Special adviser
Well well.
Downing Street has just announced a major new appointment - the first I sense of more to come. The former chief executive of the regulator OFCOM Stephen Carter (who's currently chief executive of Brunswick Group) has been appointed to the new post of chief of strategy and principal advisor to the prime minister.
Carter will be a special adviser - in other words he's a party appointment not a civil service one - but he will not have the powers to order around civil servants that were granted to Tony Blair's chief of staff, Jonathan Powell or his spin doctor, Alastair Campbell. Carter has, however, got a pretty big sounding title, was appointed by Gordon Brown personally and will report directly to him so civil servants may wish to listen to what he has to say.
Team Brown says that Carter's job will be to hone the political strategy and sharpen the message. There is, I'm told, another vital job that needs doing. Gordon Brown needs someone to take decisions when he's not available and who can say to his face "No prime minister, don't do that".
Will Carter be the man for that job or will others have to follow?
Update 19:00 - Stephen Carter has been hired, I'm told by one well placed adviser, to be Gordon Brown's 'back of the car man' - i.e. someone who can grab a few minutes with the boss on the way to an event and take him through a list of 10 pressing political decisions. In addition, the hope is that Brown and his aides will trust Carter to take those decisions when the PM is simply too busy to take them himself.
Carter has no political background, he was not a member of the Labour Party when he got this job (although he had been in the past) and he only met the prime minister in the last few weeks. He's been hired for his experience of developing a strategy and a message when an ad-man at JWT, and running large organisations in the public and private sectors; the cable firm NTL, the regulator OFCOM and Brunswick.
The talk is that the boss of Brunswick, Alan Parker, brought the two men together. Parker once employed Sarah Brown at Brunswick and she used the company's HQ to house an office for her charitable concerns. It's amusing to note that Carter told The Times that he'd gone to Brunswick, and turned down a move to become chief exec of ITV, because, "he would not be exposed to the same public scrutiny as he has been in previous jobs"! What changed Stephen?
I'm 
Comments
Did you mean "take decisions when he's not available" or "take decisions when Gordon can't stop dithering and make his mind up"?
The Prime Minister may benefit from assistance with polish and communication. It would help balance his personality and help put across a more soundly judged focus and attitude. I would expect Stephen Carter to take a very low key but active role. If he has a sense of shared vision with the Prime Minister it will be a winning combination. The historical data on strong personality types like this suggests the government will become an unstoppable machine.
Ideally, Harriet Harman would fill a similar role in public but her critical thinking is a bit neglected and she's hit a few bum notes since taking on the deputy leadership. She's way to fuzzy and erratic to be credible or stable. Not saying she's evil or nasty, just that she's a bit lightweight and drifted a bit too far off the path. As a self-styled leader and role model she's a bit of a disappointment, the Windows Vista of politics to Gordon Brown's OS X.
I might be jumping to conclusions but, I think, Nick's question about whether Stephen Carter is the real deal or will be followed up by someone a bit more hardcore is pretty shrewd. My knee-jerk opinion is that he probably isn't the man for the key role of hitman. I just can't get over the impression he's a bit lightweight and one of the usual suspects. I think, someone with a bit more edge and less predictability would be a better choice.
Watch this space, or something...
Nick, if what you imply is correct then your comments raise some important questions for all of us.
If GB is "not available" then it should not be an unelected, unaccountable Labour Party Special Advisor who makes decisions. What is the purpose of his Deputy or Cabinet Ministers?
As to saying "No Prime Minister....", I would have thought that it should be an appropriate Cabinet Minister (or the Cabinet as a whole if the item were non-specific) - or doesn't he trust any of them to tell him the truth, have the strength of character to stand up to him or deal with reality?
sorry Nick, you are too subtle. Who is paying for him? Us or New Labour ?
The thing that concerns me is that all these 'special advisers' - along with the veritable army of 'ministers' that we have now (is anyone on the government benches not a minister..?) all need PAYING - and handsomely at that! Is government so complex these days that these posts are all necessary..? Only the other day (the Rugby Network Rail debacle) we had the Rail Minister on the telly (presumably there is also a Trains Minister and a Stations Minister - if not actually a Points Minister and a Signals Minister)....
All these ministerial posts attract a salary of 拢100000 plus benefits - do we know the going rate for a 'Special Adviser'..?
Care to probe this matter on behalf of us hard-pressed taxpayers, Nick..?
From Quango to 'corporate communications' to 'political appointment. Nice cosy world these people live in.
First of a new batch of rats to join a sinking ship?
one is reminded of Mark Twain:
"Suppose you were an idiot and suppose you were a member of Congress; but I repeat myself"
Chief of strategy and principal advisor... take decisions when the PM's not available and be able to say "No Prime Minister"... Surely these are the job of the Cabinet Secretary. Are there any civil servants at all left in No 10?
I've only been out of the country for a few months, so I think I can still translate:
"Job will be to hone the political strategy and sharpen the message", that means 'spin', doesn't it Nick??
Quote:" Gordon Brown needs someone to take decisions
when he's not available and who can say to his face No prime
minister, don't do that'. "
Wasn't that person Tony Blair?
So now we have two people who can order a review of policy instead of actually solving problems. Fabulous! One point: in a world free from spin, what do these special advisors do to earn their wonga? The horrible Campbell, odious as he was (and probably still is) made a very clear contribution to Tony's success. I wonder what value Gordon is going to get.
The "who pays" comment poses an interesting question. A political role must surely come out of Labour coffers, unless persuading the population that the government is great is deemed a worthwhile use of our tax pennies. As it's Gordon controlling the purse strings this is probably a really stoopid point to make of course. MPs have never been averse to spending our money to their own ends in the past and our frugal PM will I'm sure prove no different.
Surely a general election would give the entire population the chance to say "No prime minister, don't do that"?
Peter Campbell is a politics undergraduate at the University of York and Deputy Politics Editor of York student newspaper 鈥淣ouse鈥.
Ah, it's nice to have you back, Nick, Christmas was very dull without a regular dose of political gossip and slagging off of GB. When do you think he will realise that nobody wants him and his tired ideas, and that it's actually undemocratic to carry on forcing them on the British public without his own mandate?
Who pays? You'll be glad to know it will be the Labour Party. Which of course given that he will probably be on over 100k (and that's a conservative estimate) will no doubt please the finance director and fundraising team there.
So yet another expensive spin doctor to "sharpen the message", i.e. distort the truth, gloss over the cracks, and put style over substance.
I would support any party who proposed to do away with these cancerous PR people, get back to basics, and focus on simply doing the job they're paid to do.
Good news i think. For too long the Brown government has allowed Cameron, who still seems to me to be an upper crust lightweight, to exploit some pretty shabby communication failings. With the right back up i feel Brown can come back and still win the next election.
Labour supporter gets plum job - shock, horror.
Sorry, Nick - you'll have to excuse the way my mind works...
I just had this vision of the end of the meeting at which this appointment was discussed.. Gordon Brown saying:
'Get Carter'....
Nick,
Would it be reasonable to suspect from this appointment of Carter to such a key Labour party post that that when Carter was appointed to OFCOM, that it was an explicitly party political appointment, rather than choosing the best man for the job?
If it is indeed plausible that Carter's appointment to OFCOM was party political, then should we expect more Labour skeletons to be found in the OFCOM closet?
Brown promised us a post-spin vision free from spin.
Yeh, right.
Nick
I have to say I'm amazed at this. Apparently New Labour is so devoid of talent and people Mr Brown respects that he's had to pull in someone from the private sector to be Deputy Prime Minister and/or Cabinet Secretary. And how do we vote about this chap if he takes the wrong decision?
Clearly there is precedent from the Blair era but this feels like something rather different. How do you think this compares to people previous PMs have brought in?
I was looking at my last comment and was probably a bit hard on Stephen Carter. It's pretty clear the guy is a solid performer and has a clue about communication. Having someone of his quality around to carry some of the load of making sure policy is credible and communicated well is useful. Does anyone complaining about his appointment want to see broken policy and crossed wires? If you don't, that's the impression you're giving. Get a grip.
Nick,
In the absence of being able to do something positive, this government opts instead to give the appearance of doing something, anything. When it goes wrong, the past appointment becomes the excuse and is shuffled off by a 'hitman'. Quite what this has to do with taking real decisions that are designed for the long term, only Gordon and Charles appear to know.
I would suggest that unless and until the government comes forward with sound ideas and solutions to existing problems, we ignore what they are saying. We might as well treat them the way they treat us.
All the best.
Nick since Stephen Carter is a Party Appointment and not a Civil Service Appointment. Who pays his salary the Labour Party or the Tax-payer?
Can anybody else answer this please?