The silver lining for Brown

September 18, 2008

Since this article was written, Brown's performance in international summits on the economic crisis and various gaffes by his opponents have narrowed the Conservatives' lead to three points.

The ruling UK Labour Party’s annual conferences tend to happen at the seaside, but during periods of leadership intrigue, coincidence has ordained that the party gets together in Manchester instead. Meeting in 2006, the conspicuously beachless town bore witness to Tony Blair’s last conference as party leader. Members might wonder whether this year the town will witness Gordon Brown’s last conference as leader, too.

Since the heady days of the 2007 conference -- when a summer’s skilful crisis management made an early election triumph a possibility -- Brown’s government has sunk to nearly twenty points behind the opposition Conservative party in polls, scarred by economic underperformance, disastrous policy gaffes, and a succession of local election defeats. 

This has led to persistent calls for a change of leadership, or at least a leadership vote. At first the calls came from old rivals, and those with a chance of succeeding Brown, but now increasingly fearful junior ministers and back-benchers are joining the chorus. Brown has quashed debate about a leadership challenge, in the hope of re-launching his government programme -- backed by the party’s ruling National Executive Committee, which rejected an attempt to send out leadership nomination papers to delegates before the conference. However, control of the story has escaped him.

David Cairns, popular former priest and ardent socialist, resigned as minister of state at the Scotland office on September 16 once his doubts about Brown leaked, arguing that “[t]he issue of leadership and direction are being discussed and argued over, and to go on denying it is hardly credible.” Two other ministers have so far been fired for expressing doubt about Brown’s suitability for the top job, and a string of former party high-ups have come out in support of a contest to ‘clear the air’. As Gordon Brown draws comparisons inside the party to Neville Chamberlain, a totemic symbol of UK political failure, the chances are growing that scattered rebels could form an organized camp against the prime minister, and find the 70 parliamentarians’ names necessary to trigger a leadership vote.

In such an environment, Brown might almost welcome the present economic conditions. On the one hand, they call into question his market-friendly years as finance minister, as even the Bush administration falls back on nationalisation. On they other, they might make the UK’s worsening economic position (inflation at a 16-year high in August, ballooning unemployment and a collapsing stock market) seem less his fault, and make a leadership bid seem irresponsible, and knock stories about his leadership off the front page. Moreover, by making the Prime Minister’s job that much more difficult, they make others less tempted to have a go themselves.