Labour would get rid of Gordon — if the plotters had a real candidate

There is conspiring in the corridors once again in Westminster. Who could replace Gordon, they ask. Labour’s problem is that the young pretenders are too young and the idea of caretaker leader seems slightly ridiculous, it would look absurd for the government to change Prime Minister twice in the same Parliament. So, Brown will solider on while the battle of succession rages just beneath the surface. 

After ten tedious years of firm party discipline, life is finally returning to the corridors of the House of Commons. A lobby journalist on patrol can once again gather intelligence, whether it be from ministers colluding behind the Speaker’s chair or clusters of Labour MPs holding impromptu crisis meetings. Two themes dominate: one is the scale of the disaster (or ‘how bad is it, on a scale of ten?’ as one Cabinet member has taken to asking). The other is whether Gordon Brown will be around long enough to fight the next general election.

That such a question should be asked is, in itself, fatal for the Prime Minister’s authority. He might just have survived the avalanche of disasters which have befallen him in recent weeks — but not a new police investigation into Labour party funding. His defence — ignorance — hardly inspires confidence. Mr Brown’s aides talk optimistically about how Labour recovered quickly in the polls after the 2000 fuel protest. But even they know what the true odds are for this Prime Minister who sold himself as dull but competent, and is now seen merely as dull.

Labour MPs can also guess and wait. If the latest opinion polls were translated into a general election result, at least 110 of them would lose their seats. Such a prospect tends to focus minds. These doomed MPs are usually the ones pulling each other to the side in the Commons, often seeking out Cabinet members in similar positions (Jacqui Smith and Ruth Kelly).