Mount Clarke Erupts!

Oh dear. Charles Clarke, that veritable Vesuvius of former ministers has blown hot verbal lava all over the place in this morning’s Guardian. Again.

This time the big galloot claims backbenchers are “appalled” at Gordon Brown’s “British jobs for British workers” line; that Mark Malloch-Brown was a “foolish” appointment to the Government of all the Talents; and that Brown doesn’t support Ministerial colleagues enough ("Tony would always support his key people. Gordon should do that with his people").

But did I not hear The Big Bear was being lined up to replace Mousier Mandelson as Britain’s European Commissioner? Strange way of applying for the position berating the guy who makes the decision! And anyway, isn’t Comrade Mandelson in Europe in the first place simply because Tony Blair didn’t support him at the time of his second resignation?

Clarkey does however have a neat line in describing himself as “modernising old Labour” rather than a Blairite. WCH likes that, but not as much as Bernard Crick’s bon mot of his politics being those of the “moderate socialist”.

“Small ‘m’, capital ‘S’”.

http://workingclasshero-workingclasshero.blogspot.com/

Display: Sort:

Re: Mount Clarke Erupts! (#1)

To be honest, although I'm not a fan of Clarke, I read his article as a set of honest criticisms. There wasn't really much there I disagreed with.

Brown was silly to talk about 'British jobs for British workers' and he was foolish in his 'government of all the talents' project which has caused problems since then.

Re: Mount Clarke Erupts! (#2)

I still have genuinely no idea what the substantive differences in policy are between Brownites and Blairites.

Re: Mount Clarke Erupts! (#3)

There isn't any! It's all a matter of style. Brown is dour and staid; Blair was flamboyant.

Re: Mount Clarke Erupts! (#4)

Much as I don't like Charles Clarke - I'm not sure there's a lot to disagree with him on in the bits you've paraphrased here.

Re: Mount Clarke Erupts! (#5)

There is noise circulating this morning of a telephone conference that took place last night involving 17 MP's.  The rumour is that this discussion did not involve any of the 'usual suspects', but loyal back benchers and some members of the Government.

The prospect of a delegation being sent to see Brown was discussed, with the intention of explaining that backbench support has been seriously eroded notwithstanding efforts from some senior backbenchers to calm the storms at recent PLP meetings (Kaufman, Skinner et al).

The word is that unless poll ratings improve by late Jan 08, it is more likely than not that the PM will be told he should step aside for the sake of the Party.  Apparently senior figures, including a handful of Cabinet members who are briefing openly, fear a 'total meltdown' in terms of results in the May elections next year if he is still in place.  One very senior member was reported to have told of 'widespread dismay' at the PM's inability to 'do the politics' necessary to sidestep issues.

Apparently (although who knows why!) the election of Nick Clegg has worried many MPs - another youthful, witty leader who with Cameron will continue to make the PM look out of touch...

Re: Mount Clarke Erupts! (#6)

but brown has the experience of govt! should his personal standing in the polls not improve, and milliband takes over, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between milliband-clegg-cameron; co-joined triplets.

Re: Mount Clarke Erupts! (#9)

Infiltrator says: "Apparently (although who knows why!) the election of Nick Clegg has worried many MPs - another youthful, witty leader who with Cameron will continue to make the PM look out of touch..."

Indeed 'who knows why' - with only two years experience in the commons he'll be all mouth and no trousers :-) 

Re: Mount Clarke Erupts! (#7)

Brown's problem is that the Party's current abysmal ratings are down to personal failings on his part.  This is different from Major's position before 1997 or even Callaghan's before 1979. Major and Callaghan's unpopularity was a result of political situations over which they had little control - personal misjudgment played a part but it was not the most significant factor. But in Brown's case personal misjudgment is the most significant factor. The non-election debacle is the most obvious of these, but the utterly ridiculous double-signing of the Lisbon Treaty clinched it for me - the man just does not have the skills and abilities required of a PM. It's hard to see how the Party can recover under his leadership.

Re: Mount Clarke Erupts! (#10)

So, someone isn't fit to be PM just because they turned up late for a photo opportunity? What a load of trivial, spin-obsessed drivel. The above post is entirely typical of the kind of person who spends their entire life either hanging around in the blogosphere or watching political programmes on the telly. I am tempted to tell you either to get a life, or to hang around with the triumphalist right-wing ranters on politicalbetting.com, where you will fit in like a glove.

Re: Mount Clarke Erupts! (#8)

I read the interview with Clarke in the Guardian and agreed with everything he said.


Truth be told alot of what Clarke said back in the September 2006 coup about Brown has been proven correct.  But as a party we only have ourselves to blame.


Let's hope in 2008 we see improvements.

Re: Mount Clarke Erupts! (#11)

Looks like the Blairites have seen the light and are going to stop their scheming against Brown, so says Byers. So lets welcome unity and see Alan Milburn and Charles Clarke back in Cabinet. Get rid of Des Browne and Harriet Harman; as DL, let her work outside and build up the Party machine; if she can't do it let Crudas take over or Alan Johnson.