A transcript of half-truths, exaggerations and Brownies
Fraser Nelson 2:35pm
Many of you expect Gordon Brown to lie so much that it’s not worth reading a rebuttal of his half-truths, exaggerations and Brownies. Me, I’m addicted. And fascinated. He’s a very clever guy, whose excuses and fake narratives are carefully constructed. He’s also deeply unoriginal, so whatever new excuses he cooks up we can expect to hear repeated for the foreseeable future. How can explain away sterling’s plunge? The absence of any sign of economic recovery – and implicit suggestion that his stimulus has been an abject failure? And how can he explain his ten years as Chancellor? On the radio this morning Evan Davis started his interview with Gordon Brown by a warning that he wouldn’t take his waffling avoidance techniques. “I’m going to try and chivvy you along a little bit,” he said. And we heard the PM’s latest bunch of excuses for his destruction of the British economy. I have done an edited transcript together with some of my thoughts:
GB: Every recession in the last 60 years has been caused by inflation… this is a completely different event that results from a global banking crisis. America is in recession, caused by irresponsible lending practices. There are issues of regulation to deal with.
[FN: No, this probem was caused by a debt explosion – ie, the over-supply of money. The old rules had inflation as a proxy for the supply of money, but this didn’t work because of the deflationary shock of globalisation. The Bank of England fixes the price of loans, not the bankers. The BoE acting under Brown’s instructions let the debt taps on full – creating an asset bubble which has now broken.]
ED: How long are you expecting the recession to last?
GB: It depends on the degree of international co-operation.
[FN: As if! No serious economist would argue that the date of the UK economic recovery can be materially influenced by ‘international co-operation’. But Brown is setting up someone else to blame. Officially he thinks the recovery starts in Q3 of this year. When it doesn’t, he’ll want to blame America again.]
ED: You reject the idea of David Cameron that we may have to go the IMF 1970s
GB: We have low public debt
[FN: Untrue. It’s 47.5% of GDP last month, according to the ONS, over 100% according to the IFS and 127% according to the CPS.]
GB: We have low inflation.
[FN: Nope, CPI is 3.1% - way over the target of 2.0%].
GB: Wages are under control.
[FN: For the lucky ones still being paid – Brown is setting up an Aunt Sally here saying there are no indicators of a 1970s style recession. So what? The debt burden is crushing, and this is the issue.]
ED: But huge liabilities?
GB: We are dealing with a global banking crisis…
[FN: Global debt crisis, a different thing]
GB: ...and to do so you have to take very specific measures ... I do feel that it’s only if you properly understand what the problem is can you deal with it, if I may say to our opponents, that you can deal with it. If you think the problem is caused by inflation or something in Britain you’ll come to the wrong conclusion.
[FN: What he means is that, as Orwell said, he who controls the past controls the future. Pushing a fake analysis of the past is Brown’s best hope for political safety]
ED: But they don’t think that. They’re looking at the plunging pound and the fact that foreigners don’t want to put money in the UK. We had Jim Rogers, the prominent investor, saying ‘sell all sterling’. We have the pound plunging as foreigners think how will the UK repay all these debts?
GB: If you think we’re going to build our policy around the comments of a few speculators who want to make money out of Britain then you’re very, very wrong indeed.
[FN: Note, a change of defence. Brown used to deny weakness of sterling was an issue – now he wants to blame it on wicked currency speculators. Nothing to do with his driving Britain to near-bankruptcy then! So Brown attacks Rogers rather than seeking to address the undeniable issue of people selling sterling at the GBPeso at $1.37]
GB: If I can just repeat on the measures we’ve taken for the banks…
ED: No, please don’t. Because we have a lot of ground to cover. We know the measures.
[FN: I bet Davis was cheered here across Britain. We’re sick of Brown using interviews to rehash what he thinks are his key messages.]
GB: We have put the public finances on a sustainable path for the future. We are the only country...
ED: (sounding irritated) On the public finances, we are in such different terrain than we were two years ago, lets not pretend that we’re on the same ground as we were when you were Chancellor
GB: (...ignoring the question) sustainable public finances because we are the only country that decided to take tax rises at the right time when the economy recovers.
[FN – Nope. First, Obama doesn’t have tax rises to pay for his tax cuts – his rebate is permanent. Next, Brown pencils in tax rises to coincide with a recovery which he believes will start in July. If he can't tell us when the recovery will be, he should shelve those tax rises smartish]
ED: You’re not suggesting that the legacy of the government that takes over at the next election is comparable to that you inherited in 1997 are you?
GB: We have had ten years of growth in this country that no government has had in any period.
[FN: It was illusory ‘growth’ produced by debt that the country could not afford. And anyway, over those ten years the UK economy grew by just 39% - a worse performance than any other country in the English speaking world.]
GB: We’ve already decided in our discussions that this is a global financial crisis.
[FN: Note the totemic importance Brown attaches to this point. It’s his debating trick, one of his beloved dividing lines. He asks the interviewer to agree that it is a global crisis. If the answer is ‘yes’ then this – according to Brown – means that it is cannot be attributable to UK policies such UK-generated debt explosion]
ED: You can’t mention the ten years of economic growth without mentioning the bust that comes with it. Suddenly your legacy as Chancellor looks like ‘average’ rather than ‘best postwar Chancellor we’ve ever had’.
[FN: Average? I suspect history will record Brown as one of the most destructive Chancellors ever seen when you compare what he inherited and what he left. Even Healey didn’t leave more damage.]
ED: What is your legacy? It wont be as good as the one you inherited
GB: We created millions of more jobs.
[FN: Imported them, more like: two-thirds went to (or were created by) immigrants]
ED: And now we’re losing millions of jobs.
GB: I wouldn’t put it like that. We’ve doubled investment in education and health.
[FN: and is anyone out there bold enough to claim that the quality of education and health provision has doubled?]
GB: Just as I dealt with the problems of inflation when we came into government in 1997, I’m dealing with the problem for global financial crisis.
[FN: Ha! A new Brownie. Inflation was slain in 1993 – see graph here for details. But he wants to concoct a past victory, to kid us on that he’s competent enough to deliver victory again.]
ED: A lot of people have credited you with the recovery plan, and I think it should be recognised around the world.
[FN: Sigh. And Evan was doing so well. The bank bailout, if that’s what you’re referring to, certainly wasn’t a recovery and was designed by the Swedes in 1992 and used just before Brown by the Dutch and the Germans on a smaller scale. Brown’s genius was in persuading journalists that the world was imitating him.]
ED: Looking back, with hindsight. What mistakes were made?
GB: The whole of economic policy was focused on how you control inflation. And with low interest rates, and low inflation economy, you continue to grow.
[FN: He’s exactly right. Inflation targeting – the entire premise of his economic policy – was a mistake. The BoE was given the wrong target. There was a deflationary shock from China between 2000-03 which artificially reduced consumer prices. The BoE needlessly fought this benign effect, thus sparking an avoidable credit boom. This was the problem. Not that Brown would admit that there was a debt crisis, though.]
GB: ...we also believed there was a possibility of institutional failure in the banking system. So we did all sorts of simulation exercises. But what we didn’t see, nobody saw, was the possibility of complete market failure. Markets seized up. You had the sub-prime market in the States...
[FN: Market failure? That’s a good one. This so-called ‘market failure’ was simply a debt bubble bursting – predictable and predicted by watchdogs like the Bank of International Settlements. The failure was political failure: failure to recognise the credit explosion. Failure to give the BoE the right instructions. Failure to realise that having household debt at 178% of income, the highest any G7 country has ever known, was taking a reckless gamble. Failure to realise that, while a debt bubble begets an asset bubble and makes the electorate feel rich (and grateful) there is a price to pay. Brown used to joke that there are two Chancellors: those who fail, and those who get out in time. He figured he’d be the latter.]
ED: That’s really your mistake? Not spotting sub-prime?
GB: It’s very difficult for us in Britain when we don’t have cross-border regulation to see what’s happening in a market the south of America.
[FN: Not difficult to see M3 money supply growing white hot, though, and this was the problem. The ECB factors this in as part of its rate setting policy – hence there was less of a credit boom in Europe than in Britain.]
ED: People could point to bigger mistakes than that. Like cutting interest rates in 2005. In hindsight, you must think you’d rather have strengthened the public finances.
GB: The issues about lax banking practises…
ED: You cant blame it all on the bankers?
GB: You can deal with domestic problems...
[FN: Or, in Brown’s case, cause domestic problems by presiding over the biggest debt binge known in this or any other major country]
...to deal with a global fiancial problem lax standards in America that spread across to Europe. For the last ten years, people have told me there is too much regulation not enough.
[FN: Mistake was wrong-touch regulation, not light touch. Brown failed to set leverage ratios for banks, let them lend 125% mortgages. Simple rule changes could have averted this disaster – Spain and Canada both did this. How many banks have gone bust in those two countries? None. But Brown, let’s never forget, was as hungry for his tax take in City profits and bonuses as the bankers were themselves seeing as the rest of the economy was slowly atrophying.]
GB: Governments all across the world were worried about dealing with inflation. The problem was we had a complete market failure. The markets seized up.
ED: Will we get growth this year?
GB: It depends on the level of economic co-operation. If China could create more domestic expansion itself then we’d . Co-ordinated banking, as you yourself have said.
[FN: Note how he doesn’t repeat the official Treasury prediction that growth resumes in Q3 of this year. Again, he’s preparing us to blame the rest of the world – ideally in the G20 summit, which will accomplish the same as all previous G20 summits, which is nothing].
ED: It’s boom and bust, isn’t it? Let’s agree one thing, that we have see boom and bust.
GB: Once you establish the nature of this problem as global financial failure, then you are in new territory.
[FN: His constant refrain. If it’s global, it’s not my fault. History will blame this on inflation targeting, on seeing it as a proxy for growth in money supply. The BoE should have looked not just at CPI inflation but asset inflation and M3 money supply. And Brown was so mesmerised by the feelgood factor created by the credit splurge that he convinced himself high household debt didn’t matter. This blinkered, narrow remit of central banks led us into this unalloyed and entirely avoidable disaster. Had debt been kept at 125% of income, or even the European average of 100%, Britain would not have a debt crisis. End of story. The banks, for all their deplorable misbehavior, operated within parameters set by this inept, tax-greedy, short-termist government. Brown enjoyed the political fruits of the credit binge so much, not to mention the tax revenue (that stamp duty cash was borrowed, not earned). He couldn’t bring himself to call the party to a close. Now his political future depends on spinning the past.]
Previous
golfwidow
January 23rd, 2009 3:15pm Report this commentThis forensic breakdown should be on the front page of every newspaper tomorrow. The only thing I would add is the number of times ED repeated his question about boom and bust.
strapworld
January 23rd, 2009 3:17pm Report this commentEnid Blyton is alive and lives in Downing Street.
Stephen B
January 23rd, 2009 3:18pm Report this commentIn short:
ED: Isn't some of this mess your fault?
GB: It wisnae me! A big boy did it and ran away!
Fraser Allonby
January 23rd, 2009 3:25pm Report this commentI just can not understand how a democracy can allow this man to pull the levers of power. He is delusional, he thinks 2006 is where we should be, that the artificial revenues created by the spike in tax from oil, credit and the city is a norm on which he can continue to build a platform of public expenditure.
The new labour decade thrived on a false sense of entitlement, not underpinned by hard work and innovation, but lazy lending practices, state benefits behaving like an opiate for the poor and the constant refrain “we are the fourth biggest economy in the world why shouldn’t we have….”. Well now we are plummeting down the global wealth table maybe which should curb our ambitions for the size of the state.
Can there be any more damning verdict that after 17 years of growth the nation finds itself an international joke?
The Laughing Cavalier
January 23rd, 2009 3:27pm Report this commentHe's delusional. Time for the men in white coats. This fruitcake has brought the country to its knees. Time for the men in white coats.
cuffleyburgers
January 23rd, 2009 3:31pm Report this commentLoathsome man.
Spawn of an odious culture.
Impeachment, trial and a life sentence would be too good for him.
Any private sector (mis)manager guilty of his crimes of fraud, false accounting and serial lying to shareholders (ie taxpayers) would be in jail before the ink on his expense account had dried, and would never work again, not even on the tills of a burger bar.
There truly is one law for these troughing scumbags and one for the rest of us.
Sickening.
seb
January 23rd, 2009 3:38pm Report this commentThe Moron hath said:
"Once you establish the nature of this problem as global financial failure, then you are in new territory."
So. Establish, which once meant 'to create' or 'to set up', now means 'to ascertain' or 'to figure out', as one does when solving a puzzle or a mystery. The Moron, being clever, was capable of figuring out the global nature of the crisis, whereas Cameron and the opposition are stupid and wrongly believe that The Moron is himself largely culpable.
It gets more confusing. We're all in 'new territory'. Could that in fact be Moron Territory? Where things are so complex that only The Moron can explain them to us. Is this a correct reading of The Moron's lecture to his interviewer? Is he going to get a Nobel Prize for Economics for this or an Honorary Doctorate in English?
mitch
January 23rd, 2009 3:42pm Report this commentBrown obviously believes his own bullshit.A whole edifice built on a lie.
He is the worst chancellor/PM we have ever had.
George Laird
January 23rd, 2009 3:43pm Report this commentDear Fraser
What a nice piece of commentary on Flawed Brown.
Brown's talk about recovery in the Q3 of this year is possibly based on a wish he made to Santa last xmas.
Brown won't take serious decisions because each measure by him is a con trick, a gimmick done in small stages to appear to be doing something.
There is no joined up thinking, we need to let the crash happen and then start again.
Brown lives under the dream that if he dithers about playing in his sandbox then he can win a General Election.
What is he doing about the artificially high price of housing?
Zero.
What is he going to do about people unable to get a mortgage or banks unwilling to lend because they know they might be plunging into negative equity after giving a mortgage?
Zero.
Finally, Brown's refusal to admit his incompetence is a mental flaw, which will keep Britain in recession for the next 4 to 5 years.
Yours sincerely
George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
cityboozer
January 23rd, 2009 3:50pm Report this commentFraser - a fine fisking. But one question about the jobs thing which I posted on your "Is Brown's stimulus going to miss its domestic target" which I'd like to hear an answer to:
"[..] I still don't like your "four in five working-age jobs created since Labour came to power went to *or were created by* immigrants".
The latter category surely covers a range from the productive jobs that Gulam Noon created in West London via Africans cleaning the offices of German bankers to lot of non-producing stuff such as council translation services, support staff for schools where the intake doesn't have enough English, etc.
Surely there must be a better way to measure this?"
D K McGregor
January 23rd, 2009 3:52pm Report this commentDoes your heart not sink when you hear Buster Brown's drones (denials/excuses)getting going in any interview?
Fraser
January 23rd, 2009 3:54pm Report this commentWhat level of economic co-operation could provide growth this year? I suppose Abu Dhabi could continue to purchase the Premiership, and the international money markets could continue to lend to Uk consumers, but in reality it isn't particuarly likely is it?
Ted
January 23rd, 2009 3:59pm Report this comment'Any private sector (mis)manager guilty of his crimes of fraud, false accounting and serial lying to shareholders (ie taxpayers'
Many bankers facing criminal charges lately, cuffleyburgers? No, it's the Prime Minister that should be jailed. The banks were only doing what he told them! They didn't want to do it but he made them. It's a crying shame.
Fraser's article in The Spectator where he drooled over the money from the City pouring into the Conservatives must seem a long, long, long time ago now. Still, as he says, everyone could have predicted it....Um....
Hysteria
January 23rd, 2009 4:06pm Report this commentagree with golfwidow - the boom/bust exchange supports the proposition the man is in denial
nice to to ED on the attack
John
January 23rd, 2009 4:09pm Report this commentBrown claims that the Tories are a 'Do Nothing' party - Browns line is 'Nothing to Do with me'. There must be a good quip in this for Camerom at PMQ's.
jon dee
January 23rd, 2009 4:32pm Report this commentBrown possesses the guile of a successful confidence trickster and as you suggest,the well rehearsed narrative which denies any responsibility for our disastrous state.
His arrogant insistence that only he possesses the knowledge and ability to address serious economic problems is a delusion which must continue to be exposed.
Tellingly his get-out clause remains the American factor.
Theres no doubt that if President Obama does not heed Browns words,it will continue to be America's fault and he will remain blameless.
Chris Rose
January 23rd, 2009 4:44pm Report this commentHow many more times do I have to read journalists writing, "Brown is a very clever guy", "Brown is a man with a brilliant brain",.... ad nauseam?
Brown is a complete idiot.
He lies day after day and thinks people are believing him, that his lies will never be found out and even that will one day they will become accepted wisdom.
He cannot take help or seek help from other people. Only he is right.
If people disagree with him, he shouts at them.
He always puts short-term political expediency before the longterm good of the nation.
Fraser, please, explain to me how anyone, even the most sycophantic journalist, can believe such a man to be clever?
cuffleyburgers
January 23rd, 2009 4:52pm Report this commentTed - agreed the Americans are hotter on locking up whitecollar criminals than we are.
Aless Bieri
January 23rd, 2009 4:52pm Report this commentEvan did quite well I think, but he's no Jeremy Paxman
oldtimer
January 23rd, 2009 5:07pm Report this commentThank you for the analysis of the Brown-Davis exchanges, which I did not hear.
Two observations. First on inflation:
"GB: The whole of economic policy was focused on how you control inflation. And with low interest rates, and low inflation economy, you continue to grow."
My recollection is that Brown redefined inflation so that it appeared lower in the official statistics. The mismatch between the official definition and the reality we all face is all too apparent. So his comment that he focussed on inflation is true - and he did so to fiddle the numbers.
His remarks, as you say, are an example of his practised use of smoke and mirrors. Along with being in support of motherhood and apple pie, knocking down straw men much used NuLab techniques include changing the issue. In this case it is his attempt to blame it all on global problems as you quote:
"GB: Once you establish the nature of this problem as global financial failure, then you are in new territory."
Obviously there are global problems. Equally obviously there are purely domestic problems - Nothern Rock, Bradford and Bingley, HBOS. So the Brown analysis is incomplete and therefore dishonest.
We can but hope that other commentators besides yourself have the gumption to point out the dishonesty at the heart of the Brown analysis.
Ivy Eileen
January 23rd, 2009 5:09pm Report this commentAny chance of Brown taking part in a Q & A session with the Womens' Institute ?
A Footsoldier
January 23rd, 2009 5:13pm Report this commentYou missed out the crowning glory, re'boom and bust'which went at one point
ED: Youre head is down
(or words to that effect)
GB No it isnt
Pleeese: grow up GB This is adolescent behaviour.
Coeur de Lion
January 23rd, 2009 5:17pm Report this commentBut it is quite nice to see the Beeb giving the PM a semi-hard time. Is this a seismic media shift and a presager of the next GE?
mac
January 23rd, 2009 5:25pm Report this commentDon't Draper, Boothroyd or a designated rebutter work on Fridays? I expected a panegyric to the Great Helmsman to be the first comment.
Forlornehope
January 23rd, 2009 5:26pm Report this commentI once had a guy working for me who had a 1st in maths from a good university (I forget which). He was useless and I had to come to the conclusion that he was just not very bright. However on one occasion we had some quite difficult maths to do to solve a problem - he was excellent at it. Then he went back to being useless. The moral is you can be very, very clever at a numerate task, like economics, and still be fundamentally stupid. That does appear to be Brown's trouble, very, very clever and a complete idiot. Who was it who said that boffins should be on tap not on top?
I thought Evan Davis was pretty good, but could still improve.
Mike Spilligan
January 23rd, 2009 5:32pm Report this commentED is still an apprentice at that job.
Brown did have "his eye on the ball" - the one marked "My turn next in No.10" "You promised; you promised!".
Wilhelm
January 23rd, 2009 5:37pm Report this commentFraser says '' He's a clever guy.''
EH ? Nah, Gordon Brown is just a clown, a bad joke.
Richard Holloway
January 23rd, 2009 5:39pm Report this commentNo wonder confidence in Britain is so low. With a self deluded maniac in charge who would feel confident?
Ian Walker
January 23rd, 2009 5:39pm Report this commentI presume that Evan Davis' time at the Beeb will soon be up, and Poodle Pesto will be moved to Economics.
David Belchamber
January 23rd, 2009 5:44pm Report this commentGolfwidow, how right:
"This forensic breakdown should be on the front page of every newspaper tomorrow".
The particular forensic bit I liked was:
"GB: We have low public debt
[FN: Untrue. It’s 47.5% of GDP last month, according to the ONS, over 100% according to the IFS and 127% according to the CPS.]"
One question, Fraser; is there any way of saying which figure is the nearest to being a proper statement of the situation? To have a valid debate, you have to be able to agree such things.
Mrs B
January 23rd, 2009 5:55pm Report this commentThis is a great analysis - but I fear it's too late. Brown and the Labour party are going down, and the country is going down with them. Brown needed this kind of detailed scrutiny well before now. I just can't understand why the media have taken so long. But well done Fraser.
Paul B
January 23rd, 2009 6:40pm Report this commentAgree with Wilhelm. GB is not a clever man. He is not a clown either, with due respect Wilhelm. He is a vainglorious, arrogant, pig headed, compulsive liar. I have such total contempt for him, that I look back at Blair's days as PM fondly. Callaghan days were a walk in the park, what crisis?
This man Brown,( I can barely bring myself to call him by his name, I would prefer to use a word in the Anglo Saxon vernacular) has murdered my country on the sword of his own ego. If New labour has any decency left (and I believe there are good people within the party still) then for the sake of all of us, they need to use whatever measures it takes to remove him and give us a General Election. I want to see Brown humiliated and made to grovel to the nation. We deserve nothing less.
TomTom
January 23rd, 2009 7:00pm Report this commentBrown has no economic grasp - in the 20th Century recessions or depressions are caused by the Credit Cycle. It is signifiant that British interest rates did not reach double-digits before Edward Heath let the money supply rip.
Inflation is a result of poor monetary control as China - Brown was saved from massive inflation by the Balance of Payments deficit soaring
Jim
January 23rd, 2009 7:32pm Report this commentWell done Fraser, a nice forensic analysis.
I suspect that sometime in 2009 we will see Brown deposed by his own party. It will be very drawn out and messy, but it hapened to Margaret Thatcher and I suspect Brown will go the same way, though not without a fight which will dominate the media for days.
Unlike Margaret Thatcher who went with her head held high, Brown's nuckles will be white as his fingernails drag across the floor of number 10 on the way out.
But go he will.
TGF UKIP
January 23rd, 2009 7:52pm Report this commentThank you, Fraser, for a brilliant and forensic analysis of the interview which I didn't hear live but which I've just downloaded from the Beeb website. A post this length of an interview dissected so minutely must have required a great deal of painstaking, detailed work, so a double thank you.
One of the dangers of a site like this, though, is we all assume other people think as we do, so I guess the first question must be not how we view it but how did the majority of Today listeners react (is it about 3 m, Fraser?) Or put another way were Campbell and Mandelson alarmed or satisfied. I'd be interested to hear your take on this, Fraser.
One of the most intersting things about this interview, as it is about most Brown performances, is that he is so confident in lying or making so many spurious renunciations so often and so confidently. It really can only be that he is so confident that he is going to be either completely unchallenged or that he can ride any challenge back to his own ground. Nor is this just a BBC thing, it really is because he goes fundamentally unchallenged in all forums other than by Fraser Nelson and other journos of the right.
Cameron doesn't call him a liar and a twister so why should we expect Evan Davies to when he comes out with "we have low public debt."
Your Tories had better be very careful, Fraser, Brown needs destroying now. He has a narrative to get him through this patch, he's sticking to it and Evan Davies didn't dislodge him this morning and neither has Dave so far. He's relying on being able to move onto more positive ground later this year and early next and as I've heard two front line tales of green shoots in the last few days, he clearly has grounds for believing he has something worth fighting and lying for.
What a pity Fraser,that you'll never be able to call your best mate "Killer Cameron."
PS I think you have been very kind to Evan Davies (fellow hacks courtesy?) It appeared to me that there was at times far too much cosiness (including calling him "Gordon") and as for the beginning I look forward to all politicos of the right appearing on the Today Programme saying immediately after the obligatory Good Mornings "Now John/Jim/PoshBird in line with what Evan Davies afforded to Gordon Brown I look forward to your saying to me - I'm aware you've got to have room to set out your view of things - so we can have no 3 second interruptions nor 30 second long questions."
Fraser Nelson
January 23rd, 2009 9:01pm Report this commentOkay, Brown may not be wise enough to know that he doesn't know - to paraphrase Socrates -but he studies a lot, knows the metrics and his Brownies are carefully chosen from a wide range of metrics. And he gets away with it: that is the proof of his success.
Also, under Brown, the UK's spending as a share of GDP is now higher than the European average. This is his objective: he hit it. Sure, he destroyed the economy in so doing, but you have to judge the guy by his objectives.
TGF, thanks but I rather rushed that - hence all the typos. My take is that of the 3m today readers, at least 2m would have switched off when they heard Brown coming on and the remaining million would have stayed because Davis promised in advance not to let him get away with his normal repetition.
And the internet is the place to take apart Brown's stats - if you do it on air, folk switch off. And I'm a genuine Evan fan. I am also a Carolyn Quinn fan and would be delighted if they brought her back.
Nicholas
January 23rd, 2009 9:09pm Report this commentHe really is shaping up to become Britain's second dictator.
hadrian
January 23rd, 2009 9:31pm Report this commentBroon's idea of prudence is a triple spend. For all he comes from a Scottish Presbyterian manse, such being usually noted for their staid thrift and avoidance of any hint of extravagence, Broon's like the student from a strict upbringing, away from home and heady on wild living. Actually his father's philosphy was far closer to secular socialism, as were/are most theologically 'liberal' presbyterians, than the old, authentic calvinistic ethic of the Kirk and Free Kirk. In this crucial factor Broon's approach does not remotely resemble the doughty individual responsiblity of the old Presbyterians that I can vividly recall in my staunchly Presbyterian grandparents to whom even a hint of debt would have been anathema. Broon's a socialist, pure and simple, and so he has had the voracious state appetite for tax and spend that has dug us in so deeply to the present gaping hole. I doubt the many nudging pensionable age but now condemned to either longer working lives or severely 'modest' lifestyle on the Sate pension, will be so forgiving of the man who previously was raiding pension funds right left and centre. What do you all think?
DW
January 23rd, 2009 9:43pm Report this commentUnfortunately even if Labour are wiped out at the next election, Gordon Brown will be blaming global events rather than admitting any personal responsibility. So despite Fraser's excellent analysis which I hope is distributed far and wide for the general public, Brown will deny his failings to the end. The only way any of it will strike home to him, is if he is humiliated by his own constituents in the next election if they resoundingly vote him out. Oh for a Portillo moment there.....
mac
January 23rd, 2009 9:56pm Report this commentTGF - What you say above is entirely plausible.
Unfortunately, Davies' approach is about as 'searching' as Brown will allow - or the subservient BBC cares to press. Brown's worn Emperor's clothes for a long time now, yet so much of the MSM averts its eyes to this destructive government's failings.
As for no 30 second long questions on Today: that disqualifies Naughtie by a wide margin, then.
Praguetory
January 24th, 2009 12:13am Report this comment" And the internet is the place to take apart Brown's stats - if you do it on air, folk switch off. "
On air is the place to ridicule/rile him - and boy do I wish I had the chance to do so.
J H Holloway
January 24th, 2009 4:07am Report this commentFraser touches on an important point. Having pushed Government spending to a new percentage high, he has achieved at lot for Labour philosophy.
Deep, deep down they know the spending is unsustainable (and probably undesirable) but in opposition will be quivering in anticipation to start shouting cuts.
Cameron is, probably rightly, terrified of being caught in the cuts mantra. Truth is, Gordon would rather pile up horrendous debt for the next 18 months, rather than shave one penny off bloated public spending.
Even a Mr Creosote moment wouldn't convince Brown enough was enough. In the eternal Student Union that is the Labour mind, there can never be enough spending.
Augustus
January 24th, 2009 4:10pm Report this commentThe problem is that the government is only capable of believing that bank write-downs are all down merely to illiquid and wrongly priced securities markets. If we can just peg a floor to such securities, the banks can get back to lending like it was 2007 again, is their mantra. But we're not facing a liquidity crisis. It's not just a case of freeing up lending markets. We're facing a banking crisis. Market confidence in the banking sector has eroded to such a degree that it's not even clear what measures will bring a material improvement. Our banks may not have enough capital to survive. In short, the UK banking system is on the brink. once banks have over-extended themselves to such a degree, they work very hard not just to stop lending, but to retract existing loans back from borrowers. This is what triggers the rapid rise in bankruptcies that recessions involving banking crises are always famed for.
Simon Stephenson
January 24th, 2009 6:23pm Report this commentJ H Holloway
"In the eternal Student Union that is the Labour mind ..."
Beautifully put!
Searcher
January 25th, 2009 3:13pm Report this commentSuper analysis. And another Brownie: "nobody saw [the subprime problem]". Good grief! People made billions: Paulson (John not Hank)and Steve Eisman (see article by Michael (Liar's Poker) Lewis in Portfolio Magazine), to name but two. And there was always the Sage of Omaha. It's just that nobody listened, least of all G Brown. Brown never knew what he was doing, but as the SoO also said, it's only when the tide goes out that you see who is swimming naked.
ee
January 26th, 2009 3:22pm Report this commentIt makes one sick to the core to have an unelected serial liar as our Prime Minister.
Peter
February 21st, 2009 7:21am Report this commentI feel like we're back in some earlier century, where the Establishment can't, or won't, get to grips with a clearly insane individual who is clearly dragging all the rest down with them.
Back to top