Postman Pat Positions Himself for Leadership

It’s been clear for ages that the anointed leader of Labour was the wrong one.

Pretty much a matter of two weeks into the reign, the wheels started to come off. For all his many faults Blair was popular within at least a certain faction of the Labour Party, having made them electable, and kept them in power. Brown’s sect was much smaller and less fashionable. So from the moment he took over there were those out to get him.

Everything has gone wrong, from outbreaks of pestilence to economic meltdown, it’s all happened under the touch of Midas in reverse. Of course some of it is not his fault. The election of the first ever SNP government in Scotland was nothing to do with him; nor was the election of a less pro “Anglo” president of the USA. Volcanic eruptions in Iceland can hardly be laid at his door and he could never have guessed that just as his cunning plan to buy some Catholic votes came to fruition that the cloud over the involvement of the Pope himself in child abuse scandals, would break.

But he doesn’t handle stuff well. His snub of our duly elected government and refusal to talk to them was plain childish; his creeping around desperately trying to be seen with Obama belittled the UK, and the dithering that accompanies everything else he does combine to show that he is not a suitable man to be a First or Prime Minister. The tragedy for Brown is that his overriding ambition was to be what he can never be. A leader.

For a long time Labour has known that he was their biggest liability. Election leaflets here show the local Tory candidate and a picture of David Cameron; the Liberal candidate’s own picture is relatively small, but there are two pictures of Nick Clegg, one with Vince Cable, far more prominent. But, despite the fact that the Labour candidate here has been parachuted in from Glasgow, is not known at all, and, in the circumstances could have done with some support in this highly marginal seat, Gordon is nowhere to be seen.

In an age of wall to wall 24 x 7 television, like it or not the image of ministers is important. How you come over always mattered but it matters more than ever now.

So given that he must know he has an image problem and both David Cameron and Nick Clegg are younger, fresher, more telegenic and better communicators, it was a brave, or a foolish move to agree to debate with them on live tv, not once but three times.

Since the first tv debate the polls have consistently shown Brown in third place. The looks on some of his colleagues’ faces (most noticeably Peter Mandleson’s) tell the story that it is over for Brown. The debates that he need not have had have done for him.

And so it would seen the first of his internal opponents has already come out and following Mr Clegg’s assertion that, if Labour comes third he will not support Brown “squatting” at No 10, Alan Johnson has talked up what he is now calling a “balanced” (not hung) parliament and his belief in PR.

I wonder how long it will be before the Milibands and his dear close friend Balls start setting out their stalls.


Pics: Alan Johnson and David Miliband, Gordon Brown at the famous door (how do they keep it so shiny?)

Labour rub up to Lib Dems in the hope that shine will rub off on them

The Times reports that the odds on a hung Parliament have shortened after the Lib Dem leader’s success in Thursday’s so called Prime Ministerial debate. A Populus poll for The Times reveals that the number of voters regarding Nick as likeable soared from 52 per cent before the debate to 81 per cent afterwards. David Cameron’s rating fell from 53 per cent to 43 per cent. What a shame they don’t give us the numbers for Gordon Brown but of course it is always possible that their poll wont stretch to negative numbers.

A YouGov opinion poll for today’s Sun puts the Lib Dems on 30 per cent, ahead of Labour on 28 per cent but behind the Tories on 33 per cent. Oh dear what has happened to that two horse race now. The Lib Dems popularity seems to be holding up indicating that the Nick Clegg victory is not going to be a one day wonder.

So what will the Labour party machines response to a third horse interloper be? Initially I thought that they would switch to digging for dirty on the Lib Dems in an effort to discredit them. They may still do this. But I guess a lead has been taken from the second in command himself. Old Cyclops that is and not Lord Petronella Voldermort the big smelly cheese at the top.

The Home Secretary postman Pat (Alan Johnson) speaking to The Times hours before the new poll showed how Mr Clegg’s winning performance had reshaped the election race, at least in the short term, by putting the Liberal Democrats ahead of Labour. Pat said that Labour and Mr Clegg’s party had a lot in common and that it was patronising to try to frighten voters about post-election pacts. “We have to kill this argument that coalition government is dangerous,”.

Pat went on to say that Labour and the Lib Dems were natural allies on key issues. He said that they agreed on voting reform and the dangers of Tory plans to cut £6 billion of government spending this year — although he also said that Mr Clegg’s party was “soft on crime, inept on asylum and bloody dangerous on national security”. So there we are the short term strategy is to cosy up to the Liberals and hope some of that glitter rubs off on old Gordo and his crew. Kind of like they tried to do when Barack Obama was elected. Well that didn’t work as we all know Mr Obama finds the Cyclops rather depressing. Join the club Mr Obama!

I suppose in fairness to this two horse race we ought to have a comment from the minority party. So shadow business secretary Kenneth Clarke chipped in by saying that a hung Parliament could trigger “another financial crisis” as credit-rating agencies forced up interest rates on government debt. So the response of the Tories is to wheel out their only remaining ace in the hole now that David has come over as a nice suit and tie and nothing else.

Government and Judiciary relations at breaking point over torture ruling

The Times reports that relations between the government and the judiciary are at breaking point following the decision of the Court of Appeal to reinstate a judge's criticism of MI5 in a landmark torture ruling.

The judgment concerns the mistreatment in CIA custody of ex Guantanamo Bay detainee Binyam Mohamed, and what MI5 knew about it.

The original ruling caused outrage when it emerged that the part in which Lord Neuberger, Master of the Rolls, questioned the honesty of secret service officers, had been removed following Foreign Office interference.

Now Judge Neuberger and two colleagues have reinstated the paragraph, rewritten to focus the criticism on the individual case. They have also published the original draft text.

Alan Johnson, Home Secretary, said he was deeply disappointed by the court's decision to criticize the Security Service in that manner.

He said: "The Government respects the right of the judges to reach their own judgment. But it is also right that, where we disagree with their conclusions, we say so. The UK’s security and intelligence services do outstanding work to keep us safe against a real and continuing terrorist threat, and they do so under proper control and oversight - by ministers, the Intelligence and Security Committee, the commissioners and, where necessary, the courts."

Without going into the rights and wrongs of torture, or Guantanamo, or indeed the whole war against terror, all of which may be good material for further posts by me or other contributors, we really do need to establish something.

The government depends upon the courts and the judges to uphold the law. Many people criticize them for being out of touch, elitist, superior, wrong minded... and so on, but they are the foundation of our justice system. Therefore, when they rule against the government, based in their learned way upon the laws that the government has made, it is a bit rich for ministers to get their drawers in a twist about it.

Lawyers from the foreign office should have no part in changing rulings of the courts and when they do, they should not be overly surprised that the courts eventually get their own way.

It seems to me that the Blair-Brown government was so desperate to co-operate with the Bush-Cheney administration that they were happy to overlook the fact that prisoners were being tortured. Brits, for all their faults (including island mentality xenophobia and a general dislike of anything that isn’t Anglo-Saxon, except curries and Spanish beaches), are essentially decent people. They don’t like their governments colluding in torture and this government was at least smart enough to recognize that and lie about rendition flights and actual knowledge of torture.

They were forced to admit that they had, erm, got it wrong about the extraordinary rendition flights and to apologize. Now they would do well to do the same thing here.

They have the power to change the law if they wish. Until they do they would do well to obey what stands like most of the rest of us do.

Photos show Mr Neuberger and Guantanamo Bay in the south of Cuba.

............