Is Cameron's support for Blair beginning to work?

Cameron's bipartisanship on Labour's education reforms looks very worthy on the surface but there is an underlying politics to it.  In last week's New Statesman Martin Bright captured that politics very well:

"Cameron's tactic, in smothering the government with support, is to make Blair's divorce from his own party permanent."   

The tactic may already be bearing fruit... The Guardian reports signs of a growing rebellion on Labour benches against Tony Blair's education reforms.  Greater freedom on admissions policy is provoking the ire of former Education Secretaries Estelle Morris and, significantly, David Blunkett.  Blunkett may be playing a double game - acting as a rebel when he's really getting into the rebel camp for Tony Blair.  Anyway - it's all looking very interesting...

Comments

[James Maskell]

The problem is that by the Conservatives giving its support to Labour on major issues, it might lead to dissatisfaction from our own people. Not only that but its not really highlighting differences between our two Parties on the key issues.

I see Stephen Twigg was fined yesterday for being drunk and incapable!

[Cllr Iain Lindley]

He spent the weekend at NOLS Council. Enough to drive anyone to drink... ;)

[Innocent Abroad]

Yeah right - Dave invented the gulf between Tony Blair and Labour backbenchers. It's got nothing to do with:

a) Iraq

b) Labour's majority having been halved

c) Gordo now having sat through his 3rd general election win for Tony Blair.

Truly Dave has reinvented politics and without him none of these things would have come to pass ..........

Of course ---- given that the reforms Blair wants are right and sensible, if Cameron's tactics are facilitating their obstruction, he's damaging the national interest.

[Nick Thorpe]

"Yeah right - Dave invented the gulf between Tony Blair and Labour backbenchers. It's got nothing to do with: ..."

I don't think that anybody is suggesting that he invented the split, rather that he is attempting to widen it with niceness. It's certainly something fairly novel in recent years, though I'd certainly stop short of calling it totally revolutionary. With the support of 198 Conservative MPs, it'd have to be an absolutely massive rebellion for the education reforms not to go through, so instigating a little bit of extra agitation in the process isn't going to work against the national interest to a great degree.

Incidentally, this is an excellent time for the split in the Labour party to widen. Polls have suggested Gordon Brown has been rather less popular in the country lately, but with few alternatives having been suggested Labour may have to stick with Tony Blair in spite of his own unpopularity. The frustration of waiting for power would only further irritate Brown supporters. However if they do decide to install Brown soon, he's not likely to have a great honeymoon period what with his recent problems as Chancellor. It's going to be difficult for the government to stay composed in either situation.

[RobC]

One way that the Tories could get back into power at thenext election is if Labour implode.

I think Cameron is trying to stir things up from a distance, and get Labour support to become polarised. This would be especially beneficial if Brown gets sucked into it. Blair is stuck between a rock and a hard place. If he waters down the eductaion reforms to bring the Labour backbenchers onside then Blair will be portrayed as weak. If Blair pushes on with being 'bold' and requiring the support of the Tories then again he can be pictured as weak.

Of course this could all go horribly wrong for Cameron, I'm not sure how but the Labour spin doctors are probably working on it!

[wasp]

Blair will withdraw on allowing schools to set their own admissions criteria in order to make Cameron right wing, its a game of bluff and double bluff.

[Alexander Drake]

But does that make Blair look weak and hostage to the last person that sat on him (or whatever the line was that Blair used on Major)?

[Coxy]

The problem is that Blair could call our bluff. Proceed with some half-hearted reform measures - good in principle but fudged to please his party (eg. not giving schools freedom over admissions).

Then the question will be, will Dave still back it? How consensual is he really? Either he backs ineffective blair-ised legislation, or he abandons the consensus approach.

[RobC]

"Either he backs ineffective blair-ised legislation, or he abandons the consensus approach."

Perhaps he backs it as it goes in the correct direction, with the promise of revising further when (if) the Tories get back in.

[wasp]

This is classic Blair, pick a fight then compromise and leave your opponents exposed forcing them to vote for something they don't want or break their word.