Political fight-back

The golden goalpost will be moved again.

It's already been moved so far that it's out of the football field (staying with your football analogy from earlier).

No-one seriously thinks that PFI and public sector pensions are not national debt, do they? Debt/gbp is well above 40%.

It is rather looking as if you are right that the government has reached the point of no return, and will have little chance of winning the next election. IF the global downturn isn't as bad as it might be, and IF Brown can show that the UK has weathered the storm (typhoon more like) better than other comparable countries (which seems quite a likely outcome) then he just might achieve the sort of come-back that Major managed in '92. Remember Kinnock's triumphalism just a week before that election?

But for the terrible consequences for the country of a return of a Tory government led by such masters of flim-flam as Cameron and Osborne, it would almost be worth seeing them in power just to watch their comedic antics when faced with the realities of 24-hour 'news' and the tectonic shifts in global economic power that we are facing.

The Prime Minister talked about buying new homes to rent out to first time buyers. How can the Government do this when they only have a paltry £100m margin?

The other very important point is that presumably, he would pay the going rate for these homes, when the housing market is on a downward spiral and first time buyers will be able to afford to buy their own homes anyway. Just what IS this man playing at?

I didn't believe I could be any more astounded by Gordon Brown, but I am certainly astounded today by his sheer arrogance.

He now has the temerity in the John Humphreys interview to suggest that the emergency mini-budget (for that is what it was) was not to dig him out of a political hole and win an election in Crewe, but part of a carefully thought out effort of reflation coordinated with the rest of the international community...

Just how stupid does this guy think the rest of us are?

"This is partly they're own fault"

Do you have a sub-editor?

I don't think the electorate will reward Labour with another term no matter what they do now. They are not fools and know they have been lied to and treated with contempt.

Brown's stubborn (pigheaded?) determination to push through 42 days in the face of all the evidence and expert advice shows a man who does not posess the right qualities of leadership.

And reclassification of cannabis back to class B (again in the face of all the evidence and expert advice) supports the contention that this is being done for political reasons rather than the good of the British people.

I for one don't want a Tory government. But I'd rather have that than the current shower. So bring it on, Mr Brown - not that you will, you're far too afraid of the will of the people to call an election.

When an election finally does occur, which I suspect will be at or almost at the last possible date, we won't say a Churchillian "thanks you and good bye". rather like Cromwell it will be: "Depart, I say; and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go!"

--- "I'll do it again" he says suggesting that he's managed our economy through times like this before. ---

I really do hope he won't do it again.

• Another raid on pensions?
• Sell off other assets, like gold, below their true value?
• Chuck much more money into public services than they can usefully absorb?
• Continue to enlarge the public sector?
• Encourage more large companies to move out of the UK?
• Attack small businesses even harder with constricting red tape and legislation that dissuades them from employing people?
• Hugely increase long term national debt?

I am under no illusions: Brown has 'mis-managed' the economy.

We deserve a General Election.

Now.

Nick, you're last sentence was wrong, it'll just be goodbye, there'll be no thank you.

Oil and food inflation could be caused by the fact that floods have destroyed crops. This flooding is probably caused by global warming. Which is partly caused by people using too much oil. The price of which is going up because apparently people will probably pay what ever it takes because of their addiction to the stuff. Some people even volunteer to use excessive amounts of the stuff in vehicles unsuitable for the road. To try increase their 'status'. It doesn't! This fact that oil companies can charge what they like. has increased the price of fuel. So farmers and retailers have to pay more for their vehicles. adding to their costs. adding to the food inflation. Selfish 'Top Gear' Man is partly at fault for inflation. How does that square up with Dave's green credentials?
These people have the gaul to complain about the price of fuel. When they deliberately pointlessly use too much.

To badgercourage (post 6):

Seeing as two thirds of people who voted last time didn't vote for Labour, you could argue the electorate didn't reward them power last time either, rather it's thanks to our ridiculous electoral system.

Note the complete absence of Lords' or electoral reform in the utterly timid 'Constitutional Renewal Bill' announced yesterday as part of the pre-mini-pre-queens-speech-pre-report.

Maybe a move to a more proportional system is the only way Brown can keep his job, albeit in coalition with whoever!

In my humble opinion, most English posters on this blog simply can't or won't understand that the political tectonic plates in this island of Britain are shifting in a profound way, which will impact us all.

Over-arching all of these discussions is the political timetable.

There will be a General Election at latest in 2010.

The Tories will probably gain a working majority.

The governing SNP in Scotland will hold their referendum on full independence, will I believe will be a 'yes' vote.

Everything else politically speaking, is predicated upon this timetable.

Gordon Brown has the great misfortune to be PM at the dying fag-end of the political entity known as Britain.

I am sure he knows that but cannot do anything to forestall it any longer.

So Super Bean can fix it?

This is unbelievable.

Who created the 10% tax band making the tax system more complicated?

Who abolished the 10% tax band to make the tax system less complicated?

Who couldn't work out who was going to be hit? (low paid part time single workers who presumably were those that were to benefit when it was introduced?) Someone must have memory loss!

Who has then borrowed £2.7 bln to get himself out of a hole of his own making? Who has to pay back this money?

Who has lost millions in a highly complicated unmanageable tax credit scheme?

Who sold our gold reserves at knock down prices?

Who has dithered about nuclear power stations?

Who has destroyed pensions by taxing them to the tune of £5 bln each year?

Which government has done more to facilitate the break up of the UK?

Economic prudence? Who really believes inflation has been 2%? Only people like Bean who live in TV studios and the underground bunker in Downing St.

Vision? After 10 years he has had another year to think about it and still has no vision other than to admit 'mistakes'.

So Nick when are your interviews going to deal with the real record of this Govt?

Labour's ideas were never thought through. They have taxed and wasted.

Another chance?

I wonder whether Crewe will see Bean talking to 'ordinary people on the street'?

Reshuffle anyone?

Wow ! that was a set of exciting announcements from the dear leader for the draft Queen's speech.

300m GBP to buy or share ownership of a few houses. Pales into insignificance compared to the market revaluation of 5 - 10% about to hit the streets or indeed the needless billions given away on the 10p tax compensation.

Don't most schools have one or more parent governors ?

Immigrants from the EU have the right to live and work in the UK...if they are not from the EU what happens if they fail their exams. Many economic immigrants are probably trying their best to learn English anyway.

I could go on but I don't think this is going to make a difference in Crewe on 22 May.

Nick

To be honest, I thought the Today programme got more out of the PM than your interview did.

GB said that it was complex because "tax is on individuals" and "benefits are on households"... well who is responsible for that complexity?? (If you genuinely beleive that it is that complex)

What was his 'mistake' - in clear terms?? he never actually said! To me it sounds like it was to write a budget without ensuring he had sufficient information to do so -- surely a fatal mistake for any minister. And this after 10 years in post... What else are they 'guessing' instead of researching?

He said that the allowance change was to inject more money in to the economy (he did not say it was to compensate the 10p losers) - so on what basis were these beneficiarys of his largess chosen?

If more money is to be injected (he said that other countries were doing so), then is he now a supporter of tax-cuts (rather than state spending) to get the economy going ?!

Given the sparcity of governmental interviews, I think this was a very poor showing - you seem way too cosy...

If the PM is now stepping in to look after the economy what does that mean for Alistair Darling? It's hardly a vote of confidence. As I posted yesterday the cabinet needs an urgent reshuffle to get the right pegs in the right holes. Gordon Brown in assuming personal responsability is unprudently expending personal political capital he just doesn't have. He doesn't really have any big hitters to share the burden.

He presided over a decade of unprecedented global growth, taxed and spent like never before and didnt put a bean away for a rainy day.

So hes going to do that again is he ?

Given he supposing didn't see the 10p impact, the forecast on inflation appear to be way wrong.

He has borrowed and borrowed which is a far cry from prudence he claimed.

The announcements yesterday was ambitious no almost impossible without tax rises, given the narrow margin the government has to work with.

To me and i suspect others what ever he say is just spin.

He has so little credibility now he could not convince most that snow melts.

His blustering is starting to remind me of the Muhammad Saeed al-Sahaf (Iraqi Information Minister) statements during the final days of the Iraq war.

I am beginning to understand how others have become very cynical about Politicans (in general).

I watch this Administration do practically anything to ensure their Political survival, and get the feeling that this is not at all the same as running the Country properly.

GM got a whole load of Ad folk in 10 DS, and when he says "I can heal you" or similar, it makes me shudder and question my own judgement / belief in the good nature of Others.

I had this with TB, who I thought brought the office of the PM into disrepute. Today I feel as though GB is bringing politics as a whole down with him.

It makes me very uncomfortable to think that they are blatantly manipulating us, for their own gain. It also makes me fear that others can't see this, and will be seduced.

Not good.

Finbin (post 10)

I was quoting Nick's blog but yes, I should have put "reward" in quotation marks. No government since 1945 has been returned with a majority of the vote.

As well as upper house reform Brown's speech was devoid of any other content even remotely related for making things fairer.

This is a government that is pushing ahead with more privatisation in the NHS; forcing through the shutting down rural post offices to make relatively tiny savings (£150m); colluding with covert selection in schools and handing them over to religious zealots; continuing to support an illegal war and occupation in Iraq, where do you stop?

It will be interesting if the election delivers a hung Parliament - which I suspect is a real possibility given the size of majority that has to be overcome and the fact that it will still be a UK election then (maybe the last?) - whether we will get a Tory / Lib Dem coalition, a Labour / Lib Dem coalition or a further election a few months later.

Either way G Brown won't be involved, I hope.

It should be, 'partly their own fault', not 'partly they're own fault'. Please change it - it is embarrassing.

JohnConstable is right (I have been bleating on about this for weeks too) and I think if we are less than five years from a UK break up we need to do our thinking NOW!

Browns 10p tax change was in the "iron chancellor/iron brain acts now... " and thinks later.

If we do the same with the demise of the UK its going to be a disaster.

We need well thought out options to cover all eventualities and an informed general public.

"This is partly they're own fault - they have very little money to spend because their at the outer limits of what even they believe is prudent borrowing."

Oops! Not one, but two incorrect spellings of the words 'they're' and 'their'!

I'm more concerned about the police state that is slowly and quietly being put together with ID cards, 42 days' detention and the rest.

We've survived recessions and financial mismanagement before and recovered, but a police state is much more difficult to reverse once it becomes established. The only positive side to the present set of woes is that it makes it more likely that we will have a change in government next time.

If we could get MP's to stand because they really wanted to help the country, its people, and not themselves we really would be on to a winner.

Sadly, I think that day will never come.

Why is it that Gordon claims credit for the economic prosperity he inherited and harvested, yet blames the "Global credit-crunch" for the economy he dropped in the lap of his chancellor?

He told us he'd abolished boom and bust - he was wrong....again.

Just go....

It's not the PM's fault that food, energy has rocketed or that we are experiencing a credit squeeze.We can't blame him for that. But given the fact that he been on a 10 year spending binge funded by huge amounts of borrowing and crippling taxes, it certainly is his fault that the country has no money left in the coffers.

The worst part about it all is that given the amount "invested" in public services we should have the best health service, education, armed forces, police, etc, in the world.

Instead we are paying first world tax for third world services, so my question is; where on earth has all our money gone?

In 1997, Labour stated that they would adhere to the previous Tory government's fiscal rules for 3 years. Broadly speaking they did so. Times seemed good and the economy prospered throughout the Blair years - or so it seemed at the time.

Now Gordon Brown has the gall to claim the credit for that prosperity! He and Blair realised that "middle England" would only vote for them if they thought that New Labour were the Tories in disguise. He knew that, despite the then Tory government being massively unpopular, they were actually leaving him a golden legacy. When the global economy took off, Brown claimed the country's share of it for himself - claimed that it was largely of his own making.

His attitude now, "I can do it again!" is hollow and worthless. It wasn't him who did it in the first place. The fact that he seems to couple this with a contradictory "Not me, guv" unwillingness to accept responsibility for what he now says are global problems, is worthy only of derision.

Alternatively, If it was he who created the boom we have just had over the past few years (while all the time declaiming arrogantly "No return to boom and bust!"), it was also he who created the bust we now see around us. He cannot have it both ways.

Gordon brown's latest quote "I think I can steer this economy through difficult times" should be more like "I think I can steer this economy into difficult times", because that's what he's been doing the last 11 years.

"I can save the economy again" he says apparently; oh dear, who broke it in the first place then given that you've been running it for 11 years Gordon? Oh yes, that's right; it's all the americans' fault and the fact that there's no money in the government kitty has nothing to do with the fact that you blew it all when there was a global boom.

Everything he says just makes my blood boil.

Umm If "Great Gordon" is going to handle this "downturn" what exactly does the Chancellor do?

Isn't Gordon’s' Job to manage the country and Alistair's Job to manage the economy?

Just a thought....

I noticed that in Nick Robinson’s interview Gordon expressed a fumbled desire to “deny the terrorists the oxygen of publicity” (by having to rush through emergency legislation in exceptional circumstances). He was thereby quoting Margaret Thatcher who used this terminology (grammatically) to prevent Sinn Fein giving interviews on the BBC etc. What do we draw from this? He’s a Margaret Thatcher fan? Does he agree with her position that certain people’s ideas should not be publicly aired?

"The Fightback" shows an enormous amount of naviety in thinking they can get swing voters back on side.

I take offense at the need to create shared equity schemes for housing on the basis of 2 points:

1.) It is hand wringing from a government that fails to realise that we want to own a home, not half of a home, or three quarters, this is down to a distinct lack of foresight on their part with regards to planning regulations and no incentives to build housing where people want to live. Gorden, sort it out, we don't want help to do it, we want to do it ourselves and not have to rely on Labour's "Charity"

2.) It's an encouragement to the most financially vunerable to go out and buy a house when prices are extortionate, so Labour can turn round to the comfortable middle classes who bought a second house to rent as an investment (Cheers Tony, hope that flat in Bristol is working out for you?) and say "look house prices aren't falling, we're working to help you keep that nice tidy profit you made against the next generation"

Seriously, good job Gorden, you make the Conservatives actually look like the party that cares.

Why are these UGC sites turning into a mass of party political broadcasts. Sometimes Labour but a massive majority Conservative.

I am getting quite fed up that the future of this country depends on weak news organisations with weak(What do you want me to think?) reporters pandering to its User Generated Content. Which at the moment resembles The User Generated Content you might find in an Unflushed toilet.
These sites are completely dominated by Conservative 'Points of View' stereotypes who have always held the steering wheel of the BBC.
Not everyone is salivating at the prospect of a Conservative revival. Like Nick Robinson, Andrew Neil and Robert Peston. Sensationalist hacks should move on to the Busty Beverley tabloids.

Nick saw the interview above after commenting.

To me he does not "get it" about his (alleged) relationship with the public.

Is he Mr. Bean or maybe Marie Antionette.

It sounded like : "I am the Iron Chancellor ...the people love me... 11 budgets ..... Let them eat cake!".

In fairness she was apparently stitched up and never said " Let them eat cake".

He appointed an investment banker to look into incapacity benefit so with all of these bankers working for government (General Secretary anybody?) he should have had a good view of the then impending sub-prime credit crisis and didn't. So an investment banker tells us about fraud. As somebody who had to attend an ATOS health check to verify I was not faking a heart bypass(?) I was unimpressed by the bankers assessment and strategy (why spend money on checking on people after serious hospital treatment).New Labour being "friendly" with private enterprise again?
Now we are bailing out investment banks for billions. The wisdom of private enterprise informing government?

He has talked the talk, and alienated friend and foe in the process, and I don't see the walk - except to utter, utter defeat. We haven't even had the result of the Abrahams/funding case.

They're behind you Gordon. Right behind you, soon be over. Probably after Crewe.

I heard GB being interviewed on Radio 4 this morning. Whenever John Humphrys asked him even a remotely difficult question, he completely failed to answer it.

And politicians wonder why the rest of us don't trust them as far as we could spit.

#31. Annielist wrote: "Does he agree with [the] position that certain people?s ideas should not be publicly aired? "

Of course he does;

Frank Fields
Cherie Booth
Lord Levy
David Cameron ...

In fact !(Gordon Brown) sums it up mathematicaly!

To respond to dhwilkinson (#33), I suspect that if this was being written in 1996 you'd be getting a similar bias the other way. We've had two recent demonstrations that a government left in power for too long tends to end up corrupt and self-serving, ignoring the real needs of the electorate. Your comment amuses me because the BBC has traditionally been accused of having a left-wing bias and here you are accusing it of a right-wing bias.

re: post 33
ah, but the key is that it's a public forum, so pro-labour/pro-gordon people can also contribute; the fact that only a handful of pro-labour/pro-gordon comments ever get posted means that most people don't like labour/gordon, or that most people don't think labour/gordon is worth standing up for.

I'd personally like to politically bash any party that makes a mess of things; at the moment it's labour in power so they're the ones doing all the messing.

Gordon Brown just stole most of the tory plans in his recent draft queen's speech, so to say that the tories don't have any alternative policies would be wrong. Gordon brown just steals the ideas for political gain, and then bins them via endless reviews that never go anywhere and which dilute/distort the original point.

#33 dhwilkinson - hmm, not so sure it is as black and whte as that. Seems to me there are a large number of people posting on these blogs who would view themselves as traditionally Labour, but who are incensed at the activities of this government. It's too easy to dismiss it all as some sort of Tory propoganda machine.

StormWarden wrote: "I'm more concerned about the police state that is slowly and quietly being put together with ID cards, 42 days' detention and the rest."

Exactly! Gordon Brown has such a low opinion of us that he thinks the only thing we care about is the cost of living. Important as that is, the people of this country also care about many other things - otherwise the Bank of England might as well run the country.

We want to aspire to a decent society that we can feel part of - not the fractured state we have now with children in poverty and the rich getting richer - a situation he's presided over for too many years. He thinks if he bungs us all a bit more money we'll shut up and vote for him.

He sidestepped your question 'Would you stand down to avoid defeat for the Labour Party at the next election?" (paraphrase)
And amazingly gave the reason for 'continuing the job' of running the economy! So what exactly is Alasdair Darling's job now? Chief Secretary to the Megalomaniac?

Tory Government? Bring it on! We can chuck them out as well if they haven't learned the lessons. Power to the people!

As retired officer, I find the use of military metaphors hughly amusing. Brown is on the retreat and like the rearguard of a withdrawing force is turning every now and then to fire at his pursuers. Everytime he does this, a few of the retreating forces, in this case a metaphor for his political credibility, fall to enemy fire. Morale continues to crumble and the moment is reached when the retreat turns into a bloody and ignominious rout accompanied by varying degrees of mutiny. To make matters worse, he has the problem of Fifth Columnist publishing their salacious and perfidious memoirs. It surely can't be long now, but at least GB doesn't, yet, tuck his shirt into his underpants.

Gordon Brown just doesn't get it. Lot's of incantations about intiatives and getting on with things but nothing of any substance.

How could NuLabour elect such a flake to run the party?

The attempt to get off the gold give away..that he put the money into the Euro, is utterly scandalous. He's talking about the Euro which went up 25% against the pound and the Gold price that quadrupled since he sold.

#22

Slightly tongue-in-cheek, it will be kind of amusing to watch how 'Dave' and his fellow 'Eton Rifles' react when Alex Salmond declares UDI for Scotland sometime around 2010/2012.

More seriously, we English need to think about the political landscape in England post-Scottish independence.

I don't think it is a very attractive prospect to be stuck with one political elephant, namely the Tories and no significant political counter-weights.

There is an element of the surreal about all this.

Labour have come up with a list of future commmitments to fix or improve things, all the meaningful bits of which are things they have been running for eleven years.

Gordon Brown rubbishes the Tories as lacking substance and for being no more then slick salesmen, pausing only to buy (steal) a whole range of their proposals to include in his package of proposed solutions to the problems built up during Labour's time in office.

On the economy, he blithely takes the credit for the performance of the UK economy during a decade of beneficial global conditions - then explains without a blush that our current ills are all caused by the now global conditions and nothing to do with him.

He acts to resolve the 10p 'wrong foot the Tories' stunt by coming up with another such stunt which spends £2.0b on 17 million non 'losers' as against £0.7b on 5.3m 'losers' whilst still managing to leave 1.1m of them out of pocket.

Either he is deluded or hopes we are.

Wonderful economic analysis from all concerned.

Gordon Brown: "The economy growing was all thanks to me, but today's problems are a global problem."

Anti-Brownites: "The economy growing was a global boom, but today's problems are all his fault."

Maybe - just maybe - it's a bit more complicated than that.

I would remind those who have a down on the 42 day limit on detention without charge that the present limit can be upto 58 days with very little oversight. So I would recommend that when the police require more time to investigate a complexed case the Prime Minister should just and call a National Emergency. When the 58 days are up release them then re-arrest them as soon as they leave the Police Station

dhwilkinson (#33)

Don't dare to assume my political affilations (or those of other posters) just because you seem to find find what we say uncomfortable.

I would guess that the posters here come from every political viewpoint, and are united only in being dismayed and disgusted with what is happening now. Many of them offer some pretty insightful analysis (I exclude myself from that).

And recent criticism of Nick's posts has been mostly that he is too kind to GB.

Accusing those who disagree with you of political bias is a pretty weak tactic. Respond to the arguments - please.

In response to (33)

Sounds like sour grapes - if anything BBC is weak to question the government.

(Hint nick get a bit tougher with brown)

Typical if you cannot offer us a reasonable counter view, just attempt to insult our intellects with concepts like Tory lick spits and news lead morons.

Labours is finished by their own hands - not the news.

I was a labour supporter from a family of labour supporters I have been voting 22 years 17 years of that firmly behind labour - no more.

Brown couldn’t convince me the sky is blue let alone vote for him and his ilk.

#45 - Anthony Z

Yes it is, most definitely. Which is why using the economy as some sort of crude club to score political points is so dangerous and so abhorrent to anyone able to see through the almost transparent veil of spin that accompanies these announcements.

Anyone who thinks the Great Gordon can ever win anything for his party should listen to John Humphreys demolishing him on Radio 4 this morning.

Brown buckles under cross examination and loses his rag.

This is the product of taking yourself far too seriously.

We need a new leader not this loser.

I have just watched your interview with Gordon Brown and it has just come to me, what has been eluding me for some time.

It may be chronically unfair but in facial expressions, mannerisms (and indeed jowls!), why am I suddenly reminded of Richard M Nixon, the 37th President of the United States (1969 – 1974) and the only American president to resign the office?

"The prime minister said yesterday that he asked and expected to be judged by the test of whether he'd maintained economic prosperity."

I agree that we have had economic prosperity for the last 10 years.

Whether Gordon had anything to do with that is another question altogether.

Re 37
The has always been accused and continues to be accused of left wing bias. It does not have the strength to challenge this unfounded accusation and caves in. That is how 'Points of view' perpetually angry stereotype stear the news.
News these days is always looking for the big story and will stoop to low tactics like loaded questions ay press conferences like 'Are you up to the Job?'. implying he isn't. a labour upsed is better than labour holding on.
If political coverage Truly represented the opinions of the WHOLE country. Not just the Emailing Enthusiast. Yes I know like me. It would recognise that politics over the last 40 years has been a disaster, no party comes out of it well and people are fed up and not voting. I disagree with not voting. Even though me voting could be said to be pointless as my area is a safe labour seat. I vote lib dem in the hope. In vain maybe. They can create something credible and improve the political system. Instead of having to vote 1 of the proven disasters of Labour and Conservative over the last 40 years.

Gordon claims to be getting on with the job, but he finds the time to tour the TV studios twice in about a fortnight. How is that getting on with the job?

My advice would be to get your head down, do some work, come up with something to solve the problems you have created and start to lead the country.

Blair was accused of running the country from the sofa, Brown can be accused of leading it from the TV sofa. As much as I dislike the man, I want him not to ruin the country before he goes!

No. 33.

Why would you think that the only opinion worth anything is yours?

There are millions of other people out here who don't agree with you, and some who may well have voted Labour at the last election. The fact that you say the site is now completely dominated by Conservative points of view, only goes to show how unpopular ordinary people think Gordon Brown and his government are.

And did you notice that the 'last economic cycle ended in 2007'?

This means, guess what, the Government can continue to spend and borrow money in the hope that things 'can only get better'. They're borrowing 43 billion (oops make that £45.7 billion) on the optimistic assumption of growth being 2.5% this year.

If we are about to enter a period of slow growth/ recession this means that the last economic cycle started in 1991. Government borrowing since then - about £400 billion (albeit some by the Tories). Hardly a balanced budget over the economic cycle!

Lagondawander wrote:
"It may be chronically unfair but in facial expressions, mannerisms (and indeed jowls!), why am I suddenly reminded of Richard M Nixon, the 37th President of the United States (1969 ? 1974) and the only American president to resign the office?"

A friend of mine said that she can't bear to watch Gordon Brown because it makes her feel sick because of the 'jaw dropping' habit - satirised extensively by Rory Bremner. I can't bare to watch him because of what he says - the humourless, long-winded, predicable, robotic response to even a simple question - ignoring the policies I don't agree with for a moment.

Everything people are finding slightly repulsive about him may be 'chronically unfair' but isn't Brown the volcano that has blown a legitimately elected (love him or hate him) Prime Minister out of office before his time in order to take over his job?
Now it's the voters who are rattling the keys to No 10 over his head. He wrote a book about courage - let him show some and go to the country now. He has no mandate to do any of the things he is doing and is damaging the Labour Party and the country by his actions. Of course, he is so blinded by ambition that he is unable to see that.

Gordon Brown's ascension to the premiership had what I believe pilots call "a long take-off roll". For years, he was arguing that he could not only do the job, but could do it better.

And yet it seems that when the pressure is on, his most powerful instinct is to act not as PM but as Chancellor. Not that the current economic woes reflect well on his prior performance in that role.

#41 - woodofordhalse

I enjoyed your military metaphors - spot on.
We might be able to extend the ananlogy.

If we take a look at his stated strategic aims of helping the hard pressed families, then it can be seen that his tactics are at odds with his strategy, within his overall higher aims.

eg the percentage increased tax take on petrol hits the lower end earners as a greater proportion of income than at the higher paid end.
This doesn't help the hard pressed families.

Yet he lets his uncontrolled cabinet members loose, to wage guerilla warfare on the People whereever they wish, whether this meets with the higher strategic aims or not.

For instance, petrol is already taxed highly and yet Brown allows free rein for Ruth Kelly to propose her tax-per-mile usage charge.

Which in total amounts to taxing the buying of a commodity (petrol) which has a single use for most people; and then taxes those People on using the Petrol that they already been taxed on.

A sort of tax on a tax. which doesn't fit with the original proposal of helping the hard pressed families.

He is certainly a failed strategist when his tactics fail to build towards his stated objectives.

But then a good officer would use more options than a single repetitive tactical approach.

Brown only has one weapon he seeks to use whether it is the appropriate solution or not
- Tax, Tax and yet more Tax.

And he employs his tax weapon indiscriminately outside of any coherent or observable strategy so he is thus doomed as he fails to meet his stated higher aims.

If he raised a call for going over the Top, then probably most would say he has already lost too many troops in his unproductive and expensive, diversionary sideshows.

Strategically he is unlikely to ever get to where he says he wants to be, from the hindering tax tactics he currently employs.

New Labour - No Strategy

"He thinks if he bungs us all a bit more money we'll shut up and vote for him."

I tend to agree with poster 40. Labour seem to have the idea that 'bread and circuses' (read gimic tax rebates and Olympic games) will keep the plebs happy and unaware of the creeping social engineering and erosion of civil liberties that is going on under our noses.

bryanjames (#57)

"legitimately elected"? I don't recall voting for Blair - only the voters of Sedgefield had that dubious honour, and the current government were elected with 35.3% of the vote on a turnout of 61.3%, ie 22% of the electorate voted for them.

If we had proportional representation or a a system where you voted for the Prime Minister the UK would be a very different place politically, and we would never have had the unelected GB as PM.

That said, I agree that GB seems to be blinded by ambition...

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Again and again and again Gordon Brown says that he is doing all he can about rising costs. He repeated this mantra several times on the Today Programme.

But what *exactly* are you doing Gordon, because from where I sit, whatever it is, it isn't very effective.

Poster No 33 should realise that if the Conservatives were currently in power, and doing badly, then the majority of comments here would likely be pro-Labour.

Sites like these are a good sign that we really do have democracy in this country, and you should really read through all the posts. (Especially Charles EH for a pro-Labour point of view!).

#33 dhwilkinson.

You forgott the biggest offender annd bigot of them all Adam Bolton and the Sky blog-site.
He is so far up to the elbows in Tory Brown stuff he now cannot think straight.
He does not even talk to the PM in a proper manner this man is so fullof his own importance.
Even Conservative Home have said that the Bolton blog look for the worst photo of Gordon Brown they can and print it.
He had a wonderful question today, we have food prices rising, petrol prices rising a housing market that require stimulus the PM warning us that the economy will be going through a bad patch and what does Bolton and the journalist fool Oliver Letts ask questions about...Wait ofor it GOSSIP!
One could not make it up.
Nick and Jammes Lansdale did at least ask him some intelligent questions.

A simple question for all tax cutting Conservatives, when was the basic rate of Income Tax last at 20%

Will no honerable member stand up and say on behalf of the nation...?
"You have sat too long for any good you have been doing lately..depart, I say, and let us have done with you. In the name of of God go!"
Surely this is 'rump' government!!!

dhwilkinson @9 wrote:
"Oil and food inflation could be caused by the fact that floods have destroyed crops. This flooding is probably caused by global warming. "

Twaddle like the above statement discredits anything you have to say about any subject.

This country has had occasional flooding for centuries (that's why certain areas are called 'flood planes'), and certainly long before the bogey man called 'global warming was a pimple on the environmentalists' backside.

If you want to blame someone, blame Gordon Brown - he like to claim credit for everything.

I guess most of you have seen the "Can Gordon Brown Save the Economy?" blog on the BBC site.

Can't help but reflect that as of 16:30:
Total comments:
2278
Published comments:
1838
Rejected comments:
91
Moderation queue:
349

The VAST majority are genuine voters livid with Brown for various, and understandable, reasons. Its not spin or Tory HQ. Lib Dems don't do nasty things - just get nose bleeds which dribble down their beards and onto their sandals when power is mentioned.

Therefore are we all wasting our breath about Gordon as if Crewe is next week then we might only have him for perhaps two weeks max.

So who will replace him:
Jack "The rat" Straw? (Barbara Castle analysis I think).
David "I've started shaving" Milliband?
Hazel "poisoned dwarf" Blears?
Jacqui "42 days" Smith?

Things can only get ... better?

Well said #59....There are many problems facing us and our heirs that can't be taxed out of the way.

I am sure that the ever polite British voter will actually say "thank you" to Gordon Brown at the next election, preceeded by the word NO, and followed by a vulgar line of expletives ending in the word "off"

@11 quote: "Gordon Brown has the great misfortune to be PM at the dying fag-end of the political entity known as Britain.

I am sure he knows that but cannot do anything to forestall it any longer."

Actually he could. As he is on eof the prime architects of the dissolution of Britain, he could start to save the UK and Britain as independent nations by giving us the referendum that his party promised and held an election and gained victory largely on the back of that promise.

It is NOT his political misfortune to be premier at the ending of Britain. It is his political will to finally kill of the last glowiong embers of a nation that once was the greatest empire the world had ever witnessed.

Now, under his direction, we are to be broken up into European regions with London being ruled from France. Scotland to become part of Scandanavia

There comes a "tipping point" in governments and the golem Brown has surely passed that now - he looks like a loser and when he's finally forced to call an election, since clearly he'll never have the courage to call one on his own terms, he'll lose.
General elections are lost, not won. And Brown looks like a loser. But what other choice do Labour have? The rest of the government are nonentities. I mean, Jacqui Smith as Home Secretary? It's a joke.
The 10p debacle wasn't Labour's "Poll Tax" it was Labour's "ERM disaster".
After the ERM fiasco, the British economy did well under Kenneth Clarke (who I suspect knew the game was up and decided to do what was best for the country and not to regain popularity for his party) so that Gordon Brown inherited a strong economy. It's just preposterous for him to claim he steered the economy through troubled times. It would've taken a complete idiot to make a mess of the economy over the last decade or so.

Hold on. "I've done it before so I can do it again"?

Having abandoned interest rate policy to the BoE, accepted erratic - but downward trending - year-on-year % change in gross value added, and a rising ratio of government debt to GDP for over a decade, how on earth can he claim he 'did it' in the first place?

This is cloud cuckoo land economics, Mr Brown, and you know it.

re:47|48 in response to your angry rants against me. How dare you assume MY political affiliations!

To be honest, I take any suggestion that you were a lifetime labour supporter until now with a pinch of salt. Although it could be true. I don't care anyway I'm not a sheep following a flock.

I was talking more of the 'Have Your Say' page. which is full of thousands of people making the same Party political Broadcast style messages whenever something Conservative or anti-Labour comes up. Especially at election time or the government looks vulnerable. Also the enthusiasm for the conservative 'Revival?'. There is no Conservative Revival only a long running decline in faith of politics.

These message boards if they were a fair judge of public opinion. Would be skeptical of politics instead of preaching for the political parties. The bias of amount these messages is so unbalanced and the content so unreal and politician like. I sometimes wonder where some of them are coming from. There is no possible way of checking these are genuine people and not party workers or something. So I worry if I perceive them to be taken seriously.

Well what a load of rather generally ill conceived posts all typicaly Tory I thought the comments of Lagondawander and bryanjames particularly Tory I suppose these two characters are really beautiful or consider themselves to be and of course the friend of one of them must think herself so perfect and extremely beautiful that she finds that a man who survived a serious injury losing the sight of one eye and leaving him with a slight facial tick is considered so repulsive that it makes her feel sick how does she and they feel when they see that wonderfully brave soldier Simon Weston or our greatest scientist stephen Hawkins, you people should be deeply ashamed of yourselves but I doubt that you are. Come on you Tories I would have thought that even you would have been disgusted by their remarks. As for you Katanamochi if Gordon could'nt convince you that the sky is blue says far more about your mentality than it does Gordon Brown.

Mongodavis. 69# the nasty party is alive and thriving we can see.

#41 - woodofordhalse

Re underpants, I think you must have been referring to John Major.

Are you also saying also that GB is having an affair with Edwina Currie?

lol, got to do *something* to cheer myself up!

#66 Anthonyagain.
Talk about a red herring. It is the overall level of taxation which is relevant, not any one element of it (NICs anyone?).

And tax is, of course, not a bad thing in itself. It's how the money is spent that is more important.

GB has relentlessly, year on year increased the level of taxation on people in this country and the Labour administration has done a spectacular job of demonstrating the law of diminishing returns when it comes to spending it.

Re 68:


This is part of my comment at @9 wrote:
"Oil and food inflation could be caused by the fact that floods have destroyed crops. This flooding is probably caused by global warming........." for reference. to avoid misquoting people. These dots that I have added mean that the comment goes on much further.

This is him at 68: Quoting a comment I made about the Hypocrisy of complaining about fuel inflation while driving a 4 wheel drive. wrote.

Twaddle like the above statement discredits anything you have to say about any subject.

This country has had occasional flooding for centuries (that's why certain areas are called 'flood planes'), and certainly long before the bogey man called 'global warming was a pimple on the environmentalists' backside.

I bet you would like to think so. But if there few less motoring loonies driving massive, unsuitable for the road cars sticking their fingers in their ears and going 'La la la. Im not listening". there would be less demand for oil. if you have a small car, you pay less for petrol. Its quite simple. If you ignore that its your own fault not the governments. Are you a scientist? Then if you are then I apologize. But why should anyone take YOU so seriously? I bet your a tory as well. Are they green or what? I'm confused.

#72

It is no good, once the genie is out of the bottle, it simply cannot be put back.

That is what has happened up there in Scotland.

Via the SNP political vehicle, for the first time in hundreds of years, native Scots can taste 'freedom' again.

Scottish people tell me there is a real buzz in Scotland now, although down here in London-media-centric England, you'd be forgiven for missing it completely.

The Scots will not be turning back now.

So we English have to look forward strategically and work out our own tactics.

What do we English, as an independent entity, want?

grandantidote said:
"I thought the comments of Lagondawander and bryanjames particularly Tory."

I'm afraid not - not in my case anyway. I've only voted Tory once and that was the first time I voted (Mrs T) thinking it would be good to have a woman Prime Minister and knowing nothing about politics.

I can understand why you think I might be as I probably sound very angry and fed up with New Labour, which I am, but I voted for Labour all the way up to 1997 when they had their 'landslide' - now they are having another in the opposite direction - you can probably spot former Labour voters on here because thay are taking it personal. I don't care enough about the Tories to get angry - I don't expect anything from them - but I do from a party I supported and believed in.

Of course the genie is out of the bottle - Labour really didn't think devolution through carefully enough. Alex Salmond is a sly fellow and a far superior political strategist than any other politician in the realm.
As soon as devolution came along he grasped at once that here was his opportunity to get into power. His party was always likely to be the principal party of opposition in Holyrood and he knew that, eventually, the principal party of opposition will get to form a government.
Salmond's always played the long game, unlike cretins such as Gordon Brown.
Brown has pumped fortunes into Scotland in a bid to keep the Scots content in the Union and voting Labour, but any Labour politician in Scotland wants to be at the heart of power (Westminster) rather than in Holyrood, which leaves complete half-wits like Wendy Alexander in charge in Scotland.
Now, much as he'd like to turn the taps off and starve the SNP government, he can't, because the Scots would blame him.
He can't win. He looks like a loser. And that's fatal.

# 8

It will not even be goodbye but --- GOOD RIDDANCE!!

kiwilegs, for goodness sake give it up. Gordon Brown will soon be history and it is all of his own making!!

If he cares about his party, Gordon should seriously consider losing the next election. If he pulls a 1992, the election afterwards (Assumably 2015) will end in a 1997 style majority for the tories and well over a decade out of power for what's left of labour.

Of course the advantage of the tories losing the next election is that it will mean the end of Cameron (who I personally see as Blair 2.0) and possibly the election of somebody more electable. Whatever happens, the new labour experiment has failed miserably. The question now is what next for Labour? Stay in the middle or move back to left?

Most decent hard working families cannot wait for Labour to be voted out. Taxed to the hilt since 1997 with no sign of any improvements. The NHS, schools etc pumped with money but its not been given where its needed most. An economy which has relied totally on people being in debt and now the banks have belatedly realised people cannot pay the money back, means decidedly dodgy times ahead.
Labour take credit for the good times when the whole world economy prospered but now there is a downturn its all the USA's fault.
Even the Labour sheep in the north have had enough.
Inflation 3%???Unless there is an ipod or plasma tv in your shopping budget each week, inflation must be 20%.
He's raided our pensions and now most final salary pensions are gone. We'll all have to work for the government to get a decent pension.
GB sets out his draft Queens speech with proposals which are revamped from last year or stolen from the Tories. Why should the Tories state their policies when GB will take them for himself.

Before we all get as glum as Gordon - perhaps the Labour MPs might consider performing this for Gordon at their next meeting:

"The Party's over
It's time to call it a day
They've burst your pretty balloon
And taken the job away
It's time to wind up the masquerade
Just make your mind up, the piper must be paid

The Party's over
The candles flicker and dim
You plotted and schemed through the night
It seemed to be right, not being with 'him'
Now you must wake up, all dreams must end
Take off your makeup, the party's over
It's all over, my friend."

The man has his head in a bucket.

Not a very politically astute comment, I know, but having seen 11 minutes 35 seconds of complete denial, that's my considered conclusion.

Nice blogging Nick, good editorial with video already. What are you after, TWO monitors on your PC? As for Gordon Brown, lots of us will be forever in his debt.

Brown is clearly using the economic situation as a smokescreen to hide his own incompetence over the 10p tax rate. I quote from his interview this morning on the Today Programme.
"We wanted to move to a simpler tax system and we THOUGHT and HOPED that the tax credit system would pick up those people who lost out because of the 10p change".
That just isn't good enough for a Chancellor, who after all had the resources of The Treasury at his disposal, to do the calculations. After all, the main objective of The Chancellor is to prepare a budget once or twice a year. If he couldn't work out the effect of his abolition of the 10p rate then he wasn't fit to be Chancellor and he certainly isn't fit to be P.M. Unfortunately, it appears that our system of Government isn't capable of providing people who are up to the job of running the country any more. Brown isn't qualified to run a small business, let alone the nation.

You may wish to view the spreadsheet at the NOS about average percentage on tax and NI

statistics.gov.uk STATBASE Expodata Spreadsheets D7434.xls

This shows the increase in tax since 2001 - It also shows how tax levels reduced from 1981 to 1997 as the tories cut the previous high tax rates of Labour.

It also shows the effect of the 10p lower rate band introduced by a certain G Brown. It also shows that women earn less than men as their tax paid as a percentage is lower.

I am heartened that some bloggers are trying to defend the Prime Minister. The Sky News blog is just a joke.
I have said this many times now and will not tire of repeating it. Gordon Brown is a man of intellect and substance who works incredibly hard.
The awful personal criticisms of the man on here are at best unsavoury and at worst poisonous.
If you were appointing a CEO of a major company and the choice was between Brown and Cameron there is no choice. Gordon Brown would get the job every time. All non rabid right wingers must see this - surely?

The tax credit system just makes taxation more complex - Gordon Brown's whole tenure at the Treasury saw taxation become almost unintelligible, which, of course, helped to mask the raising of taxes year-on-year-on-year.

Famously Horation Nelson said "I see no ships' as he held up his telescope to his blind eye. Looks like Gordon has tried the same trick - though this time no one actually believes either his assessment of the situation or his ability to manage it.

For 11 years he has proven time after time his total lack of comptence - both as a Chancellor and as an unelected PM.

In business - big or small - he would have received his 2 verbal warnings, his written warning and the sack years ago.

But in this strange world of ours he is allowed to keep coming back after every failure and tell us - "Didn't I do well" and when we say "Actually no you didn't" he is able to turn around and simply say "Ah well, as far as I'm concerned I did, I am brilliant and I will do exactly what I like because I want to and nobody can stop me"

I also recall that King Henry II - when talking of Thomas Becket said - "Who will me of this troublesome priest?"

Maybe dear Queen Elizabeth II would be willing to do the same and sack her "troublesome PM" - who is surely creating for the Great British public the worst "annus horribilis" in living memory!

Political fightback my rear end. More like an undignified retreat!

"Gordon Brown is a man of intellect and substance who works incredibly hard."

Probably quite true but as a P.M. he is a consummate failure!!

After the smoke and mirrors of recent months, the reds better tread carefully. Has i not occured to anybody that rather than be pushed, GB would call an election to hope to stay in his dream job (and our nightmare) rather than stand aside and let a labour party rescue ensue.

He dangled the keys for long enough, there's no way he'd give up the top job, to be proven that the party would be better off without him, his vision says that events are the problem and his (ahem) personality is intact.

Mad_Mad_Max -

'As for Gordon Brown, lots of us will be forever in his debt.'

Can be read two ways...I know which way most will see it...

Those who criticise Brown's record as Chancellor are really losing it.
The facts:
Full employment
Low interest rates
Low inflation
Record investment in public services that was long over due.
None of this achieved under the Thatcher/Major years.
The personal criticisms of Gordon Brown are nasty, petty and small. The Prime Minsister should be (and for the moment is) someone of ability, intellect and substance. No one really believes David Cameron would be better at running the country than Brown surely?