Gordon brown

According to the Spectator’s literary editor, Peter Mandelson wrote the most boring book review ever published by the Spectator. I imagine he did. You don’t read the Mandelson memoir; you wade through it in leaking gum boots. The lack of illumination is nothing compared to the faceless prose. Mandelson cannot evoke the personality of Alan Clark’s or Chris Mullin’s diaries. Form is crucial in that memoirs justify and diaries observe. Clark’s love of Mrs Thatcher and his self-importance match Mandelson’s love of Blair and his preening conceit that there was a ‘Third Man’ at the heart of New Labour’s tenure in office – Mandelson spent most of it in exile.

As Peter Mandelson has us knee-deep in Kremlinology already, it’s worth pointing out this insight from Mary Ann Sieghart in the Independent: ‘It was quite clear in 2008 and 2009 that Brown was going to lead Labour to defeat, whereas a messy leadership contest was by no means certain ….  Mandelson by then knew that Labour would lose under Brown. ‘Surely you know we can’t win with Gordon as leader?’ a colleague asked him last year. To which the reply was, ‘Do you think I’m mad? Do you think I don’t realise that?’ But Mandelson was convinced that Labour couldn’t win a majority under any leader. His big strategic mistake

Oh joy, Labour are at war again.  The animosities which have largely been kept in check since the election are now piercing through to the surface again – and it’s all thanks to Peter Mandelson’s memoirs.  After the ennobled one’s insights about Gordon and Tony in the Times yesterday, Charlie Whelan is shooting back from the pages of the Sunday Telegraph.  And, elsewhere, Brown is said to have told friends that “this is going to be a very difficult time for me.”  Yep, it’s just like the glory days of last summer. Amid all this, there’s a sense that Mandelson and David Miliband have coordinated their efforts to trash Brown

John Rentoul, who knows a successful Labour leader when he sees one, is having palpitations about David Miliband’s latest hustings speech. Everyone seems to be in fact. I’ve taken a look, following the Berkeleian principle that if everyone thinks something is important it invariably is. It’s a good speech. At last, one of the Labour leadership contenders has attacked Gordon Brown. Under Gordon Brown, Miliband argues, Labour’s failings, spin and high-handedness intensified. An expression about Sherlock and excrement comes to mind, but the first stage in a party’s renewal is to admit defeat, acknowledge failure and offer contrition. David Miliband has begun that process, which can only serve him well.

John Redwood has written a typically thoughtful piece, questioning the government’s arch cuts rhetoric. He writes: ‘Ministers would be wise to tone down the rhetoric of massive cuts. They need to mobilise, energise and reform the public services. Labour made clear in their marathon moan in the Commons yesterday into the early hours of this morning that they are out to talk the economy down, highlight alleged huge cuts in jobs and services and campaign with the Unions against sensible change. The government needs to be smart and careful in its choice of words to bring about the improvements in quality and performance needed.’ Ministers sound terse and defensive at

There are plenty of details for Budget-spotters to look out for tomorrow, but among the most important is just how far Osborne reaches into the future.  The current expectation in Westminster is that he will offer quite a few glimpses into the long-term.  A possible commitment to reduce the main rate of corporation tax to 20 percent over the next five years, perhaps.  Or similar provisions for making the first £10,000 of income tax-free. There are, of course, economic and political motives behind this.  Economically, the plan will be to reassure the markets that the coalition has a deliberate plan which extends beyond the next few months (which was a

Well done David Miliband, for writing an article in the Guardian that is free of wonkery and abstractions. Miliband deserves applause for being the first Labour leadership contender to address public spending cuts with reasoned analysis, not ideological retorts. Also, he is right to urge George Osborne not to sell the public stakes in RBS and Lloyds at a bargain price. But his central thesis merits censure. He perverts recent history to fit an avowedly left-wing analysis of public spending. Miliband writes: ‘Let’s take the deficit argument head on. We need to remember what the Tories want the country to forget: it was falling tax receipts – not rising spending

A couple of weeks on holiday, and there’s plenty to catch up on.  First, though, George Osborne’s speech to Mansion House yesterday evening.  In terms of substance, it was fairly radical stuff.  And it’s encouraging that so many of the Tories’ solid plans for reforming the financial regulatory system have survived the coalition process.  But, really, it was one simple, little sentence which jumped out at me.  This: “Debt [is] set to still rise even at the end of this five year Parliament.” “So what?” you may be thinking, “we knew that already.”  Ah, yes, but we’ve rarely heard a politician be quite so upfront about our debt position before

I had expected Alistair Darling to have slumped off to spend more time with his memoirs after the election, but here he is, fists aloft, fighting the government. About the only member of the Labour front bench effectively doing so. He has a point. The economy is looking better than expected, not worse – as David Cameron has been pretending. Each new forecast for the deficit seems to give a less ghastly picture. British house prices are on the rebound. And when the Office of Budget Responsibility announces its forecasts on Monday, it is likely to give a better picture than that in Darling’s budget. Already Darling is telling the

Andrew Neil interviews Peter Hain for this week’s BBC Straight Talk. Mastering the obvious, Hain argues that Duffygate cost Labour dear: ‘PH:  The damaging incident of course was the Duffygate incident. AN:  In Rochdale, the old aged pensioner? PH:  In Rochdale, and that had a palpable effect.  I think we were just beginning to get a bit of traction – not necessarily to win but possibly to be the biggest party in the election – and that was a real hammer blow, and everybody knew it. AN:  You really think that affected the public’s perception of the then Prime Minister? PH:  I do, because I think people had started, not

A few years ago, when I was serving with the Grenadier Guards in Iraq, I was part of a team tasked with looking after the visiting Secretary of State. There were five Defence Secretaries during my short spell in the army – a sign, perhaps, of the lack of attention the last government paid to the armed forces. Some were impressive, some less so. One was famous for falling asleep during briefings, but the one I was accompanying in Basra was wide awake. He wished to carry out of the most important missions facing Cabinet members in a warzone: conduct an interview with the Today programme on BBC Radio Four.