Anatole Kaletsky
Win a fitness package worth more than £3,000
Dear Gordon,
Last week I wrote you a seasonal greeting, recommending some new year resolutions of self-denial. In this second half of the message, I will take the liberty of suggesting some non-economic issues where self-denying ordinances could improve the outlook for your Government in the year ahead.
The most important function of government is foreign policy and defence. It is also the field where the benefits of self-restraint are most apparent. Few people doubt any longer that both the country and the Labour Government would have been better off if Tony Blair had shown more restraint over Iraq and his so-called War on Terror. One of the most intelligent decisions you made as soon as you became Prime Minister was to stop flattering and legitimising the madmen of al-Qaeda by romanticising their mass murders as a “war”.
Sadly, however, your self-restraint did not go beyond such semantic changes. Your other big idea in foreign last year — the appointment of Lord Malloch-Brown as deputy foreign secretary - was designed for a similar symbolic purpose. You spun this appointment as a gesture of defiance towards the Bush Administration, hoping to win kudos from the British public. But you then assured Washington privately that Lord Malloch-Brown would have no influence whatsoever in the one area that mattered to the White House - the Middle East. Needless to say, this gimmickry backfired.
If we ignore such gestures and look back over last year, you remained as much an agent as Mr Blair of President Bush's foreign policy. Not only did you fail to signal a change of course by announcing a withdrawal from Iraq, like the Italian, Spanish, Australian, Polish and Japanese governments. You also continued to back US military threats towards Iran, insisting that “nothing is ruled out” when asked about British participation in American bombing raids, rejecting proposals for direct US negotiations with Tehran. The predictable result was that Britain got the worst of both worlds: our foreign policy continued to be made in Washington, but we no longer enjoyed any special influence over Mr Bush.
In the year ahead, there is a simple way to improve this dire situation: you must state publicly that Britain will pull its soldiers out of Basra and will oppose any military attack by either America or Israel on Iran. The logical consequence of such a policy would be to encourage broad-based negotiations with Iran and also with Hamas, preferably in conjunction with the EU. In the meantime you could transform your domestic and international standing by firmly ruling out any further Middle Eastern military adventures, but continuing the peacemaking process in Afghanistan.
Speaking of Afghanistan, there is another self-denying ordinance you should uphold: acknowledge that you cannot win the war against drugs. As long as British soldiers are trying to eradicate opium poppies, their presence will strengthen the Taleban. Only by accepting that farmers in Afghanistan are as entitled to grow opium as the farmers of Turkey or Virginia are to grow tobacco — and by making arrangements to buy up their crops at higher prices than the opium traders can afford - will the Western coalition make any headway in winning Afghan hearts and minds.
The other great issues of foreign policy this year will be the European constitution — and here again a self-denying ordinance would serve you well. You promised in your manifesto to hold a referendum on the constitution. If you squirm out of this by simply changing its name to “treaty”, your promises will never be trusted again. There is, however, an honourable alternative to such semantic wriggling: stop imagining that you alone must carry the burden of this decision and allow a free vote in Parliament on whether the treaty should be immediately ratified or submitted to a plebiscite. A free vote to ratify would be a genuine exercise in parliamentary sovereignty. And if Parliament decided the treaty was genuinely a matter of constitutional importance, then you could organise a referendum with no loss of face and no presumption that the public would vote “no”. Either way, your personal credibility would be enormously enhanced by an achievement that has eluded all your predecessors since Harold Wilson: you would have settled the European issue for a generation.
Respect for the British constitution is another area to improve your standing through self-restraint. Your own law officers have told you that there is no need to extend pre-charge detention. You face a political nightmare in pushing this legislation through Parliament. To end this nightmare, you have only to pinch yourself and wake up: announce that this legislation is no longer needed and the ordeal will be over.
You should do exactly the same with the ruinously costly national ID card scheme. The data management fiascos have proved that government cannot cope with more information. Nobody has given a convincing argument for a national ID scheme - and anyway, you will incite a revolution if you try to force the British to carry compulsory identity cards like the Germans and French. You may believe that you have no alternative but to carry on with a programme to which you are publicly committed. But if you are banging your head against a brick wall, there is always an alternative: stop doing it.
This brings me, finally, to a much smaller, but electorally suicidal, issue that will cripple you politically even if your Government performs well in other respects: the expansion of Heathrow airport. The pros and cons of airport expansion can be discussed elsewhere; suffice it to say that London has Britain's largest concentration of marginal seats and that Heathrow is in completely the wrong place to become a vast international hub for British Airways.
Moreover, such a hub would be neither in the national interest nor in the interest of shareholders in BA. In any case, the detailed arguments are irrelevant. If you persist in trying to build a third Heathrow runway you will lose every marginal seat in London - and that alone will probably be enough to guarantee a general election defeat. Again the solution is obvious: just do nothing. Or if you must do something, then take the economically sensible course: break up the BAA monopoly, forcing Heathrow to compete against Stansted and Gatwick. This will solve the congestion problem far more quickly than any centrally imposed Whitehall plan.
You may be surprised that this letter has not even mentioned education, health and equality, the issues that you care about most. But I have been writing about what you should not do. You may claim genuine vision for transforming Britain's social services in the long term. But what you can achieve before the next general election is limited. Unless you can lay to rest the doubts about your Government's competence, honesty and ability to respond to unexpected events, your long-term vision for Britain's public services will remain just a vision. As Keynes said, we are all dead in the long run - and for any politician, mortality looms at the next election.
Happy New Year,
Anatole

Anatole Kaletsky writes for The Times Comment pages on Thursdays. One of the country's leading commentators on economics, he was formerly Economics Editor and is now an Associate Editor of The Times. He has won many awards for his financial and political journalism. Before joining The Times, he worked for 12 years on the Financial Times
Industry sectors news at a glance. Interactive heatmap, video and podcast
The inside track on current trends in the charity, not for profit and social enterprise sectors
Read our exclusive 100 Years of Fleming and Bond interactive timeline, packed with original Times articles and reviews
Everything the Business Traveller needs to know to make a better trip
Shortcuts to help you find sections and articles
05/2005
£13,500
08/2008
£109,950
2006
£10,750
Great car insurance deals online
£Excellent+ executive benefits
Torres and Partners
London
£49,229 - £62,035 pro rata
Charity Commission
London/Liverpool/Taunton
Alstom Power
Europe
Six Figure
Rolls Royce
Midlands/Europe
From £89,950
Great Investment, River Views
Special Offers now available
At the new sophisticated
Encore Las Vegas Resort!
Cruise the Islands of Hawaii - Pride of America
List your property with two leading travel websites
Great travel insurance deals online
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times, or place your advertisement.
Times Online Services: Dating | Jobs | Property Search | Used Cars | Holidays | Births, Marriages, Deaths
News International associated websites: Globrix | Property Finder | Milkround
Copyright 2008 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
Nancy Wood of London isn't the first to call Tony Blair a liar over Iraq, but she may be the first to say he lied repeatedly to Parliament.
Blair might have lied over Iraq, but I have yet to see any firm evidence produced by his accusers.
So, come on Nancy - give us your demonstrable proof of Blair's mendacity in the Commons. It's all on line in Hansard. Just one lie will suffice!
arnoldo, Coventry,
"If you persist in trying to build a third Heathrow runway you will lose every marginal seat in London"
Absolute rubbish. Live in Putney or Richmond, do you Anatole? Last time I looked there weren't any Labour MPs round there!
GB, London, UK
'showed more restraint over Iraq' ?!?
How about, 'Hadn't politicised the intelligence services, had his minions blatantly change reports, lied repeatedly to Parliament and the people who elected him and who paid his salary and now his generous retirement, underfunded the military and sent our sons and daughters to die, underprepared, in an unwinnable war'? Isn't that a bit nearer the truth?
Nancy Wood, London,
I saw recently that one of the greatest proponents of ID cards (Neil Kinnock) is on the board of the company that will make them, is anyone suprised!?
They call it corruption over here in Thailand!
Andrew Munn, Bangkok, Thailand
Great idea on the opium, but there are no commercial solutions to Ahmedinejad : this guyâs beyond venality ; heâs driven by a messianic hatred against Israel. Ask Kouchner and Blair for wisdom on this one, but Ezekiel 38 suggests there ainât gonna be no easy answer.
PS
If you lived in Walsall, you might understand why we would welcome the introduction of ID cards.
Anth, Walsall,
The only answer is for 49 million people plus to say NO to ID cards. The road to ID cards is the beginning of the road to nowhere.
Unbelievable that the government should think that the people of this country should give up the way of life fought for by our ancestors in WW2. Big up to George Galloway,Nick Clegg and Shirley Williams amongst many who will refuse an ID card.
Well done to the new Australian government for seeing sense and abandoning their ID scheme.
John , Chatham,
Is Anotole pitching for Alister 's old Job?
R James, Clifton, UK
'Most people want ID cards?' I think not, Mr Goddard. No one I know is clamouring for them to be introduced. Best forget about this ridiculous Blairite idea along with all his other follies that have cost this country so dear. Be your own man Mr. Brown and remember Britons never, never will be slaves!
Brian, Liverpool,
Anatole,
You are wrong: most English people want ID cards, they will make every day life simpler and allow us to travel within the EU without passports: this is good.
You are also wrong in saying ID cards have to be carried in Germany and France: they do not, although most people carry them as you would carry your credit cards or driving licence because it makes like simpler: this is good.
You should check your facts before writing: ID cards are not mandatory in France, but they are free and who in their right mind would not accept a free document that simplifies life and allows one to travel unhindered throughout the Union?
Why not make a new year resolution to be a bit more positive about Europe and talk of the benefits instead of inciting people to be against everything?
Peter Goddard, Epsom, England, EU
Yes, Germans over the age of 16 are required by law to carry ID with them at all times.
Inga, Karlsruhe, Germany
"you must state publicly that Britain will pull its soldiers out of Basra and will oppose any military attack by either America or Israel on Iran. The logical consequence of such a policy would be to encourage" an Israeli attack on Iran, which might well make use of nuclear weapons.
AK has a strange blind spot where the Middle East is concerned. Iran boasts of having 3000 centrifuges, and members of the regime have said publicly they think they can win a nuclear war with Israel.
Then again, I doubt if Israel or the US cares what Gordon thinks.
Gareth, Cardiff,
Those, like Anatole Kaletsky, who claim that the 2007 European "Treaty" is the same animal as the 2005 "Constitution" should answer the following two questions:-
1. Why are the French and Dutch governments flagrantly flouting the two "NO" referendum verdicts of 2005?
2. Why are the voters in those two countries not in open revolt over this rejection of their democratic decision?
Could it be that they are NOT in fact, the same animal?
arnoldo, Coventry,
Rob, I agree with you that all we need to do is give him some more rope, but by the time the next election rolls round we will have a) subsumed yet more of our freedom to choose and rights to the EU b) had our DNA taken for unwanted ID cards at a cost of billions whether we like it or not c) had the government promptly lose control of that information leaving fraudsters to impersonate us at an almost irrefutable level d) probably gone into recession. And there's bugger all we can do about it in the meantime. I despise Brown and this government; I hate their arrogance, deceit and incompetence. Anatole Kalensky for PM!
Cat, London,
Very True. Mr Brown has been micro-managing the economy every since Dear Leader Tony and tgheir closet 'Pseudo-Marxist Crew' got into office. Mr Brown was part of "Team B'Liar", so as they say - 'Mud Sticks'.
Pa Mc Broone is still micro-managing the economy even though we have a enw Chancellor in the guise of 'Baldrick' Darling becuase ven he has 'No cunning Plan' becuase its all Pa McBroone's.
AS for more reforms of the public sector - why? How many 'refors' must the public sector go through whilst this bunch of neo-controlfreaks 'fiddle' whilst the UK falls even lower down the chain of Western economies. Mr Brown will soon have to go cap in hand to the IMF like one of his Labour predecessors way back in the 1970s to get bail-out loans!!
Mr Brown reflects all that is wrong within the Senior Management of UK Public Sector -- proffessional incompetence, and they are proud of this!! They get large bonuses for Failure!
B Clarke, Chelmsford, England UK
Mr. Kaletsky, has it taken enlightened ones, the likes of you, all this time, to suddenly wake up to the disillusion of this Great ex Iron Chancellor , when we mere mortal voters have been proclaiming it all along?
We have the Incompetent media to thank for our Incompetent Mr Brown.
2008 will be the Year of the Great Incompetence.
John Maynard, Kent, UK
The Newspapers are full of commentators encouraging Gordon, telling him how to change his tactics, policies, vision, suits and breakfast cereal. It comes to the point where we believe that Gordon coming good is more to do with the careers of the commentators than good governance in Britain, more to do with analytical reputations than the competence and well-being of the state. We saw it in Polly Toynbee the other day which sparked off a support fest from Andrew Rawnsley, now Brother Kaletsky joins the club. These writers have lived through a time of certainty that required no intellectual analysis. Labourâs vast majority, a golden period of world financial stability, fountains of public cash, sit back and pen emollient eulogies, a steady feed of insider guff; entrees and chat show appearances ensue. Labour's inviolability induced scoffing, 'I told you so loomed large'. The panic in their pens is self-evident now that Brown is down and certainty has wilted, so much for insight.
Malcolm Turner, Alsager, England
"In the year ahead, there is a simple way to improve this dire situation: you must state publicly that Britain will pull its soldiers out of Basra and will oppose any military attack by either America or Israel on Iran. The logical consequence of such a policy would be to encourage broad-based negotiations with Iran and also with Hamas, preferably in conjunction with the EU. In the meantime you could transform your domestic and international standing by firmly ruling out any further Middle Eastern military adventures, but continuing the peacemaking process in Afghanistan."
Have you taken leave of your senses? Talk to Iran and Hamas? They're our self-declared enemies, not rational, stable state actors. We SHOULD be preparing for war.
Richard, Norwich,
The French do not need to carry their identity cards, and I do not think the Germans need to either.
Alan Reid, Brussels,
I would think it is far too late to salvage anything from this term in office. Labour are dead and buried already, only problem is we have to wait for 2 more years before Brown will have to pull the trigger of the gun to his head and declare a general election. Until then we have a dead man walking running the nation if you will forgive the pun. That will bring to an end the longest period that the UK has had an unelected prime minister in modern history.
But i have to say i do not share Anatole's theory that foreign policy is the most important function of government - obviously the most important to the government and the voter is domestic policy and trade/economy. As evidenced by a bailout of 1 private bank with the equivalent of the nation's entire annual defence budget.
Labour will have to go back to the political wilderness and do some soul searching about how to be less obvious with their fanatically interfering, manipulative control freakery.
phil, london, uk
Donna: I used to be a 60 a day smoker and I gave up (quite literally) overnight, with no support or assistance. (It was 20 years ago and nicotine patches hadn't yet been invented !)
Gordon could do it, if only he had the willpower.
Andy, Rugby, UK
Bold and courageous gesture such as buying up the opium from the Afghanistan poppy growers is way beyond the wit and vision of this entrenched control freak of a PM. Brown's tunnel vision makes it quite impossibly for him to see even the clear economically advantage of such a move. The man is a failure in ever respect and the only favour he could do the Labour party is to step down. Thankfully he will not stand down and that fact above all others will ensure a massive win for the Tories come the next election. These things I know.
D Case, Newquay,
What you're asking Gordon to do is the equivalent of asking a 60 a day smoker to give up overnight, with no support or assistance.
He is addicted to complicated meddling initiatives; belief in his own superior intellect; and wasting other peoples' money.
Like a heavily addicted smoker, he may KNOW that what he is doing is harmful, but he can't stop himself.
Donna Walker, Effingham, Surrey
Very obliging of the article to give Brown some good advice. But a short conversation with any citizen soon makes one realise that people don't give a twopenny toss about matters other than: a health service that works quickly and doesn't make you ill; streets where you don't get scared; schools where your kids learn something; and roads that don't shake your car apart. Simple, really.
john problem, winchester, uk
How about the euro now then,Mr.Kaletsky?When was the zone going to break down you said?
Having lived through the sterling crises of the 1960s onwards,give me a strong currency any day over a mickey mouse one.
Looks like Brown's chickens are coming home to roost this year,eh!
Joe Dignan, Warrington, England
Terry Dell, do not underestimate the British public with regard to insurrection. It was only a few years ago that the fuel protests brought the country to a halt. At the height of those demonstrations, it would have taken only a few senior policemen / soldiers to support the demos and / or refuse to break the fuel depot blockades to bring about something approaching insurrection. The government recognised this and backed down.
Fred, Bristol, UK
Anatole Kaletsky is correct - the 'war on terror' is as unwinable as the 'war on drugs' has been. The soldeirs in Basra are running a risk with no reward - pull them out. They do not have the capacity to do anything.the Iraqis and the Americans know this.
The BMA put forward a plan to but the Afghan poppy crop for diamorphine manfacture. The EU has shown that stability occurs as a result of wealth creation and trade not military muscle. Too many young men's lives have already been lost to no good purpose. As long as the USA continues to operate in Afghanistan as it has in Columbia it is simply a waste ot blood and money.
Those planning terror attacks do not need countries to operate from. No one would have considered invading Eire to fight the IRA. Terorists will always be with us the trick is good intelligence not the Parachute Regiment.
Eddie Reader, birmingham, england
For those of us who want to see the back of this lot who seem to think that they know better than we do about how to live our lives all we have to do is wait and see. The man is far more authoritarian than King Blair, and stubborn with it too, and he will come a cropper soon enough.
Come the Election, we should all be shouting from the roofs that we want to see parliament sovereignty returned, with proper cabinet government replace the presidential style practised by his partner in crime. And we should also demand that our civil rights be restored immediately.
Am I alone in this; have the great British public been seduced by this lot to the point whereby they believe that there is nothing we can do? Just watch the following; the economy, the failure of the health and education services, the more than appropriate accent on Third World affairs, (over and above the affairs of the British public), and his continuing faultline of weak appointments to cabinet positions. He will fall.
gnonk, Nottingham,
The most important function of government is to safeguard the governance and territory of this country for its native citizens. If it fails in this -as it has done with uncontrolled immigration and surrender to the EU -it can succeed in nothing else.
F Kimbal Johnson, Louth,Lincs, UK
Thank God Anatole Kaletsky's not in government. A few facts: Hamas wants to destroy the state of Israel, Iran wants to gain nuclear weapons and destroy Israel and the west. Don't take my word for it read what these people say on their newspapers and websites. We are engaged in a war for both our freedom and our survival, make no mistake about it. Never surrender the high ground or the element of surprise. Go back and read your history books. Surrender, as you articulate, is no policy at all.
Andy, Herford,
1) What is this 'so-called' war on terror? Does it include 'so-called' bombs on the London Underground, featuring 'so-called' explosions with 'so-called' fatalities? One of the guys who died on the London Underground was a young trainee journalist with the Guardian. Does that make him 'so-called' deceased?
2) The 'farmers' are 'entitled' to grow opium? A simplistic over-generalisation if there ever was one. So the honour killing prone bunch of religious fanatics are put on the same platform as tobacco farmers in Virginia. Get a grip!
There must be better ways to criticise Mr Brown - who spends taxpayers money like Zsa Zsa Gabor on speed.
R Smith, Manama, Bahrain
"... incite a revolution if you try to force the British to carry compulsory identity cards ...". Come off it, the British don't have the balls. They'll swallow anything, absolutely anything, the Government throws at them without murmur: and Brown knows it.
That we could do with an insurrection is entirely another matter.
Terry Dell, Weybridge, UK
Brown isn't a manager. He has never managed anything in the real world, but he likes telling other people how to manage. Unsurprisingly, he tells them the wrong things, and the result is bad management.
Oliver Chettle, Bedford,
I agree with Rob Jones - let him get on with it. It should be worth an extra 5 to 10 years of seeing Labour in Opposition.
Brown is too stubborn and dull headed to understand that what he mostly proposes is the diametric opposite to what people want to see.
Edwin, Bucharest,
Brown is a manager, not a leader, he'll never change. Yep, let him get on with it, and lose the election.
lala, london,
let brown get on with it, this will guarantee his removal at the next election.
Rob Jones, kettering,