The paperback edition of Peter Mandelson’s autobiography, The Third Man, will be published on Monday; here, in exclusive extracts to Left Foot Forward, he reveals what he really thinks of David Cameron.
The paperback edition of Peter Mandelson’s autobiography, The Third Man, will be published on Monday, containing a new preface which brings the edition up to date, covering the Labour party’s leadership election and the impact on Britain of the coalition government; here, in exclusive extracts to Left Foot Forward, Lord Mandleson reveals what he really thinks of David Cameron
On Cameron’s attempt to mimic new Labour…
[By the time we reached the 2010 election…] we were seen as having moved away from where the bulk of mainstream voters place themselves – in the aspirational centre ground of politics. That, of course, was precisely where David Cameron had dragged the Tories, to the squealing disapproval of many on his party’s right.
Like Tony Blair, he recognised that just about anyone under the age of forty, and many above it, wanted a combination of economic and social liberalism. That is what New Labour offered. It was what Cameron – minus the baggage of his party’s intolerant right wing– wanted to offer too… (p.xxx)
As Cameron and his team woke up to the scale and ambition of our original (New Labour) project, they realised the extent of the changes they too had to make to put them on the road back to power. (p.xxxi)
On Cameron’s “big tent” and relief in not being invited to enter it…
I can well understand why Cameron, in a further cloning of our own overtures to policy experts across party divides, included a ‘big tent’ approach to involve serious Labour policy minds like John Hutton on pensions and Frank Field on welfare among his early moves. I do not feel that agreeing to advise the coalition on issues that we too think are important is a great political crime, especially when the people concerned are not being asked to contribute to the debate about their own party’s future.
I admit to a sense of relief, however, that despite media speculation, I was not put on the spot by receiving such an invitation. (p.xxxvi)
On Cameron’s strengths and weaknesses…
Indeed, the more some Tories on the right pushed back, the more authentic Cameron’s moves appeared, just as those on the left who argued against New Labour had helped to reinforce the changes Tony was making. From early on, I saw, and tried to persuade Labour colleagues, that Cameron was not just another right-wing Tory leader.
If only because of his distinctly Blair-like talent as a political communicator, I also felt we would fail if we simply relied on our efforts to convince the country that he was some sort of clever charlatan.
I did question whether in reality he had the desire, or the ability, to follow through with the kind of profound, longer-term change in his party – a shift not just in political position but in ideology – that we had achieved in New Labour. From his early record in government, however, you have to give him points for trying, at least. Indeed, I suspect that he is temperamentally more at ease in leading a coalition than he would be leading a government of his own party. (p.xxxii)
26 Responses to “Exclusive: What Mandelson really thinks of Cameron”
jt
Exclusive: What Mandelson really thinks of Cameron | Left Foot Forward: It was what Cameron – minus the baggage … http://bit.ly/euwz0G
John Baxendale
Mandelson’s account is revealingly static. He thinks it’s still 1994, and ‘everyone under 40’ means the same people now as it did when Blair became leader. Despite all that has happened – including a decade of New Labour government and a major economic crisis – for Mandy, time apparently stands still. But if New Labour got it right, then why is Cameron taking things even further in a neo-liberal direction? And if this is what people want, why didn’t he trumpet it in his election campaign instead of concealing his intentions? And if Mandelson agrees with what he’s doing, why is he relieved not to be asked on board?
Anon E Mouse
John Baxendale – Cameron didn’t win the election outright – the coalition is a compromise so full Tory policies won’t be implemented. Cameron certainly has more legitimacy than Labour who were soundly whacked at the election but none the less it wasn’t an outright win for him.
The more Labour shifts to the left, which it inevitably will under the Ed Miliband the union man, the more the UK electorate will turn against it.
Labour supporters can complain all they like about Tony Blair but he knew, more than any other Labour leader in history how to win elections. Ed Miliband needs ditching ASAP – only 15% of his shadow cabinet voted for him and since Labour were gutless in not getting rid of the unelected Gordon Brown you’d think they’d learned their lesson.
People like Ed Balls can go onto as many shows as he likes but until the party admits where it went wrong no one will trust it with the governance of this country again – why should they?
The sooner Labour supporters start admitting their mistakes and just grow up and lose the silly university student socialist mentality the sooner we may take them seriously….
Mr. Sensible
Cameron’s mask has slipped; we now know what all this ‘Big Society’ is all about.
tonybaloni
The only mistake Labour made was to not offer Murdoch more than the Tories were offering. Basically a reigning in of the BBC especially it’s influence abroad.
The Tories agreed to pay the price but they in the long run will regret it as they have allowed Murdoch more power than he could have imagined getting away with.
The future politics of this country and it’s image abroad is now totally in the hands of Murdoch and as usual the Tories would sell their mother for even a whiff of power.