Blairite disloyalty a danger to the Labour Party

So Tony Blair has now admitted for sure that this upcoming TUC and Labour Party Conference will be his last.

It’s hard to see how it will be enough though. As Doug Henderson said, “It doesn’t seem to me that the public knows any more about the PM’s retirement plans.” So, there is nothing to stop the opposition parties from using the uncertainty to undermine the Labour Party ahead of the next election.

What real difference has the PM’s announcement made? Everyone pretty much doubted that he’d still be around this time next year anyway. What the Labour Party needs is a fresh face to take us into the Scottish and Welsh elections, or we’re in danger of losing.

Gordon Brown hasn’t got the date that he was looking for. The Guardian reported this morning that Brown had asked for Blair to stand down by the end of the year (we’ll be in No. 10 by Xmas, lads). There is no doubt about it, Brown blinked. If the Channel 4 news is to be believed, the turnaround is so sharp that he is even going to rebuke Doug Henderson for his comments.

The most interesting question is why Brown blinked. Surely the most obvious reason is that it is Brown who will have to pick up the pieces after a political bloodbath, while the Blairites just don’t care about what happens to the Labour Party. A serious bout of infighting is the only way to get Blair to go this side of the May elections. It would be a horrible affair as Blair will not go until the leadership is prized from his cold dead hands.

There is now no question that Brown could take Blair out. There were rumours of “more senior” government figures threatening to resign if Blair did not move. Given the amount of time that Jack Straw spent with Blair, some people might wonder if it was he who threatened to resign. If that had have happened, Blair would have been finished, but it probably would have mortally damaged the Labour Party.

As a mark of the Blairites’ disregard for the future of the Labour Party, Charles Clarke has now said that Brown was, “stupid” to be pictured grinning as he left Downing Street. He also questioned whether Brown was fit to be Prime Minister. This, of course, will all be repeated when Brown eventually does become Prime Minister by the opposition, and as such, it is reckless.

So the bottom line is that Blair has come out of this skirmish damaged, but he’s won for now. He’s still got almost a year, despite the fact that (according to a Channel4/YouGov poll) 59% of LP members want him gone by May and 38% want him gone now. Blair’s outriders will continue to undermine not just Brown, but also the Labour Party.

It seems, perhaps unsurprisingly, that the discipline shown by the Blairites around ’97 was always conditional on their person being in the driving seat. As such, they are a danger to the Labour Party, and I hope their more sensible comrades like Ruth Kelly, will reign them in.

6 Responses to Blairite disloyalty a danger to the Labour Party

  1. Matthew says:

    Not sure I would call Ruth Kelly sensible, but interesting piece apart from that. I was amazed to hear Blair yesterday equate him being allowed to name his own date of departure with the interests of the nation. He is not thinking straight anymore, if he ever was.

  2. Henry G says:

    She has a sensible haircut at least.

  3. The phrase was “more sensible”. it’s a relative distinction, and that’s an important point.

  4. Nick says:

    A lot of the briefing that’s come out of No 10 is an absolute disgrace. And some of it was just stark staring mad. Either way, they should never again be allowed to question the loyalty of any of us who sometimes disagree with Govt policy, while continuing to do the Party’s work on the ground.

  5. Den says:

    Charles Clarke is hardly a ‘blairite’ given that Blair effectively sacked him from Government. He has always been his own man.
    Ruth Kelly has long been a supporter of Brown – remember she was at the Treasury for a looong time.

  6. I think we’d describe Kelly as one of the younger generation of ministers who straddle the Brown-Blair divide. We just described her as “more sensible comrade” of those Blairites who are stirring it up.

    Clarke is fairly independent minded (now, anyway) but he would certainly have been described as a Blairite for quite a long time. He only seemed to be putting his name to views that have been put about anonymously by No 10 sources. The Blairites can hardly say that Brown should have stopped people speaking out against Blair, but that they can’t stop Clarke speaking out against Brown.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: