Category Archives: Gordon Brown

Tory already in government

The Prime Minister is looking ever more embattled over his plans to increase National Insurance contributions from April next year.

Not only are increasing numbers of senior businesspeople coming out in support of the Conservative view that the NI hike is a tax on jobs, but we learn today that Stephen Timms, Financial Secretary to the Treasury, also considers that the measure will have an “impact” on employment.  However, the Mail reports that:

Mr Timms refused to publish Treasury forecasts of the numbers of jobs that will go, saying they would be released after the election “if necessary”.

When David Cameron, at this week’s PMQs, referred to the view of Diageo’s Paul Walsh that the NI increase was indeed a tax on jobs, a number of Labour Members catcalled that Mr Walsh was “a Tory”, notwithstanding that he is also a member of the Prime Minister’s business advisory council.

No doubt those Brownite diehards would now also be inclined to accuse poor Mr Timms of the same grievous offence.

Change of style

The media confidently inform us that the Prime Minister will visit the Queen this morning and ask her to dissolve Parliament.  The general election will be held on 6 May.

Given that, in a few days’ time, I shall no longer be able to style myself as a Member of Parliament, I have changed the name of this blog.  I very much hope that I shall be able to change it back next month.

I shall try to continue blogging during the election campaign, but it may not be possible to do so as regularly as I would like.  If you would like to follow me on Twitter, my campaign address will be @dj4clwydwest.

If you live in Clwyd West and would like to help out during the campaign, please contact me at votedavidjones at gmail.com.

The future’s fair; the future’s orange

 

Tuned in to Sky News this evening to be greeted by the astonishing sight of Tony Blair singing the praises of Gordon Brown.

Who’d have thought it, eh?  Three years after the not wholly bloodless coup that saw him ejected from Downing Street and his auld adversary installed in his stead, there was the maestro, back in the limelight, centre stage in the incongruous surroundings of Trimdon Labour club.

Not that he looked that much like the old Blair, mind.  The last three years have not been kind to him.  His hair had greyed and thinned and he was almost painfully gaunt, the expensive Savile Row suit hanging from his narrowed frame.  Most startlingly, he was orange.  Bright orange.  Tangerine.

But it was Blair, all right.  There was no mistaking the gulps, the blinks, the jerky gestures, the faux emotion of the halting delivery, or the idiosyncratic enunciation: “Britain acted” became “Britain actud”.  Yes, there he was: Tony Blair lauding Gordon to the rafters.

But will it do Labour any good?  Hard to say.  Blair was a big hitter, of course, and the most successful Labour leader in history.  He is still sprinkled with stardust.

There again, he brings with him a lot of bad vibes, too, the very worst being the memory of Iraq.

But what cannot be doubted is that Gordon Brown must be feeling pretty desperate to trot out Tony Blair at this stage of the game.  Brown has always been desperate to make his own mark, not to go down in history as just the man who came in on Tony Blair’s coat-tails, only to be blown away at the next general election. 

It must have hurt him deeply – really deeply – to authorise Blair’s intervention today.

Good news for Gordon

In an interview with Nick Robinson today, Alistair Darling has conceded that if Labour are re-elected at the general election, they will be obliged to impose cuts that are “tougher and deeper” than those implemented by Margaret Thatcher.  I’m sure that will go down really well with Gordon “Labour investment v. Tory cuts” Brown.

Today, also, the RMT has announced a series of rail strikes starting on 6 April, the day it is widely expected that the election will be called.

I’ve no doubt Gordon will love that one, too.

Read all about it

Budget day, and the Telegraph publishes a remarkably detailed prediction of the measures to be announced by the Chancellor.

I know that the sensible tradition of Budget purdah was effectively abandoned by Gordon Brown some years ago, but if there has been such an extensive press briefing by the Treasury, there will be very little purpose in Members turning up at the chamber today.

Perfect union

A report in today’s Telegraph has the whiff of real scandal about it.

The paper has discovered that, over the past decade, Unite – the union that is now apparently doing its best to destroy British Airways – and the two unions of which it is the merged product, Amicus and TGWU, have received almost £18 million of taxpayers’ money.  During the same period, the Labour party has received over £29 million, or over 24 per cent of its revenue, from the three unions.

Over £17 million has been paid to the unions from the Union Learning Fund, established by the Government in 1998 to help train union representatives and members.   Funding for the scheme was increased shortly after Gordon Brown became Prime Minister in 2007.  However, Unite does not give details of how the money is applied and evaluation reports ceased to be published years ago.

In addition, Unite has received over £380,000 from the Union Modernisation Fund, administered by Lord Mandelson’s Business Department, which has the ostensible aim of helping trade unions improve their management structures.

Unite, therefore, has received a huge wodge of cash from the taxpayer without, extraordinarily enough, having to tell the taxpayer where a single penny of it has been spent.  What the taxpayer does know, however, is that:

  • Unite is the Labour party’s biggest donor;
  • its political director, Charlie Whelan, is now once again ensconced in Downing Street, where he is helping Peter Mandelson  mastermind Labour’s election campaign;
  • Jack Dromey, Unite’s deputy general secretary and Harriet Harman’s husband, has just been selected for the safe Labour seat of Birmingham Erdington from what was supposed to be an all-women shortlist;
  • 108 Labour MPs, or almost a third of the Parliamentary party,  are members of Unite.

On Wednesday, at PMQs, David Cameron suggested that the Labour party is now a wholly-owned subsidiary of Unite.  It’s hard to disagree with that.

Today, Francis Maude, the shadow Cabinet Office minister, commented that the financial arrangement uncovered by the Telegraph “looks like money laundering – taxpayers’ money is being funnelled into Unite then put straight back into Labour’s coffers.”

On the face of it, it’s hard to disagree with that, too.

6 May it is

Harriet Harman announced today that the House will rise on 30 March for the Easter recess and return on 6 April.

It seems likely that the Prime Minister will visit the Queen the same day and that the general election will be held on 6 May.

The waiting will soon be over, thank heaven.

Whither Adonis?

High praise must go to the courage of the Transport Secretary, Lord Adonis, for his unequivocal criticism of the Unite union’s conduct over the BA strike.

Speaking on The Andrew Marr Show, Adonis said:

“The stakes are incredibly high. I absolutely deplore the strike;, it is not only the damage it is going to do to passengers and the inconvenience it’s going to cause — which is quite disproportionate to the issues at stake — but also the threat it poses to the future of one of our great companies in this country.

“It’s totally unjustified. I do call on the union to engage constructively with the company at this late stage.”

Contrast Adonis’s admirable plain speaking with the mealy-mouthed comments that have thus far come from Gordon Brown, who has merely said that “the disruption to services is unacceptable”.

Readers who have spent the last three years marooned on a remote desert island may wish to know that:

  • Charlie Whelan, Unite’s political director, is Gordon Brown’s former spin doctor;
  • it is widely anticipated that Whelan will have a central role in Labour’s general election campaign;
  • Labour has received up to 25 per cent of its funding from Unite since Gordon Brown became Prime Minister;
  • Unite’s deputy general secretary, Jack Dromey, was recently selected as parliamentary candidate for Birmingham Erdington.  Proposals that the selection should be made from an all-women shortlist were overruled by Labour’s National Executive Committee;
  • Mr Dromey is the husband of Labour’s deputy leader, Harriet Harman.

Sadly, I strongly suspect that Lord Adonis’s political career is unlikely to advance significantly further.

The Gordon and Mandy Show

Techie Labour MP Derek Wyatt (the only Member with his own iPhone app) has suggested that the Prime Minister should deliver a regular address to the nation over the internet, a proposal apparently inspired by President Obama’s weekly radio talk.

A few months ago, it was mooted that Lord Mandelson was to be appointed Minister for Information, in which guise he would deliver a weekly televised briefing from No 10.  To my great personal disappointment, nothing came of it.

Perhaps the way forward would be for the First Secretary and the Prime Minister to combine their undeniable communication talents and deliver a joint weekly televised homily over the World Wide Web, perhaps with the occasional guest and light musical interludes.  I have no doubt that it would be the most tremendous popular success.

Infallible Gordon

Hard on the heels of my post of yesterday (showing that, contrary to Gordon Brown’s assertion that defence spending is rising year on year, it has in fact drastically declined as a share of GDP), come the findings of an inquiry by Channel 4’s FactCheck.  These reveal that in real terms – taking inflation into account – defence spending has fallen year-on-year four times since 1997.

Shadow Leader of the House, Sir George Young, raised the issue in the House at Business Questions today:

Sir George Young: May we have a statement from the Prime Minister on his assertion at Question Time yesterday? He said that under this Government

“the defence budget has been rising every year.”—[Official Report, 10 March 2010; Vol. 507, c. 291.]

That is a claim the Prime Minister made repeatedly at the Chilcot inquiry last Friday, but as he should know, spending on the Ministry of Defence was in fact cut in real terms between 2003–04 and 2004–05. The Leader of the House will know that the ministerial code requires Ministers to correct

“any inadvertent error at the earliest opportunity.”

Given that the Prime Minister is at risk of inadvertently misleading Parliament, when will he put the record straight?

The Leader of the House, Harriet Harman, would have none of it:

Ms Harman: The Prime Minister gave evidence to the Chilcot inquiry last Friday, he answered questions about defence spending in Prime Minister’s questions yesterday, and there will be a defence debate on Monday. I strongly refute any suggestion or implication from the shadow Leader of the House that the Prime Minister has in any way misled the House or, indeed, anyone else. He has been absolutely forthright about the defence budget and about this Government’s long-standing and strong commitment to ensuring that our defence forces have the resources they need. They have the full backing of the Government and, indeed, the British people.

So no prospect of an admission of fallibility from Gordon.  Indeed, he was  in denial again today.  When it was put to him that senior commanders – Lord Guthrie included – were adamant in their contention that he had rejected requests of additional funding, he replied simply: “They are wrong.”

Insulting our armed forces

For the first time, there was a flash of real anger from David Cameron at Prime Minister’s Questions today.

Cameron was questioning Gordon Brown about his evidence to the Chilcot inquiry into the Iraq war:

Mr. Cameron:   Following his evidence, one former Chief of the Defence Staff said that he was being “disingenuous” and another said that he was “dissembling”. Both those people worked with the Prime Minister—

From the Government benches, most particularly the area below the gangway occupied by the most hairy-knuckled members of the Labour awkward squad, came the cry: “Because they’re Tories!”

Cameron was incensed:

Mr. Cameron:  Oh, it is because they are Tories, is it? That is what this tribalist, divisive Government think about people who serve our country.  I think, first of all, the Prime Minister should get up and dissociate himself completely from what those people behind him have said.

But Brown didn’t dissociate himself from his backbenchers; how could he?  In a few short weeks, after all, he will have to rely on the support of each and every one of them if he is to remain as leader of his party.  He did, however, say that he had “never at any time criticised the patriotism of anybody who has been involved in the defence establishment of this country”, which wasn’t really the same thing.

Cameron then proceeded to criticise the Government for attempting “to fight two wars on a peacetime budget”.

Brown, in answer, contended that:

the defence budget has been rising every year. He might have had a complaint if we were cutting the defence budget every year, but it is rising every year.

This is a claim that the Prime Minister has made on several occasions, but it does not bear close scrutiny.  As a proportion of GDP, government spending on defence has fallen by almost half over the last two decades.  Last, week, Ian Godden, chairman of ADS, the UK’s defence trade organisation, commented:

“Any criticism of the Ministry of Defence (MoD) must be seen in the light of the defence budget having fallen from 4.4 per cent of GDP 20 years ago to 2.3 per cent today while many other departmental budgets have continued to grow. The MoD has been given an insufficient budget by the Treasury with which to support our armed forces during a period of increased operational commitments.”

It is difficult to think of any greater insult that Gordon Brown could offer our armed forces than to contend that defence spending has increased when, as a proportion of our national income, it has in fact significantly declined.

Apart, of course, from allowing the integrity of their commanders to be gratuitously traduced by his own backbenchers.

Madness in the Commons

PMQs were even more eagerly anticipated than usual today, given the incendiary allegations published in the Observer on Sunday, the flames of which had been fanned by Alistair Darling’s assertion on Sky News that No 10 had “unleashed the forces of hell” against him in 2008 for daring to predict (correctly, as it transpired) that the recession would be the worst for 60 years.

Would there, we wondered, be a certain froideur evident between the PM and his next-door neighbour? Would they each sit at extreme ends of the front bench, legs crossed in opposite directions, and stare at the rafters?  Would the body language, in short, be bloody?

As it turned out, when Gordon and Alistair arrived they were joined at the hip.  Literally.  They entered the chamber in a curious manner similar to the sub-conga shuffle formerly adopted by the 80s pop group, Madness, Darling almost physically attached to the back of the PM’s jacket, both grinning self-consciously.  You couldn’t put a cigarette paper between them. 

They sat down together.  Very close together.  An ironic cheer erupted and the Speaker had to ask us all to settle down.

Of course, David Cameron asked Brown about the briefings against Alistair.  I mean, he had to.  There was an open goal and it would have been unprofessional, indeed disrespectful of the PM, not to have a crack at it.  Gordon, intensely discomfited, affected a sort of hysterical insouciance by pretending to chat cosily with Alistair, who, in fairness, played along and chatted back.  It didn’t deter Cameron:

Mr. Cameron: Just as we need openness in the health service, we need openness at the heart of Government. After the Chancellor’s extraordinary statement last night, the Prime Minister said this morning on GMTV:

“I would never instruct anybody to do anything other than support my Chancellor”.

Will he try to stand up with a straight face and tell us that that is true?

The Prime Minister: Not only is that correct, but this is the nearest that the right hon. Gentleman has ever got to talking about the economy in the past few months.

Not a terribly good answer, but the Labour backbenchers, heavily whipped, roared.  Not very enthusiastically, you understand, but roar they did.

Cameron was still undeterred:

Mr. Cameron: If the Prime Minister wants to talk about the economy, we can talk about the Prime Minister trebling the deficit, about wrecking the pension system, about ruining the tax system and about bringing this country to its knees. Right now, six weeks before an election, with a record Budget deficit, at the end of a long recession, I want to ask why the Prime Minister and the Chancellor are at war with each other. This is what we are told—

Gordon and Alistair were continuing their animated love-in, pretending not to listen to the beastly man, their heads almost touching.

Mr. Cameron: If they get any closer, they will start kissing. We are told that Damian McBride, Gordon Brown’s spin doctor, was “spreading poison against Darling” and that he

“told every journalist who had access to a pencil that Alistair’s interview was a disaster.”

We are also told that there was the most poisonous briefing against him. Last night, the Chancellor said that after he had said what he had said, No. 10 Downing Street unleashed “the forces of hell”. Why does the Prime Minister think that he said that?

Gordon rose wearily:

The Prime Minister: I have already answered the right hon. Gentleman’s question. I never instructed a briefing against the Chancellor.

And perhaps he didn’t.  But he did look extremely uncomfortable.

The session was leavened at its very end by the House’s jester-in-residence, Stephen Pound, Labour Member for Ealing North, who, with a grin spread wide across his Punchinello countenance, asked in stentorian tones:

Stephen Pound (Ealing, North) (Lab): I enjoy a pint of porter and a game of darts as much as any old Etonian, but there the similarity ends. Can I ask my right hon. Friend to strain every sinew to try to achieve an international agreement on a Robin Hood tax, bearing in mind that we all know who in this House speaks for the Sheriff of Nottingham?

Even we laughed at that.

The friendly question had clearly come as a huge relief to the embattled Prime Minister:

The Prime Minister: I cannot beat the humour which my hon. Friend brings to this occasion.

Very true, Gordon.  But I’m sure you did your best.

Take a second look at Brown’s behaviour

The Prime Minister has denied that he has ever hit anyone.

Speaking in an interview on Channel 4 News, Mr Brown said:

 ”Let me just say, absolutely clearly, so that there is no misunderstanding about that: I have never, never hit anybody in my life.”

I fully believe the Prime Minister’s assurances, particularly since nobody has ever suggested that he did hit anyone.

The allegations against him are all of violent outbursts that stop short of actually throwing a punch.  They are repeated in today’s Observer and include:

  • grabbing his deputy chief of staff by the lapels and snarling: “They’re out to get me”;
  • thumping the back of the front passenger seat while travelling in his official car, causing his protection officer to flinch with shock;
  • stabbing the same (presumably now reupholstered) seat with a black marker pen;
  • screaming four-letter words at his American speechwriter;
  • employing similar vocabulary when irate at the prospect of meeting European ambassadors; and
  • turfing a No 10 typist out of her seat and taking over her computer.

The Observer now tells us that Brown’s conduct toward his staff was so bad that the cabinet secretary, Sir Gus O’Donnell, was obliged  to give him a stern “pep talk” and order him to change his behaviour.

If these allegations are indeed true, they must give huge cause for concern as to the Prime Minister’s fitness for office. I sincerely hope that they are not, but they should be answered as part of the process of “taking a second look” at the way Mr Brown has governed our country.

PMQs

A very lively Prime Minister’s Questions, with Gordon Brown on the ropes over his Damascene conversion to the AV voting system, as David Cameron put it, thirteen years into this Government and ninety days out from a general election.

Cameron and other Members also tackled the Prime Minister on the evidence given by the former Chief of the Defence Staff, Lord Walker, to the Chilcot inquiry that service chiefs had threatened to resign en masse because of cuts in defence spending.

“They’re all Tories,” yelled Chris Ruane (Labour, Vale of Clwyd) helpfully.

Gordon’s luck

Gordon Brown’s notoriously bad luck manifested itself again today.  On the morning that the PM might have hoped to reap some modest cheer at the formal announcement of the end of the recession with news of 0.1 per cent growth in the last quarter of 2009, a Californian gentleman named Bill Gross went and burst his bubble.

Mr Gross is the founder and chief investment officer of Pimco, the world’s biggest bonds-based fund managers.  When he speaks, it matters, and his assessment of the prospects of the British economy is bleak indeed:

“The UK is a must to avoid. Its gilts are resting on a bed of nitroglycerine.

“High debt with the potential to devalue its currency present high risks for bond investors.

“In addition, its interest rates are already artificially influenced by accounting standards that at one point last year produced long-term real interest rates of 0.5 per cent and lower.”

No cheer there for the Prime Minister and, to make matters worse, it turns out that Pimco’s European operation is headed by Andrew Balls, the brother of the PM’s only remaining significant cabinet ally, Ed.

Gordon was absent from PMQs today, stuck in the Northern Ireland talks.  Given what he would have faced in the Commons, however, he may have found in  Belfast a blessed sanctuary.