Watch Out

Of course Brown will portray it differently. He will demonstrate that he is different from Blair. New Labour is now seen as a party controlled by the rich. What could make the party seem newer when Brown takes over than dropping the word “new” from its name?

Labour’s potential voters will want to know where he stands on Iraq. Last week Brown defended “what we’ve been trying to do” there (please note not “what we have done” there). In fact Brown is unlikely to face difficult decisions on Iraq. Support for the war in the United States is crumbling. At some point the troops will have to come home whether Iraq is governable by then or not, and we shall not see another Anglo-American military adventure for many years.

The most important questions concern Brown’s performance and personality. The budget speech once more demonstrated his power and mastery of the Commons. But over the years the hectoring has not diminished. The bluster and bombast constitute an immature style for such an experienced politician. His moodiness and the grudges he harbours must worry his supporters.

To be prime minister is wholly different from being chancellor. In the top job it is not possible to duck the big issues as Brown has done consistently. Blair has the extraordinary quality every day to dust himself down and do the job again no matter how bad things are. Even now his media performances are still superb. He withstands assault from every angle, sustained by a sort of inner perkiness. I doubt that Brown has the same resilience.

The budget provided a test for another potential prime minister, David Cameron. Opinions on his Commons riposte were divided, but overall it was not a good week for the Tories. They were unable to decide which of Brown’s initiatives they opposed. When asked whether they would want to spend as much per pupil in state schools as occurs in public ones, or whether a Tory government would put £750 into a child’s trust fund when it reaches the age of seven, they mumbled.

The Conservatives are in a mess over party funding, too. The party has refused to reveal the names of those who have loaned it money, making it look even less transparent than Labour. People have little incentive to give to opposition parties anyway, and the Conservatives can afford even less than Labour to offend those who lent money and were assured that they would remain anonymous.

With those inhibitions, the Conservatives could play almost no role last week as Blair’s problems worsened and Brown limbered up to replace him.

The Tories have yet to produce their best jibe against Brown, which is that his seat is in Scotland. Under Labour’s cack-handed devolution, a prime minister in a Scottish constituency would constantly be proposing legislation that did not affect his own constituents. The Conservatives are right to hold back on deploying that powerful argument, which for now might appear a little theoretical. But Blair’s people might start that ball rolling.

The media’s rage against Blair has led to a view that his resignation will be brought forward. Not necessarily. The editor of a Sunday tabloid told me that things will clearly be much duller when Brown takes over. Blair’s troubles provide the newspapers with pages of splendid copy. It is in the press’s interest, he argued, to keep Blair in office for as long as possible. I know that the prime minister will be consoled by that.

michael.portillo@sunday-times.co.uk