Category Archives: Alan Johnson

Memo to Gordon: you really need Mandy

This morning’s Telegraph report that a rift has developed between the Prime Minister and Peter Mandelson comes as little surprise.  It has been very obvious for some weeks that Mandelson deeply disapproves of the strategy of entrenchment that the Prime Minister, together with the likes of Ed Balls, Alan Johnson and Peter Hain have decided to pursue, and is showing his displeasure through his absence.

Indeed, little has been seen of Mandelson – who was virtually omnipresent in the media in the first half of this year – since the Labour party conference in September.  It was then that he urged delegates that the only way for the party to stand a chance of winning the general election was by welcoming and embracing change:

This will be a “change” election.  Either we offer it, or the British public will turn to others who say that they do.

Of course, we must celebrate our record and be proud of defending it.  We did fix the roof while the sun was shining…

But let us remember that you win elections on the future, not the past.

No doubt to Mandelson’s dismay, however, Brown has apparently decided that the future is the past.  The PM and his allies have pursued an extraordinarily crude, class-based campaign that appears rooted in the mid-1970s.  Peter Hain’s speech to the Welsh Grand Committee last week was a prime example of this unsubtle approach, which must be utter anathema to the urbane, calculating Mandelson.

The Telegraph tells us that Mandelson is now rarely seen in the No. 10 war room, having seemingly become “disengaged”.

If that is indeed the case, it can only be to the Prime Minister’s detriment.  He should remember that it was Mandelson’s recall to the colours that saved his bacon after his dreadful summer of 2008, when it was only David Miliband’s cold feet that prevented his being ousted.

This close to a general election, Brown needs Mandelson badly.  He should make his peace with the First Secretary without delay.

How very true

The refreshingly candid Alan Johnson, from an interview in today’s Guardian:

“We’d have had a much better record to fight on with the economy if it hadn’t been for the recession.”

Swine flu fiasco

Yesterday’s conflicting advice to pregnant women as to what action they should take during the swine flu epidemic has led, at last, to the posting of an advice note on the Department of Health’s website.

The episode was a further illustration of the Government’s frankly chaotic response to the outbreak.  The new Health Secretary, Andy Burnham, will apparently make a statement later today, urging the public not to panic and saying that the virus can be avoided by making “commonsense adjustments” to their lives.

This, however,  is somewhat at odds with the alarming view expressed by the Home Secretary, Alan Johnson, yesterday, when he  informed Andrew Marr that swine flu is a greater threat to Britain than terrorism, a warning somewhat diluted when he went on to say:

“In the vast majority of cases it is a mild illness. We have got stocks of anti-virals to cover over 50% of the population and a vaccine on the way.”

The Government really should get its act together by putting up one spokesman on the issue, getting its FluLine up and running, and asking everyone else to pipe down.

Extraordinarily, though the illness appears to be raging everywhere, I have yet to meet or hear of a single individual in North Wales who has been affected by it.  It’s not just a personal impression, either; this graph, from the Health Protection Agency, shows that Wales, for some reason, is the least affected part of the country:

_46076369_swine_flu_rates_17_07_09

I am intrigued to know why the Welsh, uniquely,  should be enjoying this apparent immunity.  Sensible suggestions are invited.

Johnson undermines Brown

Johnnson-Brown

The Telegraph is reporting that Alan Johnson’s announcement last Tuesday that he was abandoning his party’s flagship policy on compulsory ID cards was made without prior consultation with the Prime Minister.

If this is true, it is truly astonishing news and demonstrates a significant further erosion of the Prime Minister’s authority, already seriously undermined by Peter Mandelson and Alistair Darling.

Brown clearly recognises the threat from Johnson, the cabinet minister most likely to mount a leadership challenge, and is already mustering his defences.  The Telegraph reports a “Labour MP who is a strong supporter of Mr Brown” briefing heavily against the Home Secretary:

“Alan has been behaving a bit strangely since going to the Home Office.

“He seems to spend a lot of time closeted behind closed doors with his key advisers rather than getting to know the whole department.

“You hear worrying things from his supporters – that they are going to have another go at Gordon at conference and stuff like that.”

It could well come sooner than that.  The Norwich North by-election will be held on the last day of the current Parliamentary term.   If Labour do badly, it could well trigger a new assault on Gordon Brown’s leadership.

The prospect of another summer of internecine strife within the Labour party is becoming increasingly likely. 

Brown uses the c-word

The Government has performed more U-turns over the last 48 hours than a learner driver in a supermarket car park on a Sunday afternoon.

First, it was Alan Johnson’s scrapping of ID cards.  Then, yesterday, the First Secretary of State and Lord President of the Council announced that the partial privatisation of Royal Mail would not, after all, be proceeding.

Now, at last, the Prime Minister has admitted that there will have to be cuts under a Labour Government.  Given his prodigious gyrations when confronted by David Cameron over the issue at PMQs over the last few weeks, this is a remarkable development. 

One might be tempted to conclude that the Government is trying to clear the decks of embarrassing baggage in contemplation of  an earlier general election than generally anticipated, but that, I suspect, would be to credit this administration with more strategic coherence than it actually possesses.

Lost identity

Yes Minister

Alan Johnson, the Home Secretary unknown to his own receptionist, made the headlines yesterday by announcing that it will not be compulsory for British nationals to carry identity cards and dropping a proposal for trials at airports.  Johnson announced that:

“Holding an identity card should be a personal choice for British citizens — just as it is now to obtain a passport. Accordingly, I want the introduction of identity cards for all British citizens to be voluntary and I have therefore decided that identity cards issued to airside workers should also be voluntary.”

On the face of it, this looks good news and is certainly a PR reverse for the Government.  However, as the Times points out:

The Government is to press ahead with creating a national identity register that, from 2011-12, will include the details of everyone who applies for a passport.

Legislation to be debated next week will make it an offence punishable by a fine of up to £1,000 not to inform the Government of a name or change of address as it appears on the register.

Jettisoning the requirement for ID cards to be carried, therefore, is essentially cosmetic.  The Government will still be harvesting the personal details of virtually every UK national, in an exercise supported by the full weight of the criminal law.

Alan Johnson’s announcement  is simply a way of camouflaging the progress of the surveillance state.  It is reminiscent of the classic (and prescient) Yes Minister episode in  which Jim and Humphrey are agonising over how to make the new pan-European ID card more palatable to the electorate.  Bernard helpfully suggests:

“You might get away with calling it the Euroclub Express.”

Hard to keep up

Yesterday, I asked my researcher to hand deliver a letter to the Home Office. 

Upon her arrival at the governing mall, the conversation went as follows:

 Researcher:  “I’ve got an urgent letter for Mr Alan Johnson.”

 Receptionist:  “Who?”

 Researcher:  “Alan Johnson.”

 Receptionist:  “Who’s he?”

 Researcher:  “The Home Secretary.”

Enter Miliband minor

Alan Johnson appears to be staking his claim this morning as the front-runner in any race to replace Gordon Brown as Labour leader after the Euro elections. 

Cleverer than Hazel Blears (no “YouTube if you want to” sneers from him), Johnson is dressing up his pitch as a helpful call for the PM to finish the “constitutional renewal” exercise that briefly engaged the grasshopper-like attention of Tony Blair before he became bored with it.

Coincidentally perhaps, though probably not, Ed Miliband makes a similar call in today’s Guardian, urging the new Speaker to initiate a root-and-branch review of the way politics is done in this country.

Miliband minor played a very cautious game on the sidelines when his elder brother made his poorly conducted leadership bid last year.  David Miliband’s failure of nerve in 2008 lost him enormous support within the party; he is unlikely to have sufficient following to be able to mount another attempt now.

Ed, however, wisely stayed quiet in the brief, damp, cold summer of 2008.  His own time may soon be coming. 

Not an immediate leadership challenge – the moment is not right – but he is positioning himself as a strong and serious contender after the general election.

Two ringing denials

harriet-harman1Harriet Harman has just appeared on Today, back-pedalling like fury, and denying absolutely that she cherishes any personal leadership ambitions whatever – even if Alan Johnson throws his hat in the ring.  We’ll see.

She also  asserted, remarkably firmly and apparently seriously, that there was unity within the party.

When it was put to her by a quizzical John Humphrys that Hazel Blears’s Observer piece was hardly a ringing endorsement for Gordon Brown, Harman replied that Blears had denied that ringingly, too.

Today’s Guardian reports the terms of Blears’s “ringing denial”:

Blears said her description of a “lamentable” failure by the government to get its message across had been an attack on all of her colleagues, not just Brown.

I’m sure that will go down really well around the cabinet table.

Helpful Harriet

harriet-harmanIt’s turning out to be another eventful holiday weekend for Gordon Brown.

Just as Easter was dominated by the McBride affair, so the May Day bank holiday – surely a time, if ever there was one, for Socialist unity – is being taken over by Labour infighting that has now spread from the back benches to the cabinet itself.

Hazel Blears’s helpful Observer critique of Brown’s performance forced Alan Johnson and Jack Straw to ride to their leader’s aid this afternoon, both denying any personal ambition and pronouncing Gordon the individual supremely equipped to lead the country out of the economic morass in which it flounders.   

Now Harriet Harman, according to the Telegraph, has upped the ante by letting it be known that if Brown is persuaded to step down or is challenged by Johnson or Straw, she will not stand aside and allow an orderly succession, but will enter the fray herself.

In a perverse way, this may prove of assistance to Brown.  The last thing Labour need, twelve months out from a general election, is a lengthy leadership election that focuses prolonged attention on the party’s internal divisions.

That’s the logic, but the reality may be very different.  Labour’s mood is highly febrile and no attempt is being made to conceal the disarray within the party.  Projections such as this won’t improve matters, either.  Some members of the Parliamentary party may take the view that they have little to lose and possibly much to gain by trying to get rid of Gordon. 

If that happens, it will be a very bloody summer.

Labour still don’t get it

Labour and their apologists still don’t get the enormity of the McBride affair.

The Mirror’s Kevin Maguire decided, rather injudiciously, to pop his head above the parapet on his blog yesterday evening.  Under the unfortunate title Spare us the Hypocrisy, he pronounced the people of South Shields, or at any rate the habitués of the Steamboat, Alum House and Riverside pubs, unmoved by the effete metropolitan brouhaha that had broken out in the blogosphere.

Expanding on his dodgy theme, Kevin went on to laud McBride as “formidably bright” and to slag off Guido, Iain Dale and Andy Coulson.  He concluded with a comment of such astonishingly bad taste as to beggar belief that he has spent the last few years as associate editor of a national newspaper, as opposed to making the occasional contribution to a student rag-mag.

Kevin has clearly never heard the old adage: “Speak softly of the crocodile’s mother when crossing the river”.  He has been torn to shreds by his readers.  I suggest you take a look at his post pretty quickly, before he decides that, on reflection, it’s not his most successful piece of commentary ever and takes it down.

This morning, Alan Johnson appeared on BBC Breakfast, protesting remarkably stridently that it wasn’t appropriate for Gordon Brown to apologise for the affair “because you only apologise for things you are responsible for”.

Alan Johnson is a senior cabinet minister, in charge of the National Health Service, the world’s biggest employer after the Chinese army and Indian State Railways.  He was able to understand the need for him to issue an apology for the failings at Stafford hospital; he knew it was the right thing to do.

If Alan Johnson considered it right to apologise for something that happened 150 miles away from his office in Richmond House, Whitehall, why can’t he see that Gordon Brown must – yes, must – apologise for the grubby activities of his right hand man just a few doors down the corridor from his own office in 10 Downing Street?

Grim Realisation

Talking of the deputy leadership, I have twice encountered Alan Johnson in Westminster churchyard on my way to the House in recent days.

He looks downcast, tired and glum – quite different from his normal chirpy self.

I think he realises that he has probably lost it.