Miliband could still succeed me - Blair
Tony Blair's aides are letting it be known that the Prime Minister thinks if David Miliband ran against Gordon Brown for the Labour party leadership that 'he will win'.The explosive revelation came in a series of interviews with those closest to the outgoing Prime Minister. One member of his inner circle made it clear that the PM and his allies still think Brown can be beaten. 'I know what Tony thinks about this,' a senior Blairite who has been close to the Prime Minister since the Nineties told The Observer. 'He thinks that if David runs with conviction and mounts the right argument, he'll win. He'll win, because by the end of a leadership contest, the ground will move.
Miliband has always stated that he has no intention of running against Brown, although the one man with the power to change his mind is certainly Blair.
Readers of the OT know my views on many of Blair's pronouncements, but in this case I think there's a very good chance that Blair is right. What may very well change the way Labour MP's choose their next leader is how that potential leader would face up to David Cameron.
Gordon Brown is extremely well qualified for the post but appears old and tainted by the Iraq war when compared to the fresh faced Cameron. Hopefully the public would not be so facile as to choose a Prime Minister on those terms, but I wouldn't put it past MP's to take this sort of thing into consideration.
Miliband is a blank page in the eyes of the electorate in the same way that David Cameron is a blank page. He would be a fresh start, whereas Gordon - much as he would hate to hear anyone say it - is a continuation. Although he has maintained silence over some of Blair's most controversial policies, "qui tacet consentire videtur" or "He who is silent is taken to agree". Silence means consent, and Brown is seen by many to have consented, or to have failed to condemn, some of Blair's most disastrous policies.
Indeed, when David Blunkett released his diaries, he revealed that Brown had only signed on to the Iraq war because he believed that Tony Blair would sack him if he didn't, which hardly reveals the pulsing heart of a conviction politician as much as a man who would put his political advancement before his political beliefs. He would be a much more commanding political figure, and a much more natural replacement for Blair, had he, in fact, resigned rather than back Blair's disastrous Iraq campaign. In much the same way as Robin Cook was elevated into the role of the Labour Party's conscience by his resignation, so Brown too would have greatly added to his prestige had he done the right thing rather than remain in office with his eye fixed firmly on the ultimate prize.
So Brown has hurt himself in many ways and those of us hoping for a new Labour leader to wash away the sins of Blairism are kidding ourselves on if we believe that Brown is the man to do that.
So the door is actually open for someone to challenge Brown, and even an obvious Blairite like Miliband has a chance of winning because of the self inflicted wounds that Brown bears. And, if Brown is already stained with the worst sins of Blairism, what's to stop the party choosing a younger, more enigmatic Blairite to challenge Cameron?
There were times following the Iraq war when many of us were baying for Brown to wield the knife and drive Blair from office. He always failed to do so. His time may very well have come and gone.
That's why I, for one, don't dismiss out of hand Blair's claim that - were Miliband to run against Brown with commitment - he could very well find himself becoming the next Prime Minister.
Click title for full article.
No comments:
Post a Comment