麻豆官网首页入口

Tweedledum and Tweedledee
Agreed to have a battle;
For Tweedledum said Tweedledee
Had spoiled his nice new rattle.

Do we really want Gordon Brown as the next Prime Minister? Rather than being the solution, surely he is half the problem.

Surely after all this, Blair won't be able to retain his influence even if he isn't ousted just yet.

By not announcing a departure date, today, in speculation, he may go sooner rather than later. Surely, that would give Brown ample time to settle in before the may elections?

Tom

'Wrestling' of power? - that's a great Freudian slip

Absolutely, your blog by its nature focuses on the story behind the story, and does so very well.

I'm bitterly dissapointed with the MPs who have gathered like knife-wielding senators around Caesar. We've seen the answer to the question 'can a strong leader in politics ever finish well?'. The answer is no, not while feckless junior MPs exist.

I grew up under Thatcherism, and it was the combination of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown that inspired me to take an interest in the political process. I care much less for who leads than how the party acts together. I will remember those supposedly loyal MPs who have stuck the knife in. May they all lose their seats.

David
P.S. Keep holding the door open Nick, so we can see behind the curtain...

As a long time New Labour supporter I can't help noticing the similarity between this debacle and the pending strike by South West Trains. Despite preaching that "the customer is King", the rail unions strike rather than negotiate and the travelling public are left with no rail service despite in many cases having paid in advance for a season ticket. So to the members of the New Labour government jostle for publicity, and try to best position themselves for a change in leadership. Meanwhile governance of the nation takes a back seat despite the voters having paid in advance (so to speak) by electing the government.

Once again it's the unedifying spectacle of those same politicians (who regularly tell the rest of us how to live, behave and even think) acting like spoilt children as they manoeuvre to get into a comfortable post-Blair position.

Sit back and enjoy the question-dodging, back-stabbing, self-interested hot air and then wait for the next big show of grovelling to us at the local elections.

Surely annihilation in the May elections is all but guaranteed for Labour? I'd like to see the back of Blair now, but in reality, he should be around to take full responsibility for the inevitable (and I suspect record breaking) poll slump in May, and then scuttle off in disgrace.

Still, that shouldn't stop the audience at Conference giving him the slow hand clap, and a rousing chant of "Resign, Resign, Resign...". A perfect TV ending for our image obsessed PM. Better than Songs of Praise.

Please carry on writing about the personalities, squabbles and timetables Nick, for those of us who love politics for politics sake, this is a golden time!

So at the end of the day, it looks as the man is still going to hang on until he can "celebrate" 10 years in office.

But would someone please tell me what he is doing to sort out all the problems currently besetting this once great country of ours?

He makes Nero look like a saint!

Blair is staying in the role of prime minister through narrow self-interest and certainly not for the interests of the country. Blair is some-one, who has demonstrated his over-weening ambition for himself, his incredible weakness and personal vanity and his over-arching arrogance in believing that the people of this country can take another day of this highly discredited meddlar of miracle cures. Does he give the soldiers in Iraq or Afghanstan a moment's thought. The deaths of British soldiers have secured his future with the Americans once he leaves office. Not a great legacy is it.

Has the time for the Chancellor's continued silence now passed too?

If Brown wants to be seen as a credible prime minister, then have we have reached the point where he needs to demonstrate political grit and candour - continued silence and use of junior ministers and PPSs is hardly the act of an "heir in waiting".

All this raises another curious question - is there a reason why Gordon Brown is afraid of a competitive transition from Blair to a new leader? What skeleton is it that skulks in the Chancellor's past that now torments him into inactivity?

Perhaps nothing, but the longer his silence persists, so the interest in the "smoking gun" of Gordon's past is likely to develop.

Maybe if the labour activists are worried about annihilation at the polls as a result of Blair's leadership, that's the biggest statement of this whole thing. This has turned from Blair retiring in good humour, to a commentary on his ability to lead and control his government. Personally, I don't think we'd be any better under Brown/Cameron/Menzies/Reid/Kennedy, but it would be nice to focus on the issues that face the country, not the issues that face the party....

Facinating Stuff!!

This is a comment about many I know who have supported Tony Blair 3 elections in a row. We are natural Tory voters.

We did so because of Blair - and clearly, no matter your views on him, he is - and has been - a true leader. He has transformed UK plc. We are NOT card-carrying New Labour voters - but we managed to vote Labour in marginals which gave New Labour thumping majorities.

We will NOT support Gordon Brown! Period! He should be in no doubt that we perceive him as the grumpy, whingeing, uncharismatic, boring and uncooperative minister, he is. Brown will NOT tolerate such an egotistical grump in a Government he forms as he has been.

Now that he has wielded the knife, as cowardly as he has been all through his 9+ years at No. 11, New Labour should seriously consider this fact as Mr Brown ponders his next career move.

He believes if he gets more card-carrying old Labour members, he will win the next election. So sad, he does NOT realise that he has been at No 11 for so long because of Blair who ensured millions of natural LibDems and Tories voted Labour without carrying New Labour cards. Mr Brown - you have certainly lost my trust and vote - even before you have begun.

I thought the 麻豆官网首页入口 was supposed to be impartial, so why has Nick Robinson been given a prime link on the News Front Page, which takes us directly to his daily "Have a go at Blair" page? Everytime I see this man on TV or read his articles on the web, he is always revelling in anti-Blairism. I've never seen him criticise anybody else, he just seems obsessed with bringing down Blair's opinion rating. People who want to see this kind of article on a daily basis have the option of buying the Daily Mail, but let's try to keep the 麻豆官网首页入口 impartial in future.

No timetable- well when under TB鈥檚 leadership has on time delivery mattered? I can鈥檛 think of a single major initiative that has been eg yet another IT project shelved this week.

Government paralysis until he goes? Will anyone spot the difference?

Leader of our country? Well of those that bothered to vote only 36% voted labour and not all of them are Blairites. Ours is the only so called 鈥渄emocracy鈥� on the planet where such a small group can willfully ignore the majority. And they wonder why people don鈥檛 feel it worth voting?

Disconnect with the voters? The election statistics show there never was one with most of them in the first place!

Gordon Brown to the rescue and reverse all this, spreading harmony in the Labour party, eloquent communication and wit at PMQ鈥檚 and a feel good factor for all Englishmen? Now that is funny.

Only one possible conclusion, If Tony stays or Gordon arrives Labour lose the next election.

Is it just me, but I know very little about Gordon Brown as our potential next leader. He has always been that bloke beavering away at the Treasury. Does a good job but BORING. I have never seen him make a speach on TV that didn't bore me to tears after a few seconds. Can somebody please reassure me that he is really prime minister material?

I am looking on from Switzerland where i live and I am aghast at the way these so-called colleagues have turned on Blair in a way that smacks of absolute power corrupting absolutely. Gordon Brown could end this putsch by declaring that clarifications as given in recent days are sufficient and order the dogs of war to stand down. I can guarantee that Brown will be damaged goods from this point on unless he engages in an air-cleansing debate and election for the leadership with any other candidates. Otherwise he will not be seen as having a clear mandate to lead his own party and those factions loyal to Blair may pay him back in the future. Brown needs the challenge of a leadership election and he should come out and declare that as a target for him. He would immediately gain respect and credibility as a man who is anxious to prove himslef first to his own party, and then to the country.
Those MPs who resigned cannot be trusted; Brown should distance himslef from them, and throw them to the mercies of their constituencies; even though all these are clearly acolytes of Brown, if he gives such as these rewards for their treachary by positioning them in any team he might make, then Brown will make for himself another Achilles heel.

If the Labour Party thinks that Tony is now an electoral bondage and they would be annihilated at the polls in May 2007, because of their leader what is the benefit of retaining him until the defeat comes to past or because of history book?

The Labour Party must sell to the public an expired milk.The feeling in the country and opinion polls have not been sexed up. PM, the dice has been cast, anything that goes up must come down.

'Oh how are the mighty falling'

Nick

Let's face it - the issue here is not just Blair's leadership: it is also about policy, philospohy and ideology. There has always been a group of people in the Labour Party who have never agreed with the kind of public sector reform Blair has been trying to put in place or with his foreign policy or his approach to civil liberties. The problem for the Blairites is that it now appears that large numbers of people who voted Labour in the past support this group of people and want a change of direction. Formerly docile MPs are speaking out in the hope that a new leader will change direction because thye know that Blair can't.

Gordon Brown tries to have it both ways - claiming to be New and Old Labour at the same time. If Brown wins and pursues Blairite policies he will be subjected to the same attacks that Blair has been subjected to and if he doesn't the Blairites will be after him.

Its a mark of Gordon Brown's lack of any principles or leadership that he has sulked and stewed in the background without coming out with a clear vision of what he stands for. The truth is that he stands for himself.

Don't be fooled. For everyone else - that is apart from Gordon Brown - this is about ideology pure and simple.

I posted a few days ago that I thought a coup attempt would be made at the Labour party conference in a couple of weeks' time. It appears that I was right about the coup attempt but wrong about the date!

Nick, was there any inkling of this happening or did the political commentators (such as you) suspect or expect anything?

I havent laughed so much since "Two Shags" got caught out. What would really add more fun would be if TB sacks GB!!.. go on Tony! if you are going to go , may aswell add some fire to it. Where is Alistair Campbell these days? why isnt he going around all the TV & radio stations defending(and spinning) the undefensible like he used to??

Thanks for the updates Nick.

You are absolutely right to keep mentioning personalities and squabbles as it shows the rest of us that office politics are present in every office and Politics is no exception!

I'm a bit disappointed that we've not been offered an 0845 number to vote to keep Tony for another week, the entertainment factor alone would be worth the money!

This makes Big Brother look very tame!

At its rawest, perhaps, but it's most significant? I'm not so sure.

Over the centuries, our system has evolved to box in, and render as harmless as possible, the testosterone part of politics. Clearly we have some way to go, but I hope we can continue that path.

When Tony Blair (remember him?) came to power there was a lot of talk about 'evidence-based policymaking'. While he himself has not been the most consistent exponent of this idea (let's lock people up for 90 days because the Police say so even though they have delivered no supporting evidence) one can hope it has taken sufficient root, particularly at the Treasury, to start to mean that who the leader is is becoming, if not irrelevant, at least not the 'most significant' thing.

Well, I can dream, can't I, of the day when policies - the things that affect our lives - will be accepted or rejected because they are thought to work, instead of because No. 10 has a bee in its bonnet.

One ALMOST feels sorry for Blair; but then one remembers that he's put himself in this position.

Fool.

Nick, it is really a fascinating time at the moment - I think there would be even more annoyed if you didn't cover the the daily developments.

I think though that the public are more agitated by the politicians that are continually using the media to vent anger and feed discontent.

fair enough in this instance, but you and others still don't cover enough stuff about policy - the public knows infinitely more about the blair/brown divide than it does about changes to education and health. Why? Because we get our info from you. You could even combine - what are the specific policy differences on education and health between for example stephen byers and backbench critcs of blairism?

We pay taxes that go towards providing public broadcasting so tnhatw e ahve an informed democracy. If I want personality gossip I'll buy a non publicly owned newspaper

Thanks for your analysis Nick but how does it answer the question about Gordon Brown been the next PM of this great country of ours?

Secondly, how come no one is challenging Gordon to come forth and tell us the reason why he is so determine to see the back of Blair?

Thirdly, what makes the Labour party believe that Gordon is the solution to their immediate problem i.e., winning election?

Finally, why do we have silence in the cabinet? Answer: Because they are all evil and disloyal bunch!

Only evil people practice politics in my humble opinion.

Dear Nick,
Is this not just about job preservation for MPs in marginal seats? They all got in because Blair was popular and now look like they may have to go back to being mere mortals. Just as the Prime Minister has persuaded himself he has a divine mission after nine years of being told by advisors that he is the great saviour, the MPs have convinced themselves that they are there on their own merits. They are not! They were candidates of the popular party.

Raw politics is fascinating and it is about the people so carry on. I would love to know your views on the self interest that drives the venom.

Meanwhile let's enjoy the chicken run as the marginal MPs contemplate life outside parlialemtn without the lecture tour, book deal, Order of the Garter, fellowship at harvard or anything else Mr Blair can expect when he leaves office and makes some real money!

Do you think it's possible that the public and grass-roots' desire for Blair to leave exceeds Browns'? Next year sees the publication of the second Comprehensive Spending Review, the most important document on domestic policy that the Government has published since 1998, and almost entirely under Brown's control. Blair seems so weak in public, and so utterly undermined, that there is no credible reason why Brown would not administer the final blow - the old reason that it would 'split the party' no longer seems to apply. Why else would Brown (the most powerful Chancellor in history) refrain, unless he felt that overseeing the final stages of CSR07 - and setting his /own/ strictures of policy agenda - were worth tagging along in the Exchequer for another six months. Blair and Brown are united in allowing the status quo to perpetuate - it is only party activists, the public and MPs fearful of these two groups that are causing this current crisis.

I'm a self-confessed politics junkie, and this is indeed politics at its rawest, but the fact that the media consider it more newsworthy than the tragic loss yesterday of another three soldiers (fighting at the behest of this same Prime Minister) is very telling. It says everything about your values: the Labour Party may be in difficulty, but there are now three more families who would happily swap. Carolyn Mackay, Colchester

You write too much about personalities, squabbles and timetables. Why don't you get a proper job as a political editor rather than working for Heat magazine. You guys seem all too happy to not only be the principal weapon in this coup, but to actively encourage it to be weilded.

Whatever Labour activists think, I don't see the local elections as providing enough stimulus for Mr Blair to leave before May. But the Scottish and Welsh elections are a different thing. If First Ministers start telling the party that significant numbers of Labour seats are at risk if Mr Blair stays until May, it's hard to see how they could be ignored. These are tough, experienced politicians of some local standing, not some panicky activist who is stil wet behind the ears.

The timing is only the secondary issue, a distraction from the real question. Which is, will Blair back Brown as his successor?

If he does, it will be a huge kick in the teeth for his own cronies, the people who've helped him to keep Brown at bay for so long. They'll find themselves on the floor with Brown's cronies walking all over them.

But if Blair backs an alternative true-Blairite candidate, there'll be a bloodbath. No rival can expect to beat Brown simply by throwing his hat in the ring, he'll have to be spoiling for a fight, no holds barred.

A lot of people, starting with those closest to Blair, are now going to want to know the answer to this question sooner rather than later 鈥� their own future depends on it.

Can someone who knows please explain to me in simple terms just why it is that Blair and Brown are allegedly such enemies and yet have worked together as #1 and #2 for so many years?? Just what have they got against each other???

"Sixthly, keep reading, listening and watching as what you're witnessing is poltics at its rawest and most significant - the wrestling of power from the leader of our country."

Which is a shame because government at its rawest and most significant would be about serving the citizens. It would be about the education, health and enrichment of the people. It would be about authenticity and ethics.

But you did say "politics"... and I'm coming to believe that the party political system is one which fails the electorate because no matter what party is in power - we always end up funding these power struggles.

Let's get rid of the parties and just have individuals standing for election!

Politics at its rawest may provide you and a few enthusiasts with an interesting livelihood, but I don't believe it's in the interests of democracy or the nation. It's just a power trip for politicians and media pundits like yourself.

As an employee of a public service institution, surely you have a duty to the greater good? It's not just the Primeminister and Gordon Brown whose egos are out of control - news journalists are equally guilty. That includes you Nick.

Nick,
You say in your first point that 'TB does not know what will be enough to convince the party'. I'm sure you're right, but surely that what the Whips are for?? I thought they were meant to be the link between the (revolting) MPs and the elysian heights of Downing St. At the very least, this episode suggests that the Whips were/are not up to the job.

I thought that an early changeover was politically logical, especially as far as the Welsh and Scottish Labour people are concerned). But the Labour guy on Newsnight last nite suggested that TB should stay until after the May elections so that GB is not tarnished with the drubbing they will get. Nick - what's your view on this?

Thnx Nick, and keep it coming.

The sad thing about all of this is that the Brownites will find that the electorate is even less interested in Brown than in Blair. If you look at the newspapers then it is clear that things have shifted right.

Labour's best chance might be to do a last minute swap before the next election to avoid voters being exposed to Brown's lack of charm.

The losers in this will be the vulnerable, for, much as I dislike the way New Labour have taken this country, the New Tories will be even worse.

Despite the mess is the 'golden path' thats still available for Labour that Blair resign as Labour leader (rather than PM) a few weeks before the May elections, thus;

a) any feel good factor about regime change will be in the air during those local elections reducing the scale of the hit Labour will inevitably take whoever is leader

b. Brown sails into the leadership (presumably) a few weeks after those elections, thus maximising his tenure before the next general election but avoiding an early tarnishing to his leadership that would no doubt result from the first set of elections with him as leader being a series of losses?

Seventhly, even 麻豆官网首页入口 reporters get carried away with words at such a heady time: Gordon was actually wresting power from Tony, not 'wrestling'.

Spot on and balanced as usual. No doubt your views will be proved right as the afternoon unfolds.

I hope that TB will exit at the most oppurtine time for GB not to automatically take over. I cannot imagine anything worse than some kind of 'deal' where GB takes over with no credible democratic leadership contest. That really would spell the end for the labour government.

Nick, whilst I agree that this is fascinating politics, I am nevertheless getting a little bit annoyed that whilst they are squabbling over who gets the top job they are in fact not doing what You, I and everyone else pay them to do and that is run the bloody country.

I would be very interested to know just how much time Tony Blair was in this country during the whole of his premiership and precisely how much it cost to travel around the world both financially and from pollution. More time spent dealing with our massive transport problems at home (traffic jams causing more pollution than necessary)and the influx of immigrants would have been more productive than baiting the terrorists by sending our young men to war to be killed. For me he has a lot of blood on his shoulders and a complete shambolic mess at home particularly with the huge number of Laws introduced which are contradictory and ill conceived by moronic unelected quangos.

Why is it that your comments are so banal and meaningless? You continually waste the licence-payers' money giving us mis-interpretations of facts pretending to know everything. You don't.

Making comparisons with Northern Ireland and other trivia over Blair's probable resignation date and issues with Brown is space-filling rubbish.

Teletubbies offer better value and probably more informed comments.

Bring back Andrew Marr or John Simpson.

Blair should go when he wonts to not when everyone says he should.I for one DO NOT wont gordon brown as pm i did not vote for him and i will not vote for him.

Why doesn't Blair use hi nuclear option?

TB is the democratically elected Prime Minister of this country, with a mandate to govern until May 2010.

As such he should sack the disloyal Brown and all his acolytes and inform the country of his intention to do the job we elected him to.

But he won't because he hasn't got the 'cojones'.

That's quite the crystal ball you have there, Nick. After all yesterday's posturing, as of 3.20pm, we know nothing new.

Gordon still has to find the cojones to mount his frontal assault, whilst Tony is content to sit it out.

If Blair announces a date and triggers a contest before the May elections, he will ensure that the media focusses on the LAbour party and Labour policies in the run up to those elections. It will be a last presentation masterstroke from a leader who has delivered a remarkable number of election successes.

Nick,

Just heard Doug Henderson's statement. You've got to give it to Blair: he prempts the this kind of statement, by in effect calling them childish etc and puts himself on a raised level compared with his attackers.

p.s. john sopel introduced henderson's statement by describing him as an uber brownite (which he is), and then asks Kevin Macguire for his views. However, he doesn't say that Macguire is a brownite as well, hostile to Blair and that it was to him that the memo was leeked on blair's fairwell tour - obviously by a brownite.

Hi Nick
Tony Blair (ever the good lawyer) DID NOT SAY HE WOULD RESIGN AS PM WITHIN THE YEAR - he simply said this would be his last labour party conference.

Since he promised to serve a full term as PM (and likes to keep his word) and since he might well still be able to command the most support amongst MPs in the House - he can simply resign from the Labour party (sacking Gordon for disloyalty at the same time) and run the country as an independent.
- Now that would make Gordon choke!

A lot has been discussed about how the PM will be a lame duck when people know his departure date.

How is this situation different from American politics when the President has to relinquish office after a second term? Surely he would be in the same situation?

People who attack the reporting of the horse race, completely miss the point. There is no neat division between who is running the country and the running of the country itself. Of course it will have a tangible difference if Gordon Brown is running things instead of Tony Blair.

Of course it should be reported.

It's understandable that people will argue that Blair now can't set the agenda for long-term policies and therefore on every issue his critics will claim it's long-term - leading to political stalemate. But Blair's position is arguably now like a US President coming towards the end of his second term. Can anyone shed light on how contentious/long-term policy decisions are handled during the final year of a two-term presidency? Or is the President's relationship with Congress compared to PM and Parliament so different as to make comparisons facile?

After Tony Blair's coyness in not naming George Brown (or anyone else) could it be that he intends to "jump ship" and join David Cameron when he leaves ?

As your 6th point says, politics is never more captivating than when a large number of politicians sense that they may either gain or lose a lot of power. It's very enlightening to see the supposed leaders of our country behaving like rats in a bag...

What Tony Blair says is actually as meaningless as it is worthless. I don't think New Labour as a whole quite realise just how out of step they are with their natural core support.

Take me, I voted Labour at every election - national and local - since 1976 until the second Gulf War. I will never vote Labour again whilst so much as one Blairite remains in Parliament. It isn't just because of the war, it's because of other things as well.

It's because of total reversals to what was said in manifestos, it's because of promises that were not only broken but not even attempted to bring about in the first place, it's about cash-for-questions, it's about being holier-than-thou, it's about thinking that because you're in public office that somehow you're entitled to abuse the system and not have to immediately resign when found out and it's about appaling lack of morals. People who wish to be leaders must lead by example, ESPECIALLY in their private life.

Gordon Brown won't make a jot of difference, the damage is done. It's it's not just me - alll my friends think the same.

So, to all you Labour MPs who might read this I shall ask two basic but key questions at street level for Labour voters:

1. Exactly when will I get my NHS dentist? (no later than... will do)

2. Exactly when are you going to start building more council houses, where, and how many and when will they be ready by?

These are the questions that you are going to be asked next May and at the next General Election. Answer them, in full, and guarentee it. Or face a thoroughly well deserved annihilation.

Nick,
Blair has no credibility, he lost it through the lies over Iraq and his refusal to call for a cease fire in Lebanon. Brown has no credibility either, if he had had the courage to resign before our illegal attack on Iraq he would be PM by now. If he agreed with it it damns him even more.

There are no current candidates who would get my vote, I would like to see someone like Bob Marshall Andrews stand for the leadership.

Jack
Liverpool

Your analysis seems to be pretty spot on. Watching Blair give his statement haltingly, struggling to find words, I felt sorry for the pitiful wretch of a man I saw on the screen. He's not so much a lame duck as a dead duck (apologies to ducks everywhere).
Perhaps now the 麻豆官网首页入口 will be a little less obsequious towards No 10 than it has been post-Hutton (I don't mean you though), and re-assert its independence.

Sorry, Nick. I disagree the focus is about wrestling power from Prime Minister Blair. Yes, it鈥檚 your focus. I have a different one. Personally, I鈥檓 more interested in the policies than any individual, and the broader picture of maturity. For example, I believed the Iraq War was a mistake and the quality of scrutiny showed by Parliament was an embarrassment. Since then, Prime Minister Blair has risen above his mistakes, developed new policies, and is laying the ground for what I believe, and hope, are historic changes that will help Britain become a more enlightened country.

As a country, from Elizabethan England onwards, Britain has defined and advanced itself by war between the classes, between people, and with other nation states. It should be no surprise, then, that industrial relations, political cynicism, and crime are at the high levels they are. By remaining stuck in yesterday, Parliamentarians set a poor leadership example, make bad decisions, and discourage good communication. If they weren鈥檛 trying to burn the Prime Minister, they鈥檇 be warring among themselves or, worse still, leveraging their ego on the people.

I hope the Prime Minister is allowed time to end his Premiership well. By putting respect and responsibility on the agenda he created a focus for improvement of family life, schooling, and work. On a broader front, waking up to the impact of leadership on outcomes, the headline difficulties with social exclusion and immigration are resulting in people of all backgrounds engaging in developing understanding and compassion. By example and opportunity he is helping improve leadership in communities and flattening inequalities.

The boy鈥檚 done well. Let him be.

Jilted John was right all along.

Is this blog Anti-Blair? I think not, and that's coming from a fan. Comment on the Westminster village may seem farce, but that is the subject matter not the comment.

Speaking of which, nice interview with Tony Benn (one of the great idealogical politicians). I think he was too nice to Humphreys and Paxman, but spot on otherwise...

Be it Blair or Brown can they be trusted to look after our interests, and not their own,so much has happened since labour arrived at No 10 is it not time they served those they entered politics for.As for war this country has paid such a high price for loss of life sad to say.The image, of I want what, you have has gone on since or just after Blair and Brown entered Downing street.It just makes one fed up.Think of the country and its people