Yeah Right!

No 10 also fiercely denied Conservative claims Mr Brown was using the visit to troops in Afghanistan to divert attention away from the row over his refusal to sign off on equipment.

Is the moment when Labour lost the election?

“Every request that the military commanders made to us for equipment was answered. No request was ever turned down.”

Gordon Brown, 5 March 2010, Chilcot Enquiry

A Fairer Britain or The Forces of Hell?

Good! So that's alright then. We now all know that Mr Brown is not a bully. He's just someone who cares and is determined to build a fairer Britain.

In the meantime Mr Darling, arguably the next most important man in government to the PM, has confirmed in an interview with Sky News that two of the Prime Minister's key aides briefed long and hard against the Chancellor when he predicted, back in 2008 that Britain's economy was in for a very rough time. According to Mr Darling, "the forces of hell were unleashed." Now who could have unleashed the forces? The 'forces of hell', clearly not a very nice man. But does this constitute bullying. No it probably does not but what then followed exposes someone who is clearly hell-bent on getting his own way.

During the summer Mr Brown wanted to replace Mr Darling with Ed 'Blinker' Balls, but Mr Darling got his own back by refusing to be replaced, insisting he would resign to the back benches rather than accept another job in government. This would have made the PM's job close to untenable. Result Mr Darling is still in No.11, while Mr Brown remains in No.10.

Now all this can do little for the smooth working of government in these most testing of times. Mr Brown is clearly someone who likes to get his own way. For years he wanted the top job, over which he agreed a deal with Tony Blair. Now is it, was it, right that Tony Blair, who said he was going to serve a full term, stepped down to allow a man into the top job who is most obviously not cut out for such a role?

As I've often said on this blog, Mr Brown is not a leader, he is not the stuff from which leaders are made. All that has gone on since he has come to power shows a man who is Machiavellian, a man who has not the skills to be PM and most worryingly a man who is by inclination introverted rather than an extrovert. Leadership in a parliamentary democracy, one that is founded on the longstanding principals of cabinet rule does not sit well with Mr Brown (nor did it with his predecessor but he was a lot cleverer, as were those he gathered around him.) Gordon Brown is a controller, not a leader.

Vast column inches are given over to the opinion polls, the tea leaves and crystal ball gazing by pollsters trying to determine who is ahead, and by how much, and what it could all mean for our future government. Clearly Mr Cameron has not grabbed the electoral high ground; it might all change when we have the TV debates, but then again it may not. So could Gordon Brown still be PM after the election? Yes he could, and then the country will be in real trouble. Watch then the infighting and the jockeying before the knives come out. We will be faced with a Labour party who thinks it is omnipotent, one that will contain even less experience than the current cabinet. Who will push the knife into Mr Brown should he win in a couple of months?

Gordon Brown may want to be careful what he wishes for. . .

60,493,912 of us are marching to the beat of one man with 24,278 'friends'

So let's get this straight. Gordon Brown, a man elected to serve his constituency in Fife by 24,278, who then becomes Prime Minister in some kind of stitch-up with Tony Blair wants change. He's a man who has brought into government as his de facto No.2 someone who has been disgraced twice and continues to show little more than contempt for everyone who comes into contact with him. He's also a man who has added more unelected people to his front bench than any Prime Minister in living memory. This is the man who is now proposing electoral reform of our democracy. It's bloody staggering!

You'll pardon me for being somewhat sceptical of his reasons. At best he's looking for ways to deflect yet more criticism of his patched up government. At worst he's trying to save his own skin. In fact everything that Gordon Brown does is about 'me', not about the country and the people he constantly claims to serve. Naturally to do a job like PM you have to have a highly, a very highly, developed ego. It seems like we have a man who is so convinced of his own rightness that he does not tolerate dissent, is prepared to sell his soul (to Mandelsdon, if not the Devil) and who is more focused on himself than the job he has to do. Despite all the talk of getting on with the job all he has succeeded in doing is getting on our collective nerves. In a random poll across the country I doubt that Brown would make double figures in the popularity stakes.

And we all thought it couldn't get any worse.

Gordon Brown – Nero Without a Gun (Or the Bullets)

Gordon Brown when he became PM promised us a government of all the talents and set about granting peerages left, right and centre to bring in people to positions as 'ultra special advisers'. But with this latest reshuffle Brown seems to be bringing in more and more talent' to do jobs that others could just as easily do. Mrs Kinnock, while experienced in Europe, gets a great gig to boost her personal standing and do precisely what? Is there really nobody among the 350 Labour MPs who could do the job?

Of course we've already had Mandelson who is now according to reports defacto Deputy Prime Minister. Lord Adonis is the Transport Minister and Alan Sugar has been given a peerage to be 'Enterprise Tsar'. In many ways the appointment and peerage of Sugar is the worst of all. It's a flagrant attempt to cash in on his profile as a TV face and got little to do with 'enterprise'. It's arguable what anyone in a position like his can actually do. I also doubt, among British business leaders, that Sugar has the highest respect quotient.

Democracies are wonderful things; we are blessed in this country with one that is much better than most. However, Brown's actions are making a mockery of the whole thing. Unelected cronies, hangers on, self servers and out of touch is what most of them are. It's the out of touch bit that's probably the worse thing in all this. But that's Brown's Achilles heal. He has been in government for so long that he has lost touch with people. Not content with bringing people into government his bunker mentality is what has done for him.

There's more than a whiff of "I'm going to take you all down with me." The moral compass was lost a long time ago. His emotional radar never has worked and now it seems the 'brain the size of a planet' has gone into lock down. We are about to witness a very unpleasant few months in which Brown finally implodes before our eyes. Do I feel sorry for him? No, not one bit. But I do feel sorry for Britain though. His arrogance and delusional behaviour has brought the office he coveted for so long down to a level of disrespect I never thought I'd see in my life time. Defiance is not strength. Saying you are, "not going to walk away", does not make you a leader.

Fundamentally Brown is a weak man. He's no leader as he's proved, yet again, over his dithering about Alastair Darling's removal. How can a man who cannot command the respect of his party get the respect of the country – let alone run it. It's all going to get very nasty indeed as Brown impersonates Nero. Unfortunately such is the ineptitude of his cabinet that none of them thought to take a gun, let alone the bullets into the bunker.

In The Name of God Go. . .part 2

The official web site of the Prime Minister's Office, and more specifically the bit about the petitions, seem to be tampering with the information. The petition that states – We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to resign, has been shortened to just 'resign' on the front page. Why? 'Cos it's all so horribly embarrassing for Gordon Brown who seems to be completely losing his grip. Even Baron Mandy in his interview at the weekend spoke in a way to suggest he knows that they're doomed....then as long as Brown is in charge I guess we all are.

I urge you all to sign here....it's already the most popular petition on the site.

In The Name of God Go!

During the early months of World War 2 with Chamberlain both ill and his position increasingly untenable there were calls in parliament for him to resign. Among the Tory members who spoke out against Chamberlain was Leo Amery, a man not noted for his oratory but who on this occasion surpassed himself. “You have sat too long for any good you have been doing. Depart, I say let us have done with you. In the name of God go!”

On Friday a petition was added to the downing Street web site asking Gordon Brown to resign. It quickly reached 500 signatures and by this morning it's well on the way to 12,500. I suspect by the end of the week it could be at 100,000. Who knows where it will end up. You can sign HERE

Gordon Brown is Finished

Anyone who has been a regular on this blog will know that I'm no fan of Gordon Brown. But, honestly? Not even I thought he was this bad. Back in May 2007 under a post entitled, Never Make Dreams Your Master, I said.
Previously the one thing that people perhaps could say about Brown is they respected him for what he has done, now even that is unravelling. So what are we left with? A man who isn't actually very likeable, who is fond of telling us all how wrong we are and how he knows what's best. At the same time those close to the clunking one have been working double time to try and soften his image, they know how damaging it is. Yet no matter what they do he will never be able to pull it off. Gordon Brown will never a leader be.

Five days later I commented on The Last Ten Years – It was Nothing To Do With Me.
It was after his first speech as PM in which he famously said.
He was to move away from the "cult of celebrity" and sleaze allegations that had tarnished Mr Blair's years in office and that his premiership would be guided by a "moral compass" instilled in him by his father, a Scots minister of religion, and his mother.

By June I went all Oscar Wilde and talked of The Importance of Being Earnest. It was in response to Milliband's appointment as Foreign Minister and the bringing in of 'experts' who would be made peers to do specific jobs.
Government of all the talents my big toe, it's Gordon Brown trying to appear to be all embracing while he will continue to be what he's always been - a controller and a man who is exclusive rather than inclusive. This is not going to be a lot of fun.

By May last year I was getting desperate, Gordon Brown – Back Door Man
People talk of Brown's intellect, his work ethic, his brain, all the other attributes that he is supposed to have in abundance, yet has any one ever talked about his leadership skills? It's too easy to say, ah yes, but he was always been in Tony's shadow, but he’s had time to do his own thing and he’s been found wanting. No matter what Brown does he has not the charisma, the charm, the interpersonal skills - that special something that leaders have and those who are their number's two's always think they have - that's GB's biggest problem and always will be. He thinks he's cleverer than everyone around him, which he might well be in intellectual terms, but IQ, brainpower, cleverness, and being a bit of a know it all will never out trump someone who has that special something. Like it or not Blair had it and Brown will forever be the man in search of it.

In the same month I was asking if he was Standing on the Shoulders of Midgets.
Twenty-five years ago I was on a plane somewhere over America when I picked up a copy of Time magazine with Ronald Reagan’s picture on the cover. The lead article was about Reagan’s style of managing his team. He said, “Surround yourself with the best people you can find, delegate authority, and don't interfere as long as the policy you've decided upon is being carried out.” It’s the total antithesis of what Gordon Brown is about and it’s why he can’t hack it. As a No.2 his power was based upon tripping people up on the detail, as a No.1 it’s his Achilles heal. He just doesn’t have what it takes to be a leader and the more that the young guns defend him it only highlights what’s wrong with his leadership.

By June it was another question. Are No.2s Always Brown?
Leadership is an art and it’s also something that has a huge deal to do with confidence. It’s why I have constantly said that Brown is no number one, he’s a No.2 and always will be; sort of appropriate really….

By July 2008 I was loosing it Gordon Brown, Superstar

“Gordon Brown, Gordon Brown
Who are you, what have you sacrificed
Gordon Brown, Superstar

Do you think you're what you say you are?”

Gordon Brown is no superstar; he’s just damaged goods.

At the Labour Party Conference in the autumn I noted that Gordon Brown was Like A Worn Out Record
"This is not about rhetoric", says the Prime Minister. It's not? That's what this and his entire government is based upon. He doesn't do leadership; he does talking. Politics as we all know has a lot to do with the ancient art of smoke and mirrors, but it also, just occasionally, has to do with not just talking the talk, sometimes you have to walk the walk too. Fundamentally it's all about leadership and it's what Brown doesn't get about it. He thinks the more he talks the talk about “fairness” and “rising to challenges” it will all magically come right on the night. Just about everyone in Britain have had their pockets picked by Labour with stealth tax after stealth tax making things ever worse, while all Brown can do is blame it on the global crunch. Yes of course there are global issues but our problems are also domestic, labour-made, issues. It's been an accident waiting to happen and Brown has overseen this mess - much of which is his own making.

A couple of days later I suggested that.
Gordon Brown will become a similar object of derision for Conservatives and those who vote labour out at the next election. He will become the man whose legacy will keep Labour out of power for years to come. No matter what happens he’ll be the Brown eyed loathsome man.

Over the past week or so the McBride scandal and now the addition of Balls, Whelen and co. has dragged Brown to a new low. In the Sunday Telegraph there is an article by Tom Bower. It is THE best article I've read anywhere on the calamity that is Labour and the unmitigated disaster that is Gordon Brown – especially since becoming PM. The simple fact is that Brown does not have the ability to lead. He's like a guy I once worked with that was recruited from academia. His response to everything was, let's write a paper. These papers looked impressive, were big and were full of graphs and diagrams. However, very little of what he proposed made any sense – fine in the confines of the classroom, no good in the real world of cut and thrust business. Brown and his boys (because that is largely the problem, they have little experience) can go on and on talking the talk – they just can't walk the walk.


What's to happen? Well, we're going to have a completely discredited government under a leader who cannot lead, doesn't know how to lead at a time when we need leadership and a strong government more than we've ever needed one. The blogosphere (not keen on the term, but it'll do) did well under Guido's full frontal attack last week. However, the MSM, and especially the newspapers have been stung into action. They are having difficulties coping with declining sales and Ad revenue; they don't need their credentials as journalists and commentators called into question. We will have a run of stories on the government from papers anxious to show their Lobby correspondents are not tame hacks doing Labour's bidding.

Watch their space....it's going to get bloody.

McBride. . .How Come It Took So Long?

There's an interesting post on Iain Dale this evening about 'client journalism'; talking about how journalists are reliant on people like Damian McBride for their information so that he was in some way tolerated. Am I surprised, not one bit. But when you get to hear how bad McBride's behaviour has been it's all pretty staggering. Take this little scenario...

In early 2007 McBride sent a text message to Anthony Browne, the outgoing political correspondent of the Times.
'I just wish for once you'd try to get past your cynical, Tory, halfwit Harold Lloyd schtick to try and be a genuine journalist. It’s presumably cos of your inability to do so that you’re off to earn a crust at some Tory think-tank instead. Pathetic.’

Apparently Browne had asked McBride for a comment on his paper’s scoop that Gordon Brown had been warned in advance about the problems his 1997 pensions fund raid would cause. He was the Prime Minister's special adviser on press issues, working closely with the director of communications Mike Ellam. Even then McBride operated in the shadows and was perceived to be closer to the PM. He also dealt with personal PR for Sarah Brown, the PM’s wife.

According to some McBride employed Machiavellian means when it came to Brown’s obsession to succeed Tony Blair as Labour leader. According to one unnamed source ‘Anybody who was potentially a rival to Gordon would suddenly find lots of negative stories about them in the press, whether it was David Blunkett, Alan Milburn or John Reid – with all the disasters in the Home Office – and then David Miliband. A lot of people would say those stories have come from Damian.’

Now let's not forget that this man was being paid by us, the taxpayers and are we seriously to believe that Gordon Brown knew nothing of his dark arts?

Hat Tip Brand Republic

McBride – The Price of Silence

Is it fair to assume that McBride was allowed to resign, rather than be sacked, because it will in some way help his financial position? Will he keep pension rights as a result? Is there any 'hardship payment' for a resignation rather than a sacking? Or was this all about buying his silence. If McBride was sacked then surely he would be more likely to have something to say about the Great Protector that is Gordon Brown.

Which ever way the affair is looked at how can Gordon Brown not be implicated? The PM had lunch with Derek Draper at Chequers shortly after Draper registered his Red Rag web site. . .WHY? Why would the Prime Minister invite Draper to lunch? To discuss his work as a psychotherapist? Downing Street were oh so quick to react to the situation, casting McBride adrift, which tells you how worried they are.

What is clear is that there is something very rotten at the core of Labour. The fact that they think there is some orchestrated Tory campaign against them, led by Guido, shows how delusional they are. They are so beleaguered that they are demonstrating all the worrying traits of a bunker mentality. Brown's ability to get on with the more important job of getting us through the recession will be close to impossible.

Draper, McBride and Brown – Triplets of Different Mothers?

Liam Byrne, the Cabinet Minister, was on BBC News this morning stating the government and Gordon Brown's position on Smeargate debacle. He said not once but several times that Mr. McBride sent these emails to "a friend" and engaged in "juvenile banter". It's as though Derek Draper, the 'friend' had nothing to do with Labour and this was just a couple of 'lads having a laugh'. Draper is the editor of Labourlist, for which we can assume the Labour party have been paying handsomely. How long will Draper be in that position? Draper has written a piece on LabourList justifying his actions and in the comments section he's been attacked by just about all the commentators. Interesting too that the minister in commentating about McBride always referred to him as "Mr." It's as though they barely knew one another when in reality they worked together on a daily basis.

Of course Gordon Brown didn't order McBride to do what he did, but he knew exactly what kind of person McBride is and what in general he was up to in his capacity as his tame spinner. If Brown didn't know, why didn't he? You don't employ someone like McBride, who incidentally is paid for by us, and not know what he's doing, do you?

Gordon Brown Speaks Out on Second Homes Row?

"Something must be done about the iniquitous arrangements by which senior cabinet ministers are claiming massive benefits on second homes while living in grace and favour properties supplied at the taxpayers expense. Hard working families in Britain need to know that we feel their pain, that we share that pain, and are not out of touch; we aim to take action on this issue as soon as possible. As Prime Minister, I, of course, don't do any such thing as cheating the system, I am above all that kind of thing. Neither do I accept that I'm now making this statement because the cat is out of the bag and I'm being forced into it by public opinion. I've always felt it immoral and it's evidence of greed from MPs of all parties, who work the system to their advantage, while increasing the burden upon the state. However, what am I to do? I have been totally unaware things like this are going on in parliament, even when I was Chancellor. Neither was I aware that it was an issue with the public at large because none of my cabinet colleagues have brought the matter to my attention. Now that I am aware I will put in place a parliamentary review to come up with an alternative scheme that will help to realign the collective moral compass of Parliament. This review will be conducted by a select group of MPs chaired by a minister who will I am sure act promptly and in the best interest of MPs."

Gordon Brown Demolished. . .

Yer Little Bliar. . .

According to the Daily Mail. "Tony Blair faced fresh allegations of cashing in after launching a business venture touting political and economic advice. His new firm, Tony Blair Associates, will allow wealthy clients the chance to buy the experience of Britain's longest-serving Labour Prime Minister.

On the basis of their expenses wealthy clients could be almost any one of the current cabinet. Still I suppose after he loses his job our current great leader will get a job running Tony Blair's economic advice division. On the other hand perhaps not if Cherie's on Tony's board.

Tell It Like It Is

So, RBS seem to be saying that they may be paying bonuses to their senior management. How can this be when they've lost such spectacular amounts? Most of the country seems to be happy having a job at the moment. But then what does Gordon Brown say. "We expect whatever decisions are taken to reflect the conditions of the economy and the performance of the banks. There are no rewards for failure in what we are proposing." Meanwhile his new best friend Mandy (who last night said on TV "Remember small business grow into big businesses." – what insight!) said. "What I would say is please be mindful about how this looks and what public opinion will be,

What is it with politicians that they find it so hard to speak in proper clear language. "RBS you must not pay those bonuses." Is what he should say. The Government owns 70% of RBS after all.

Brown's Resignation?

Well it's a fair question isn't it? Surely after solving the world's financial crisis the last time by telling the world what to do, and it not working here in the UK, then maybe he should just go. This idea that he's the only man that can save us seems increasingly hollow. Is the rest of the world really in the kind of hole that we in Britain are? Somehow it doesn't seem like it. Yesterday Brown kept thundering on about it being everyone else's fault but his.

Just remember we didn't elect him; he's not there by right. He's a bit like a caretaker manager at a football club – the only difference is he hasn't had that lucky 'Brown bounce' where there's an upturn in the results.

Mandy Watch No.7

There's an interview with Baron Mandelson of Foy and Hartlepool in the Guardian today. Apart from it being mostly about how great his Lordship thinks he is, there is much guff about how good his relationship with our Prime Minister has become once again and what a truly great leader Gordon Brown is. This utterly bizarre statement tops it off.

"Internationally people say to me,’ Your prime minister has been transformed. His standing has soared.' People really do look to him like some Moses figure who is going to lead them away from this economic mess to the promised land."

First he wants to be on Strictly Come Dancing and now he's waxing lyrical. He gives the impression of somehow taking the whole thing as a bit of a joke. Then again he has it made. Mandelson will spend the rest of his life, assuming Labour lose the next ejection, being a non-exec director for a large number of businesses keeping him the style to which he has become accustomed, yet never having done a decent days work to deserve. The man is a shyster, a fiddler and worst of all he's arrogant in the extreme.

Beware of Cheap Imitations

There seems to be an overwhelming feeling amongst those who love Labour to see Mandelson's appointment as the return of the Prodigal. Michael White in the Guardian says that he always seemed to know what was the right thing to do in a crisis. Well for a bloke who is so bloody clever he was really stupid over his mortgage dealings, not to say dishonest, and again over his relationship with the mega rich Indian brothers.

When all is said, and there is still a lot to be said given that it's Sunday tomorrow and the papers will be full of it, he has to perform. It's all fine and dandy for the pro Mandy columnists to say how clever he is and how he is so well placed with business leaders because of what happened in Brussels. How great a trade secretary he was (don't forget that was seven or eight years ago and a lot of water has flowed under that particular bridge), but there are flaws in his character that will eventually do for him.

His arrogance and his vanity knows no bounds and while it might be that he's a lot more likable in person he doesn't come over well with the electorate as a whole. Some wag yesterday suggested that Brown's masterstroke was that he had brought in someone to the cabinet that the public hated even more than the PM himself. True but dangerous. 

There's one other aspect of this whole affair that will not play out well. There's no mutual trust between the two men. Of course some might say that Mandelson is Labour to his roots and he will die fighting on the barricades for what he believes in. I'm not so sure. He is now a peer, and as the song says, "they can't take that away from me". He doesn't have a seat to defend or worry about which means he will not ever have to face his adoring public ever again. Trust is essential whether it's in relationships, business or politics and Brown should be aware that whatever suits Peter best is what Peter will do. . .trust me.

The Blairites in the cabinet and on the back-benches are no doubt delighted with his return; similarly with all the talk of Alastair Campbell being back in the fold. They would all do well to remember one thing – none of them are the real thing. Blair had style, he had leadership abilities and he had what it takes to win the beauty contest that is now British politics. None of them and especially Brown have the ability to lead. 

Oh Mandy. . .

Just back from a few days away, hence the lightness, well to be fair, the non-existence of any blogging. Up to my eyes in stuff, but the news that the Prince of Darkness is set to return couldn't go unrecorded. It will prove to be a disaster. He's disliked, distrusted and despicable.....still Gordon loves him. . .

Yesterday's a dream I face the morning
Crying on the breeze
the pain is calling, oh Mandy

Well you came and you gave without taking
but I sent you away, oh Mandy
well you kissed me and stopped me from shaking
And I need you today, oh Mandy

Meanwhile the man becomes a Lord....it proves that you sometimes you can always get what you want.

The Look of Defeat

In today's political world it's as much about what you look like as what you say. Yesterday on Andrew Marr Gordon Brown looked absolutely awful, his face is pudgy. his eyes circled with black rings and his pallor was shot. His talk of aspirational policies such as the nursery scheme are redolent of a government bereft of real ideas; he's clutching at imaginary straws in an effort to ward off defeat. All this is made worse today with news that there's a shortage of nursery teachers in Scotland, with their numbers dropping by around 10% in the last four years.

In a world where our politicians find it very hard to continue to hold onto our respect it is, almost by definition, even harder to regain respect once lost. Added to which, while it shouldn't matter a two-penny toss, Brown is just so unlikeable. All the talk of being an ordinary guy just doesn't ring true. He seems far from ordinary; he doesn't have that common touch, he looks arrogant when he's interviewed and worst of all he's surrounded by a whole bunch of amateurs – the Bunker analogy extends to the 'Labour Youth'. Almost every commentator is suggesting that Glenrothes will be impossible for Labour to hold, it will be Brown's Waterloo. Somehow or another I think that even if Labour looses then Brown will hang on in there. He waited so long for the prize, is so convinced of his own rightness and unable to accept that there could possibly be anyone better that he'll not go.

UPDATE. According to Tory MP Nadine Dorres a friend of hers who works in the cosmetic surgery industry is convinced Brown has had Botox. If I were him I'd want my money back!