Nick Longworth: The song remains the same

Nick Longworth, Head of Broadcasting at Central Office under Iain Duncan Smith, says that Brown is failing to pull off Blair's tricks.

Our front pages were dominated by photos of Baroness Thatcher standing on the steps of Downing Street ahead of talks with Gordon Brown. Has the world gone mad? What is Brown up to? The answer is simple. He is following the Blair song book note for note.

Consider Blair’s first acts on winning the 1997 election. Set up reviews into the most contentious policy areas. Transport, Health and Education. Brown has set up reviews into Casinos and Cannabis. It implies action, but comes with no commitment. It also masks inaction in other areas.

Recruit Conservatives and businessmen to the government. Blair roped in Heseltine and Clarke over China and Europe as well as Chris Patten who flew the flag in Brussels. Brown only managed the lesser lights of Quentin Davis, Patrick Mercer and John Bercow, but the song remains the same.

Brown recruited Digby Jones from the CBI, a pale reflection of Blair’s hiring the highly successful businessmen, Lords Simon and Sainsbury, to ministerial posts.  Appoint respected figures to head action plans. Blair had his Czars, including former Chief Constable Keith Halliwell. Brown has found Matthew Taylor at a loose end.

Play the Liberal Democrats for fools. Blair promised all sorts to soften up the LibDems, only to renege in the light of his landslide. That was a secret deal, only revealed years later. Who knows what has been discussed on all those Westminster to Fife train journeys by Gordon and Ming? Judging by Ming’s capitulation over promises of a Constitutional referendum, something’s going on.

It’s all designed to illustrate the classic New Labour idea of the Big Tent. It worked for Blair, but will Brown’s more clunking efforts have the same impact?

There are reasons to doubt it. First, the names recruited are far more junior than those herded into Blair’s Big Top. Second, by definition, we’ve seen it all before. Third, Brown does not have Blair’s relaxed sales technique. (Whenever I see Brown these days, I think of Garfield: Never trust a smiling cat!) Fourth, Brown’s efforts are rushed and designed to create space for an early – 2007 or early 2008 – election. Fifth, there is little substance to any claims that Brown has brought about change.

The Blair bounce in the 1997 opinion polls was huge. The collective sigh of relief that greeted the end of the Major government led to unprecedented polling scores for Labour (the Guardian’s ICM poll in June 1997 gave Labour a 62% - 23% lead). Brown has benefited from a national sense of release from the chaos of Blair’s last two years, but the poll bounce has been smaller and proven short lived.

Maybe Brown has missed the key element in the Blair song book; Blair. When you’ve seen Ole Blue Eyes sing the tunes, why stick around for the tribute band? As Eric Morecombe put it, he’s playing all the right notes, but in the wrong order.

The lesson for David Cameron is to hold his nerve. He’s the one taking the risks on policy and strategy, while Brown fiddles with PR tactics and spin to imply great changes. 

The voters aren’t stupid. If they want change, then Brown certainly isn’t it.  They have seen New Labour do it all before; lots of talk and very little action. What Cameron is putting together is a Conservative programme they haven’t seen before, moving into ‘no-go’ areas, thinking the unthinkable, facing up to the real problems we face. 

Perversely, the danger for Cameron is that voters go off the idea of change as economic storm clouds gather. Events, dear boy, events.

Comments

[Stephen Tolkinghorne]

"The voters aren’t stupid."

Au contraire, they are, for the most part, very stupid indeed.

[Umbrella man]

Mr Tolkinghorne (above) is a supporter of UKIP. Interesting that that is his view of the voters.

[Tony Makara]

There is no doubt that David Cameron is the only leader with a real programme for government. Gordon Brown, the manipulator, has nothing new to offer. The rash of policy announcements that greeted Brown's coronation were re-heated old policies. Labour's policy think-tanks have stopped thinking. They are intellectually exhausted and burnt-out. Labour are yesterdays men clonging to yesterdays ideas.

[Scotty]

Interesting article.

"As Eric Morecombe put it, he’s playing all the right notes, but in the wrong order."

Like everyone else I watched the clunking fist sweep all before him in his first few weeks, or more pertinently, the media tarts of the political Lobby who were desperate to forge new links with No10's press operation in the hope of the odd scoop or two.
Watching Head to Head last night was interesting, and I have a lot of time for both Steve Richards and Ann Lesley. They come from different newspapers and therefore dare I say it, they have a different readership.
Ann Lesley is not impressed with stunts being pulled by Brown and thinks it is too obvious and will be a turn off for the voters, Steve on the other hand gushed at how clever Brown was being and that it caused problems for both the Conservatives and the Libdems.
We have been told that Brown is the Statesman, the tactician and a political beast of mythical proportions, where is the beef???
Well he finally got the job he coveted for so long and we know that he wants to smash the Conservatives and the Libdems but as for everything else.... What is his vision for the country this week, next week, or the long term? He can't even commit to whether we will have a GE next month never mind 3 years from now!!!
Now most people would like to know what is going to happen to the economy and how he and his government will protect us from a bumpy or even a more serious downturn. Instead he is busy playing a different tune which involves stamping out opposition, fair game you might say, but the last time I looked it was not at the top of most voters priorities as it was back in 97'
I am not even sure he is playing the right notes even in the wrong order.
Oppositions don't win GE's, governments lose them.
The Conservatives need to OPPOSE relentless the negative aspects of this governments record while appearing as a credible alternative to the present bunch at No10.
Brown and his cabal will be brought down by their arrogance, they put out a carefully crafted narrative about being a change from Blair, they promised a more consensual style of politics. They then indulged in the most cringe worthy and obviously cheap political games, only problem is that all the same problems that were queuing up before Blair left are still there.
The architect of most of those problems is now in complete charge without even the safety valve of Blair next door, and all he has for answers is yet more cynical spin.

[Mr Angry]

For all the "thinking the unthinkable" and "facing real problems" spin from various Camroons the fact still remains that the Voters, stupid or not, (and just like people everywhere some are and some aren't)patently remain unconvinced as yet of the benefits to them of current Conservative Party proposals, what there is of them. Since the headlines seem to be more new taxes and not enough attention to the issues that they really care about, even with our considerably improved news management operation, the question is till open as to whether or not this is an election winning approach or just a sop to rich liberal consciences.

[Tony Makara]

Scotty, you are right, the Brown brigade will hang themselves if we give them enough rope. Like all oligarchies, they now see being in office as their reason for existence. All ideas of being a socially progressive movement have vanished. Simon Wiesenthal once said first people promise miracles then they wait for miracles. So it is with Labour, the party that promised so much and has produced so little is now politically exhausted, reduced to stealing policies, magpie style, from other parties, ie, border police. Labour is a machine running on empty. Their time came, they wasted it, and it now has passed them by.

[Peter Coe]

These "voters are/aren't stupid" comments drive me crazy; because it's one of those trite soundbites that entirely misses the point.

I'm not stupid but I couldn't perform a heart bypass because I have no experience of it; nor could I construct a tower block or broker shares at vast profit on the stock exchange.

The voters aren't stupid, but they're also not public policy experts (at least on the vast majority of subjects - they may have great expertise in the areas in which they work).

It goes to the problem with a referendum on the EU Treaty (which I support): in the sense that referenda need to be constructed on fairly straightforward questions rather than a matter of massive complexity like the EU constitution - some aspects of which I suspect the most euro-sceptic of us might support, but for which there are others we absolutely hate, Ming Campbell's demand for a wider referendum on our membership of Europe is right.

[Shofar]

Excellent post Scotty.

The over-riding image I have of Brown's premiership is the infamous leaky drain at the Purbright laboratory that caused the outbreak of foot and mouth. Brown tried to act like he personally could eradicate the virus by rushing back from his hols and posing as the saviour of the situation, but the grubby truth is that it was his micro management of Treasury funds that led to DEFRA failing to cough up to get the drain repaired. That drain is an excellent metaphor for Gordon Brown's leadership. No doubt elements in the media (led by a fawning BBC) will continue to fall over themselves in their effort to tell us how 'brilliant' 'clever' and politically 'astute' old clunking fist is, meanwhile trying to flush down the drain all the bad news that Brown is directly responsible for. But voters won't be fooled for long. The drains will start leaking and a lethal virus will break out - leading no doubt to massacre in the Labour ranks. It's only a matter of time.

[Yet Another Anon]

The collective sigh of relief that greeted the end of the Major government led to unprecedented polling scores for Labour (the Guardian’s ICM poll in June 1997 gave Labour a 62% - 23% lead). Brown has benefited from a national sense of release from the chaos of Blair’s last two years, but the poll bounce has been smaller and proven short lived.
The end of John Major's administration after 18 years of Conservative government is hardly comparable with a new PM who has already been Chancellor of the Exchequer for just over 10 years previous to that. At the best of times Opinion Polls reflect those willing to respond, rely on them not lying and assume that even if they aren't lying that they are making the same decision that they would make if they really were in a polling booth. In a Polling Booth or with a Postal Vote at an election people know it is the real thing and so are more careful in voting.

There has never been a time when Labour would have got much more than 50% of the vote or the Conservative Party would have got less than 30% in a General Election if it had been held immediately. I rather doubt Labour would have reached 50% of the vote even if a General Election had been held during the 1995 Conservative leadership contest or immediately after the statement on BSE in 1996. The only time that Labour might have exceeded 50% was in the 1940s and early 1950s and again in the mid 1960s - voting intention polls in 1980-81, 1986, 1989-92, 1993-99 & 2001-02 were all hugely distorted and unreliable because of people refusing to answer or saying what they think sounds good rather than what they intend to do.

[Ian Parker]

Gordon Brown may be playing the same old song but, so far, it’s the only tune in town.

To date, he’s found it very easy to outmanoeuvre the hapless Cameron who can find no plank of policy other than vague waffle on the environment and the promise of higher taxes for the middle class (good Tory message, that). However, dear old Gordon has many skeletons in his cupboard. Had there been an effective opposition, the game would already be up. As it is, there’s all to play for.

Currently, Gordon’s main challenge is how to deflect culpability for the developing economic crisis which he so royally helped to engineer. Alistair Darling, of course, tells us it’s those damned yanks again! Problem is, Cameron will probably believe him, in which case that game really would be over.

[voreas06]

COMMENT EDITED FOR BAD LANGUAGE

I think we are being a little complacent. Gordon Brown is indeed an arrogant incompetent, unprincipled buffoon when it comes to governing. Indeed he has wasted more money on more devious or daft plans than any chancellor/pm in history, but he is truly the king of spin and politicking. He knows how to manipulate and is shameless in what he says i.e it doesn't matter about truth or lies it is all about what the public can be made to believe, he has the BBC pretty much on side and many commentators like Steve Richards, andrew Rawnsley, Jackie Ashely, Polly Toynbee, David AAronovitch, Tim Hames etc etc will do constant puff pieces. Plus he is the Prime minister and is machiavellian in his use of that position. Cameron has none of those advantages and therefore those who argue it should be easy to hold Brown to account and cameron should be 50 points ahead in the polls fail to take any of that into account. However as I said above Brown's record is awful, his nature is a cowardly tricky bully and his own party know he is a Stalinist control freak and believe he will make an awful prime minister. Whatever Cameron's team do they need to keep on reminding people what his own party really thinks of him. The public know it deep down they just need to keep being reminded of it.

[voreas06]

Ok fair enough ed but it was John Hutton that said it not me, and I used stars and everything.