Brown's reward

It's annoying to read people saying 'I told you so' but I did tell you so, as did many others. I was especially pleased to be dismissed in the summer as an idiot for predicting it would all end in tears, when Brown was riding high in the polls.

(This blog is now looking rather amusing: With Labour 11% ahead in the polls (albeit a conference special) it is interesting to hear the thoughts of political commenters and bloggers on Gordon Brown.

Stephen Pollard (and Oliver Kamm) have described him as:

Mr Unelectable
Robert Harris, in the Times, argues:

[Gordon Brown] has shown the most appalling political ineptitude and has reduced the Labour government to a farcical grotesquerie without precedent in living memory. So much so that, as the reality sinks in, I would put Brown’s chances of succeeding Blair at not much more than 50-50 and his hopes of winning the next general election at substantially less than that.
Ah, apparently those comments were made last September. "Has reduced the Labour government to a farcical grotesquerie without precedent in living memory" - good grief, surely analysis of that standard should disqualify Robert Harris from ever being taken seriously again?Er, maybe not, eh, matey?)

I've been reading a piece I wrote for the Spectator in January on the year ahead:We already know what the political event of 2007 will be. Even if David Cameron is run over by the proverbial bus or Sir Menzies Campbell wakes from his political slumber, nothing else will stand comparison with the departure of the most brilliant politician of the modern age (a description which has nothing to do with policy and everything to do with strategy and tactics) and his replacement by the most overrated politician of the modern age.

As is usually the way with these things, it is only after he is gone that Labour will miss Tony Blair. Even at the height of his political powers, his party would have preferred it if he had stuck to the Bar and the adjective New had never been associated with the word Labour. When Gordon Brown takes over, the astonishing political skills of Tony Blair will come sharply into focus — but with hindsight.

It is one thing to have as Chancellor a man who speaks as if words are merely a formula for conveying policy and who will only answer the question he has been programmed to answer — we are sort of reassured by the idea of the books being looked after by someone with a chip missing. Being Prime Minister, however, requires a very different personality.

The public mood apparently demands a break from spin and from the smoothness of Mr Blair. Yeah, right. Have those who think that not noticed the rise of David Cameron? In any event, Mr Brown is hardly the man to ditch spin. Mr Brown was responsible for the manoeuvre which first gave the government the reputation for spin: passing off modest spending increases in 1998 as a spending bonanza by triple-counting them. As for the supposed contrast with Mr Blair of Mr Brown’s lack of smoothness, if there is one thing more cringe-making than the genuinely smooth Prime Minister, it is the attempts by Mr Brown — such as the rictus grin now attached to his face — to come across as a smoothie. If I say so myself, not too bad a prediction.

Gordon Brown has built an entire career on the six months he enjoyed as a stand in for John Smith as Shadow Chancellor, after tthe latter's heart attack. He was indeed impressive. But he is almost comically over-rated, taking over an economy which had been put right by Ken Clarke and then proceeding to over burden it with taxes and regulations. And now we are about to reap the consequences of his time as Chancellor.