Senior members of the Labour Party are quite clearly anxious about retaining their seats at the next General Election if Labour's stock continues to fall at the current alarming rate, but there seems to be a cynical pattern of protocol about expressing such things. One can quite see why. A senior politician is rather like a bank manager. Express too clearly your discontent with the performance of your institution and investor confidence drains away overnight.
This partly explains the performance of Britain's Foreign Secretary, David Milliband, who quite clearly feels that Brown is not doing a good job and that Labour is headed for disaster at the next election. He wrote an article in 'The Guardian' newspaper which very skilfully pointed out the deficiencies of the Party under Brown's leadership and how we MUST do better (he didn't actually say that was more likely under his own leadership but many people inferred as much). What he didn't do was express any criticism of his leader. He left us to read between the lines.
Now that the issue of the leadership has reasserted itself, and some back-bench MPs have attempted to table a leadership challenge, Milliband has very swiftly announced that his article had no lines to read between. He was always loyal to Gordon, always felt that Gordon was the man to lead us into the next election, and that he would never be so disloyal as to...etc etc.
Well I'm sure he wouldn't. The way these things work is that favourites for the post take soundings. Then they discuss with political advisors the strength of those soundings. They try and decide whether the top gun really has a chance of being toppled. Then hints are dropped out at fringe political meetings or at dinner parties, not necessarily by said hopeful. No, he remains aloof while campaign friends drop out that 'If it looks bad for Gordon....and damn it, we all hope he can pull it round...well, you know, whatever he might say I'm sure David would feel obliged to tender his name..in the party's interest, you understand..to maintain stability..." while of course, David remains ever steadfast, having dropped out one risky article, he will then appear to be the government's most steadfast loyal servant..until...he gets the nod from insider friends who tell him that Gordon really is in a rocky state.
Then its time for another article in 'The Guardian' which will come across as a loyal desperate plea for action, a confirmation of faith in the Prime Minister BUT this time containing a clear set of actions which he, David Milliband, would initiate if he were PM...though of course he will regularly remind us that he doesn't want the job. Few will be fooled but he will be covering his arse. It will be a veiled manifesto. But if Gordon's position really does get this bad - and many think it's already beyond that - Milliband will not be alone. For by now other senior 'loyalists' - the Harriet Harmans, Jack Straws, Alan Johnsons will all be writing similarly pained and hurt articles in the newspapers proclaiming how much they support Gordon ..'but here's what I'd do in his place.'
It is so transparent as to be nauseating. But in a sense it's also inevitable. No senior member of the government is going to compromise him or herself by blatantly confronting the Prime Minister until it's clear that he is too powerless and so bereft of authority that he cannot even sack them. To do so would be to terminate a very lucrative job while, at the same time, risking the accusation that he/she was responsible for undermining the Prime Minister's authority and presenting the next election to the Opposition on a plate.
So they say nothing until they have to. Instead this charade of veiled challenge but public support, this garnering of stalking horses to test the political waters while not sullying their own hands, continues.
It's sad but somehow understandable given the way the system works. Meanwhile, every time a politician says 'trust me' on the goggle box, hollow laughter rings around every TV set in the land.
No comments:
Post a Comment