Gordon brown

Wednesday

Peter Hoskin

Brown’s fightback is hampered by the negative stories that hover over him

So Brown has said more about the al-Megrahi case, although he hasn’t said anything particularly new.  Speaking at an event to mark the government’s new “Backing Young Britain” project, the PM claimed that, “There was no conspiracy, no cover up, no double-dealing, no deal on oil, no attempt to instruct Scottish ministers, no private assurances to Colonel Gaddafi”.  Which is exactly the message we’ve heard from a string of ministers, and which has been thrown into doubt by all those published letters.  No word yet on whether Brown agreed or disagreed with Megrahi’s release, when it finally came. All this exemplifies the problem that Labour have had for months now,

Martin Bright

10 Days Away and Libya Still on the Front Pages

It’s not often that you take a holiday to return to the same story running nearly two weeks later. Just before I went away, I updated my Facebook page to say that I thought the release of Megrahi would rebound on the UK government, but I had no idea it would develop into a full-blown crisis. Bill Rammell was filmed in very unfortunate circumstances making his confession last night. But well may he sweat — perhaps he agreed to be shot like that in sympathy for the dissidents held in Gaddafi’s desert jails. But the game is up now. Rammell, Miliband, Straw and Brown all decided that they didn’t want

James Forsyth James Forsyth

The Sky debate could be a lifeline for Brown

As the Megrahi case grows more serious by the day, one thing should be cheering up those in the Brown bunker: Sky’s plan to host a debate among the party leaders. Now, Brown might be the only party leader yet to have agreed to the debate but he is the one with the most to gain from it. If Brown is to have any hope of stopping David Cameron from winning the next election outright, he needs a game changing moment—and a debate might just produce one. The first televised leaders’ debate will be a hugely hyped event. One has to imagine that it would draw a huge TV audience

David Blackburn

The Lockerbie papers

Bill Rammell’s admission that the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary told the Libyans that they ‘did not want al-Megrahi to pass away in prison’ is the bombshell the government hoped to avoid. And, together with Jack Straw’s sudden decision not to exclude al-Magrahi from the PTA to protect ‘wider negotiations with the Libyans”, this disclosure requires answers from the government. David Miliband heightened the chaos the government now finds itself in on the Today programme when he very foolishly remarked: “We did not want him to die in prison”. It was a slip of the tongue that undoes the government’s wilfully neutral stance over the al-Megrahi affair, stoking the rumour

Tuesday

James Forsyth

Brown’s new dividing lines are merely muddled hypotheticals

Reading the transcript of Gordon Brown’s interview with the FT one is struck by how little of a domestic policy message Brown has. Say what you like about Labour’s mantra in 2001 and 2005 of Labour investment versus Tory cuts but it was clear. By contrast, Brown’s attempt to explain his new dividing lines to the FT is distinctly muddled. Brown’s main line is that things could have been a lot worse without the government’s action. But that is, of course, a hypothetical. It also seems doubtful that the public will share this view or forget who was Chancellor in the decade before the crisis. Brown then moves on to

David Blackburn

Cameron is the winner of the al-Megrahi scandal 

It is clear that the al-Megrahi release has damaged Labour, not least because their collective refusal to condemn, or at least have an opinion on, the release of the Lockerbie bomber has confirmed that the government is totally out of touch with public opinion. On the other hand, David Cameron has played a blinder. In stark contrast to the Prime Minister’s Trappist monk act, Cameron has led this issue, voicing considered condemnations of Kenny MacAskill’s decision, the government’s reticence and the its supposedly ethical foreign policy. Cameron writes a piece in today’s Times branding the entire affair a ‘fiasco’ and a ‘failure of judgement by the Scottish government…the British government…and

Monday

David Blackburn

But he did for the both of them with his plan of attack

The tension between defence ministers and senior officers has been a running story throughout the summer, perhaps at the expense of the opinions of troops on the ground. The Times’ war correspondent, Anthony Loyd, wrote a piece today describing soldiers’ views in the wake of the Prime Minister’s visit: ‘One can only hope that if Mr Brown had braved the journey northwards from Bastion to Sangin (he didn’t), where British infantrymen are getting killed or wounded at a rate directly comparable to that of their predecessors in Western Europe in 1944, his media men would have first whitewashed the graffiti in the latrine third from the left on the northern wall. ‘“I

Sunday

Peter Hoskin

The Libya plot thickens

So the Sunday Times has got its hands on letters which suggest the al-Megrahi release was tied up with a BP-Libya oil deal, and overseen by the Government with an eye on “the overwhelming interests for the United Kingdom”.  The ST article deserves quoting at some length: “Two letters dated five months apart show that [Jack] Straw initially intended to exclude Megrahi from a prisoner transfer agreement with Colonel Muammar Gadaffi, under which British and Libyan prisoners could serve out their sentences in their home country. In a letter dated July 26, 2007, Straw said he favoured an option to leave out Megrahi by stipulating that any prisoners convicted before

Saturday

David Blackburn

Libyagate: first denial, then silence now contradictions

The Times has obtained confidential correspondence suggesting that, in 1999, Robin Cook assured Madeleine Albright that those found guilty of involvement in the Lockerbie bombing would serve their sentences in Scotland. A senior US official told the Times: “There was a clear understanding at the time of the trial that al-Megrahi would serve his sentence in Scotland. In the 1990s the UK had the same view. It is up to them to explain what changed.” So how do they explain it? Kenny MacAskill claims that US officials urged him against releasing the Lockerbie bomber because Britain had pledged he would serve his serve sentence in Scotland. Seeking clarification, MacAskill wrote

Friday

Peter Hoskin

Brown’s hypocrisy over Lockerbie?

So far, Gordon Brown has refused to specifically comment on the Scottish Government’s decision to release Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi to Libya.  Yes, we’ve heard that he was “angry and repulsed” by al-Megrahi’s reception in Libya, and that our government had “no role” in the decision.  But there’s been nothing on whether he actually agrees or disagrees with the Scottish government’s actions. The official excuse has been that Brown has to respect the devolution settlement and can’t comment on devolved matters.  But – what’s this? – it seems he hasn’t had a problem with commenting on another devolved matter before now: the level of health spending set by the Scottish Government. 

David Blackburn

No way to lead a nation

It’s been terrible a morning for Gordon Brown in the editorials and on the front pages. And David Cameron, scenting blood, has condemned Gordon Brown’s leadership over the al-Megrahi affair. These pieces share the same basic analysis: Brown’s calculated caution is the cause of his problems. John Rentoul, admittedly no fan of the PM, writes in today’s Independent: ‘This has everything to do with a pattern of behaviour, an inbuilt caution that served Brown well enough on the road to No 10, but which is disastrous in anyone actually holding the top job.’ Brown’s leadership style has been unremittingly disastrous because it is not leadership; it is the political equivalent

David Blackburn

Brown faces another backbench revolt  

Despite protesting to the contrary, it turns out the government have been cutting all along. The Times reports that, buried in the small print of the budget, there is a commitment to abolish the £780 per year surplus housing benefit allowance, which encourages families to pay their rent and trade quality of accommodation for cash. These changes come into force on April 1, probably a month before the election. Labour backbenchers condemn the saving, worth £160 million per year, and plan to table amendments. Frank Field, who draws a comparison between this cut and the 10p rate revolt, tells the Times:  “At one stroke, they get rid of a reform aimed

Tuesday

David Blackburn

It’s written in the stars

The gods of fortune have spoken: Gordon Brown is not finished. According to the Independent’s Andrew Buncombe, an Indian astrologer has cast the embattled PM’s horoscope and predicts that we “can expect sudden positive changes in the economy from 19th November 2009”; that Mr Brown will win the election; and that “the year 2011 will be the best year of his lifetime, with many achievements”. “Why must the British people endure another term as tennis balls for the gods’ sport?” I hear you ask. Well, because Gordon’s got good karma – the position of the moon in his chart suggests that Brown “did good for the marine animals” of yesteryear.

David Blackburn

Brown breaks his silence

At last, Gordon Brown has something to say about the Lockerbie bomber’s release. He said he was “angry and repulsed” by the welcome the Lockerbie bomber receive in Libya. And he also added: “I made it clear to Gadaffi in July that we could have no role in the release of al-Megrahi”. This doesn’t draw a line under the controversy. As William Hague has argued, the story is now about why it took Brown so long to say those few words and still managed to say nothing. And he hasn’t answered any of the serious questions being asked of the government.

Peter Hoskin

The language of political debate

A great spot by Tim Montgomerie over at ConservativeHome, who highlights this Wall Street Journal graphic on the words that both sides of the US healthcare debate should be using to score a rhetorical advantage.  For instance, it suggests that the pro-Obama team should say “rules” rather than “regulations”, while the President’s opponents should attack the system for being “too profit-driven” and “too bureaucratic”: As Tim says, words have power.  Indeed, over the past decade, the fiscal debate was partially

David Blackburn

A very risky strategy

Labour’s attempt to create a new dividing line on cuts is intriguing because it suggests that the government reckons we are pulling out of recession – a message Alistair Darling has been stressing recently. Central to Labour’s argument is that their initial interventions, opposed by the Tories, preserved public services through the recession. By claiming that now is the time to make extensive cuts, beyond mere efficiency savings, suggests that they think the economy is robust enough to survive sweeping public spending cuts. If an economic boom couldn’t save John Major, I doubt a modest recovery will save Brown from defeat. But, if the economy does recover and Brown initiates

Peter Hoskin

Twilight Zone Tuesday: Brown to announce spending cuts

Now this is a turn up.  According to the Independent, Gordon Brown is going to “issue a list of specific [spending] cuts” as part of his Autumn “fightback”.  Here’s how the strategy goes: “Initially, Mr Brown will seek to establish in voters’ minds the key differences between Labour and the Tories – on policy, government intervention to limit the impact of the recession and preserving frontline services. Then he will acknowledge that the Government needs to go beyond the £35bn of efficiency savings it has already promised. The aim will be to show Labour is serious about reducing the deficit, which is set to rocket to £175bn in the current

Monday

David Blackburn

There’s no one like Macavity

Paul Waugh’s spot on: Brown has been reluctant to congratulate England for their Ashes victory because he is so desperate to avoid being dragged into the international furore surrounding al-Megrahi’s release. A Number.10 spokesman described Kenny MacAskill’s release order as a “uniquely sensitive and difficult decision” and one that (surprise, surprise) was taken completely independently of the British government. But, as yet, Macavity’s not here. I suppose I could be doing the PM a disservice. Braying about our Ashes victory would, of course, be uniquely insensitive to our Australian brothers. And besides, giving congratulations is probably someone else’s job.

Peter Hoskin

Confidence returns

One of the most significant news stories of the day comes courtesy of the Institute of Chartered Accountants: “Confidence among business professionals has surged, suggesting the recession is at an end, a survey has said. The Institute of Chartered Accountants’ index of business confidence rose to 4.8 at the end of June, from -28.2 in March, the biggest rise for two years.” Economically speaking, this is encouraging stuff – it’s the view from the frontline of the real economy, after all.  And these types of surveys always tend to have a self-fulfilling quality, as more confident companies adopt the measures – spending, hiring etc. – which are likely to drive