Can Dave stay in the lead?

The election sprint has turned into a marathon. Can Dave keep the lead?

13 October 2007

After a momentous week in politics which has seen a 14 point swing in the polls and an election called off, Fraser Nelson assesses the new political landscape. He warns Douglas Alexander and Ming Campbell to watch their backs in the months ahead and the rest of us not to expect an election until 2009 or maybe even 2010.

The tables of British politics have, once again, turned in the space of just a few weeks. David Cameron has been transformed from the affable leader of a suicide mission into a potential prime minister. Mr Brown is no longer seen as a titan led by a moral compass, but a hesitant bungler. In all the excitement, few have noticed that the Liberal Democrats have weakened to the point of total collapse. Everyone is now working to a new timetable, with an election expected not on 1 November, but in 2009, or even 2010.

Much of the damage to Mr Brown is, of course, self-inflicted. Not since Jim Callaghan sang ‘Waiting at the Church’ to the baffled TUC congress in 1978 has the decision not to hold an election been surrounded by so much drama. With striking honesty, Mr Brown’s aides last week admitted an election would be called if the opinion poll numbers were right. And with striking dishonesty, Mr Brown has spent the last few days claiming he delayed because he had not yet conveyed his ‘vision’. This mantra is incredible to the point of comedy.

The election decision overshadowed all the Prime Minister’s attempts at recovery last week. The spending review — delayed for more than a year — looked like little more than the abandoned launch pad for a cancelled election campaign. The Iraq statement had the whiff of unseemly politicking. At his press conference on Monday the PM said he would have won an election, had he run. Yet the cameras picked up his handwritten note which said ‘could’ have won. The all-important element of doubt is, of course, why he did not run.

In another era, Mr Cameron could have released a live chicken into the chamber to make his point. But at Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday, Mr Cameron acted as if he had found a live chicken, in the shape of the Prime Minister, and grabbed it by the neck. For most of the week, the Labour benches have maintained a stony silence. It is not just that the MPs are embarrassed about the disingenuous manner in which the election was cancelled. Almost all of them do not have a clue how, precisely, Mr Brown intends to recover — and whether the damage already sustained will prove permanent.

Mr Brown has been in a foul mood (no pun intended) since returning from Labour party conference — flouncing, wincing and making late-night protests to editors of newspapers whose front pages displease him. The ultraviolence which goes on behind the scenes has reached levels not seen since the botched coup against Tony Blair last year. Mr Brown’s aides are each trying to avoid blame, and seem to have agreed like a pack of school bullies to finger Douglas Alexander, the election co-ordinator. A bloody cycle of reprisals may be about to begin.

Previous page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 Next page

More articles from: Fraser Nelson | this section

Print this article | Email to a friend | Permalink | Comments (4)

Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit

Post comment

M. Hristov

October 11th, 2007 12:44pm Report this comment

This is a very interesting analysis. Gordon Brown may have "something up his sleeve" but recent events suggest that he doesn't. I was amazed by the feebleness of his answer on Inheritance Tax. He simply saved married couples a trip to their solicitor, as the same effect could be got by establishing a discretionary trust. This is the second transparently misleading policy within a year. The first being the dropping of the 10% income tax band. I think that this is indicative of two problems. A lack of the imagination needed to produce genuinely new policies and a deteriorating economy.

C.Gatenby

October 12th, 2007 2:52am Report this comment

Brown and his aides' perceptions that Labour had the majoritysupport of the British people can only be described as misguided hubris. The only 'vision' Brown had was a 'clouded' one. His scuttling and bumbling and now an almost 'just-kidding' approach on floating the prospect that he would call a snap poll shows that the next two years is simply delaying the inevitable. The days of Tory glory are at hand.

colin martin

October 12th, 2007 10:29am Report this comment

The odds are against Brown. Every month that goes by the chances for Gov c*ck-ups increase whilst Blair's air-brushing means that Brown gets the blame for every mess since 1997. His only hope - to fool the Tories by going for it in May 2008. He simply said to Andrew Marr "no election" for the "next period": that's commonly understood to mean 28 days.

MK

October 18th, 2007 10:37am Report this comment

Many thanks once again for an erudite article, however the "knife-wielders" got to Ming before you had finished writing! I disagree about the delayed election. John Major probably postponed the 1992 election in which he received the largest number of votes ever cast. Even without the Sun's help he would probably have still won this one(who can fail to remember the Sheffield rally by Kinnock?!). Brown could yet emulate this feat and gain a fourth New Labour term, well that is if the economy does not collapse and the Cameroons decontamination becomes mucky!

Post comment