I gave an interview to the Evening Standard last week which is in today’s paper. Generally it’s a fair piece and reflects my views on Iraq (articulated previously on this blog) and other issues.
But one line that I took issue with was where the article says:
“Gordon Brown and Tony Blair have been a huge disappointment and let down the Labour Party,” he believes.
As readers of Left Foot Forward will know, I have been a defender of Gordon Brown and believe that the recent attempted coup against him was a mistake.
I have spoken to the writer of the article, David Cohen, and we shared our notes on the interview. It seems that I did make these comments towards the end of our conversation in the context of a wider discussion about Labour’s organisation (a topic on which I have co-edited a book) and some specific policy areas including the Government’s timidity in relation to the City and the lack of progress in tackling inequality – themes on which I regularly write.
I also mentioned earlier in the interview that, like others, I was disappointed by the lack of progress on constitutional reform under Gordon Brown. But I also noted that Brown had been buffeted by an economic and a political crisis not of his making. I want to reiterate here that, aside from these points, I do not regard Gordon Brown to have been a disappointment or to have let down the Labour party.
In relation to Blair, we discussed a number of issues where I praised his record as Prime Minister including some covered in the piece such as his record on education and health.
It is also worth noting that the article implies I have more strategic vision than is actually the case:
So it is fascinating that he should have picked this moment, as his 63-year-old father prepares to give evidence on Thursday to the Chilcot inquiry, to speak his mind and put clear water between the party that his dad represents and the new generation of young Left-wing progressives who, like him, are disenchanted with its direction.
David Cohen made the initial contact and the date was suggested by him.
I understand why the article has been written in the way that it has and have not sought a correction on the Evening Standard’s pages. But I thought some context would be helpful.
To reach hundreds of thousands of new readers and to make the biggest impact we can in the next general election, we need to grow our donor base substantially.
That's why in 2024, we are seeking to generate 150 additional regular donors to support Left Foot Forward's work.
We still need another 124 people to donate to hit the target. You can help. Donate today.
17 Responses to “Evening Standard interview: a clarification”
Anon E Mouse
Liz – I meant 350 members of the PLP…
Liz McShane
Anon – I am thankful that Gordon Brown is one of the few people that understands economics in this country and managed to navigate us through the rather choppy waters of the last 12-18 months and successfully minimised the damage – that’s what matters to people on the street.
Anon E Mouse
Liz – If he does understand it he shows no sign of it. And he most certainly hasn’t minimised any damage, he’s just delayed the pain.
As bad as everyone knows he is as Prime Minister (from the lowest poll rating since records began) as a chancellor he was beyond useless. That’s why Black Wednesday never gets mentioned anymore – that was a drop in the ocean.
We are not “best placed to see out the recession”. He did not “end boom and bust”. We are not “leading the G20 out of recession”.
We now have the largest debt in this country and will be paying it off for generations and for what?
To allow him to reward the bankers with our money and they still get their bonus payments – now with (RBS 83%) our money, not money from share holders.
See Billy Bragg on the net for further info…
He claimed that removing the 10p Tax rate “would not affect anyone” – the guy is an absolute disaster.
Hey but don’t ask me Liz – Mervyn King says it today in The Times – funny how Will Straw missed the headline on his politics summary…
Liz
Anon – an excerpt from an article posted by PPC Ann Pettifor on Compass’s website yesterday….
“In 1946 Britain’s debt was roughly 5 times what it is today – a staggering 250% of GDP.
At that point an extraordinary thing happened.
The heavily indebted Labour government began to spend – as soon as legislation was agreed by Parliament.
Labour invested in a bold and visionary project: – a publicly funded health service free at the point of use – the NHS. There was a slum clearance and housing programme. They revived the ancient universities, provided pensions and welfare to the poor. They trained ex-soldiers to become teachers.
To revive the economy, to protect the vulnerable, and to prepare the country for the threat posed by climate change – a Labour government must do the same again: invest in a Green New Deal.
What happened to the public debt in the 40s and 50s, you might ask, as a result of Clem Attlee and Hugh Dalton’s apparent extravagance and flouting of the economic orthodoxy? Did the deficit balloon, the bond markets blackmail the government, and did capitalism as we know it, go into free fall?
No. On the contrary. Look at the chart. What Lord John Maynard Keynes advised would happen, did happen. Government investment kick-started private economic activity. Tax revenues rose, expenditure on unemployment benefits fell, and government cut its borrowing, which fell dramatically as a share of GDP.”
Don Quixote
Anon- May I say that I’m genuinely happy to see some genuine arguments form you, it is incredibly refreshing after the “one-eyed scottish idiot” drivel that seems to be popular among the British right these days…
I’m afraid I haven’t got time to respond to them individually at the moment (and I agree with some of them, in any case). But I am resolute that Gordon Brown is the best Prime Minister we could currently have.
Incidentally, as a matter of curiosity, why is the claim to have ended boom and bust so inflammatory? A lot of anti-Brown rhetoric seems to revolve around this, but was there a single person anywhere who actually believed at the time that boom and bust was banished forever? Am I really to believe that it should be interpreted as a personal promise from Brown that there would never be any sort of market fluctuation again?
It seems manifest to me that no one took Gordon Brown to mean it literally when he said it, he simply meant that the market was doing well and seemed to be stable under Labour… I mean, hyperbole is not exactly uncommon in politics…
Michael- I stand corrected.
Liz- I agree wholeheartedly.