The shot putter’s final throw
After schools, houses, electoral reform and the future of the human race, it’s time for a bit of politics to finish off the week; time also for one of my famous incredibly contrived analogies. Gordon Brown is in the position of an Olympic shot putter who has had two no-throws.
At the beginning of the competition his supporters thought he was a real contender – that’s why he was selected. Now, given the performance so far of his main opponent in the competition, not many people think he can win. But he has to get his third round throw right or else he won’t even be there at the finish. Fortunately for him, he has conditions on his side.
OK, enough of the analogy. The bad news for Gordon Brown is that his ministers and MPs could still force a terminal leadership crisis in the autumn if things haven’t improved for Labour. By that time three aspects of the case made for the Prime Minister two weeks ago will have gone:
• The argument that a change of leadership will force an early election; GB himself will only have seven months left and a new leader could anyway say the first realistic time for an election would be spring
• The argument that better news on the economy will improve the polls will to some extent have been tested
• Those who turned against GB in the autumn could argue that they had stayed loyal for as long as could reasonably be asked.
But the good news for GB is that there are several reasons why his position may improve:
• MPs’ expenses will eventually stop being a big story
• There will be the steady flow of better economic news and international praise for his recession strategy
• Over the next two or three weeks the Government is unveiling several big policy statements with the aim of demonstrating it still has an agenda
• Governments generally improve their poll rating over the summer recess simply because people are in a good mood and are less likely to read newspapers or think about politics
• Labour conference will be a carefully choreographed pre-election rally
• And, finally, GB has his final Queen’s Speech to make commitments and draw dividing lines. He might still, for example, respond to growing public and cabinet pressure and pledge a polling day referendum on electoral reform.
So, all in all, the odds are on the veteran competitor throwing far enough to make the final. But he’ll stay nervous until he does, and, of course, making the final and winning it are two very, very different things.
Economic crisis and party fortunes – has Cameron got it right?
The Conservatives are still favourites to win the next election. But, as I said yesterday, things are closer and more uncertain than anyone would have predicted a few months ago. There is no question thus far that the economic crisis has been good for Labour and bad for the Tories. This too was unpredictable. There is no simple correlation between the state of the economy and the ruling party’s fortunes; parties can win in bad times, as the Conservatives demonstrated in 1992. But thinking about moments when stories of economic crisis have dominated the news; devaluation in the pound in November 1967, taking an emergency loan from the IMF in September 1976, and leaving the ERM in September 1992, each has damaged the Government’s standing and each been followed by its defeat at the subsequent General Election.
In all three of these examples plenty of other things went wrong for the ruling party between the point of crisis and the election, and there is an important difference between a short term emergency and a longer term downturn, but there is little in recent history to suggest Governments benefit from economic turmoil (a good thing too given the obvious moral hazard of bad times leading to good polls).
Despite being implicated in the creating the conditions for the crisis, Gordon Brown has been pretty successful in portraying himself as being the kind of leader we need right now. But his team have also been helped by the Conservatives’ decision to open up a clear policy divide on the handling of the crisis. In 1992 John Smith established a lead for Labour which persisted largely unchanged up to 1997. Yet Labour had been a supporter of ERM membership and it didn’t offer any serious economic alternative to the short term measures forced on Major and Lamont. Instead Smith focussed on competence, charging the Tories with being dithering and divided, charges that stuck.
In contrast David Cameron has chosen to argue for a different policy approach. Labour has been able to portray the Conservative alternative as ‘do nothing’, which, I understand, is an attack that is working in Labour focus groups.
There appeared to be a clear switch in Cameron’s strategy marked by his ‘moral responsibility’ speech in Glasgow East in July. Having successfully decontaminated the Conservative brand in his first thirty months, from that point on the focus has been on highlighting what is distinctive abour the Tory approach. But in choosing to differentiate on the economy and public spending the Conservatives appear to setting themselves against the international consensus. They may have more work to do to defend their stance in the new year when is seems that President Obama (someone with whom the Tories have generally been keen to identify) will launch exactly the kind of public spending splurge the Conservatives are seen to oppose in the UK.
The Independent reports this morning that voters have shifted their priorities decisively from public spending to tax cuts. In the medium term as the public sector retrenchment and rising tax levels kick in there will be plenty for the Conservatives to get their teeth into. But now as millions prepare for a Xmas dinner that has more of the feel of a last supper, the issue is how to get through the next six months.
In choosing to oppose the Government on the substance of policy, and not just competence, Osborne and Cameron have displayed political courage. If they win the next election it will be easier for them to argue that they have a mandate for diffcult decisions, echoes here of Thatcher and the economics of the corner shop. But first they have to win that election aganst a Labour Party whose strategists seem keen to splash about in the clear blue water of economic policy.
2020 Public Services Commission – and some nerve wracking memories
My busy Tuesday ended with the launch of the 2020 Public Services Trust, an independent, all-party inquiry which we are hosting here at the RSA and on which I sit as a Commissioner. Having Times columnist Camilla Cavendish in the chair helped compensate for the rather white, middle-aged, male feel of the panel (and, yes, that does include me).
Originally, the 18 month time scale for the Commission was designed with the idea in mind of reporting around the time of the next General Election. But now it fits neatly with the point at which public services will experience a massive deceleration in revenue and deep cuts in capital allocations. This is a vital turning point for public services and provides a good focal point for our deliberations. Anyway, I suspect that next spring is now the most likely election date.
Personally, I will be relieved if we are not publishing at election time. I will never forget being woken at 6.00 in the morning on 16 May 2001 with the news that the Guardian had splashed with Labour’s secret plan to privatise public services, a plan apparently based on the recommendation of the IPPR Commission on Public Private Partnerships. As the Director of IPPR, I was at least relieved of my worries about how we were going to generate interest in our learned but rather dull and worthy Commission report!
I still don’t know who gave the draft report to Patrick Wintour. I was told the leak was authorised by Labour strategists worried that the 2001 Manifesto was insufficiently New Labour. Unsurprisingly, elements in the Labour Party and trade unions were apoplectic with rage.
Later that day I got a call from a friend in Millbank with a warning:
‘I overheard one of Gordon’s people telling a journalist to try to do you and the Commission in. Be prepared’
Ten minutes later a call came from a journalist. ‘About this Commission, I see it was part funded by firms that sell private services to the public sector. How do you respond to the charge that you were paid to call for privatisation?’
I won’t reveal the name of the journalist as I don’t bear a grudge and we are now friendly acquaintances. Anyway, as he’s a Sunderland fan, I will be hoping to get more morsels of revenge when the Baggies go to the Stadium of Light on Saturday!
RSA Animate
RSA Mobile
RSA Comment- RSA Projects Blogs
- Twitter @RSAMatthew
- RSAMatthew: Matthew's blog: Developing development http://t.co/hhhUGYX1
- RSAMatthew: RSA Xmas Party was huge - my whole life I have been a snobbish git about ceilidh type fun - now I want to dance every night
- RSAMatthew: On my way to RSA Xmas party - I won't stay too long as it spoils the fun to have the boss around
RSA Bookshop
The RSA Bookshop, in partnership with Blackwell's the UK's leading academic bookseller, offers Fellows and friends an opportunity to purchase books and to explore our speakers’ ideas in greater detail. Visit the RSA Bookshop.