Matthew d’Ancona says that, by sticking with Brown, Labour has opted for a mad collective delusion. The party is still in thrall to the trio who invented New Labour and cannot think beyond the Blair-Brown era — an incapacity for which it will pay a terrible price
In the same Times interview, the new First Secretary of State said of his relationship with Blair and Brown that ‘we were a triangular friendship. At that time [in 1994] the hand of history was placed on Tony’s shoulder, not Gordon’s... I had a difficult relationship with Tony. I was his best friend and his chief ally, but that was the problem because it excited jealousies. Of course, one of the sources of the difficulty was the tensions between the then Prime Minister and the then Chancellor. All that’s gone. I’ve reinvented myself.’
What a remarkable way of looking at the government of the country over the last 12 years: through the prism of a triangle of friendship, in its many permutations and combinations, a Jules et Jim for Westminster. And the more you think about it, the closer you get to the heart of the matter. Because these three men — Tony, Gordon and Peter — are now threatening to destroy the very party they once saved. Their grip upon Labour’s collective imagination and behaviour is undiminished. Even in retirement, Blair is everywhere in the party’s deliberations, its dreams and its fears. None of them can let go. They still dominate the show, even as the show enters its last agonising act. In a sense, Blair, Brown and Mandelson have become Labour’s bed-blockers, unwilling to move on, to allow the Miliband-Purnell generation to take its turn at the helm. And the Labour movement is co-dependent in this: the tribe cannot truly conceive what life would be like without these three chieftains, this fissile triumvirate of ferociously strong personalities. It cannot escape this triple-headed shadow. It is frightened of the future.
Watch them, these shattered, withered MPs, slouching through Westminster, slumped together like Eliot’s ‘hollow men’, their ‘dried voices, when/ We whisper together.../ quiet and meaningless/ As wind in dry grass/ Or rats’ feet over broken glass/ In our dry cellar.’ They are finished, but still they stumble on; knowing that nothing has been resolved; knowing that their date with oblivion has not been cancelled, but merely postponed.
More articles from: Matthew d'Ancona | this section
Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit
Advertisement
1,700 Unusual Christmas Presents Request Catalogue 01935 815 195 Quote SPEC10 for 10% discount www.presentfinder.co.uk
Pimilco based Florist with online ordering Web: www.olivebranch.net Tel: 020 7630 1868 Fax: 020 7233 8844
62 Shore Road, Warsash, Southampton, SO31 9FT Telephone: 01489 578867 Web site: www.ruffs.co.uk
Apollo Magazine | Corporate | Advertising | Privacy | Terms
Spectator, 22 Old Queen Street, London, SW1H 9HP
All Articles and Content Copyright ©2012 by The Spectator | All Rights Reserved
wonderfulforhisage
June 11th, 2009 9:01am Report this commentInteresting that you see Blair, Brown and Mandelson as the three musketeers of NuLab's first ten years in office. From where I type, admittedly much further from SW1 than you are, Blair, Mandelson and Campbell were the satanic trinity.
I always felt that Brown was more a Hubert Lane figure to Blair's Just William. Similarly I see Ed B. as Bertie Franks.
Wikipedia: 'William has a few arch-enemies - Hubert Lane being the most sought after. Others include Hubert's lieutenant Bertie Franks and supporters.'
Ethan
June 11th, 2009 9:40am Report this commentI hope that all that you say comes true, but I have a dreadful premonition. First, Brown’s diversionary tactic on proportional representation gains traction. After all, it’s only fair, isn’t it, and although there are good constitutional arguments for FPTP, the Tory position looks self-serving. Second, the Tories continue to fail to find a convincing narrative on public expenditure, (a) because it’s complicated, and (b) because Labour lie about it. Those two factors pull Labour back far enough from their 15% trough to allow them to hold enough seats in the general election to form a coalition with the LibDems. Then it will be the Tories that do not survive, not least because the voting system will be fixed to ensure it.
Rhoda Klapp
June 11th, 2009 10:03am Report this commentDo try to go easy on the metaphors. A feeding frenzy of crazy phrases snapping at each other in an attempt to devour any meaning
Sarah
June 11th, 2009 11:05am Report this commentWonderful summation of a Labour Party led by an empty tin-pot who is being dangled on the end of a string by a thrice dis-credited Machiavelli clone.
dorothy wilson
June 11th, 2009 11:55am Report this commentMaybe I'm cynical but my view is that one of the key reasons why Labour MPs stuck with Brown is that to do otherwise would be to trigger a General Election. Now how many of those who would lose their seats would be able to find a job paying equivalent salary and benefits in the private sector? Very, very few. Thus they are simply clinging on as long as possible to line their pockets for a little longer.
Kalvis Jansons
June 11th, 2009 12:55pm Report this commentWhen the world looks at the Number 10 website they see this:
http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/please-go/
Let us make it look even better for them and even worse for Mr Brown.
Moraymint
June 11th, 2009 1:56pm Report this commentYes, Matthew, it is 'Groupthink' that now defines and, indeed, paralyses the Labour Party in Government. Of course, it was 'Groupthink' that led to the Bay of Pigs fiasco. The Labour Party's 'Groupthink' will, as you say, lead to its consignment to oblivion in due course.
It seems quite weird being able to predict the future with such certainty like this. It's like watching lemmings pour over a cliff and wondering why on earth they don't simply stop being so stupid?
The Labour Party in power has been an unprecedented peacetime disaster for this country. The behaviour of the Labour Government and its parliamentary members now is merely a symptom of their shocking contempt for the British people over past 12 years ... contempt that will conclude in ignominy for Gordon Brown and the crew of incompetent cowards who have sailed with him.
The Labour Party deserves never to recover from this shameful episode in British political history.
Tariq
June 11th, 2009 2:48pm Report this commentThis article makes perfect sense, as long as one assumes that the expenses scandal and the European election results will will not be forgotten in a trice, that Messrs Purnell and Johnson have a real chance of displacing the prime minister, and that the prime minister and his deputy will not pull every one of the many levers still at their disposal to stave off disaster. In other words, it doesn't make much sense at all. Entertaining read, though.
Ruth
June 11th, 2009 3:06pm Report this comment'the Miliband-Purnell generation'! lol
So that's why they all hung on to Gordon.
Ivor Evenden
June 11th, 2009 4:45pm Report this commentNixon's adviser, Charles Colson, explained the NuLabour dilemma: "When you have them by the balls, their hearts and mids will follow." Where does our democracy stand? - Unelected leader, six unelected gurus to see them through and a peasant Cabinet. It begins to look a bit like the Cultural Revolution of Chairman Mao. Send them out to be 'educated' by the peasants!
Herbert Thornton
June 11th, 2009 6:47pm Report this comment"The party is still in thrall to the trio who invented New Labour and cannot think beyond the Blair-Brown era — an incapacity for which it will pay a terrible price."
"A terrible price"? Boy, if that comes true it will be worth every penny of it.
Ethan's premonition of a Labour/LibDem coalition is worrying, but would not New Labour's presence in the coalition poison it?
Might there be a coalition of the Tories and UKIP? So long as the Cameron mindset dominates the Tories I should think it impossible, but is there any chance of enough Tories moving to UKIP to render the Tories obsolete too?
It would be even better if most genuine Tories - along with a great many former Labour supporters - would then join the BNP. This may seem unthinkable to some people, but in G. Lowes Dickenson's "A Modern Symposium" the full text of which can be accessed here - http://www.archive.org/stream/modernsymposium00dickuoft/modernsymposium00dickuoft_djvu.txt - one of the characters - Allison - adumbrated that kind of possibility when he said - "I'm not without hope of seeing, before I die, a Tory-Socialist party." Perhaps we can hope along similar lines and that we will progress to having, as our two main parties, UKIP and the BNP? Indeed, to my mind, the BNP is the natural party for both genuine Tories and traditional Labour supporters to join because its core beliefs are virtually identical to theirs.
Incidentally, I first read "A Modern Symposium" around 1945 and after reading it again, much of it seems very much relevant to the present day.
J.F.
June 12th, 2009 9:42am Report this commentDead maggots 'w.. er' crawling
Peter W Watson
June 12th, 2009 10:55am Report this commentWe are emigrating. These Marxist bastards knew all along what their orders were. Well when the UK Prison finally descends into civil unrest, I for one can say "I told you so", having warned since 1997 but no one wanted to hear it. And Cameron is useless or he would have exposed the evil these men do. Satanic is the correct choice of words.
Scott Mebeat
June 12th, 2009 11:23am Report this commentEver since the europhiles bumped Margaret Thatcher - the last eurosceptic prime minister - her fate has haunted all her successors.
Bottler blatantly broke his party's promise and failed to call a referendum. Such a treacherous action can only have been at the behest of the EU. It is therefore clear that Bottler dances to Europe's tune, just like all the others since Margaret Thatcher.
The EU (assuming that it does not implode under the weight of its own contradictions beforehand) will not allow Bottler's government to fold while there is still time for Cameron to kill the treaty, if at all possible.
Wouldn't it be hilarious if the Irish stuck to their guns?
It's the common meerkat - simples!
Thomas Maren
June 12th, 2009 1:30pm Report this comment'James Purnell will be able to hold his head up high'. ??? Not very, if Rod Liddell's piece last week is accurate, and I have no doubt that it is, to wit, that Purnell is one of the worst crooks re flipping. So do we just forget about that? Better to give Red Ken credit for telling it like it is, that Blears, Purnell et al were caught with their hands in the till, and the purported reasons for their resignation are diversionary tactics which Mathew d'Ancona appears to prefer to emphasise.
Andrew Bamji
June 12th, 2009 5:59pm Report this commentA test for dementia requires patients to be able to answer "Who is the Prime Minister?". If one of mine says "Peter Mandelson" do I mark them down?
John Corfield
June 13th, 2009 5:31pm Report this commentSuperb analysis Matthew you hit the nail on the head with such a chillingly incisive article exposing the gruesome threesome
martin
June 14th, 2009 7:37pm Report this commentwell said
the source of the problems are nulabor, not The Labour Party, and unless and until nulabor are purged from the party this country will suffer
Wayne Barnes
June 16th, 2009 12:30am Report this commentThe sad fact is that during the past month, not one person came forward and acted like a statesman. Not one person spoke for the people, not just the electorate. I would like to believe that NuLabour will be voted out in a forthcoming election but I no longer trust Brown, nor do I trust Parliament and the people, who feel so thoroughly ignored, to do anything other than switch channels to Britain Has Talent, when Brown engineers a situation that rules out the need for any further elections...
Pem
June 17th, 2009 3:23pm Report this commentWhen reading this last week the song that came to mind was "i'm dead but I don't know it" by randy newman (listen from 2.00 mins onwards)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rW4qx3iCrcg
Back to top