Combine Blunkett & Blair - a possible arbitrage
December 29th, 2004
One of the great pleasures of political gambling is when you find situations where whatever happens you end up a winner. With the news in the Sun today that David Blunkett will return to the Cabinet if Tony Blair wins the election then an interesting situation opens up.
The current best price on Blunkett returning during 2005 is 4/1 which, given the Sun’s status as almost the “official mouthpiece of New Labour” for such things, makes that the best bet there is on Labour winning the General Election. It’s certainly much better value than the 1/6 best price that’s available on Labour winning most seats.
To cover yourself what about combining the bet with the 7/2 that’s still available on Tony Blair’s tenure as Prime minister ending during 2005?
So if Blair stays you should win on the Blunkett bet - if he goes you win on the end of tenure bet.
If just one of these bets comes up you make a profit and the risk of both falling down must be a lot lower than the profit you make at 7/2 and 4/1. There’s also a possibility that you could win on both.
This is not a true arbitrage because it is just feasible that Blair will still be at Number 10 and Blunkett will not be in the Cabinet. But the Sun story is pretty strong and it’s not often that it gets one of these wrong. There’s also the risk of the election being postponed beyond January 1 2006. But this is worth the punt.
Get on while this is still available.
MessageSpace Advertising
Hmmm… Prescott as Leader of the Lords? I’m not going to attach too much significance to this story - this time of year may not be the silly season, but it’s at least the speculation season.
Independently of the story, I do think Blunkett has a reasonable chance of coming back after the election. When you look at the detail, his integrity is nowhere near as intact as Blair believes it to be, but he can ride the storm after the election. Blunkett does seem to be one of the few allies Blair values sincerely rather than manipulating.
There is the factor of Blunkett’s potentially ongoing case for access to Child A, though. If this rumbles on it will harm his chances of returning.
Forget Blunkett’s lack of integrity, why not focus on his total lack of JUDGEMENT?
People who go around deliberately (or even wantonly) impregnating other people’s wives who are also busy having sexual relationships with other blokes at the same time are hardly carrying the message to the yoof of today (as sold by John Reid) that responsibility is a good thing. I do not believe that just saying ‘oh well his brains were in his ***** on that occasion’ is a good enough excuse. Judgement is judgement. Blunkett has zilch. Whyever do you think he has been forever losing court cases (pouring public funds into barristers pockets along the way) on cases where your average bloke in a pub would realise he had no chance? I’m not saying the laws he lost on were good ones, just that it was pretty obvious that he needed to change the law if he wanted to have his way - and he was just too lazy of stupid to do so (or knew he’d never get what he wanted through Parliament). Then there was his backing of Beverly Hughs. Purrrrlease! Those of us who had/have to deal with immigration laws day to day knew what a total ****-up she was making of it (no different today btw!) with innocent genuine visitors and real ‘partners’ being knocked back on the feeblest of pathetic excuses while the ‘baddies’ continue to get in.
Of course we now have a Home Secretary who doesn’t give a monkeys apparently for the judgement of the highest court in the land so bye bye separation of powers, hullo round 56 of elected dictatorship!
Happy New Year
I agree entirely, Zebidee. Hughes was hopeless. Watching her try to get out of a corner on Newsnight by snapping at Kirsty Wark (’of course not Kirsty! of course not’) had me shouting at the TV (she often made me shout at the TV, the mousey non-entity, the arrogant drip). I’ve probably mentioned how she condemned the Brass Eye satire on the tabloid media’s moral panic over p**dophilia as ‘unspeakably sick’, and then admitted she hadn’t even watched it!
Apart from his lack of judgement in asking for Hughes as Minister of State (and recommending that the equally drippy Estelle Morris, with her grammatically challenged and jargon-laden speech, be made his successor at Education), there was also Blunkett’s total lack of judgement in making such scathing comments about his colleagues on the record to a biographer, and of course the business with the visa. Flying the red flag in the Socialist Republic of South Yorkshire is one thing, but the fast-tracking of the visa was like something indulged in by the nomenklatura. Mary Dejevsky had a good piece in the Independent saying may we never become a country where passports were sold (as they are in some other countries).
As for the adultery, he got a remarkably easy ride from the media. Only Private Eye compared with his behaviour with all the pronouncements he’d made about the importance of marriage.
It’s a pity his judgement went awry as I enjoyed his plain speaking (saying he was ‘mortified’ by June’s results was an enjoyable departure from the usual ‘Just because we’ve been annihilated, doesn’t mean we did badly’ cock and bull usually indulged in by politicians viz bad election results).
It did go awry, though, so he shouldn’t be re-appointed to the Cabinet any time soon. If he is, it’ll be Mandelson all over again.
oooh, fantasy cabinet after a third Blair win… assuming Brown stays or goes as Chancellor?!?
Scenario A:
Brown as Foreign Sec, pushing Straw to (say) Leader of the House. Prescott jumps over to Lords (say) giving Hain the Deputy Leadership of the Party. Clarke stays at Home Affairs. Either Blunkett or Reid as Chancellor. Milliband takes Education, Kelly to Work&Pensions, Darling to Health.
Scenario B:
Brown stays in the Treasury and Prescott steps down as Deputy Leader. Straw again goes off to be Leader of the House, giving Hain the chance to be Foreign Secretary. Either that or a swap with Clarke at the Home Office. In which case Reid would have to be offered the Party Chairmanship back again.
Another interesting move would be the sacking / resignation / moving of Geoff Hoon from Defence and his replacement by Hilary Benn. Hoon maybe to take over Transport? This would give Darling the chance to do Education and allow Kelly to move over to Health. Plus McCartney would be sacked, but without Prescott he’s useless anyway!
Some random thoughts
Although Private Eye’s poltical tips are not always good (it was hopelessly wrong about Alistair Campbell going for Stoke South - ‘the man most likely to’ was the eventual winner, Rob Flello), it may be right in arguing that Brown would not refuse the Foreign Office (if offered it by Blair after the next election) but would grab it with both hands, and that all this interest in things like a Marshall Plan for Africa and debt cancellation is a build up to that decision.
Moving from the Treasury would certainly have its advantages, as the next Chancellor could then take the unpopularity for tax rises or spending cuts necessary to prune the deficit after the next election. Brown probably remembers that cleaning the Augean Stables cost Healey the leadership in 76 (whereas taking the FCO, which he’d shadowed in opposition, may well have enabled him to win it, as Jim Callaghan indeed won the leadership from the FCO that year).
Would Kelly not decline health since she is anti-abortion?
I think scenario A is broadly more credible as regards most posts, but Brown would need some inducement to go to Foreign Affairs - probably combining it with International Development and with a lot of influence over trade policy. I’d also question whether Blair really wants Brown as the UK’s primary face towards Europe.
Re 4 Are people in England not getting a bit irritated by Scots (like John Reid) being in charge of departments that have no effect on their constituencies? I’ve a feeling that this might have dissauded Blair from giving John Reid a really big job as Home Secretary. Might also stop Darling making a move to a more high profile role (assuming that the good people of Edinburgh SW don’t stop him first, which is depressingly unlikely!). Wonder if the marginality of Ruth Kelly’s seat might stop her getting a big job. She should be safe this time round but presumably Labour wouldn’t want to lose a ‘big gun’ at the election after next.
I agree about Darling. He’s probably the most boring politician in the UK (and, when he seems hellbent on re-privatising the route operated by South-Eastern trains - never mind that this Network Rail operated TOC seems to work - isn’t all that competent).
Richard,
Healey only became Shadow Foreign Secretary after losing the leadership to Michael Foot in 1980. He was actually Shadow Chancellor from 1972-74. If my memory is correct (hmm?), his prospects of succeeding Harold Wilson were greviously weakened following a tired and emotional outburst in the Commons tea room ranting at assorted Labour rebels that they were “out of their tiny Chinese minds” just a few days before the little man announced his intention to quit. But Callaghan had long been the heir apparent.
The Sun story reads like Number Ten flying a kite to see whether the party will accept Blunkett back. If not, it’s either the Lords or EU.
Marc Ed
Reshuffles eh?
Personally I think Blair would be very unlikely even if (as I anticipate) Labour are returned with a majority in the 70-100 range to move Brown, that said I think Brown could be moved to the Foreign Office, he’d be more than able and his heavy involvement in the “international development” side of things as chancellor would cross over nicely but I think an added incentive such as becoming deputy Prime Minister would be need and for that to happen Prescott would have to be moved and where he to be bumped up to the Lords that would mean a by-election in Hull and potentially an election for the deputy leadership.
What ever happens I think Straw will be demoted and Darling could also be losing one of his two posts.
I think Hewitt could potentially replace Straw she’d be up to the job and what is more would be a presentable face for Britain internationally especially (from Blair’s perspective) towards Europe, Hain is another possibility. Allowing Straw to be busted down to Leader of the House and Milburn to go to Trade and Industry.
I think the big story however will be the radical restructuring of the Home Office along with the Department for Constitutional affairs as Blair had planned to do in August but decided against largely because of the lobbying of both Blunckett and Straw. What would emerge from such a move would be a Department of Justice and a Department of Constitutional Affairs that would also swallow up the responsibilities for freedom of information, immigration and elections. The likely heads of both would be Hoon at the former and Clark at the latter.
Kelly will no doubt remain at Education, she’s barley arrived it makes no sense to move her to Health so quickly and the point about her stance abortion is also well made, even though I happen to agree with her on the issue. Reid could be moved if to replace Hoon at Defence (apparently the department that he was always wanted) and that would enable Benn to be moved to Health and Miliband to International Development.
Darling will no doubt stay at Transport, Hain could be moved to the duel posts of Party Chairman and Minister Without Portfolio where he to have to make room for a demoted Straw, but I don’t think Blair would won’t Hain to be lost he a competent minister and a good tv performer. That said Hain might well replace Beckett who’s been long overdue for a move out of the cabinet (if anyone is heading for the Lords she is).
I believe the Sun as the key media organ, and I now have it delivered every day (as I suspect our more astute contributors also do). How else will I know what’s happening?
To save me time and trouble searching around–where can I get 4-1 on Blunkett being returned to the cabinet?
William Hill are quoting the price.
http://www.willhill.com/iibs/EN/buildcoupon.asp?couponchoice=PO695183&aff=bgenPB
Ref my Scenario A:
Brown as Foreign Sec, pushing Straw to (say) Leader of the House. Prescott jumps over to Lords (say) giving Hain the Deputy Leadership of the Party. Clarke stays at Home Affairs. Either Blunkett or Reid as Chancellor. Milliband takes Education, Kelly to Work&Pensions, Darling to Health.
I think this answers a lot of the points that have been put. Reid, as a Scot, would be in a difficult position in Health, so the Treasury should be fine (as they still have a UK role). Milliband is the education secretary that the education profs. wanted - Kelly is an economist and would make a much better W&P Secretary. Darling at Health would cause problems I admit - the weak link in my arguement.
“Kelly to Work&Pensions”
Alan Johnson won’t be moved, baring a disaster he’s there for some time ditto Kelly at Education. Neither have been in their posts that long and Johnson is doing well while Kelly is well qualified for the job and seem to be doing well thus far…
“Kelly is well qualified for the job and doing well thus far.”?? In the last 2 weeks standards have flown up - on Christmas day my daughters each got an A level.
I did say “thus far” it’s far too early to tell but I would anticipate that she will do well and the first signs are encouraging.
Sorry Ben, Alan Johnson is a big too much linked with Brown, Prescott … anybody but Blair. He’ll pop off to Trade & Industry or something dull once Hewitt has gone.
Marc Ed
Disagree with you about Johnson, he seems close to Blair and the other Blairites… that said his trades union links mean he can appeal to the broader Labour Party what is more Blair was keen to bring him to “sort-out” pensions and so far he has been doing well so he will no doubt stick it out after the election.
Hewitt is another competent minister and good TV performer (even if she does sometimes seem like a Primary School Headteacher)and might well replace Straw and then provide a vacancy for Milburn (assuming a healthy majority in the 70-100 range).
Will Milburn return to a “real” job (i.e. health, education etc) rather than as a “parliamentary” job (i.e. party chairman, leader of the house etc)? I’m not so sure he will. I’m also a bit scared of the New Labour wimmin rising up - Hewitt, Jowell etc. - could we see as Hewitt Foreign Sec?
As i say Hewitt replaces Straw, Milburn replaces Hewitt, Straw repalces Hain, Hain replaces Beckett… as part of a reshuffle.
Oh, I’d forgotten about Beckett (easy to do). She’s ancient and will almost certainly do a Prescott and go after the general. So, Ben, which of the third generation Labour MPs will be promoted to the cabinet then?
Marc, you’ve forgotten Hilary Armstron - another pseudo-leftie of old femme who makes Blunkett seem quite ‘liberal’!
There are a long list of the 97 intake who’ve been touted as ready to move in to the cabinet, that said its always the quite ones (Kelly, Benn, Johnson etc…) who seem to make it before the media golden boys and girls (King, Miliband, Alexander, Cooper etc…).
David Miliband might well be promoted, but perhaps simply to replace Milburn, if Mr Darlington is promoted to something like T&I.
Alexander and Cooper will no doubt be staying where they are until Gordon assumes his “rightful place” as leader of the Labour movement.
If she wins in Bethanl Green and Bow, King might become a junior minister (Housing for example) and her career might well get a second lease of life.
Kelly IMHO will stay where she is ditto Johnson, neither have been at the respective posts very long and both “seem” to have made good starts.
Benn may very well get promoted, his currency seems to be rising at all levels of the Labour Party within the TUs, the CLPs and the PLP and he is a very good commons and TV performer what is more he has done a commendable job at International Development (more than Short ever did!) so I expect he’ll be advanced to something like Health with Reid being moved to the post he always wanted at Defence.
Re. 9, John O, it’s you who’ve got this one wrong. You say Healey was Shadow Chancellor from 72 to 74. Quite right. What job do you think he did before that, though? Between 70 and 72 he was - wait for it - Shadow Foreign Secretary.
When he shadowed the FCO under Foot and Kinnock’s leadership, he was doing it for the second time.
If you don’t believe me, just read the Healey memoirs and Pearce’s biography (or, say, any Times Guide to the House of Commons from February 74 to 87)
You are, however, right to say that Callaghan was the heir apparent anyway, and Healey’s meagre number of votes in the 76 PLP election can be explained by his outburst.
Apart from the sources I’ve already mentioned, John O, you can also check George Walden’s memoirs, ‘Lucky George’, in which he recalls Healey’s opposition, as Shadow Foreign Secretary, to then Foreign Secretary Sir Alec Douglas Home’s decision in the early 70s to expel a 100 or so KGB agents in the early 70s.
Healey very much wanted to continue as Shadow Foreign Secretary, but Wilson needed a heavyweight as Shadow Chancellor after Roy Jenkins left the frontbench in protest over Labour’s stance on Europe (Wilson’s agreement to a referendum, to be precise).
Two more sources to prove I’m right, there - Jenkins’ memoirs, not to mention the Benn diaries.
Richard, Just seen your 31/12 posting (I had already departed for Hogammany!) on Healey as Shadow Foreign Secretary 1970-72. Fair cop, guv, and if I hadn’t just finished supper, I’d have put humble pie (au gratin) on the menu. Weird really as my reading material for the 8 hour Highland Chieftan Express and back were the Benn Diaries for 1973-76. Anyway Happy New Year.
I appreciate your magnanimity, John O. Happy New Year to you too.
0IkIrXseHHQZ yelEISdQwt5E l3e1a2nONxF
credit bureaus…
Darwin breachers Carpathians scans:nominated rewrites inquirer crunch speller equifax http://www.credit-report-2u.com/ …
slots…
Thank you for your interest in slots. You may now proceed to download your free trial version of slots by clicking on the link below. Choose a slots Package - We will install and activate a fully operational http://slots.game71.com/index.html website b…
delta…
Look for this symbol of delta resources. It signifies that the Web site you are visiting was reviewed by delta and accepted into its directory of select web sites….
Soccer World Cup…
plainest!aristocratically,continuations:reinitializing around wrecking restore referencer mortgage brokers http://www.ourmortgagebrokers.com/ …
odzffpdde…
bxtprch mpmayipkw qaklidul…