Daniel Finkelstein
Download 'Too Hot', an exclusive Specials track from iTunes
It’s time someone put in a word for Tony Blair. And I suppose it had better be me. Do you think he’ll mind that this is being done by someone who worked in Conservative Central Office? You know what, I don’t think he will. I’m pretty certain that deep down, he knows the score.
As Labour’s conference opened in Bournemouth a fortnight, and a political age, ago, I took a phone call from an old friend of mine, a former Labour Cabinet minister. He wanted to tell me off. You Tory modernisers are in trouble, he said, because you liked Blair too much. Now the country has turned against him decisively, and you’ve been beached. Gordon Brown is posing as the anti-Blair, he said, and he has understood the spirit of the times.
Well, this is a pretty common view and it’s obviously one that Mr Brown shares. But I am sorry, I don’t. Rather unfashionably, I believe that the desperate attempt of the Prime Minister to airbrush his old friend out of history is an error. It’s the same error, incidentally, that Al Gore made in his campaign to be President. Using a pair of scissors he neatly cut Bill Clinton out of all their joint photographs, with hilarious consequences.
I’ll start with a point you may regard as quaint. For Mr Brown to make one grudging reference to Tony Blair in his conference speech was spectacularly rude. I used to write speeches for a living and can spot a formulaic, last-minute paragraph a mile off. “Whoops, we forgot to mention Tony, better stick in something when we mention the Middle East.” What a disgrace. This was, after all, the man who led his party out of the wilderness and to three huge election victories. Leaving all politics aside for a second, common courtesy demanded much, much more.
Now you may wonder why a question of manners has got me so exercised. It’s because I believe in a simple rule. If you see a person you know behave unreasonably to someone else, you can bet your last pound that before long he’ll be behaving like that to you.
This gracelessness was not an isolated incident. Alastair Campbell decided that he had better remove any references from his diary that showed Mr Brown in a bad light. There wasn’t much eraser left on the end of his pencil by the time he had finished rubbing out the tales of tears and tantrums. Mr Brown’s obsessive and unreasonable behaviour towards Mr Blair is seen as history by most people. I see it as a glimpse of the future.
The problem with confining Mr Blair to a single sentence of his conference address was not just that it made Mr Brown look small (at least it did to me, the rest of you can speak for yourself). It’s also that it robbed the new Prime Minister of the ability to make a proper argument, to tell a story about Labour’s period in office and its plans.
He says that he delayed his election (and Ed Balls’s election, credit where credit is due) because he wanted us to see his vision for change. But what is that vision? Change from what? Why do we need change? What has gone wrong in the past? What did they do right? What have they learnt? How on earth can you answer any of these questions without mentioning Tony Blair? Mr Brown’s unfathomable row with his predecessor over who said what to whom over a dish of spaghetti in 1994 reduced his speech to a series of unlinked assertions and has clouded his vision for change.
Now some people will be perplexed by what I’ve written. Hasn’t Mr Brown, without mentioning Mr Blair, really capitulated to him? Hasn’t all the spinning and inviting Margaret Thatcher and courting Tories and seeking eyecatching initiatives just been one long homage to the departed Member for Sedgefield? No. I think that represents a misunderstanding.
Gordon Brown is new Labour to his fingertips and as Prime Minister he has demonstrated that – the restless initiatives, the endless political manoeuvring, the search for a third way out of every policy dilemma and the pitch to Middle England.
But by the time he left office Tony Blair had gone beyond this. He realised that third-way compromises were not enough and that reform of public services were necessary. He had grown tired of thinking solely about political manoeuvres and had, too little and too late, begun to think in terms of arguments and legacies. And (I wonder whether he would admit this?) even become a little bit exasperated with Middle England.
The standard view of Mr Blair was that he was good to begin with and then went off. I am of the opposite view. I think the Blair that left office in 2007 was a much better prime minister than the one that walked into the door ten years earlier. I am sure that would be Mr Blair’s view too. He slowly learnt that he hadn’t done enough to reform public services, for instance, and that he would have to try harder. With the incoming ministers I feel we have landed on a snake and slid all the way back to the beginning of Snakes and Ladders.
I know what a lot of my fellow commentators think, though. Who cares about all that stuff – the electorate are just glad not to put up with all that preening and simpering. The consensus appears to be that Mr Brown’s dull solidity is his great asset. I think this an eccentric judgment.
We are asked to believe that emotional intelligence, an attempt to engage and a sense of humour are no longer qualities we look for in a politician. If that is so now, I don’t think it’s a national mood that will last very long.
This view was reinforced when I watched Gordon Brown at his press conference explaining, ludicrously, that he would not have called the election even if the polls had predicted a landslide. There was no Blair self-deprecating joke, no disarming use of the truth to make a clever argument. I hate to admit that I was a sucker for all that. But if I’m going to have my intelligence insulted, I'd at least like it to be done well.
I didn’t vote for Tony Blair to be Prime Minister, but for those who did to walk away from him now is worse than a crime. It’s a mistake.
Daniel Finkelstein is a weekly columnist and Chief Leader Writer of The Times. His blog, Comment Central, is a personal round up of the best political opinion on the web. Before joining the paper in 2001, he was adviser to both Prime Minister John Major and Conservative leader William Hague
Win a luxury weekend to Newcastle and its neighbour Gateshead, find out more here
Risk, resilience and embracing new technology
Industry sectors news at a glance. Interactive heatmap, video and podcast
Discover the power of collective thinking. Submit a solution and be in with a chance to win a Media Hub Home Entertainment System
The inside track on current trends in the charity, not for profit and social enterprise sectors
Everything the Business Traveller needs to know to make a better trip
Make the most of the summer and enter our fabulous photographic competition, you could win a £5000 holiday
Corsica is an island of beauty and contrast, an ideal holiday destination
Enjoy further reading from Travel to Fashion, Business to Sport, discover more
Shortcuts to help you find sections and articles
The clever way to lease a new car is with Car leasing made simple™
2009
per month on 36-month
Personal Contract Hire (PCH)
2008
42850
Car Insurance
£24,250 - £30,346
MI5
London
£60,000
The Environment Agency
Bristol
Up to £90K
Boots
Midlands
OTE £85k
Credit Protection Association
Nationwide Opportunities
Completely London
Luxury Condo's in Manhattan with NYC views
The best new homes in Wimbledon?
Nationwide
Fabulous Cruise And Cruise & Stay Offers Including Virgin Atlantic Flights Prices Start From Only £699pp!
Last Minute Cruise And Cruise & Stay Offers. Med From £499pp, Caribbean From £699pp!
5 star quality at a 3 star price.
8 fabulous Canadian cities ...you won’t find cheaper
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 | Subscriptions | E-paper
News International associated websites: Globrix Property Search | Property Finder | Milkround
Copyright 2009 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.
If Brown is airbrushing out Blair, it's nothing new. Didn't Blair airbrush out John Smith pretty quickly. I think so. That's politics.
jujitsu, Edinburgh,
Excellent. The comparison with Gore/Clinton is brilliant - I had forgotten that absurdity , but it's precisely parallel.
Eloise, Bristol,
Throughout the last ten years Brown has kept well out of sight whenever there was a crisis or simply Labour were in a spot of bother. Brown lacks courage . He's one of those people who relies utterly on being ' right ' in any situation . Last week we saw that he wasn't ' right ' ; he thought he was ahead in the polls and it was an opportune moment to call an election. Then came the Tory conference and suddenly the polls moved against him and his courage failed him and so too did his ' rightness ' . Blair was a phoney, but a far smarter politicain than Brown.
John Hope, Hitchin, UK
@Robert Barry: That's funny, we think Bush is 'something of a mistake that you have been unable to avoid'.
Mr Brittain, Derbyshire, UK
Excellent article and good points made about emotional intelligence.
Blair had tremendous charisma in his personality and his sense of humour and actions alluded to greater emotional intelligence.
Brown in turn seems to lack both.
Is it that humans prefer being led by charismatic leaders and even accept them at times with their faults in contrast to brooding, flairless taskmasters?
Chaitanya Bal, London,
I must confess i agree with you intoto. Time will be a better judge of Blair and i dare say in a very positive light.
Blair would have done better in his later years in power after the teething problems he had at the start of his premiership. But the electorate chose to concentrate on the mistakes,and prominent amongst them was Iraq.
Brown to me was part of the team that made the economy what it was yesterday as recession creeps in. Without trying to be the devils advocate,Brown and labour are in for a rough ride. The economy which used to be their strong points will be Browns legacy of economic recession and unemployment. Brown has simply run out of ideas and is not an all round politician. To me he is simply not change but status quo ...
Ade Nsoh, Birmingham, West Midlands
Blair was never liked by the majority who could see through him and New Labour. If only we could airbrush the lot of them and the last ten years out i'd be a happy little bunny. They have destroyed a once wonderful country, i know i will never forgive them and if the Tories pulled us out of the EU once and for all...they'd romp home.
What are you waiting for Dave?
Samantha Jones, Bucks, England
Mr. Brown is a one-trick pony. Well, two tricks, if you count the old prostitution charge. He has already rendered himself ineffective. In the U.S. he is perceived as something of a mistake that England seems to have been unable to avoid.
Robert Barry, Hamden, Ct
... and, to put what seems to be the minority view on this post ....
Blair was disliked intensely because he achieved little in terms of improving public services and - in common with many of his colleagues - found too much enjoyment in the trappings of power.
Incidentally, far from having a superlative command of English as suggested by one post, Blair will be forever remembered for his incessant and incorrect (is there ever a correct use) of that awful word 'got'.
Sadly we seem to be visited by the politicians that we deserve.
Stephen Reeve
Stephen Reeve, Southend, UK
Point of order.We already have devolution,independence is a different issue.
And no thanks,you keep him!
Disgusted Dorothy, Glasgow, Scotland
Tony Who?
Mark Lyndon, London, UK
A very good article indeed, points well put. I never voted for Blair either but being a Tory or not, the first time I watched over the internet a live press conference from his constituency, I had to acknowledge that he was good, damn good. What "did" for Blair as indeed Bush, was the lack of WMDs in Iraq but for that, I wonder when we would have got rid of the bugger !
In a sense, it is better that we now have Brown who in comparison is a little man with a meaner and more introverted character, he is more fitting as we approach the no doubt temporary demise of Labour for about a decade following the 2010 General Election - which will be held at the very last moment. It struck me the other day watching Brown just how differently Blair would have handled it: "Well of course I am a politician and of course I looked at doing it, it's what we do chaps." We would all have laughed and the Teflon Kid would have done it again, Brown is a poor substitute.
John Haynes, Burnham on Sea, Somerset, UK
Blair did not get my vote, maybe out of loyalty to a conservative party that lost its way, but Brown will not get my vote for a whole host of reasons:
By stealth he is reversing years of this country to the seventies and early eighties where union oligarchs are tightening their control over the country and the country is powerless to stop them. The punishing taxes on the middle classes which drive out entrepreneurship and enterprise. The ever encroaching state that is apparently there to serve the country only reduces civil liberty, attacks those it is to serve and only serves to line its own pockets. Finally the fact that he is Scottish, and the Scots want devolution, means that effectively we will have a foreigner with no mandate to be in an English parliament making laws that are crippling England.
Blair was not much better, but perversely had a degree of honesty which I cannot see in Brown.
Daniel Fielding, Egham, England
Daniel, what you don't mention is that all of Blair's supporters nowadays are Americans and Tories who would have no intention of voting for him if he'd remained PM. He'd alienated many many people. He may well have been right but if people won't listen to you you can't convince them. Ask IDS or William Hague! (The jury is still out on Cameron).
Ned, London,
I have a vision for the future too and, for the sake of England and the traditional virtues of Englishness, I pray it may be realised in my lifetime. It is a vision that haunts my fondest dreams and although at the moment it is nebulous and fanciful it seems there is a possibility of it becoming more concrete.
It is the sight of Brown's fat Scots arse disappearing rapidly across the border into the fastnesses of Fife, never, ever, to reappear south of Hadrian's Wall. If he were closely followed north by all of his New Labour countrymen and catamites, the vision would indeed be beatific.
Roland Scott-Jackson, Verteillac, France
The Clinton analogy is a sound one. Seen as a liability at the time, he now seems to be the Democrats greatest asset in the forthcoming Presidential election.
I predict within two years Gordon Brown will be mainly remembered as the Spinmeister-General who massacred small business and steered our economy down the toilet.
Tony Blair, in contrast, will be viewed to be the real conviction politician of our times, who went so far as to enact policies that made him incredibly unpopular, such were the strengths of his beliefs.
Jon Miller, London,
Blair spent oppostion and the first term of his government bleating and spinning about how wicked the tories were. But then realised that tory ideas were realistic and correct.
james c, london,
Daniel, great minds think alike ! I was, sort of, thinking the same today ....
I never voted for Blair and could not abide his style of leadership but something crossed my mind. Indeed Brown ditched the Blair 'legacy' and dumped Blair along with it. Blair's last election win was credited to Brown. Bizarrely there will be no Blair to help Brown at the next election. Argueably the nearest thing to Blair at the next election is .. alright, lets admit it ..... Cameron !! And he's on the other side !
Today we didn't see a glimpse of the Brown vision - we saw the whole lot - and it was small and pathetic. No great master plan . Yes, we saw ambition. But not ambition for our country. Brown is detail , Blair is big picture, big vision.
Brown without Blair is like Little without Large or pizza without topping. He's grey, two dimensional and devastatingly smug.
Blair and Campbell must be laughing all the way to their publishers.
DaveL, Swindon, Wiltshire
Excellent! I agree with you 100%.
Fernandez, San Francisco,
Blair was far and away the best PM since Churchill, better than the rest put together.
His command of the English language was always superlative, without ever being pompous or pedantic.
Best of all, he took Britain into the 21st century.
Dave, Southampton, UK
Tony Blair did not become exasperated with Middle England late in his reign, he despised Middle England all along. It was lucky for him (and unlucky for the country) that the liberal metropolitan media was itself too detached from Middle England itself to notice.
Oliver Chettle, Bedford,
well said ..and congradulations on seeing and conveying the truth of the "Brown project " ...He's been a loser since he entered politics and will for sure end up as one ..Blair with hindsight and a few more months will be greatly missed
mahendra patel, leicester, leicestershire