ANALYSIS:Cursed with endless bad headlines and awful poll results, British prime minister Gordon Brown needs the Conservatives to start making blunders
GORDON BROWN was in foul temper as he arrived for early-morning television and radio appearances in Brighton yesterday, hours after he had heard that he had lost the support of the UK's most powerful tabloid, the Sun.
Brown could be forgiven for wondering if he ever had the backing of the Rupert Murdoch-owned newspaper, which claimed the credit for destroying Neil Kinnock’s chances of replacing John Major in No 10 Downing Street in 1992.
Its declaration that it will back Tory leader David Cameron in next year’s election, which emerged less than six hours after Brown had addressed delegates, was designed to wound.
Nevertheless, there is much in its judgment that will resonate with British voters, worried as they are about the UK’s parlous public finances, public services and Afghanistan, and infuriated by MPs’ expenses abuses and funding for bankers.
In reality, Brown faced an impossible task in Brighton. In one speech, he was expected to save his premiership, inspire Labour and make the British people love him. He did not, of course, achieve all of that, or perhaps any of it, but then no single speech could.
He did what he does best: detail. In fact, the best part of the speech came when he listed Labour’s achievements since 1997 one after the other; and this section was included only at the last minute.
The problem for Brown, however, as with all politicians, is that voters never care about what they have received in the past. They care only about the future. Here, Brown opted to reveal much of Labour’s election manifesto in advance in a bid to woo them.
And it was targeted at the middle classes, the section in every society that feels it is paying for everyone else, above and below them; and also the one that is most likely to bother to vote. Or at least that is how it looked at first glance.
A second examination revealed flaws in the pitch since, for example, free childcare for two-year-olds from the poorest families will be funded by abolishing the voucher system currently used by more to pay for care now.
More such problems can be expected to be thrown up in coming weeks, because money for Brown’s list of extra promises will have to be found by a treasury that is struggling to pay what it has to now.
The British public appears persuaded that spending cuts will have to be made, but an audience convinced of the theory are unlikely to stay that way when it realises that something they want is no longer available, or will take longer to get.
The problem with Brown’s approach is that he says services can improve, with the funds coming from the legendary “efficiencies” that politicians always rely on when they do not have the cash necessary to pay for them.
Yesterday, Brown faced attack on two fronts: that he had made unaffordable promises, and, conversely, that he had not made enough of them to change the dynamic in the party’s battle with the Tories.
Up to now, Labour has demonised the Conservatives for slavering at the mouth at the idea of reducing the state’s influence in the UK, and yet failing to detail where the axe would fall. The Labour criticisms are fair.
However, Brown’s own actions leave Labour open to the charge that he is being equally irresponsible, particularly since he has laid so much emphasis on a legally-binding pledge to cut the deficit.
The fiscal responsibility Act, he said, would require year-on-year cuts in the deficit, and its halving within four. The scale of the challenge is illustrated by the fact that Labour will struggle this year to keep borrowing below £175 billion.
Such a law, if passed, would tie the British government’s hands, leaving it unable to cope with a second economic crisis, should one occur. Nevertheless, some in Labour feel that Brown’s detailed promises may force Cameron into putting more flesh on the bone of his ambitions for government; or else to squirm uncomfortably as he seeks to avoid doing so.
It may work, but Labour has made the mistake until recently of underestimating Cameron as an Eton toff, born into a life of privilege. It is a mistake that could be fatal.
Besides his audience away from Brighton, Brown had to appeal to his party membership, many of whom are displaying the gloomy fatalism that was prevalent within the party before the glory days of the early Blair era.
In Brown’s mind, he is the man who saved the globe from an economic depression of great magnitude over the last year, forcing other countries to follow his lead in saving banks for the public good, and injecting cash into the economy to get it moving.
In voters’ minds, however, he is the former chancellor who promised to carefully husband taxpayers’ money and end the culture of “boom and bust” that has marked the British economy for decades.
In a bid to deflect their fury, Brown harked back to an older Britain – one that may never have existed – where hard work, thrift, honesty was appreciated and valued, and where the culture of “the quick buck” was frowned upon. Yet a man who has struggled all of his adult years to get into No 10 now has just a finger-grasp on the keys of office.
Mark Hennessy is London Editor