Saturday, Jun 06, 2009
Ouch! Ouch!! Ouch!!!
FT: Time runs out for Gordon Brown
At the end of the worst week of his political life, Gordon Brown is still standing – just. The question is whether he can still govern. That must be answered because, with the challenges it is facing, Britain desperately needs a government.
Posted by devo @ 12:33 AM (3394 views) Add Comment
32 Comments
- If you do not have an admin password leave the password field blank.
- If you would like to request a password allowing you to add comments and blog news articles without needing each one approved manually, send an e-mail to the webmaster.
- Your email address is required so we can verify that the comment is genuine. It will not be posted anywhere on the site, will be stored confidentially by us and never given out to any third party.
- Please note that any viewpoints published here as comments are user's views and not the views of HousePriceCrash.co.uk.
- Please adhere to the Guidelines
1. devo said...
For those who can't access the article...
After a wipe-out at the polls and a walk-out from his cabinet, the prime minister’s authority is in shreds. As Friday’s bungle of a reshuffle demonstrated, Mr Brown plainly does not have the power to choose his own cabinet. Conservative leader David Cameron’s jibe that ministers were reshuffling themselves was a bull’s-eye.
2. devo said...
Jacqui Smith, home secretary, and Hazel Blears, communities secretary, would have had to go anyway. After the expenses scandal they were damaged goods. But they chose the timing. James Purnell, telling the prime minister to step aside as he resigned as work and pensions secretary, chose the terms of debate.
That put paid to Mr Brown’s plans to put his ally, schools minister Ed Balls, into the Treasury. It would be nice to say the prime minister had followed the advice of these columns in keeping Alistair Darling as chancellor but, in truth, he had no choice. David Miliband, weakened by his half-hearted bid to unseat Mr Brown last summer, could in these circumstances dig in and refuse to give up his tenure at the Foreign Office.
3. devo said...
Many choices Mr Brown was able to make look hollow. Bigging up Lord Mandelson’s business department is a bit like bringing the mountain to Mohammed. His signing of Sir Alan Sugar as “enterprise tsar” is a last gasp of gimmickry: government meltdown as reality TV – which is what Westminster resembled all week
4. devo said...
The loss of John Hutton at defence – a minister on top of his brief, with British troops at war in Afghanistan and a defence review ahead – demands proper explanation. On its sixth defence secretary, fourth foreign secretary and sixth home secretary, Labour comes across as, well, careless
5. devo said...
Mr Brown, for his part, evinces no sense of purpose beyond survival and shows no sense of direction beyond averting an early test at the polls. He could just limp on. It is not just party rules that make regicide difficult in the Labour party; yet again, this rebellion of all the talents has been willing to wound and yet afraid to strike.
6. devo said...
The stench of fin de siécle round Mr Brown resembles the way John Major was undermined towards the end of his mandate. Mr Major submitted himself to a “back me or sack me” leadership contest and won. The prime minister should now do the same.
He has failed to reassert his authority in the cabinet reshuffle. He faces humiliation in the European elections. He should show he commands a clear majority in his party or step down and clear the way for a general election.
7. letsgetreadytotumble said...
Can we remember why we are here? :o)
I'm thing that house prices will be minimised if the Labour government remain in office for as long as possible.
Also, the local elections tended to show that a Conservative win now would still leave a significant number of Labour MPs in the H of P. Maybe the number of Labour MPs would also be minimised the longer this government remain in office.
Anyway, I'm finding the Labour blunders very entertaining.
8. devo said...
7. letsgetreadytotumble said... Can we remember why we are here? :o)
I'm here to witness (and comment on) the end of an era.
9. japanese uncle said...
Scheming filth vs thick slime, what a futile conflict!
10. Bear said...
"desperately need a government".
Ehem, we need liberty from government!
11. uncle tom said...
One reason Labour won't go to the polls that has been somewhat overlooked, is the little matter of the party being broke - it is doubtful that they could raise the cash to fight a campaign at the moment..
12. crunchy said...
Brown found to have his hand in the cookie jar £180 so far, but as long as he and others have the power to keep the lid on other jars we will never find out the true extent of the dunking. Is this just a crumb?
http://news.aol.co.uk/brown-repays-180-in-expenses-row/article/2009060522533595232446
13. crunchy said...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/2016184/MPs-expenses-Gordon-Browns-9000-kitchen-subsidy-revealed.html
Nice kitchen!
14. crunchy said...
I am no expert being a dumb HPCer, but can things like kitchens and such increase the value of a property when sold?
Is that called profit?
The questions are mounting up!
15. enuii said...
Crunchy: I also heard that all Blairs receipts/expenses claims had been accidently shredded.
How strange, what a coincidence, well I never, what a surprise, oh-dear.
16. crunchy said...
15. enuii, Some cookie jars are hard to open. I have one such container, but when I finally open it, just the smell alone is worth the effort.
Some cookies escape in the effort. Always the best one's.
Yes, what a suprise!
17. braindeed said...
@ 4. crunchy said... Give me a party that truely cares for Britians future as in a balanced economic and social dynamic, and has the "collective credentials" to acheive this;
˜˜ ˜˜
{ ʘ ʘ}
¿
Ó ....presumably what Edvard means regarding 'Britain's future’, is how that future relates to the fortunate’s who have accumulated capital during this Bubble Economy – hardly the same thing. I also wonder how the ‘social dynamic’ will be affected by whatever is decided to be ‘A price worth paying’ this time?
Maybe ‘tax and spend’ would be the most equitable way of spreading the burden, post bubble. Nulab and Broon are doomed, but what ‘efficiencies’ are Dave and his fag going to instigate? ….we should be told.
18. braindeed said...
@ 4. crunchy said... Give me a party that truely cares for Britians future as in a balanced economic and social dynamic, and has the "collective credentials" to acheive this;
. ˜˜ ˜˜
. { ʘ ʘ}
. ¿
. Ó ....presumably what Edvard means regarding 'Britain's future’, is how that future relates to the fortunate’s who have accumulated capital during this Bubble Economy – hardly the same thing. I also wonder how the ‘social dynamic’ will be affected by whatever is decided to be ‘A price worth paying’ this time?
Maybe ‘tax and spend’ would be the most equitable way of spreading the burden, post bubble. Nulab and Broon are doomed, but what ‘efficiencies’ are Dave and his fag going to instigate? ….we should be told.
19. crunchy said...
17. braindeed
Your presumptions are way out as usual. The enlistment of Alan Sugar along with his obvious overpowering personal objectives is the last thing we need influencing Brown. braindeed, Rentier Sugar and Harrison don't exactly make a harmonious coupling. Go figure.
I was not implying left of right is the answer, if such a parigdim exists now. If Britain can be guided by people that are individually qualified
in the required fields and have Britains future at heart before there own personal interests like Fred Harrison, I feel that this would be a great starting point. Your misconceptions of me are clouding what you think my comments are trying to convey. That's a mistake.
Try also in future to keep to the relative thread. It would make things easlier for the reader to follow.
20. braindeed said...
Agreed on Sugar and Harrison.
Do you see my point about the way debate should be ensuing - surely it's time to look at Daves plans?
You presume much about my conception of you too.
....and yes, i should'nt open to many windows at one time - point taken
21. crunchy said...
4. crunchy said...Was the guy on he left of Nelson taking the mick. lol
This just shows Browns obsession with growth even when It would seem an impossibility to acheive this in the near future.
It would also go some way in explaining why Brown allowed a bubble of such historic proportions.
We now need a party of thrift and an ability to use public money in a less wastfull and more forward thinking manner.
Give me a party that truely cares for Britians future as in a balanced economic and social dynamic, and has the "collective credentials" to
acheive this; along with the humbleness to listen to there electorate and the wisdom to act upon that feedback.
May they also have a place for the likes of Fred Harrison. Such people have been ignored for too long!
22. crunchy said...
You also should not call me Munchy if you want an ensuing debate, or imply that I am insane.
That can encourage one to ignore you braindeed.
23. braindeed said...
Edvard, we both know you'd rather be painting than trading currency.....I hope you can retire soon and do what salves your soul.
24. crunchy said...
23. braindeed
I do both now. Assumption has no place in either pursuit.
25. crunchy said...
Away for a while to map out a three point perspective.
Not on a bridge.
26. braindeed said...
Good .....that will help you grasp the difference between 'small', and 'far away'
27. crunchy said...
@ 26....One has to know the difference before one embarks on such feats.
That was a bit like asking pro Squash players if Squash keeps them fit. Just as funny on a cryptic level. lol
However, no question or assumption is dumb, misguided, perhaps.
FT: Time runs out for Gordon Brown... Let's not lose perspective or the thread on this one.
28. braindeed said...
Best you just have a look at this.....it's not that complicted, Edvard
http://thepoormouth.blogspot.com/2009/04/father-ted-on-perspective.html
29. crunchy said...
Thought it would be more profound.
Getting bored! zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Red Star. Could do much better.
30. james stephenson said...
The Illusion of Change.
The Tories no longer have any real policy or ideology difference from Labour.
They never squeaked as we built up huge debt.
They won't make any attempt to reduce the massive flow through our borders - in fact how could they - Europe decides what immigrants we allow through. 56 Million more Africans to be invited into the EU (google africancrisis).
The Tories no longer wish to punish criminals - they believe as labour do that criminals are victims of circumstance who need support.
They will not reduce the size of government.
They will not introduce rigour into education.
They will plunge us further into the Franco-German Super State and further sign away our sovereignty.
As for governments knowing how to spend our money better than us. How retarded!!!!
Street Football Coordination Officers anyone?
Thousands of trendy pointless jobs created in the Public Sector. Every project the Goverment has initiated has been a costly mess - every IT system they have introduced has been a huge bungle.
Private business knows best how to invest money for the good of the country. Charitable causes know best how to target the real needy.
Both these areas have been slaughtered under Labour and there will be no change under Blue Labour.
31. james stephenson said...
Sorry - googling africancrisis won't do it. See:
http://www.africancrisis.co.za/Article.php?ID=37953
32. nickolarge said...
There is an aspect of the Euro elections that I have not seen mentioned anywhere else.
The Tories came first but with a low % and hardly any increase in share of the vote.
More importantly, another right wing party came second.
Labour voters mostly stayed away rather than vote for any of the other choices.
My point is that the main reason why the Tories have had so much time in power for the last 100 years is that the left of centre vote was split between the Liberals and Labour.
If UKIP can keep even half the percentage of the vote that they collected in this election it will cause big problems for the Tories when it comes to size of majority or even getting any majority at all.
If the Tories failed to win, as they often did, when they were the only viable party on the right, they have little chance if the right wing vote is split.