Has Blair come to terms with his departure yet?
February 22nd, 2007
Is Hoggart right about the exit?
A throwaway line at the end of this morning’s Commons sketch by Simon Hoggart in the Guardian has got me thinking about Tony Blair and when he will step down.
For when asked at PMQs yesterday what he hoped to be remembered for Hoggart notes the “extraordinary” fact that Blair ..”didn’t have anything prepared… he hasn’t worked out what his own legacy is..I’ll believe he’s going when he goes.”
Usually a good litmus test on what’s going on at the top of the Labour party is John Prescott. The picture strip are screen shots of the leader and deputy during yesterday’s encounter with Cameron when I thought that Blair just got the better of the Tory.
Yet rather than his usual cheering his man on giving him forceful vocal backing Prescott seems very detached and at one stage looked as though he was falling asleep. He certainly does not appear happy and content.
For has Prezza realised that Blair has still to make the decision to actually go and that there’s still a lot more to come in the drama of Labour’s succession?
Is Tony trying to hang in there as long as possible in the hope that something will emerge that will make his exit more palatable and help secure his place in history.
Have we all been wrong in thinking that Tony is following a settled plan and that the removal vans will arrive in Downing Street in late June/ early July so Gordon can take over then?
Quite simply has Tony still to make the final decision?
My sense is that he’s looking for anything that will put back the date by even a short period and maybe there will need to be a September 2006-style rolling resignation threat before he’s finally shifted.
In the betting Q3 2007 has now become favourite again for “when he’ll officially cease to be leader”. That’s at 1.14/1 while Q2 has eased to 1.2/1.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Maybe Prezza is just knackered, after all he’s nearly 70…or saving his energy for something else!
Reply to Innocent Abroard on Previous thread, I will explain it to you because of your innocence & naievity.
“[3] In what sense is a man who came to this country in 1990 (your Daily Torygraph story) a “NuLab immigrant”?”
So called “Honour Killings”, indeed a killing without any honour, is a product of NuLab Multiculturalism. The Killer was an immigrant, arriving under a Conservative Administration. Under the Conservatives, he would be “encouraged” to integrate.
Under NuLab, such cultural import, is tolerated and indeed funded. An example is the publishing of official texts in Urdu, Bengalli, Farsi etc… Such immigrants feel no need to integrate. Not only do they import their homeland culture but under NuLab, it is encouraged and is fertilised with Political Correctness. There is no need to adopt new attitudes for that would be racist - as if Islam is a race…
Under NuLab, all immigrant Culture is provided with the status of a Sacred Cow. Alien attitudes, no matter how abhorent or intolerance are tolerated, in the name of Politically Correct Tolerance.
Dishonourable, so called “Honour Killings” never existed under the Conservatives. Under NuLab, they are so common, they regularly pass without comment.
A murder that is product of Multiculturalism and Political Correctness.
In every sense, the Killer was a NuLab Immigrant.
Creatures are about early today.
Mike
This is perfectly credible and it may help to explain the extraordinary row last autumn when Brown and/or his supporters appeared to risk all in an attempt to tie TB down to a date.
It’s the bad guest syndrome, isn’t it? They’ve long overstayed their welcome but you don’t want to be rude so you keep dropping hints which they somehow fail to take. What do you do?
I suppose, as a punter, there’s only one thing you can do. Hedge your bets.
2. Not very on topic, is it?
O/T - Following on from yesterday’s piece, an interesting story about Obama and Clinton’s spat:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6384821.stm
This will be an interesting test of Obama’s ability under pressure and of how negative Clinton is willing to go to defend her interests.
Back on topic, has Blair come to terms with his departure date yet? No, I don’t think he has. Will it make much difference as to when he does go? No, probably not.
The fact is that he’s said publicly that he’ll go before the conference season; he’s said his goodbyes to the Labour conference and the TUC. Everyone, including his cabinet ministers is working on the assumption of a spring/summer handover. This is putting government into limbo and damaging the Labour Party - no new initiative is credible if the PM will be gone in a few months (which also means that Blair’s legacy is already determined).
The polls and predictions are that May’s elections will be bad for Labour. If this is so, I don’t see how he could get out of at least naming the day. Because he’s said he’ll go this year, there’s nothing to stop his cabinet colleagues - never mind backbenchers, defeated councillors, MSPs, AMs and activists - saying ‘now is the time’. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if one does, more precisely, one that’s running for deputy leader. Naming the day would be the least damaging way of escaping, apart from the combination of both good election results May and bad opinion polls for Brown - the latter may hold true, the former seems unlikely.
Even so, I don’t think the reality’s really sunk in yet. In his heart, he still believes he can recapture the magical moments of his first triumph in 1997 when he was loved and all-conquering. But it’s a different world now with a lot of water under the bridge and a more formidable opposition and a much eroded party base.
Blair let slip “a couple of months” on the Marr interview. Great images BTW, looks like a Backbench Blair
I don’t think that Blair is the master of his political destiny any more.
I see no reason why the 2007 locals should not be even more disastrous for Labour than 2006, and there is a realistic chance of losing power in Wales and Scotland too. There is also the possibility of criminal charges being brought against people close to Blair.
Could he really continue to limp on, indefinitely?
I suppose this is where hatchet jobs such as the Guardian’s come into play. Their declared intention was to encourage a full contest for the leadership when Blair went. However, there really doesn’t seem to be anyone but Brown, except Blair.
Faced with polling evidence that suggests they would be jumping from the frying pan into the fire, it appears that Labour MPs are generally least unhappy where they are. And so, the ship of state drifts forlornly on, rudderless and shedding rats.
The advantage of Blair staying would of course be an even longer period in which damning stories about his ‘unfitness for purpose’ come out, such as this one…
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=RZJZWJJ3PNSR5QFIQMGSFFWAVCBQWIV0?xml=/news/2007/02/22/niraq22.xml
7. But as you say, the option isn’t between a party with Brown as a secure leader and that party with Blair as a secure leader; it’s between Brown having the full reins of power as leader and PM on the one hand, and Blair heading (but not leading) the party God knows where. Even Labour MPs who are uneasy at the propect of Brown as PM must see that unless the uncertainty is resolved one way or the other - and Blair doesn’t have the power to defeat Brown and his camp - their party can only suffer.
I think trying to divine when TB will go by using JP’s expressions is somewhat desperate!
He’ll be gone in June.
Thanks for a welcome touch of common sense, David. My bets are well and truly hedged on Quarters 2 & 3 but if he does a volte face and tries to stay on beyond September, I have a problem! Each time I get nervous about this I have to remind myself of the clear, open promises he has made to his Party. Cue cynics to point out other broken promises but going back on his word would create mayhem and I just can’t see him doing that, however reluctant he may be to leave.
I agree about the May elections and sort of agree about Brown’s poll numbers - could be bad but maybe not. And judging from remarks he made in the Marr interview, I think he accepts the world has moved on and he will not recover his former popularity, at least not while he is still in office.
As regards the Democratic nomination, this ’spat’ must suit both parties, because it raises both their profiles. This is particularly valuable for Obama but it won’t hurt Hillary either. It’s a row in which neither side is obviously right or wrong - so no harm done and lots of lovely publicity!
Have a good day. I’m out now and won’t be back till tomorrow.
Give my regards to The Creatures.
6 I heard it too Jonathan but I wouldn’t attach much significance to it. It’s just a turn of phrase. I don’t think you could take it literally.
My guess remains end of June or early July, but I haven’t a clue which.
I’ve been saying for ages, when many were predicting an early resignation over one thing or another, that (a) TB will go this summer and (b) he enjoys the job and will keep on at full tilt till then. I don’t have the slightest doubt about either point. July rather than June, I’d think, but I agree that’s a toss-up. I’d expect a precise announcement in the next couple of months.
Can’t believe that the time is almost upon us - after all this speculation! Exciting times ahead
Look chaps, I’m straight kinda of guy. I know I promised to resign but I’ve had so many e mails (nearly 1.8m just on a little transport matter) asking me to stay and tackle the real issues affecting our country that Cherie’s said I should heed the country’s wishes and carry on with the burden of leading our country. There is so much to do if my legacy of public sector reform (have you seen the scars on my back?) is to be completed and there’s Northern Ireland, Bosnia, Iraq, Africa, World Poverty, AIDs…
15 - Nick you forgot a few “ye know”s!!
13. Blair will ‘keep on at full tilt ‘…how that phrase must fill people up and down the country (especially Labour supporters) with dread!
15….managing the (my?) second coming…
BBC reporting that Meacher will run against GB. Or perhaps that should be ‘try and run’ against GB.
#9 - That is right, but it isn’t an open choice between Brown and Blair because they still have Blair as default.
If Blair were to decide that he wanted to stay on for a full third term, then any departure would be a forced departure. I don’t think Labour MPs could manage that.
I’m guessing that when Thatcher was kicked out there weren’t polls comparing her support with Major’s. Conservative MPs perhaps only had the bad numbers for their party and their leader to go on?
Rik W, for sure ye’know your right ye’know. But hey, this is no time for sound bites, I feel the hand of history asking me to carry on.
19 - oh god
will anyone else on the left be willing to tilt at a windmill. Who next Jeremy Corbyn ? Glenda ? the Judean peoples front ?
re 6. Thanks Jonathan for the comments about the pictures. I love doing a screen-shot sequence like this.
has anyone else noticed the audit commission review of council performance - no lib dem councils improving strongly - all the top positions go to Tory councils - should make for some interesting bar charts in the run up to May !
Nicholas Bennett is wrong about Chérie. She thinks it’s time her other half started earning real money, too.
[2] There is a strong case for ignoring that kind of rant; there is also a strong case for not letting it go by default. I don’t have access to a newspaper morgue, but I’m pretty sure that so-called “honour” murders didn’t suddenly start on May 2, 1997. Also, it was reported in the recent case that the perpetrator was drunk, which isn’t a very Muslim sort of state to be in. If either integration or multi-culturalism reduced mental illness in ethnic minority communities I think we’d've heard about it by now.
25. ‘Honour’ killings are more a cultural thing than a religous one. There is nevertheless something to be said for the idea that allowing large scale immigration of poorly educated people from some of the more backward areas of the subcontinent is likely to increase the prevalence of such incidents.
22. Meacher said he has more MPs than McDonnell.
I wonder if someone has pledged his/her vote to both….
Meacher said he’s confident to reach 44 nominations meaning that he hasn’t them yet. In his after retirement announcement interviews, Alan Simpson didn’t seem so secure that Meacher (or McD) would have reached the 44 figure.
Good article Mike. Mind you I put Tony’s resignation date at September ages ago and it is in my predictions. e won’t go until he is dragged out kicking and screeming!
Whether Blair wants to stay a liitle longer or not will be irrelevant after the May election results.Everyone believes including most Labour party members I know that they will be a disaster for the party. It is not beyond the bounds of probability for Blair to distract atention from this by announcing his departure the day after the pollin May. In Wales Rhodri Morgan began to outline Labour’s strategy of voting Labour in the assembly elections because of the threat posed by David Cameron! This must rate as a really desperate attempt to get out the Labour core vote by building up the prospect of a Tory led coalition in the assembly after May. If it is it is bound to fail and probably turn more voters off voting. Meanwhile in the real world BBC Wales radio ran an item on the possible effect of Peter Hain owning an aga cooker on his deputy leadership chances. Apparently Hain has declared in an article that food cooked in a conventional electric cooker is second rate! The programme calimed that the article has now be removed from the aga website. It could be the turning point in Hain’s campaign. Perhaps Nick Palmer will tell us whether owning an aga is mandatory amongst Hain supporters!
6 - TBH I got the impression from the Marr interview that he wasn’t committed to going yet, and I agree with Mike’s suggestion that he might be looking for wriggle room to stay on longer.
After all - what can force TB to stand down? GB won’t make a putsch because if he does he virtually guarantees a contested election, and one which might go against him if he’s seen to have forced Blair too openly. There’s no other mechanism to get rid of him, and now he’s got opinion polls suggesting GB will do worse than him.
If I was a Labour MP at the momebt, I would be very hesitant about getting rid of TB too quickly at the moment. GB is no guarantee of a better prospect electorally, and like it or not, TB is still the man most likely to win a 4th term for Labour. The chattering classes and Westminster village wannabes might lambast him, but they did so to every other PM in living memory. The country as a whole are far more supportive of him and, I beleive, would give him a 4th term.
Personally I’d see him go asap so w can have a new PM and get back to proper politics instead of guess the future, but I’m not sure TB won’t be in No10 Dec 2007!
Well done Michael Meacher for at least being a slightly credible left challenger to Brown.
Interesting stuff as ever Mr Smithson. Though I think it is tricky to divine such things from a slow-motion replay of television coverage of Blair ! Perhaps you are missing your true vocation in life as the presenter of a ‘Question of Sport’ ?
Very telling that the odds have moved back in favour of a Q3 departure - certainly the storm over ‘loans-for-lordships’ is on the backburner for the moment. How does Teflon do it ? Mind you he sounded in turns resigned and panicky on the ‘Today’ programme this morning. But not like a guy who was on the verge of throwing the towel in.
Perhaps he is waiting for a ‘bronze statue’ of him to be done ?
24. The worst council in the country seem to be Lambeth, Sandwell, Stoke on Trent, Rutland and Bristol
Re 16, RikW, Nick also forgot at least 3 gulps and did not take an onion out of his pocket once!
31. If madcap conspiracy theorists are ‘credible’ Labour really are in trouble.
31. Yokel. Meacher….credible?! He’s not a credible challenger…he’s someone who voted for Iraq War when he was a minister, but then after being sacked, he became against it. He also voted for foundation hospitals (and he was just a backbencher at the time)…policies that the Left didn’t like so much.
And then there’s his 9/11 piece.
So far his campaign has also been pretty badly run IMO…he let McDonnell build a network among far left wing grassroots/trade union organization. Now those people will perceive MM as someone who has arrived just to “break” things.
Welsh Goat - your point about the ‘Aga Saga’ is very pertinent and raises an issue about the English obsession, and I do mean obsession, with class.
If an English person says they love rugby, send their kids to music lessons, that they went to university and have an Aga, it is because they want you to assume they are middle-class.
If a Welsh person says they love rugby, send their kids to music lessons, that they went to college and have a Rayburn, they might be working class farmers, middle class teachers or indeed be a celebrity rugby player. I’ve never understood why the English have to compartmentalise people in this way - and the politicians have to jump on that bandwagon.
Why shouldn’t people who didn’t go to university care about the environment ? Why shouldn’t wealthy people care about equality ?
33 Andrea. Rutland one of the worst councils ?!?!?!?!? … it can’t be so.
BTW Johannson gave Roddick a decent run, but Roddick won “assisted” by some dodgy line calls at 5-5 in the second set !! However 6/1 was very good odds for the Swede.
I have often speculated -to hoots of derision- that Blair won’t go at all.
This man is the shortest term strategist we have ever seen in politics. If he can bat a problem off until the day after tomorrow he will, because his life experiences have tought him that ’something will turn up’ to save him; and every time it just does.
So he has consistantly cleared bad news from the desk by making a ‘commitment’ that has turned out to be no such thing.
He won’t have any qualms at all about rescheduling his departure by a year, say. Perhaps on the premise of a security problem (this is not the time to be changing leaders…) or on the basis that the party ‘needs more time’ to find a potential challenger to Brown.
He doesn’t calculate, he has no plan, he just takes every day as it comes.
Blair will come under increasing pressure to pre-announce a departure timetable. IMO this will happen some time between the end of March and the May elections, with a June/July handover schedule.
If there is no announcement, Labour MPs would have to act before the end of June to force a departure, as the deadline for the conference resolution and the 70 nominations required for a contested election is early July.
In my view Meacher is a vain, elitist failure of a politician. McDonnell has support within the broad lefts of the unions and in some CLPs, even if he was struggling. If Meacher had more centrist appeal than McDonnell (I’m not actually sure of that!) then he’d be better off encouraging such MPs to nominate McDonnell to ensure legitimate debate. The happiest person about a Meacher candidacy will of course be Gordon Brown.
36 Andrea. Spot on. Meacher is a political train crash and has all the credibility of a Virgin rail time table and the charisma of a speak you weight machine on the station.
Excellent montage Mike. If you did a few more frames we could do a fast scroll and sse it as a movie. Whether it would bring Prescott to life is another question……
Blair is very skillful as he showed in his interview with Humphrys. Indeed he’s so much more accomplished than Cameron that I’m surprised so many on here are impressed with Cameron. After ten years of Blair they should be used to good media performers. Perhaps they don’t expect it from a Tory?
Anyhow despite his performance ultimately it was shallow. Just once we need to hear that all he did in his foreign policy wasn’t perfect. I think that if he isn’t gone by July at the latest his party will revolt. Prescott sitting next to Blair is not a good advert for Labour values.
36, Is he going to draw a slightly wider base of support than McDonnell?
Probably. Thus he’s slightly credible, however crap his camapaign. McDonnell is a waste of space who still thinks the 70s & 80s.
Meacher is going to lose and lose big but it makes it a little more interesting than McDonnell.
Rik w, Sqn Ldr. I’ve been meaning to ask you, if you were on an aircrew selection board, and a candidate, admitted that he/she had taken drugs, would you pass that candidate?
Re: 15 - Thanks for the reply from Tuesday, Nicholas. The boundaries have changes since I left the area. In 1986, there was a West Wickham North and a West Wickham South. As you might imagine, the High Street was the boundary followed by Glebe Way.
I fought North Ward in 1986 together with a charming, if naive, SDP man. I was also rather naive for while I was cutting the Conservative majority there, we missed a seat in Bromley Common by just 10 votes which was how I learnt the lesson of targetting.
WWS was always the stronger Conservative ward. One of the SDP candidates in 1986 joined the Owenites and stood as an independent SDP candidate in 1990 before re-joining Labour. To be fair, none of us ever got anywhere near winning though I think Labour did finish second in one election.
As for WWN, we did poorly in 1990 but much better in both 1994 and 1998 which were very poor years for the Conservatives on Bromley Council. I was at the re-count for Plaistow & Sundridge in 1998 when your party lost control of the Council - something I thought I would never see.
44. Yokel, I can’t see how he can make the contest more interesting.
I know you’re a Meacher’s fan (the only one I met so far!), but I think even Dennis Skinner would be a more credible challenger.
42. Jack
Andrea Henry etc. Meacher would be the ideal candidate to face Brown and give his leadership a flying start. He has more skeletons in his wardrobe than Harold Shipman but at the same time as an ex-minister and someone who has been around a long time he wont be the joke candidate McDonell would be. It could be the perfect way to give Brown the publicity of a contest and also the kind of result Mubarac would be jealous of.
47. I’m working on a fanclub right now….
45 coldstone. You may find that members of the selection board had taken stimulants, as has been the practice since the Battle of Britain !!
HenryG, I just see your piece on LabourHome about Meacher…LOL!
I think you’ll get many replies by all McDonnellistes there
47 Andrea. Now that the dust has settled a little, what’s the general take on the prospect of early elections in Italy ?
Totally Off topic.. Check out the latest on the frontpage
http://www.sarkozy.fr/home/
So different from UK politics. There is an old dude (Marcel Z) doing an acoustic guitar number/homily to Nicolas.
Can you imagine anything like this in the UK? The Proclaimers singing Browns the man or Chris De Burgh writing a song for Cameron. Vera Lynn singing about the Ming she knew when she was a girl.
The French have a genius all of their own. Vive la difference.
48. Roger, are you saying he’s a joke who can be dressed up as credible just to show Brown had a real contest when in reality he faced a joke anyway?
51. I wanted to know if it was just me that wanted to punch his brains out.
52. Jack, probably not so imminent afterall.
CL seem keen to ask President to give Prodi another mandate…he would probably win a confidence vote at the Senate. Then they would try to enlarge their coalition
“The Labour Party will let him have his 10 years. If he tries to go a day longer than that, they will kill him.”
Unnamed backbencher quoted in Sunday newspaper a while back. I’ve yet to read a better or more succinct analysis of the situation.
david @ 24:
1. There are more Con-controlled councils than LibDem ones, so it would be understandable to have more Con controlled ones at the top (and the bottom) than LiBDem ones
2. The cycle of CPA means that not many of the LibDem councils are in this review - and those that are mostly score 3 stars.
3. LibDems councils are often recently taken over from other parties, so we have to do a lot of work to repair damage
4. If Cons are so good, why is Tory Rutland one of the worst in the country (and it stands out as a poorly performing rural area - rural authorities generally do much better), and not only is it doing badly, it’s getting worse - since the Cons took over.
Also, talking of Rutland, how nonsensical is it that it’s described as ‘improving adequately’ when its rating has dropped since 2005!
Any thoughts on whether Blair might do a Major and stand for election against Brown - in the interests of the country, you know, so as to avoid a coronation and to give, you know, the people the chance etc etc. No broken promises; at least a 50% chance of winning and wouldn’t Cherie love it.
57: Sorrry, but I don’t know anyone in Parliament who thinks the 10-year anniversary is significant: it’s one of those token things that the meida get obsessed with. And the quote is guaranteed to be false if taken literally - there is no possibility whatever of a May handover (which would imply an April leadership election).
45. Coldstone in the Navy that is an instant failure we have the strictest drugs policy of the three services. People have been thrown out for wearing tee shirts with a cannabis leave design. They call it promoting drugs’
58 JamesD. Pick on a county your own size …. leave poor Rutland alone !! …. it may be Tory controlled, but it’s very, very, very small !!
56 Andrea. Thanks.
60. ‘Sorrry, but I don’t know anyone in Parliament who thinks the 10-year anniversary is significant’
How about Tony Blair?
OT - Do we have the by-election results from last night (BNP were defending if I recall correctly). Or am I a night out…?
night out lennon
62 - Jack, I refute any suggestion I am the size of a county, any county! (Although Rutland does a little small in comparison…)
65 - Thanks… and apologies… Nasty head-cold means I’m not quite thinking straight this morning.
I’m not suprised, most of Rutland is a b****y lake anyway!
OT. Old Shagger Norris, he of the conservative moral majority (NOT) and past President of the John Major Fidelity Club says via Mrs Dales Dairy that “if I run I’ll win”.
Presumably he means runs after any female over 16 with a pulse …..because he can’t possibly be angling for yet another doomed run at the London mayoralty … can he ??
66 JamesD (Sussex). Refute all you like …. but you live in a county doubled in size by the presence of Nick Soames !!
69. My GF once had dinner a deux with Steve Norris- said he was indeed very charismatic and could totally see how he got his three mistresses. Score one for pug ugly men.
24 - any link for this report - I’d be interested in having a skim…
OT - looks like Peter Riddell of the Times has been reading Mike on the Tories & UKIP:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/peter_riddell/article1421223.ece
We read it here first!
72 http://www.audit-commission.gov.uk/Products/NATIONAL-REPORT/1ECBC9FA-6F4A-471c-82D2-E087437925CC/CPATheHarderTest2007.pdf
Andrea, your man Dinky is giving Alistair Darling a good going over in the chamber
53. That’s hilarious.
The most striking thing about Sarkozy’s site is how much it resembles the TF1 website.
“48. Roger, are you saying he’s a joke who can be dressed up as credible just to show Brown had a real contest when in reality he faced a joke anyway?”
Exactly! Or more precisely the non-voting public wouldn’t realize he was a joke no-hoper. They would just see Brown beating a ‘credible’ candidate by a mile.
Meacher is a bit of a joke but he has 2 things going for him.
1. He has been remorseless in ringing round MPs searching for nominations, while McDonnell basically doesn’t really like talking to other MPs.
2. He has a pitch about how his challenge can be good for the left and the party (by focusing on the environment, engaging with Brown rather than just attacking him).
So I can see why MPs who want a bit of pressure to come from the left on Brown will go for him.
It is still all fluid. Charles Clarke has been touting a left-right alliance against Brown, which may be why Meacher is going public now.
My memory is not what it was, but wasn’t Michael Meacher involved in a hilarious libel action against the Observer some years ago? One of their columnists said that he was lower-middle class not skilled working class, or something. It created hours of amusement at the time, heightened by the fact that he won his ridiculous case, so we were all able to laugh at the Courts for coming up with such a stupid decision, laugh at Meacher for being pompous and humourless and laugh at the fact that the paper had to pay up.
Happy innocent days. Just wish I could remember what it was all about.
Gordon appears to be enjoying himself
The e-petition asking the Prime Minister to “Scrap the planned vehicle tracking and road pricing policy” has now closed. This is a response from the Prime Minister, Gordon Brown
Thank you for taking the time to register your views about road pricing on the Downing Street website.
This petition was posted shortly before we published the Eddington Study, an independent review of Britain’s transport network. This study set out long-term challenges and options for our transport network.
It made clear that congestion is a major problem to which there is no easy answer. One aspect of the study was highlighting how road pricing could provide a solution to these problems and that advances in technology put these plans within our reach. Of course it would be ten years or more before any national scheme was technologically, never mind politically, feasible.
That is the backdrop to this issue. As my response makes clear, this is not about imposing “stealth taxes” or introducing “Big Brother” surveillance. This is a complex subject, which cannot be resolved without a thorough investigation of all the options, combined with a full and frank debate about the choices we face at a local and national level. That’s why I hope this detailed response will address your concerns and set out how we intend to take this issue forward. I see this email as the beginning, not the end of the debate, and the links below provide an opportunity for you to take it further.
But let me be clear straight away: we have not made any decision about national road pricing. Indeed we are simply not yet in a position to do so. We are, for now, working with some local authorities that are interested in establishing local schemes to help address local congestion problems. Pricing is not being forced on any area, but any schemes would teach us more about how road pricing would work and inform decisions on a national scheme. And funds raised from these local schemes will be used to improve transport in those areas.
One thing I suspect we can all agree is that congestion is bad. It’s bad for business because it disrupts the delivery of goods and services. It affects people’s quality of life. And it is bad for the environment. That is why tackling congestion is a key priority for any Government.
Congestion is predicted to increase by 25% by 2015. This is being driven by economic prosperity. There are 6 million more vehicles on the road now than in 1997, and predictions are that this trend will continue.
Part of the solution is to improve public transport, and to make the most of the existing road network. We have more than doubled investment since 1997, spending £2.5 billion this year on buses and over £4 billion on trains - helping to explain why more people are using them than for decades. And we’re committed to sustaining this investment, with over £140 billion of investment planned between now and 2015. We’re also putting a great deal of effort into improving traffic flows - for example, over 1000 Highways Agency Traffic Officers now help to keep motorway traffic moving.
But all the evidence shows that improving public transport and tackling traffic bottlenecks will not by themselves prevent congestion getting worse. So we have a difficult choice to make about how we tackle the expected increase in congestion. This is a challenge that all political leaders have to face up to, and not just in the UK. For example, road pricing schemes are already in operation in Italy, Norway and Singapore, and others, such as the Netherlands, are developing schemes. Towns and cities across the world are looking at road pricing as a means of addressing congestion.
One option would be to allow congestion to grow unchecked. Given the forecast growth in traffic, doing nothing would mean that journeys within and between cities would take longer, and be less reliable. I think that would be bad for businesses, individuals and the environment. And the costs on us all will be real - congestion could cost an extra £22 billion in wasted time in England by 2025, of which £10-12 billion would be the direct cost on businesses.
A second option would be to try to build our way out of congestion. We could, of course, add new lanes to our motorways, widen roads in our congested city centres, and build new routes across the countryside. Certainly in some places new capacity will be part of the story. That is why we are widening the M25, M1 and M62. But I think people agree that we cannot simply build more and more roads, particularly when the evidence suggests that traffic quickly grows to fill any new capacity.
Tackling congestion in this way would also be extremely costly, requiring substantial sums to be diverted from other services such as education and health, or increases in taxes. If I tell you that one mile of new motorway costs as much as £30m, you’ll have an idea of the sums this approach would entail.
That is why I believe that at least we need to explore the contribution road pricing can make to tackling congestion. It would not be in anyone’s interests, especially those of motorists, to slam the door shut on road pricing without exploring it further.
It has been calculated that a national scheme - as part of a wider package of measures - could cut congestion significantly through small changes in our overall travel patterns. But any technology used would have to give definite guarantees about privacy being protected - as it should be. Existing technologies, such as mobile phones and pay-as-you-drive insurance schemes, may well be able to play a role here, by ensuring that the Government doesn’t hold information about where vehicles have been. But there may also be opportunities presented by developments in new technology. Just as new medical technology is changing the NHS, so there will be changes in the transport sector. Our aim is to relieve traffic jams, not create a “Big Brother” society.
I know many people’s biggest worry about road pricing is that it will be a “stealth tax” on motorists. It won’t. Road pricing is about tackling congestion.
Clearly if we decided to move towards a system of national road pricing, there could be a case for moving away from the current system of motoring taxation. This could mean that those who use their car less, or can travel at less congested times, in less congested areas, for example in rural areas, would benefit from lower motoring costs overall. Those who travel longer distances at peak times and in more congested areas would pay more. But those are decisions for the future. At this stage, when no firm decision has been taken as to whether we will move towards a national scheme, stories about possible costs are simply not credible, since they depend on so many variables yet to be investigated, never mind decided.
Before we take any decisions about a national pricing scheme, we know that we have to have a system that works. A system that respects our privacy as individuals. A system that is fair. I fully accept that we don’t have all the answers yet. That is why we are not rushing headlong into a national road pricing scheme. Before we take any decisions there would be further consultations. The public will, of course, have their say, as will Parliament.
We want to continue this debate, so that we can build a consensus around the best way to reduce congestion, protect the environment and support our businesses. If you want to find out more, please visit the attached links to more detailed information, and which also give opportunities to engage in further debate.
Yours sincerely,
Gordon Brown
Augustus. This is just one of his skeletons. My memory though is that he lost a court case and it cost him several hundreds of thousands of pounds. Whether it was that case I cant remember.
78.. “He has been remorseless in ringing round MPs searching for nominations, while McDonnell basically doesn’t really like talking to other MPs.”
which is part of reason I think he run a poor campaign. He made just it and he hasn’t built a profile in the country inside left wing organization that could have helped his campaign.
Basically McDonnell concentrated outside Parliament and Meacher just inside it.
“It is still all fluid. Charles Clarke has been touting a left-right alliance against Brown, ”
I thought that Clarke just wanted to push the Left out of the party….seriously, later last year, at a CLP event in Bethnal Green (can’t recall if it was Bethnall Green CLP or Poplar & Canning Town), he suggested to McDonnell that he should join Clare Short and leave the party.
I also seem to remember that Meacher’s property portfolio is almost as extensive as Chris Huhne’s.
81. Roger, according to wikipedia he lost a libel case against “Alan Watkins, who had pointed out that Meacher had invented working class origins by referring to his father as a farm labourer (he was in fact an accountant). “
83. Augustus, yes, Meacher owns 9 homes
http://www.guardian.co.uk/guardianpolitics/story/0,,425372,00.html
Augustus. He lost the libel action against Alan Watkins who had refuted his claim to be working class!! I’ve just checked on Google and it cost him a fortune. So don’t anyone go round accusing Dave Cameron of not being working class!
Class War Libel case:
http://almax.wordpress.com/tag/politics/michael-meacher/
Surely the point is that Gordon actually has it within his power now to claim the prize? He could resign tomorrow and take half the cabinet with him.
Obviously this would force a split in the party but it’s a split that’s already there.
At least he’d earn the support and respect of the vast body of floating and centrist voters, and indeed most Labourites who want Blair out - now.
And he could manage the timing of a leadership election to his own advantage.
As it stands, Brown just looks chicken and the longer this runs on this worse it gets for Labour.
Sorry Andrea!
Not a very well though out post methinks Trafalgar!!
77
‘Exactly! Or more precisely the non-voting public wouldn’t realize he was a joke no-hoper. They would just see Brown beating a ‘credible’ candidate by a mile.’
So if Brown beats a crap candidate like Meacher he will then be credible,sounds pretty desperate to me?
It sounds more like an Egyptian election,97% of the population voted for the president, 3% in prison.
I wouldn’t discount the press reminding the non-voting public what a joke Meacher is and therefore highlighting the contest as a sham.
Not just his questionable ‘working class’ credentials but all those numerous houses it was rumoured he owned,I believe it was 5 in total.A true role model for all the lefties.
Stephen Pound MP on Meacher (from BBC website):
“He’s a faintly ridiculous” figure, adding he would be surprised if the veteran left-winger managed to get the required support.
“It’s a pity because, frankly, he’s going to get humiliated,” said the Ealing North MP.
“I suspect he knows that, if he put his ego to one side a bit he would realise that.
“Michael Meacher is a major figure on the British political scene, yet the majority of people I have spoken to, who came into Parliament in the last six or seven years, just said: ‘Who?’ They didn’t know who he was.”
Roger, I just want to see Brown show that he has some balls for once.
Blair will go on and on and on until someone has to force him out, and it must be Brown who wields the knife.
S Penketh: Throwing people out for wearing T-shirts with a cannabis leaf on is part of the mindset that has given the forces a massive recruitment problem (along with Iraq, etc).
Augustus: I dont think Huhne pretends to be a working class man. Meacher is MP for working class Oldham West, while Huhne is MP for property-owning heaven Eastleigh.
PS: From BBC - “Tony Blair has refused to apologise for the security situation in Iraq, saying he bears no responsibility for it.”
Witness the rise of Pontius Pilate Blair!
Re 95, MBoy, I heard that. Blair makes my fists itch, especialy when he comes up with stuff like that!
94, MBoy “Meacher is MP for working class Oldham West, while Huhne is MP for property-owning heaven Eastleigh.”
I don’t think that’s the point. More than representing a working class constituency, the problem for MM is that he condemned second home owners for preventing young people in rural areas from getting a foot on the property ladder…and then he was a 9th home owner!
re 90. it’s very well thought through. We could be seeing the fruits of Brown’s first 100 days (if there were any) by now if he’d wielded the dagger last Autumn but “The right hon. Gentleman is afraid [of an election], is he? Afraid? Frightened? Frit? Could not take it? Cannot stand it?”
Right comment, but to wrong Labour politican
91 john. Of course no Conservative would face a crap candidiate for leadership of the party ….
Ooopppps ….. just when you thought it was safe, up pops that well known singer of Welsh tunes and member for Klingon South !!
Michael Meacher is very well known - he was the one willing to pay his own fare to the Earth Summit in Rio when Blair and his cronies wanted to deny him the opportunity - no doubt because he was willing to put the noses of their corporate paymasters out of joint.
He was a very good environment secretary, but he would be better having a crack at the now overcrowded field of candidates for deputy leader.
Of course, now that he has put his hat in the ring, the three candidates for leadership will be joined by a host of others -
Reid
Hain
Johnson
Miliband
and who knows if Alan ‘wilderness’ Milburn might return..
OT. Rather good profile in the Scotsman of the redoubtable “Madame Ecosse” - Winnie Ewing.
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/politics.cfm?id=283592007
Re 87, Carlotta, I have just read your link. Very very funny!
Meacher is, well a bit of a pratt really isn’t he?
101. Jack, what do you think of SSCUP prospects next May? I read a piece last week that they attracted quite a good number of former Labourites to stand for them
In a move that could put could bring 9/11 conspiracies to the whole nation, Michael Meacher is set to challenge Gordon Brown for the leadership of the Labour Party.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6385285.stm
What Meacher has to say about 9/11 (and I agree with him):
This war on terrorism is bogus
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1036571,00.html
As I stated before Meacher is in grave danger of ending up like David Kelly.
104 “As I stated before Meacher is in grave danger of ending up like David Kelly.”
Or David Icke.
“As I stated before Meacher is in grave danger of ending up like David Kelly”
Reading that article, I’d say he’s in grave danger of ending up like David Icke, or David Shayler.
[101] Jack, would you care to join me in inviting Nick Palmer to respond to Winnie Ewing’s comments about the PLP?
Damn. Beaten to it.
103 Andrea. Frankly not too good … scrambling around the political exit sign !!
104 Wish you live upto your new moniker !!
108 Great minds, Sean, great minds…
105.
Btw, I’ve just seen Sinn Fein political broadcast for next months’ elections…I think it’s a bit weird how they switch languages (I suppose it’s Irish) at some points.
And they seem to switch from one topic to another without few connection…at one point they go directly from education cuts to Middle East situation
107 IA. I’m sure Nick Palmer’s generation of Labour MPs is a little more civilised than the rows of borish, sexist cretins that occupied too much space on both sides of the HoC in the late sixties.
Sean Fear, is there a specific piece of Meacher’s evidence you dispute?
That we should have only one MP who questions foreknowledge of 9/11 or the war on terror shows that our democratic system is a sham and those who mock him, mock all of us. A democracy is supposed to be about differing views.
[112] Deep irony, I suppose …
113 Mystic Moonshine. You’re flogging a decidedly deceased solid hoofed quadruped if you think Meacher’s views on 9/11 count for diddly squat on this site.
Instead try davidshayler4pope.com !!
“Sean Fear, is there a specific piece of Meacher’s evidence you dispute?”
I dispute his interpretation of the evidence.
By way of analogy, for decades, the IRA carried out a massive number of attacks, and the security forces received a massive amount of intelligence about planned IRA attacks. It doesn’t follow that the government therefore allowed IRA attacks to continue for purposes of their own - nor does it follow that Bush and his colleagues allowed 9/11 to go ahead, as Meacher implies.
98, Brown does seem to be frit.
As I say on my blog (don’t bother clicking through to it, you get the highlights here, the rest is deadly dull) the great thing about Meacher’s 9/11 article is that he makes it clear he thinks Pearl harbour was a conspiracy too. Oi! Leave FDR out of it, Meacher.
Meacher claimed he was brought up the son of an agricultural worker, which was sort of true, his father was an estate manager, who (I think) was a qualified accountant. Well ummm I suppose, Prince Charles is a sort of agricultural worker, he potters around at Highgrove no end. Alan Watkins ridiculed Meacher’s claims in an Observer article leading to the libel case, Meacher lost, costing him big bucks. Douglas Hurd of course tried to downgrade his own background in a similar way, when he ran for the party leadership. Its amazing those at the bottom of the social heap, often try to ‘up’ their backgrounds those at the top try to ‘down’ theirs.
Of what other British prime minister - or potential prime minister - could it be even alleged they were frit?
Jack W @ 112 — more civilised, who knows? Another question is whether they are more effective.
Today’s backbenchers do not hold the executive to account, nor pass legislation to match their 60s equivalents: who is the David Steel of today?
Today’s more civilised backbenchers have improved their own office conditions and working hours (while keeping the second home subsidies that were necessary when the House regularly sat through the night). Salaries, expenses, pensions: all gold-plated.
But what have they done for their constituents? Pull up the tailgate, Jack: I’m all right.
Meacher’s 9/11 article was really a career destroying moment. It showed that he does not have the judgement for high office. This is a shame, because he was a good environment minister, and much of his other belief is spot on and very welcome from the Labour party.
JackW, maybe diddly squat, but if Meacher uses the opportunity as a platform to generate publicity and scepticism on 9/11 and the war on terror, who knows what impact that could have?
There is a void out there who will lap this up, as shown in America where sceptisism is soaring. According to a Zogby poll, half of New Yorkers believe their government consciously failed to act on foreknowledge. Other polls have put the figure higher.
That scepticism must have a political impact.
For two years after 9/11, nobody dare speak out in USA, as Bush said “you are either with us or with the terrorists.” That climate of fascism has changed. War on fascism in Soviet America has talen hold. Britain is next to destroy the attack on our freedoms from the Blairite enemy within who want to control and enslave us with their draconian big brother police state.
hatfield girl @ 120 — frit prime ministers? Well, there was the one who ducked out of the Iraq debate the other week.
113-I suppose you are just as keen on the BNP et al having a voice too? Or is this one differing viewpoint too many?
Just heard Peasant Meacher describe Mr. Punch Pound as an “ultra Blairite, a ‘rent-a-quote’ whom no one takes seriously”
Meooww, comrades
Re 118, Britspin, We had an agent codenamed Tricycle who told the Americans that Perl harbour was going to be attacked.
124 Frit is a state of being; Blair wasn’t frit, he regarded the debate as irrelevant; looking at the British withdrawal possibly it was in realpolitik terms. Blair is many things but not frit.
Good summary of Meacher’s career on WATO with Meecher himself arguing that Brown is the architect of New Labour and what we really need is intervention to support industry. Asked whether he was an “Aunt Sally” there to be knocked down he said ‘lets have a debate’. On Iraq war recorded (voted for) described as ‘the biggest mistake of my life’ - misled by Blair. Claims to have 30 MPs ‘in the bag’ with 25 others who’ll support him nearer the time. Time will tell……
An interview with Meacher. The interviewer has just made the same point I made at 48. He asked him if he wasn’t the perfect foil for Brown. A no-hoper who doesn’t look like one! He even asked if Brown had Lent on him to stand!!
121 John L. I have no problems with MPs earning a decent salary or having the tools to provide a good service. Neither is it IMO the responsibility of the government or MPs to become the nanny for every possible problem or difficulty that befalls a constituent.
123 Mystic Printz. Sorry but it’s difficult debating with someone who’s reference points are Michael Meacher, David Shayler and the Easter Bunny !!
WATKINS Alan: A Slight Case of Libel, Duckworth 1990.
I’ve read this book twice - and enjoyed it both times.
123. Mystic Moon. You wrote crap when you called yourself Printz and it’s still crap. Why don’t you go back to one of the conspiracy sites you used to spend your time on.
Sorry Jack. I look like your echo but without the subtlety
So Meacher claims he has 30 MPs supporing him, naturally McDonnell claims that he also is in mid 20s, Tom Watson claims that rumours are that Meacher is in mid-20 and McDonnell with just 6 supporters…..yawn, the “guess who has less supporters” game doesn’t look so interesting.
The “who support who” in the Deputy leadership looks much more interesting
135 Andrea. If I were Gordon I’d encourage support for Meacher to ensure a contest. Meacher makes AN Other appear Prime Ministerial !! ……. mind you from a PB point of view, we’d be treated to months of “Mystic” claptrap, that surely is too much to endure !!
Sean Fear, Meacher is not a sheep. He may not agree with what he is told to believe. He doesn’t swallow all he is told by the US Administation. Maybe you do. I don’t see that as reason to mock Meacher. What he has done takes guts.
He recognises the 9/11 Commission report was edited and censored by the Whitehouse and it stated that following the money trail was of no significance. You might agree with that. I agree with Meacher it is of very great significance.
You might also agree with the official version that two jets hit the towers, exploded, melted steel to turn two of the largest buildings on the planet to a pile of dust and shards of steel and just one passport in tact flew out of a pocket, flew out of a plane, flew out of the fireball, flew out of the building to be found below in the street. And guess whose passport it was? Mohammad Atta, the ringleader of the hijackers.
If you want to believe that, fine. As soon as you start questioning any one aspect of the official story, it seems you become a conspiracy theorist.
Michael Meacher has every right to ask questions and imply whatever he wants to imply. His job as a decent politician is to scrutinise and ask pertinant questions.
I disgree with MBoy that his article was career destroying. It was the highest point of his career, when he put himself on the line, because sometimes the truth is more important than anything else. Meacher does not claim that what he implies is correct. He states that there are questions that need answering.
What sort of passive wimp nation has Britain become, when the whole basis for wars we have started with Bush are not subjected to rigourous scrutiny?
re 111. I hadn’t realised the assembly had such a broad remit. They seem to be as confused as “Dr” John Read complaining about cuts in his constituents’ hospital services.
136. Jack, Meacher can make Adam Rickitt looking like a Prime Ministerial contender
139 Andrea. Nuff said.
140. Jack, we haven’t seen Meacher’s 6 pack, but I doubt he can surprise us.
197: Winnie Ewing retired from Parliament 18 years before I was elected, and I’ve never met any of the people to whom she refers, so I can’t give a useful comment. There is however still a general tendency among politicians to rubbish the overall quality of the other side(s), adding a few exceptions to show fair-mindedness.
The only bit of the article that I know about is how Fiona Jones was treated here. I knew her quite well and liked her, and she seemed habitually cheerful to me until the police saga got her down. I’d be surprised if anyone tried to bully her - she was a sparky woman and perfectly capable of telling them to f*** off.
As for today’s MPs, we seem to me to be a fairly hard-working bunch and although you hear of the occasional incident and there is lots of semi-fake outrage during high-profile debates, the atmosphere when the cameras are not watching is generally pretty friendly, serious and civilised - contrast the tone at PMQ with the tone at any other Ministerial question time. Whether MPs are best deployed with the work profile that we have (half multi-tasking scrutiny, half social worker) is another question, probably too complex to be suitable for discussion here.
100 - I don’t see how Meacher’s long known ambitions to split the left-ticket and challenge Brown himself are going to suddenly prompt others to join in?
Unless they feel coming second of three is better than second of two, and still having no prospect of a serious role under ‘forgive and forget’ Gordon?
If Meacher causes McDonnell to fail to enter the race, he won’t get the support of a lot of people on the left at all. I used to have a lot of time for Meacher, but JM has done the work and has the best approach - I wouldn’