The workings of Brown's brain
James Forsyth 11:51am
Matthew Parris’s column brilliantly skewers the utter predictability of the policy announcements coming out of Number 10.
Then whole of Matthew’s column is, as always, worth reading. But he is right that Brown has shown the voters no idea of what a better tomorrow would look like. It now seems that the government is to try and set out a vision for where the country can go but I suspect the PM is now too discredited to be credible on the subject.“Much the same may be said of the problem-solving programme known as Mr Brown. Focus-grouping tells him voters are angry that top British bankers have been paying themselves fat salaries and bonuses. Key words in these reports trigger links in the Brown brain to key remedies: thus “angry about British banker's bonus” triggers “stop British banker's bonus”. “Salaries too high” triggers “curb salaries”. A cross-linking response is assembled: “control remuneration of British bankers”. But the word “British” then triggers a logic filter; and on to the Brown screen pings a warning pop-up: “Incompatibility with frequent assertion that causes of crisis not British. Try ‘international system for curbing remuneration'.” Brown tries that, and hits Return.The screen says “That's it. Done. Finished. Your policy transaction has been successful. Add to basket? Create another policy?” But the computer program has overlooked the fact that, internationally, Mr Brown is not in charge. Nor has it the wit to ask such elementary questions as “where does this take us as a general principle? If bankers, why not all company directors?” - let alone the deeper question: “what's the root cause of the public anxiety? Is it really bankers' bonuses?”
When the PM taps into his computer a problem like “house prices falling”, it proposes “act to shore up house prices”. “Voter concern about knife crime” elicits “release misleading statistics about fall in knife crime”. “You're too Scottish” is met by “launch initiatives on Britishness”. This is the politics of the mop and bucket, wiping up spillages in the supermarket aisles; the politics of the clipboard, piling prominent shelves with market-tested goodies for the impulse-purchaser.”
Previous
Sally Chatterjee
March 7th, 2009 12:15pm Report this commentIt's the only time I ever read The Times!
cuffleyburgers
March 7th, 2009 12:19pm Report this commentHowever they try to spin it the announcements reported by The Grauniad amount to nothing so much as a centrally planned economy. It is beyond belief that this doesn't trigger a national outcry.
It is inevitable that these policies, if implemented will lead to the economic disaster far greater than the recession we have at present.
There is good reason to be deeply worried about this. Thank god I got out in time.
Now shelving ideas about coming back. there'll be nothing left to come back to.
Anan
March 7th, 2009 1:07pm Report this commentHehehe, the Times really doesn't like Brown. Now if only they could see sense with the rest of the Labour appartus, we might finally have the first ever fair and balanced newspaper in the UK.
David Ossitt
March 7th, 2009 1:13pm Report this commentThis is the politics of the mop and bucket, wiping up spillages in the supermarket aisles; the politics of the clipboard, piling prominent shelves with market-tested goodies for the impulse-purchaser.
In other words he reacts from a personal viewpoint.
But it is obvious to the whole world that he has a personality disorder.
He is not normal.
Frank P
March 7th, 2009 1:19pm Report this commentI see that your leftie mate Steve Richards was given another opportunity to further G Brown's interest via a cosy little debate with your Editor on Newsnight on Friday chaired by Gavin Esler, on whether or not Gordon is doomed to lose the next election.
Hardly a debate, more midwifery on the part of Matthew who spoke twice of Gozza's 'authenticity'. Authentic what? Bullshitter? Social spaz? Destroyer of our economy? We should be told.
The only good thing about watching Richards now is that his appearance is now so akin to that of Arthur Scargill that it must be impossible for anybody to take him seriously. And at least Arthur's barnet was a comb-over not an Irish jig.
God help us all if our major daily political news analysis round- up on BBC has now plunged to this level of debate. How accomodating to the left can this magazine get before you have to rename it?
TrevorsDen
March 7th, 2009 1:34pm Report this commentBritain is all at sea, adrift and rudderless with no compass moral or otherwise (in fact if there is one thing we can be certain on there is NO moral compass). Taking on water and going under.
The crew are paralysed and incapable of either waking up the captain or declaring him incapable.
THX1138
March 7th, 2009 1:43pm Report this commentI skim read Matthews column this morning lying in bed with Mrs THX and the little THX's bouncing about and I agreed with it all.
Today's piece was called
"Put away your mops and buckets - and lead us
British politicians have disappeared down a supermarket aisle: we want politics to be about more than wiping up spillages"
I was however reminded of a piece he also for The Times back in sunnier days at the beginning of 2005 when he took almost the complete opposite line.
The piece was called:
"A vision for change? Bring me a blindfold
The public is hungry for plodding efficiency, not lofty rhetoric"
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/matthew_parris/article3134745.ece
A snippet:
"Change, Renewal and Principle are the chocolate, brandy butter and Christmas pudding of politics. Vision is the tinsel. We are surfeited. The truth, if we would but face it, is that our world and the lives we lead are not changing as fast today as when our fathers and grandfathers were young; nor is there any great clash of rival ideologies between which to decide. We stand at no threshhold, no fork in the road, and on no brink. We contemplate no broad, sunlit uplands. Our lives are, for most and for much of the time, not as bad as they are."
I agreed with that whole heartedly too. I wonder do we need a new vision or just better management? I hope it's a new vision but I wish I knew for sure.
Mitch
March 7th, 2009 2:10pm Report this commentThe only reason to follow Brown would be out of morbid curiosity.
Just before he jumps off a cliff doesn't mean we have to,just wait for the splat and move on.
George Laird
March 7th, 2009 3:55pm Report this commentDear James Forsyth
I am surprised by your article.
The New Labour solution to a problem is to "fix" it and by doing so create another problem.
There really is no grand scheme to make people’s lives better; it is a myth and a pretty sick joke at that.
You only have to look at Wendy Alexander, Labour MSP and her actions regarding the Glasgow City Council Housing stock transfer to know that the only thing Labour can see is short term.
Yours sincerely
George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
David Ossitt
March 7th, 2009 5:02pm Report this commentTHX1138.
How refreshing to hear that there is a MrsTHX.
Rather than the ubiquitous 'my partner' of most of the chattering classes.
David Ossitt
March 7th, 2009 5:10pm Report this commentGeorge Laird.
I know that you hate us Tory's but I for one am getting to like many of your comments.
Though I do not believe that we have rights only privileges.
Too many bad people escape the consequences of their actions because of Human Rights.
George Laird
March 7th, 2009 6:38pm Report this commentDear David Ossitt
Thank you for your kind words.
It is a pity but not all of my comments get published on here.
Are you aware that I have attracted a "fan club" that are terribly hostile to me?
They like to think they are Moral PC Police.
Any act of support or gesture to me could turn the howling mob on you, especially if you trot over to Melanie Phillips’ blog.
I am having a "discussion" with some of them why Melanie is wrong.
With regard to your comment;
"Though I do not believe that we have rights only privileges".
You cannot be seriously believe; for example that the right to a fair trial is a privilege?
I would have thought as a Tory; you would believe one of the central planks of Tory policy, Law and Order.
If you believe in Law and Order, it must fall that you believe in rights because no modern system can function effective under privilege. This would lead to miscarriages of justice because someone’s face doesn’t fit.
Another example would be employment do you think it is acceptable for cronyism in public office?
Sorry but there must be rights; unfortunately some Politicians don’t understand that if a person cannot exercise their rights then they have no rights at all. New Labour has created a smokescreen that people can exercise their rights but the truth is; they have put in barriers at every stage to deny them.
Therefore my recurring theme that Britain is a corrupt society has merit.
Yours sincerely
George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
Fergus Pickering
March 7th, 2009 6:54pm Report this commentThere is a Mrs Pickering. I just thought I'd tell you that. Matthew Parris is usually right. Steve Richards never is.
David Ossitt
March 7th, 2009 7:18pm Report this commentDear George Laird.
You are quite right; I was being quite glib and mischievous but I do think the human rights issue along with health and safety and equality and diversity.
Are the cause of many of the problems in our society.
THX1138
March 7th, 2009 11:11pm Report this commentThanks Dave O but of course in proper norf LDN librul tradition both little THX's were at our wedding and the honeymoon to unfortunately.
BTW I don't agree with you much but I'm enjoying your contribution to this blog please keep posting.
Tiberius
March 8th, 2009 9:37am Report this commentAs Chief Inspector Dreyfus said of Clouseau,"brain, what brain!?"
Ivy Eileen
March 8th, 2009 5:23pm Report this commentSally -
if you still have last Wednesday's The Times, you may find the letter from Jeremy Lever Q.C. interesting and forthright - especially if you are (or your husband is) self-employed.
Back to top