(Observer) I won't quit, vows Blair as cabinet rift opens

[Anarcho-Socialist]

I won't quit, vows Blair as cabinet rift opens

· Defeated MPs blame leader for poll losses
· Blair reveals 2008 timetable for departure

Gaby Hinsliff, political editor
Sunday May 8, 2005
The Observer

Tony Blair and Gordon Brown were locked in a fierce power struggle last night over the cabinet reshuffle as the newly born partnership stumbled during the first days of the new government.
Within 24 hours of the end of the campaign, the united front adopted by Labour's two most powerful men was cracking over plans to parachute a controversial Downing Street adviser into government - and speculation over the timing of the Prime Minister's departure.

Blair has made clear he has no plans to quit early and has given Brown no date for his departure. The timetable being discussed within his private circle is for him to trigger a party leadership contest in July 2008 and remain as Prime Minister while the succession is resolved, allowing the new leader to take over that autumn. 'The best thing would be to get in at party conference 2008 - that gives you a year to establish yourself but not become overfamiliar,' said a Downing Street source.

The first serious test of the truce between the two men emerged yesterday, over plans to propel Blair's policy adviser Andrew Adonis - an unelected former SDP activist who is widely mistrusted by the Labour backbenches - into government as deputy to Education Secretary Ruth Kelly. He is said to be frustrated that education did not get a higher profile during the election campaign. The Treasury was understood to be fiercely resisting the appointment last night, amid signs that Downing Street was backing down. 'Gordon will never let this happen,' said one well-placed source.

(snip)

The renewed outbreak of infighting comes as defeated MPs who lost their seats on Thursday night blamed the leadership. Jon Owen Jones, who lost his Cardiff Central seat to the Liberal Democrats, said it was because of issues such as Iraq and tuition fees. Asked if there was anything that could have saved him, he said: 'If he had decided to stand down that would have been different. I would have had a good chance whereas, effectively I had no chance.'

edit to add link: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/politics/story/0,6903,1479107,00.html

--------------

If this is true it means Gordon Brown has been screwed again. Tony Blair's ego will destroy the Labour Party unless something is done about him. I don't think the Conservatives ever recovered from removing Margaret Thatcher, and I hoped it would never have to come to this - for Labour to forcibly remove their own leader; but it looks like the only option.

[flordehinojos]

1. if he won't quit, maybe he will be pushed out.

[Anarcho-Socialist]

2. (Independent) Cabinet defies Blair in power struggle

Cabinet defies Blair in power struggle
By Andy McSmith and Francis Elliott
08 May 2005


Tony Blair's authority was ebbing away last night as details emerged of how he was repeatedly forced by members of his Cabinet to cave in during a chaotic attempt to give his government a post-election shake-up.

John Prescott, Charles Clarke and Ruth Kelly are among ministers who defied Mr Blair as he tried to reshuffle his Cabinet to concentrate power in the hands of Blairite modernisers.

Mr Prescott flatly refused to cede control of local government to David Blunkett while Mr Clarke was furious at plans to strip the Home Office of its responsibility for curbing anti-social behaviour.

This week, the Prime Minister will have to reassert his authority over the Labour Party after a bruising election campaign. Despite a 66-seat majority in the House of Commons, several MPs are openly calling for Mr Blair to hand over the reins of power to Gordon Brown much sooner than the four years he has said he will stay on in office.

More at: http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/story.jsp?story=636608

-----------

The Independent's take on recent events, emphasises Cabinet discord with Blair.

[Anarcho-Socialist]

3. (Observer) If the PM's really listening, he'll go

If the PM's really listening, he'll go

Another move forward for Labour could be a step too far for the party leader

David Aaronovitch
Sunday May 8, 2005
The Observer

(snip)

So it is with politics. Since Thursday's election, every time I think about it, the result has looked worse to me. I can find nearly no comfort in the electorate's choices whatsoever, despite the size of the Labour majority. The share of the vote makes it impossible, except in the most legalistic sense, for the government credibly to claim a mandate. The campaign was fascinating, but was very damaging to Labour. The confected controversy over the Attorney General's leaked advice, for example, took up more time than discussion of education.

Now the Prime Minister threatens us with listening. Nothing makes me more worried than the demand that politicians should listen. For a start, some people talk much louder than others and are far easier to hear. Take top-up fees, an issue on which the Lib Dems probably gained tens of thousands of Labour votes. Nowhere during the campaign did I hear or see the question of support for poorer students raised with candidates or in the media. I would think that most people simply have no idea that these students will not have to pay fees and will receive, for the first time for years, a substantial maintenance grant. The issue didn't come up because the parents of such poor students don't work in journalism and they won't write to the papers or go on marches. The redistributive nature of top-up fees has been successfully obscured by middle-class self-interest. In the same way, the Iraqis who want British troops to remain while they build their country are not heard with the same Lib Dems arguing for withdrawal, no matter what the situation is.

(snip)

But it is obvious to me now that Tony Blair cannot be the vehicle to carry things forward. Just as in 1994, the right calculation was made that Blair was the person best placed to win support for change, now the self-same calculation says that he isn't. The combination of the assassins, of time, of blame, and his own inevitable errors mean that someone else must take on the job. At last the man with the empty head and the loud mouth has got it right.

(snip)

Already some on Labour's backbenchers are giving notice of rebellion. A collection of tattered men o'war and patched sloops is firing directly over the decks of the old admiral's flagship and into the area of HMS Brown. Lynne Jones MP warns the Chancellor that the Lib Dems are 'tapping into core Labour values' and that they should be quickly re-embraced (ironically on the same page, in the same paper, the Lib Dems' Vincent Cable writes about the need for his party quickly to untap from such values, for fear of losing out to the Conservatives). The last thing Labour needs is a reversion to the sterile triangulation between the demands of the party and the demands of the voters. This can best be avoided by a leadership election in which Gordon Brown stands on the basis of a commitment to change and reform in public services, to education, to taking the necessary hard decisions on pensions and to an intensification of the internationalism of New Labour on Africa, on Europe, actively promoting environmentalism, democracy and social justice abroad. Winning on such a platform, Brown will be entitled, as Tony Blair will not, to demand support, not just from Jones, but even from supposedly lovable buffoons such as Bob Marshall-Andrews. If the rebels have the courage of their own convictions, they will stand a candidate against Brown, and be trounced.

More at: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,6903,1478986,00.html

---------------

It seems that even arch-Blairite David Aaronovitch know's which way the wind is blowing. I'm very surprised.

[Jack Rabbit]

6. Yes, Aaronovitch surprised us with that

Aaronovitch may be wrong often, but he comes by his mistakes honestly.

[aneerkoinos]

16. Polly Toynbee

It's also interesting that Toynbee, who had the consistent habit of seeing silverline everywhere around Blair and never lost her hope about Tony soon doing the right thing, has now joined the crowd saying Tony must go. No doubt her views have been affected by the barrage of emails from unforgiving anti-war people.

[newfaceinhell]

12. It makes sense really- Aaronovitch knows Blair is to weak to advance the

Blairite agenda that Aaronovitch is so slavishly devoted too, so now he's turning his hand to arguing that Brown should become leader on the basis of exactly the same agenda. His typically snide swipe at Bob Marshall-Andrews made me smile though, simply because it betrays how much it must have pissed Aaronovitch off when Bob held onto his seat.

[muriel_volestrangler]

4. The fight over Adonis may show which way Labour will go

From a more detailed piece in the Observer, talking about the education section of the manifesto:

Technocratic and uncompromisingly radical, it called for every school in Britain to become a specialist school - one that may select a small proportion of pupils according to ability, focusing on particular skills - and for a major expansion of private sector funding. There was, says one Whitehall source, an 'almighty row': Kelly fought to water it down.

She won, but victory made her some powerful enemies. Chief authors of the draft were Downing Street special adviser Matthew Taylor, and Adonis. A fortnight ago, rumours began that Adonis had exacted the final revenge: he was to become her deputy.

The reaction was instant. Dan Corry, Kelly's mild-mannered special adviser, yelled across the war room at his counterpart, Patrick Diamond, who until recently worked with Adonis: 'Is this true? Because, if it is, I'm fucking off.'

Blair's admiration for Adonis is not shared by many of his colleagues. But when Blair settled down on Thursday afternoon, after voting in Sedgefield, to start the reshuffle over a cup of tea, Adonis's name was still in the frame.

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/politics/story/0,6903,1479053,00.html

So, selection and private sector funding, or keeping the schools under public control? Remembering that Blair still occasionally says "education, education, education", I think this is where we'll see if Blair will go quietly, or intends to change as much as he can while he's still got time left.

[newfaceinhell]

9. OMG- Blair and buddies have spent way too long hanging with the DLC

'Senior Party source'- "I wouldn't be too cocky if I were a Brownite. Their great progressive consensus is not going to help us win Enfield Southgate".

Blair and his clique of core supporters seem to be the only people on the planet who don't realise that the one thing that could help Labour win back seats right now is getting rid of a leader that most people despise. Hence Hain getting demoted for speaking the truth- they have to try and cover up the fact, shown by the increase in the Lib Dem vote, that Britain is ready for a shift to the left, and electability is therefore no longer a valid justification for the Blairite agenda. This agenda has become so important to Blair and his supporters that to them it outweighs the interests of both party and country, hence Blair will hang on to power for as long as possible, and by the time Brown takes over it might be too late for him to salvage Labour's cause against a Tory opposition that will capitalise on Blair's unpopularity and the divisions his continued presence will deepen within Labour.

[tjwmason]

5. Push poodle-boy out will be very different to outsing Maggie

Because of the different attitudes which they two parties have taken to their leaders.

The Labour Party has always been far more difficult to lead than the Tories - ousting a leader would help to re-confirm that the party leader is simply the chosen servant of the party.

That tradition didn't exist within the Tory Party, where historically the leader would be appointed and left to do as he/she pleased until this became an electoral liability. Thatcher was replaced with Major who never carried the respect of a large number of his back-benchers, and therefore they refused to be lead - it is only really with Howard that they are starting to accept a leader again.

Though there is bound to be a split between those supporting Blairism and real-Labour - this will be back to a more 'normal service' - the Labour Party is far better equiped to deal with this than the Tories were.

[Jack Rabbit]

7. Last night's discussion in LBN

Please click here.

[Jack Rabbit]

8. BBC (Friday): Labour rebels target Blair

From the BBC Online
Dated Friday May 6

Analysis:
Labour rebels target Blair
By Steve Schifferes
BBC News website reporter

When Parliament resumes next week, Tony Blair will face a much-reduced Labour majority in the House of Commons.

With a majority of only 66, just 34 rebels could stop him in his tracks, if supported by the opposition parties.

But are there enough Labour rebels left with the reduced majority - and if so which are the issues that they are most likely to rebel against?

And, just as importantly, will they be able to make common cause with a divided opposition?

Read more.

[non sociopath skin]

10. There seems to be an underlying worry ...

... that we'll finish up with an internal struggle a la Major rather than a straightforward dropping of the pilot as with Thatcher or IDS.

Early days yet, though ...

The Skin

[fedsron2us]

11. Interesting times

If Blair had just beaten a sitting Conservative government then he would have relatively little difficulty maintaining the cohesiveness of his party and pushing through his legislative program even with a majority of only 68 . Unfortunately for him, this is Labour's third term of office so different rules apply. The 40-70 Labour MP's who rebelled in the last Parliament have nearly all been returned to Westminster. Most have continuing doubts about Blair's domestic and foreign agenda. As they are in the latter stages of their Parliamentary careers they are unlikely to be bought off by offers of ministerial office. Worse for Blair is the fact that those hinting that he should depart are not just the 'usual suspects' such as Robin Cook. Approximately 100 Labour MP's were put the sword on election night and over 40 of those who were returned now find themselves in marginal constituencies where only a small swing to the Tories or the Liberal Democrats would see them ousted at the next election. These individuals have no reason to trust that a third Blair serving of New Labour policies will save their skins. Add in the fact that there must be one or two ambitious individuals at the top of the party who crave the job of Prime Minister and you can see that there is plenty of scope for trouble. If Blair simply tries to ignore the discontent in the ranks and rely on the Conservatives to help him push through unpopular policies then I think he will be ousted. The Labour movement
have never forgotten the dire consequences of Ramsey MacDonald's betrayal in the 1930's. The key figures in the current situation are the unions. They still bankroll the Labour Party and will probably play a decisive roll in deciding whether Blair survives. I expect that
they are already making soundings to see who is going to be his successor.

[LSdemocrat]

13. Why doesn't Blair just publicly set a date to step down?

Is there any disadvantage to doing that?

[Jack Rabbit]

14. He did

2008.

Any bets here that he'll last that long?

[LSdemocrat]

15. That was an apparent leak

I'm asking why doesn't he just say I will step down on such and such a date. Wouldn't that just settle everyone down rather than prolong the current uncertainty?

[LeftishBrit]

17. 2008?

You mean he doesn't think he can cope on his own, once his beloved master across the pond has stepped down?

[muriel_volestrangler]

18. "Gordon will never let this happen" - it just has

In other high profile moves, Mr Blair’s policy adviser Andrew Adonis was made a junior Education Minister with a seat in the House of Lords.

http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=4531519

So Blair still has the whip hand.

[fedsron2us]

19. Just one more reason to abolish the House of Lords

Blair still has the powers latent in his office as Prime Minister but it is clear that the tide of history is going out on him. The real question is how much damage are the Labour Party going to allow him to do before he goes. One thing is for sure. if Blair had been leading a Tory government to a loss of 94 seats he would have already have been given the pearl handled revolver by his colleagues and told to do the decent thing.

[Matilda]

20. if he thinks he has the numbers, why doesn't Gordon Brown

mount a challenge to Bliar now? It seems obvious that Bliar's
leadership will be destabilised as long as Brown remains a contender
for the leadership, so wouldn't it be in the best interests of the
party to get it over with?

I know there's a vote on the EU constitution coming up, but is it
essential for Bliar to remain leader until it's over?

We have the same Westminster system here, and in this situation,
Brown would now be number-crunching.