Labour’s double whammy

After asking for some polls, ComRes comes to the rescue.  John Rentoul has the details:

Con 41% (-1) Lab 24% (-) LD 18% (-) Other16% (-)

So, Labour’s strategy of keeping Brown away from the media fails.

And there is more:

When voters were asked whether they agreed or disagreed that "The NHS would be safer under Labour than the Conservatives", only 39% agreed and 47% disagreed.

So, the not-serious-about-power element of the Tory party has made no difference to voters views on the NHS or dented the Tory lead.

So, what will it be?  If Labour is to avoid meltdown at the polls, there is no alternative.  The party has to do what it should have done in June.  It has no choice.  Labour have to make make the switch in favour of Alan Johnson.

How will the change be achieved?  We will return to this blogs pet subject shortly.

Some Tories love being in opposition

Making speeches on the NHS, writing to Brown about Megrahi release are fine, but Dave has got to get his party in order.

Here is yet another example of not-serious-about-power element within the Tory ranks.  Alan Scard, the Chairman of Gosport Conservative Association in Hampshire, on the possibility of selecting a woman to replace Sir Peter Viggers:

If they are attractive, yeah I would go for it.  I know it's a sexist thing to say, but you could get the blokes saying 'Oh you know, I would vote for her because she's really attractive'.  But then the other women say 'Oh I don't like her, she's too attractive'.

Unbelievable stuff that gets all the publicity it needs during the silly season.  Get a grip Dave.

Are the Royal Family banned from using trains?

This a Royal Family free blog, except when HMQ gets rather upset with her Prime Minister.  However, this story is just ridiculous.

The Princess Royal is refusing to attend the 70th anniversary reception of the Auxiliary Fire Service because the RAF could not find an aircraft to fly her to the event in London.

Brian Coleman, the chairman of the London Fire Brigade and Emergency Planning Authority, said:

The Princess Royal was obviously the main attraction and, without her, there would seem little point in going ahead with it.  If the Princess Royal is at Balmoral, I would be willing to pay for her easyJet flight to London myself.

What the problem with this stuck up Royal?  There is no excuse for this.  There is perfectly good train service that could bring this lazy taxpayer-funded-Royal to London.

These Royals of the second rank.  What purpose do they serve?

Brown loves being on holiday

Remember when Brown stated that he would be taking a “few days off” at his last press conference?  Well, Sarah and the boys are enjoying Gordon’s company so much that Our Dear Leader is to extend his holiday for a further week.

Mandrake has discovered that the Prime Minister will away until the 7th September.  Or will he?

This could, of course, mean he has a secret foreign trip planned. Or maybe Harriet Harman wants another go in the hot seat and a chance to tell the world's media more about her feminist views. Whatever the reason, one trusts the decision about extending the PM's absence was not made unilaterally.

Indeed so.  So what is Our Man in Scotland up to?  Who he is off to see?  Maybe he is waiting for some further polls?

Come back soon Gordon.  Life is becoming rather dull without you!

Are we going to win the Ashes with Brown as PM?

Just pray that Brown remains hidden up in Scotland.

Brown sends Cameron a holding reply to his letter

Our Dear Leader has received a letter from David Cameron regarding the release of Megrahi.  Paul Waugh has the details.

For some reason a copy of Brown’s initial reply has been sent to my in box

Dear Dave,

Thank you for your timely letter, which I have read with much interest.

Unfortunately, I will not be able to send you a more considered reply for some hours.  As you may know Lord Mandelson entered hospital this morning for an operation.  When he recovers from the general anaesthetic, and I can discuss with him the points you raise, I will be sending you a more considered reply.

I trust you will understand that without Lord Manselson’s advice and guidance, I haven't a clue what to do about the contents of your letter or any other matter that is brought to my attention today.

Yours sincerely

 

Gordon Brown

We need a few polls

Good stuff from Mike Smithson overnight as he asks, Is the Brown TV black-out a deliberate strategy?.  Of course it is, as discussed here.  The dilemma for Labour is that when the strategy was devised, they hadn't factored in that the Tories would cock up during the silly season.

We need some polls, but the results may not shed much light on whether Brown is Labour’s problem.  The two published last weekend ago showed little movement, but obviously that was before the full effect of the Tories bad fortnight could be reflected.

The next polls could be interesting.  If the they stay the same, then not only is Brown the problem but Labour also and, more importantly, the Tory mistakes have not resonated with the voters.  However, if they move in Labour’s direction, will it be due to Brown’s absence or because the self-inflicted Tory errors have been recognised?

AJ4PM?  Certainly the next few weeks may well give a good indication as to whether Labour must make the change to avoid a meltdown at the polls.

The critically important conference season could be decisive for both parties.

Let’s hear it for Liskula Cohen

Liskula Cohen, a fashion model, has won a court case in the US instructing Google to hand over the name of anonymous individual who defamed this pretty girl on her blog:

The ruling has divided the blogosphere, with some applauding the decision, and others fearing it could be the thin end of the wedge, setting a dangerous precedent that will enable companies, organisations and individuals to demand the unmasking of any internet commentator they take a dislike to.

There is good reasons why a blogger would wish to remain anonymous.  Nightjack being one of them.  However, there is no case for personal or threatening attacks by bloggers or people who leave comments.  We are all here to debate issues and should not resort to vitriol.  The blogosphere does itself a disservice by doing so.

Three cheers to Liskula but not to The Times, who exposed Nightjack for no reason other than to satisfy Rupert Murdoch’s desire to control any form of media outlet that he can’t get hands around.

Megrahi, Libya, Labour and the SNP

No, I will not join the hysteria over the release of Megrahi.  I have no knowledge or experience of Scottish law, but these two fine gentleman reflect my views on the matter.

Sir Menzies Campbell, a former Lib Dem leader, said:

Labour is clearly facing two ways on this issue: wanting to enhance relations with Libya but at the same time determined to criticise the SNP for an American audience.

Lord Owen, foreign secretary in the late 1970s when British intelligence learned that Libya was arming the IRA, said:

It is very hard to get at the truth and yet Lord Mandelson is seen with the Libyan president's son.  It is very clear that the British government are in this up to their neck.  I view all this noise as party politics in a rather crude way.  I am a humanitarian. Wherever you can you come down in the final analysis to looking at the individual.  Are they entitled to die at home or die in prison? If it is humanely possible you should allow them to die at home.

If the government are ‘up to their necks’ in it, the truth will out.  Enough said.

Is Cameron right to speak out?

Question:

On the news that Megrahi is to be released on compassionate grounds, would Cameron have said:

This man showed no compassion to those he murdered.  This is a very bad decision.

if he had been Prime Minister today?

Answer:

No.

August has been a very perplexing month for the Tory party.

Comrade Sugar is a silly billy

Just as Brown was beginning to think that luck was running his way, Baron Sugar of Clapton in the London Borough of Hackney has rather cut the ground from under Our Dear Leader:

This country has had a proud history of apprenticeships, but they have been scandalously neglected in recent times.

That is the problem with a ‘Goat’.  They never seem to do exactly what is required, e.g. keeping their mouths shut and getting on with the job.

It serves Brown right.  Sugar was only appointed to grab a few cheap headlines.  In that, he has far exceeded his expectations.

Surely, there is some mistake with this book title

Mark Oaten, the long forgotten disgraced Liberal MP, has decided to tell all.  He has a book coming out on the eve of the Lib Dem conference.  It should blow the place sky high at the beginning of a dull week.

Screwing up….!

Rumour has it that this title had been reserved for Brown’s forthcoming autobiography.

Dave attempts to put the toothpaste back in the tube

After a couple off weeks when the Tories have rather let the political agenda slip from their grasp, Cameron is to make a speech on the NHS today.  Whether the timing is right or he should have waited until the political season kicks off again remains to be seen.

Nevertheless, the Tories have got their strategy wrong during the silly season, which I initially discussed here.  Niall Paterson over at Boulton & Co. has an excellent post along similar lines, where he picks up on David Hughes comments of yesterday.

It is worth adding this.  So long as Cameron is dealing with the internal party problems that have cropped up over the last few weeks, as well as making policy announcements, he should be able to quickly regain the political initiative.  The electorate will start to question Cameron more closely if the party is not united behind him.  Just as important, he will have to come up with a strategy to counter the Mandy-Osborne fight to the finish, which could be a big diversion if his Lordship gets his way.

Of course, all this wouldn't have been necessary if Cameron had thought through the silly season rather more and not taken his eye off the ball.  He has no one to blame but himself.

No Frank, it will not be Harriet

Frank Field, no comrade of Our Dear Leader, has done his bit to boost the sales of New Statesman.  He has fallen in love with Harriet Harman:

You have to hand it to her. Harriet Harman has really shown how to use No 10 as a platform from which to direct policy. You may not agree with how she presented her programme, but, for the first time since 2005, there has been a real sense of direction and priorities from the government.

It was much needed. Morale among Labour MPs could not be lower, with many refusing to contemplate the extent of the slaughter awaiting us at next year's general election and sandbagging ourselves in with yet more constituency casework. In our hearts we know that this will not save us, but, with nothing else on offer, what are MPs in swing seats with majorities of less than 12,000 to do?

He motors on waxing lyrical about Andrew Adonis.  Then he simply gets carried away:

If the Prime Minister considers how his understudies have performed, he may recognise that the Harman-Adonis model is not only the right thing for a left party in government to do, but that it might also reduce the number of seats lost at the next election. Adopting such a strategy would transform morale among his high command as well as the Parliamentary Labour Party, and such enthusiasm in the past has proved infectious, rippling out from Westminster into our constituencies.

Oh dear.  Frank is such a capable chap, but his report card has to conclude with the deadly words, “not suited to politics”.

If he was to rewrite the article praising Alan Johnson, we might get somewhere.

Ainsworth’s Ministry of Chaos

If you thought that the BBC topped the league table of bungling organisations, you are wrong.  The lead position goes to the Ministry of Defence:

The National Audit Office (NAO) refused to approve the MoD’s accounts this summer after auditors were unable to find equipment worth £6.6 billion, including about a sixth of the vehicles, weapons and radios used by British troops.

The equipment includes £1.25 billion of machineguns, encrypted radios, night vision goggles and body armour, as well as more than £5 billion of raw materials and spare parts for equipment and vehicles.

With fighting intensifying in Afghanistan, and the death toll rising more steeply than at any other time in the conflict, poor record-keeping could hamper critical decisions being made about resources. The value of missing equipment has almost tripled since last year.

Are the problems likely to be fixed soon?  No.  Are Ainsworth and his henchmen spending all the their waking hours attempting to improve administrative systems at the ministry?  No, they jolly well aren't.

So, what they doing? Smearing General Dannatt, that’s what.

The priority of Ainsworth and Co. is to discredit a man that has spent 40 years of his life in the armed forces, who speaks with the best of motives, rather than support our troops propping up a failed state.

Brown is “an engine-drone monotone”

It seems that covers of books can be rather deceptive.  Next month, Gordon Brown’s book Wartime Courage is published in paperback.  The cover quotes the words "carefully chronicled and swiftly told” from a review by Boyd Tonkin.

However, the review itself is rather more frank.  Mandrake explains:

He said Brown's tone "too often kills his tale," that it amounted to "an engine-drone monotone," and added his "mealy-mouthed avoidance of 'controversial' issues" actually "downgraded" the achievements of the men and women whose heroism in World War Two he had sought to celebrate.

How reviews of books reveal so much about the author.

A Tory MP doesn't want DC4PM

If it goes on like this, Alan Johnson will not be needed.  Brown will get back by default.

Dave needs to urgently get a grip on his party.  Brown, tucked up in Scotland, must think that turkeys have vote for an early Christmas.

UPDATE: David Hughes over at Three Line Whip is on the money about Cameron’s complacency, although he gets a few facts wrong.  The 1997 election date was May.  Also, Cameron doesn't need such a huge poll lead because the polling methodology has changed since the 90’s, as Mike Smithson as pointed out many times.

The plot to smear Dannatt begins

Oh, what a surprise.  Labour have decided it is in their best interests to rubbish General Sir Francis Richard Dannatt, GCB, CBE, MC:

Labour ministers have launched a shameful plot to smear Army legend General Sir Richard Dannatt - just days before he retires.

Senior MPs, led by an MoD minister, want to expose the cost of business entertaining at the Army boss's home in Kensington, West London.

A series of Freedom of Information requests have been tabled to unearth the costs - and, under Government rules, Gen Dannatt, 58, has 20 days to answer in full.

Liam Fox hits the right notes:

Labour has now become the government of fear and smear. Whilst suppressing reports of their own incompetence, they attempt to undermine the reputation of one of our most distinguished generals.

At a time when our soldiers are dying in Afghanistan, ministers spend their time in puerile personality politics. General Dannatt is a man of honour and integrity who leads from the front. His Labour detractors are squalid and cowardly, undermining from the shadows.

Did you expect anything else from this government?  Did you expect they would listen to the criticisms that Dannatt is voicing and take action?

It is pathetic and despicable. Brown sends his henchmen out to do the dirty work, so he can act as the Statesman on his return from leave.  It shouldn't be allowed to happen. 

Brown’s grubby little hands are all over the mess in Afghanistan.  The price he pays for creating it could indeed be a very heavy one.

At last. Sanity on the health debate

Danny Finkelstein has a must read column in The Times on the differing healthcare systems in the UK and America.  This is the key section:

On a piece of paper, in a pamphlet, it may seem helpful to pitch one country’s system against another. But practically? Politically? It really isn’t that useful. The US will never create the NHS and the UK will not adopt the American system because we are starting in different places.

The only meeting point is that we face a common crisis. Available treatments now outstrip our ability (never mind our willingness) to pay for them. In the US this is experienced as a crisis of cost, with health inflation rampant. In the UK it is experienced as a crisis of provision, with the State refusing to finance life-saving procedures.

The fatuous efforts to compare the quality of US care with that of the UK never seem to give sufficient prominence to the money Americans spend purchasing their quality. The World Health Organisation records that in 2006, Americans spent $6,719 per head while Britons spent $2,815. One result of this disparity is the startling fact that the US Government spends more on healthcare per head of population than the UK Government does ($3,076 in the US compared with $2,457 in the UK). The Obama reforms are required as much to get a grip on these costs as to ensure universal healthcare.

Meanwhile, in the UK we have some control over costs (although it doesn’t always feel like that) but little answer to the pressing problem of the next decade — how do we decide how much of our income to spend on treatment and how do we cope with the fact that, while every person has a different answer to this question, we all still feel that everyone should get a good standard of care.

If we are going to spend time on either side of the Atlantic debating health policy perhaps we might use it debating these dilemmas. Spending it on a pointless comparison between the NHS and the Americans is a gigantic waste of effort.

What Finkelstein has said is spot on, and, yes, it is a pointless comparison.  Americans have a fear of centralised government and considers itself more individualistic in approach.  This is possibly due to the size of country and the remoteness of Washington.  In Europe and in the UK it is different.

Brown, of course, will dismiss all this when he attempts to to create his dividing lines with the Tories over the NHS and will no doubt leverage off Obama’s health plans.  It will be a futile debate that creates more heat than light.

Dave needs to do a little housework

Some small matters need attention in the House of Cameron before Brown launches his autumn onslaught.

The Times is reporting that one Lord McColl is a paid consultant to a new private healthcare company.  The Indy mops up yesterday’s news that Bromley council was considering plans to subsidise the fees of children attending private schools if their parents lose their jobs.

These little local difficulties, coupled with the more substantial self-inflicted errors by Duncan and Hannan, just give Brown more ammunition to fire off against Cameron when he finally returns at the end of month.  Then there is the other problem of Mandy’s fondness for having a go at George Osborne as discussed here.

Dave needs needs another reminder of what Roy Jenkins said when Blair was preparing for power:

Blair’s approach to the 1997 election as being like an elderly butler carrying a Ming vase across a slippery floor from one end of a room to the other.

It may be the silly season when stories get magnified out of all proportion to their significance, but Cameron needs to be rather careful as he navigates along the path to the election.