The Balls deterrent
James Forsyth 12:09pm
There have been many interviews with Peter Mandelson this week, but I don’t think
any of them have got as much out of him as Patrick Wintour has in today’s Guardian:
‘For he is quite clear in the interview that Labour would be probably be in power now if it had been possible for Brown to be replaced by a consensual alternative.
"If you really force me, I think probably it would make a 20 to 30 seat difference to the result. They would have gone to 280 and we would have gone up to 270. They probably would have been the largest party, but not by a decisive margin."
Asked why, then, he tolerated Brown's continuation in office he says: "I felt a sense of personal loyalty. I felt a real bond between us and I was not going to be shaken on that.
"But it was also my guess that if Gordon stepped down and people got behind David Miliband, Ed Balls would have entered the contest, and before you knew where you were there would have been an ugly fight, not just between two people perceived to represent new and old Labour, which was the last thing we want."
But he would not have stopped the attempted coup in January this year if the three or four cabinet ministers involved had gone through with it.’
Mandelson’s comments show how effective the Balls’ deterrent was for Brownites. As soon as Balls made it clear he would force a contest that would be bloody and divisive if Brown was forced out, Brown staying became the safer option even though most of the Cabinet seemed to realise that he was leading Labour to defeat.
Previous
Ed P
July 16th, 2010 12:20pm Report this commentWell done Balls, you have proved useful after all, as we have a decent government thanks to Brown staying. But you are no longer required - just fade into obscurity please
Woodbine
July 16th, 2010 12:35pm Report this commentMandelson always found democracy inconvenient.
Chuck Unsworth
July 16th, 2010 1:03pm Report this comment"I felt a sense of personal loyalty. I felt a real bond between us and I was not going to be shaken on that."
How credible is that?
And Mandelson is saying that the Cabinet committed collective suicide whilst simultaneously ensuring the defenestration of so many Labour MP's from Parliament? And Balls was party to this as well?
How not to ensure survival, then.
It was clear many months before, even before he became PM, that Brown had become a serious liability. Yet no one in the Cabinet had the balls to mount a serious challenge. What duplicitous and self-serving idiots.
David Booth
July 16th, 2010 1:11pm Report this commentSo in January we seem to have had a consensus in the Cabinet that Brown would lead them to disaster but were to afraid to take action because "Scary Balls" would glare at them and stand as Brown mark 2.
This coupled with the fact that they were all desperate to cling onto their Ministerial cars (even the so called green ones) perks and pay to give any attention to the needs of the Country.
This Labour Cabinet were the most despicable spineless creatures on the face of the Earth. And to think that good men and women were sent to war and their deaths at the behest of this pathetic bunch of criminals.
Tom FD
July 16th, 2010 1:13pm Report this commentOn the contrary Ed P, we need Balls to become Labour leader so they're kept out of power for a generation.
ollie
July 16th, 2010 1:30pm Report this commentThe assumption that Labour would have done better ubder Miliband is nonsense. Had he taken over from Brown last summer, Labour would have been wiped out if an immediate election had been called. The public would not have tolerated a second unelected PM.
I don't know where this idea comes that Miliband is a supposed election winner anyway. He has all the baggage of the previous govt strapped to him.
Labour were doomed whoever was their leader.
RMH
July 16th, 2010 2:02pm Report this commentThis is great.
So doing ACTUAL damage to the country is less important than MAYBE doing damage to the Labour party.
Talk about self-interest.
JohnAnt
July 16th, 2010 2:03pm Report this commentYes, Ed must win at all costs, to save the country from another Labour win.
Let the brave cry of 'Balls to the Labour Leadership!' ring out throughout the land.
alexsandr
July 16th, 2010 2:04pm Report this commentthe only way labour can get credibility is to find a leader who was not in the Brown or Blair government. They are all tainted.
or werent their lobby fodder. because they can never answer the question 'If it was so wrong, why didnt you resign or vote gaianst the government'?
so we will have a wait while some of the new intake get enough maturity and experience to be credible.
lescam
July 16th, 2010 2:20pm Report this comment"I felt a sense of personal loyalty. I felt a real bond between us and I was not going to be shaken on that"
Rubbish. More likely, he wanted to keep his job as Business Secretary and Deputy Prime Minister, which meant continuing to support Brown. He didn't show much loyalty to Brown when he allegedly "dripped poison into George Osborne's ears" in Corfu. True it was before he was brought back into govt, but even allowing for that, where was his loyalty and support for Labour then?
Dimoto
July 16th, 2010 3:37pm Report this commentHmmm,so James Forsyth thinks the latest spun witterings from this congenital liar and fantasist are worthy of serious analysis does he ?
I don't.
TrevorsDen
July 16th, 2010 3:40pm Report this commentAll very well in theory but labour would have had to admit that all the last 13 years would have been lies and would they ha e got away with dodging the cuts issue??
Brown was nominated by the entire PLP - just how thick does that make them?
Back to top