo could have forced Major out was by working together, and I seem to recall one or two kites being flown to that effect. But the wily Major knew such a "dream ticket" was highly unlikely, which is why his "put up or shut up" gamble was always likely to come off.
The one time Portillo would undoubtedly have become Tory leader was in 1997 had he not lost his seat - but that is another political counterfactual.
This post was featured in The Times' daily blog round-up Web Grab.
This point of view was exemplified by a supremely egotistical article in last weekend's Sunday Times by Michael Portillo, whose position in the 1995 Tory leadership crisis is seen by some (including himself) as analagous to Miliband's now.
Portillo wrote: "The premiership of the United Kingdom is almost within Miliband’s grasp, as it was for me in 1995. Unlike Cameron, Miliband could be prime minister without winning a general election, without even having to wait. He could be in No 10 by the end of June.
"If he does not grab it now, the opportunity may never recur. Brown will become leader, might lose the general election and condemn Labour to a decade in opposition. By which time Miliband will be a has-been, his best years spent fruitlessly harassing the Cameron government, for ever marked by his failure to seize the day, consigned to history as a vacillator. I can tell Miliband that this does not feel good."
Leaving aside the question of whether Portillo is over-estimating Miliband's current prospects, is he also over-estimating the strength of his own position back in that balmy summer of '95, forever etched on my memory as it was my first year in the Lobby?
I think he is. Over the years, a myth has grown up that if only Portillo had had the balls to challenge Major himself instead of letting John Redwood run as a stalking horse, he would have succeeded in dislodging the Prime Minister in the first ballot and gone on to defeat all-comers in the second.
It's a seductive theory, but it's not how I remember things. I recall a Tory Party that was split moreorless three ways - between those who wanted Michael Portillo to be Prime Minister, those who wanted Michael Heseltine to be, and those who couldn't care less who it was so long as it wasn't either of those two.
It followed that the only way either Heseltine or Portillo could have forced Major out was by working together, and I seem to recall one or two kites being flown to that effect. But the wily Major knew such a "dream ticket" was highly unlikely, which is why his "put up or shut up" gamble was always likely to come off.
The one time Portillo would undoubtedly have become Tory leader was in 1997 had he not lost his seat - but that is another political counterfactual.
What a Dykehead
Oh dear. It seems David Cameron is so keen to ape Tony Blair's "big tent" politics that he was prepared to offer the Tory candidature for the Mayoralty of London to a known Labour sympathiser, but in doing so he appears to have incurred the wrath of a formidable collection of Tory bloggers. More from Iain Dale, Guido Fawkes, Dizzy Thinks and PragueTory.*
* Back in business after apparently shagging his way round the Czech Republic.
* Back in business after apparently shagging his way round the Czech Republic.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)