You think you’ve seen everything, and then Dizzy goes and unearths this Taiwanese news report about Brown and the bullying allegations. The computer dramatisations, from the 35 second mark on, are simply jaw-dropping:
As Pete points out, the longer the bullying story runs the more chance there is that the public sympathise with Brown, as they did over the Jacqui Janes story. Now Ed Balls is playing the sympathy card for his mentor, saying that Brown has been deeply hurt by these false allegations. Whatever next? Damian McBride breaks his retreat in a seminary and says: “Brown’s the loveliest man I’ve met, never hurt a fly guv, honest.” The preposterous and the distasteful hang above this latest twist, but Downing Street’s spin operation remains terrifyingly focussed. Yesterday saw the destruction of Christine Pratt’s credibility – she didn’t deserve such a barracking but most
The sight of two unelected members of the legislature and John Prescott lecturing Andrew Rawnsley about political propriety on Newsnight last night was one of the more surreal moments of the past week. Lord Steel in particular has very little right to the moral high ground as a longstanding member of the board of General Mediterranean Holidings, the company owned by Nadhmi Auchi a British-based Iraqi billionaire convicted of fraud in the French Elf-Aquitaine scandal in 2003. This business of bullying in Downing Street just gets weirder all the time. Whoever allowed the combined might of Downing Street’ spin vultures to swoop down and peck at the bones of the
Much confusion on the digital grapevine, last night, about YouGov’s latest daily tracker poll. Turns out, it doesn’t have the Tories leading by twelve – but, rather, the positions are unchanged from the poll in the Sunday Times. So that’s the Tories on 39 percent, Labour on 33, and the Lib Dems on 17. A six point gap between the two main parties. The poll was conducted between Sunday afternoon and Monday morning – so, after the bullying story broke, but, perhaps, too soon for it to have filtered through to the public consciousness. Even so, Labour will be encouraged by what they see. A below-headline question has more people
The unfortunately named Christine Pratt, her husband and the National Bullying Helpline have been completely demolished by one of the most well co-ordinated spin operations I can recall. The charity’s accounts bear no examination. Two Patrons, Cary Cooper and Mary O’Connor, have resigned – disgusted that Pratt broke the charity’s commitment to confidentiality, as indeed was Ann Widdecombe. The Charities Commission have been called in. She’s flip-flopped on her original claims at least twice: initially suggesting that Gordon Brown was a bully, then insisting he wasn’t and then recalling that he possibly might have been. Plainly, her memory of who calls her and what they say is as leaky as
Ministers are a fickle bunch. It is striking how many have come out in support of Gordon Brown today; they were much more bashful on the afternoon of the Snow Plot. The government has been galvanised and today is a rare glimpse of what a truly united government might resemble. Cynics would intimate that this sudden cohesion validates Rawnsley’s observations, not only about Brown’s swivelled-eyed rages but also his government’s immediate descent into faction after the election that never was. I’m with the cynics. Rawnsley’s more sensational exposes have masked the narrative of disintegration. It is this – as much as the fact that Labour installed unopposed into office an
By way of a response to the comments on my post yesterday, here are some reasons to be cheerful about Cameron and the Tories. The poll lead dropping to six points is indeed a wake-up call, and Cameron probably worked out a while ago that things were going a bit Pete Tong. Indeed (Short the UK), there are signs that he has already started to act. Look at last Monday: three strong election videos, without a politician in sight. The perfect remedy to the Tragedy of Cameron’s Head poster. The policy of allowing management buy-outs of government departments is bold, radical and entirely in keeping with Cameron’s general policy of
Cameron just got the question on Brown and bullying. His reply was well pitched, right tone of voice and all that. But it contained the suggestion that Sir Phillip Mawer, who polices the ministerial code, should be asked to investigate. This is the last thing No 10 wants, it just wants this to go away. But I suspect Cameron has just given the story a nudge along.
As James predicted last night, the ‘Bully boy Brown’ story is now at full steam and will speed on as phone-ins discuss bullying in the workplace. The National Bullying Helpline’s intervention, ethically dubious in view of the charity’s supposed confidentiality, has negated Labour’s damage limitation strategy. Both Peter Mandelson’s line that Brown is a passionate and demanding man and the PR campaign to soften Brown’s image have been blown clear out of the water. Brown has made significant progress recently: David Cameron’s personal ratings have halved since September. That brief resurgence will be reversed as this story rolls. The Sun’s hot-headed frontpage says it all. Now is the time
Two seriously worrying polls for the Conservatives today. One is a Sunday Times/YouGov poll, showing a Labour recovery reducing the Tory lead to six points well into hung parliament territory and the lowest since December 2008. The other is a PoliticsHome poll in the News of the World, according to which: Cameron’s approval rate has been steadily falling, and Brown’s similtaneously rising – the difference between them has halved, in recent months, from 90 points to 45 points. If the election is a 39-33 split, then the Tories end up with just ten more seats than Labour and are dependent on coalition with the LibDems. A result like this, against
The question tonight is: which piece of bad news will make the biggest impact? The bad news for the Tories, or the bad news for Labour? Let’s take the second one first. I’m referring, of course, to the first installment in Andrew Rawnsley’s revelations about Gordon Brown. ConHome have already published some snippets – click here – and they give you plenty of juice for your buck. Not only are there the expected allegations about Brown hitting his staff (much of which seems to have been covered in the Mail on Sunday a couple of weeks ago), but Rawsley also reveals that the Cabinet Secretary, Gus O’Donnell, investigated and reprimanded
“I’m not perfect” Gordon Brown said in his speech today – knowing that, in a couple of hours, we’ll hear details of the many ways he is not perfect, when the first extracts of Andrew Rawnsley’s book are published. He has got his defence in early on Channel Four news. Here is a transcript: Q: You know tomorrow there are going to be a whole slew of new allegations being made by Andrew Rawnsley, so let’s hear about you at work. Do you get angry at your staff? Do you swear at them? Do you throw things? GORDON BROWN: If I get angry, I get angry with myself. Q: Do
David Cameron is a man for all seasons. The Bullingdon Club man told the men’s mag, Shortlist, how he takes a glug of Guinness, steps up to the oche, shoots 180 and then retires to watch the seemingly interminable Lark Rise to Candleford. He also likes pottering around his garden dispensing Miracle Grow with liberal conservative largesse. So it’s only fitting that the Leader of the Opposition will appear on housewives’ favourite, gardener and erotic novelist Alan Titchmarsh’s daytime TV show. This is a PR masterstroke. Brown has benefitted from his interviews with Piers Morgan and Tesco magazine, not in the polls but in terms of perceptions. Cameron will strike at undecided and reluctant
Move along, now – there’s nothing to see here. Or rather, reading Gordon Brown’s Big Speech, there’s nothing that you hadn’t already seen in the papers, or that you wouldn’t have expected to see anyway. The four election themes got a mention. Labour’s record in government was pushed and promoted to the point of absurdity. Words like “new”, “fair” and “change” were flung around like so much confetti. And no election date was given. No alarms, no surprises. More than anything, Brown set about attacking the Tories on every conceivable level. He caricatured Cameron & Co. as a party of privilege and wealth, who are more concerned about fox-hunting than
So now we know. Labour’s election slogan is A future fair for all. And – as various folk, including Alex, have pointed out – it’s kinda screwy. As in, “we’re all going to The Future Fair” kinda screwy. So don’t expect it to catch on. Unless, of course, there really are bright lights, big wheels and rollercoasters on offer. The slogan kickstarts a feverish weekend of activity. Brown is going to set out the main themes of Labour’s campaign. The Tories might try to sabotage it all. And we may, possibly, perhaps, find out what the election date is. Stay tuned, so to speak. P.S. I wouldn’t be too surprised
There’s an interview with Gordon Brown today in the Mirror about his relationship with his mother. As you might expect given the subject, it is hardly an interrogation. Indeed, it manages to make Piers Morgan’s questions to him resemble the final part of the Frost Nixon interview. But what caught my eye was this note at the end, “This article appears in Tesco magazine, published by Cedar Communications Ltd. The magazine is available in store from March 1.” Tesco magazine isn’t small beer. Its circulation is more than five and a half million and data shows that more women read it than any other magazine. To Brown, the attraction of
Has Alastair Campbell lost his touch? In his heyday, Labour’s spin was mesmeric, with the godlike Campbell blowing smoke and manipulating mirrors. Now their tactics are as obvious as Britney Spears. Having prepared the ground with Piers Morgan last weekend, Brown will attempt to divert attention from the dreadful state of the economy; his government’s collusion in torture; the steady increase of casualties in Afghanistan; the Labour party having a slanging match before the Chilcot Inquiry; Argentine posturing; James Purnell’s awkwardly timed resignation; and indeed the spectacle of Brown himself doing a Derek and Clive skit in the nude, which, if you want to make eating Sunday breakfast impossible, will
The news that James Purnell is to stand down is a shock. It is clear that Purnell was disenchanted with Brown’s continued leadership and with the direction in which the Labour party was heading. Purnell was marginalised in parliament and his much vaunted alliance with John Cruddas came to nothing. Plainly, he believes that he can exert more influence outside the parliamentary Labour party than within it. The Tories stole the limelight this week with their commitment to public sector co-operatives; Purnell’s response fell flat, caught in the contradictory statist language that even the most uber-Blairites cannot escape. Purnell’s journey into the wilderness is the firmest evidence that the Conservatives
Earlier this week I asked what Obama’s experience could teach a Cameron government. At the same time, there has been a well-argued debate in The Times about whether the Tories should go negative or not. There is one point where the two issues converge – and that is in how a newly-elected government should deal with the country’s economic legacy. Once in power, a Tory government will be tempted to be optimistic, to point to the sunny uplands. General Colin Powell said “positive thinking is a force multiplier” and the Cameron team come across as natural adherents to this viewpoint. There is also the fact that the modern Tory agenda
Labour have certainly come out of the traps snarling and gnashing this morning. For one, they’re making the most of two letters in the FT, signed by 60 economists, which ostensibly support their position on the public finances. And then there’s Gordon Brown’s speech to European leaders, in which he implores them to tackle the “hatred” of “the right”. Naturally, by “the right”, he means “David Cameron”. It’s those letters which really grab the attention, though. Not really because of what they say, or who has signed them, but because they’re suggestive of how the debate over the public finances is going to go. Yep, the Tories get 20 economists