Even from beyond the grave, Tony Blair continues to direct British politics,
but perhaps not in the way he had hoped. Now he has gone, the nation is not
pining for its previous Prime Minister, as most of us predicted. Britain
does not seem to be missing him at all. The pangs of separation barely
outlasted the absurd standing ovation from MPs that capped the Mr Blair’s
last appearance in the Commons.
What has followed is not nostalgia for the Blair style of politics, but the
queasiness that follows having drunk too much sweet dessert wine. No wonder
we reach for the disgusting brown Fernet Branca. It is this, I believe, that
is dictating Gordon Brown’s current run of positive polls and favourable
opinions. And it is this that underlies the fit of unease about David
Cameron that has ambushed the Conservative Party.
The wave of national suspicion about Mr Cameron has little to do with Mr
Cameron: it is Mr Blair’s spectre the voters flee, and that they think they
see grinning behind the Tory leader. The wave of national relief that has
greeted Mr Brown’s early weeks has little to do with Gordon Brown – still an
unknown quantity – but to a shrewd series of signals he is sending out that,
whatever he is, he is not Mr Blair.
Do you remember that not two months ago it was the collective wisdom of most
thoughtful media commentary that the outgoing Prime Minister would enjoy
something of a revival in his popularity after he left office? “We’ll miss
him when he’s gone” was the columnists’ cry.
I for one joined it. For a while at least, I thought, a warm glow would
descend upon the national recollection of the Blair years. Hectored by a
cold and boring Mr Brown bombarding us with statistics, we would remember Mr
Blair’s apparent warmth, his folksiness, his humour and his charm. We would
miss the stardust, the theatre, the oratory. We would remember too his
enormous confidence – a hallmark of leadership – and the way that he strode
the world and domestic stage with such apparent ease.
Mr Brown’s enemies in the Labour Party could hardly wait. Gordon has it
coming, they murmured; he won’t know what has hit him. Soon a nation and its
media will be regretting our churlish and cynical treatment of Tony. Soon we
will realise that to be a statesman you have to have stage presence: to know how
to stir, to move, to persuade and to amuse. Tony was a master of arts that
are essential to this job. Gordon lacks them. He’ll flop. Serve him right
for making Tony’s life so difficult.
And the Conservative Party bought this line. To a degree I did too. Like Mr
Cameron and his advisers, I thought it sensible for the Opposition not to
waste its ammunition on an outgoing prime minister lest the national mood
turn in his favour once he had gone. Better, perhaps, for the Tories to
present themselves as the party (with the leader) best able to carry on Mr
Blair’s work.
I remembered (and for Mr Cameron’s young advisers it will have been a
formative memory) the mood of hope and trust after the general election in
1997: a mood that had carried Mr Blair on its shoulders into Downing Street;
and I reflected that the Britain which had so warmed to that engaging sense
of youth, glamour, style and vision probably still wanted something similar
from a leader; and that it was not a bad idea for Mr Cameron to present
himself as the modern leader for whom Mr Blair was really just a flawed
prototype: “What Blair promised,” Mr Cameron should imply, “is what I’ll
deliver. Where he stumbled, I will carry on.”
And though I winced at “heir to Blair” because it seemed dangerously
unambiguous, I did not think the underlying strategy wrong. “Leave future
historians to expose and dismember the Blair legacy,” I thought, “but for
now let the Tories capitalise on the good feeling he left behind.”
How fast it has fled! Within weeks replaced by a sort of shudder bordering, I
believe, on self-reproach. “How could we have? Why did we fall for it? How
were we taken in?”
In retrospect, it all looks so tacky. The Berlusconi villa holiday, the
air-guitar, the tight trousers, the grinning poses with George W. Bush; the
Ecclestone affair, the Hinduja brothers, the Mittal affair, the air of
inappropriateness that still clings to those secret loans and surprising
honours nominations; the Dome, the supercasinos, the arms deals; the funny
people in Downing Street. All this we now remember, though somehow at the
time we kept drawing a veil over things, giving him the benefit of the doubt.
We remember now the scowling face of Alastair Campbell, we read his diaries
and realise it really was as mean and shallow, as sneaky and shoddy, as
crafty yet directionless as we half-suspected but never quite let ourselves
conclude. Small tales, but all pointing the same way. The feeling is of
inappropriateness, shallowness, of sheer bad taste. New dawn? The Giving
Age? A nation reborn? We remember the speeches – how overblown they now
seem. We are embarrassed that the melodrama touched us at the time; that we
did not let ourselves acknowledge what we did always sense: a faint pong.
To be fooled by a quack is sheepishness-inducing; but beyond embarrassment
lies shame: David Kelly’s body in a wood; Mr Blair’s denial of complicity in
his hounding; the dodgy dossier, the perversion of intelligence, that
extraordinary row with the BBC, then the whitewash, though the BBC was
right. And of course the Iraq war itself, of which colossal miscalculation I
cannot bring myself to write more.
And now after promising to stay Mr Blair vanishes like the Cheshire Cat,
leaving British troops virtually under siege in Basra and beleaguered in
Afghanistan, Scottish devolution causing a headache for Labour, Lords reform
like a half-finished building with rusting reinforcing rods sticking out,
and a health service demoralised yet costing nearly twice as much. Meanwhile
the electorate, aware that their lover-in-the-night has slipped away, and
feeling in some way debauched by the whole heady affair, are looking for
someone on whom to take out Britain’s lingering sense of shame.
Enter Mr Cameron, who offers generous hints that for those who fear for the
future of Blairism, the Conservative Party is a natural home. And enter Mr
Brown, whose first acts as Prime Minister are linked only and signally by
being repudiations of Blairite policies and attitudes. No wonder the polls
have flipped.
But Mr Cameron’s “heir to Blair” stuff was only a silly marketing ploy; the
real Mr Cameron (as Mr Brown keeps pointing out) is a proper Conservative of
a fairly classic kind, and none the worse for that. The real Mr Brown,
meanwhile, is inextricably tangled in almost everything about the Blair
years that Britain should repudiate. Let the real Mr Cameron step forward,
and challenge the real Mr Brown to shed his disguises.
Much of the same..the big bleat we didnt know..the media..times included all at some time or other supported a man who in my opinion was ..err...A lifetime of politics..beginning when Winston was rejected..leads me to believe that Blair was the man who reduced this country to the abysmal level it is[Aided and abbetted by the current PM...Bounce..he should be Bounced all the way to his Scottish constituancy.I cannot remember a more pathetic government..Brown?.Part timer[whilst our troups suffer] ] Browne..McNulty? Balls..no im not swearing but i should..Hillary thingy.And yet i am informed by the media[Brown Broadcasting Co] that that gordons got a bounce..he would have if i [and many] could get to grips with him.Once it wassaid that there wastory sleeze..a few quid in a brown envelope..now its millions in the open.My one hope is that the soon to be rleased info on PUBLIC sector pensions will show that they are cin difficulty..now that makes me smile..i
david, Barnsley, S Yorks
We. the missing electorate have never "wanted " Blair..labour or now Brown.I have managed to live ..a.while.. despite drink..sex..drugs and binge drinking.97 was a date that should rival 1066..history shows that we expected..never got...a new "regime".Spin..Lies..useless "management"..anyone name a minister who achieved..anything?Cooper and Balls..no it aint a gag..Milliband..made Becketts fiasco at DEFRA continue..now a Minister..once touted as challenger to brown..Both achieved high office.Brown..miniter in charge of our overstretched..underfed..under equipped heroes..plus minister for Scotland ..where we dont have a say.Politics has sunk to the Gutter Level..aided and abetted by the media..and the BBC
david , Barnsley, ENGLAND
Mr. Parris,
You were not taken in by anything nor anyone. What has happened with relative ease is the simple fact that incompetence did not succeed Mr. Blair. While you and other Blair critics are willing to judge his ten years based on Iraq alone, history has taught us that a government which accomplishes much remains relevant long after its time.
You will miss Blair eventually because he was not a one horse showman...He was much more.
Femi, lauderhill, Florida
"We" didn't. "We" threw up everytime Bliar opened his mouth, bared his teeth or wore a new Paul Smith suit. Cameron and squeaky Osborne are equally sick-inducing. Brown will be a busted flush as the credit boom he presided over unfolds. Portillo would have made a good Tory leader intellectually, but is hopeless in the commons and his grin reminds people of his poll tax Tory-boy background. The only serious contender for Tory PM will be the matured and now statesmanlike William Hague. The sooner Cameron and his schoolboy chums are sent packing the quicker the Conservative party will get back to government. Looks like you are still being taken in though Matthew - It seems it is a recurrent theme?
John Smith, Manchester, UK
You are well wide of the mark on this one, Mr. Parris.
Sections of the metropolitan media were taken in by Blair, but the evidence suggests the majority of the nation was most decidedly not.
In the 2005 General Election, of those entitled to vote, a paltry 22% voted for ‘President’ Blair’s New Labour (which attracted the lowest share of total votes cast ever recorded for a winning party).
The bare facts are, a whopping 78% of entitled electors did not support Blair/Labour. They either saw through, or they were not persuaded by, the Blair & Co charade and voted for another party, or were not moved to vote at all.
Face it. Blair’s performance exhibited the talent of bit part player in a fifth form production of Charley’s Aunt. History will record him as the worst Prime Minister in Parliamentary history – worse even than Edward Heath.
Ed Burrows, Knutsford,
A legacy of suspicion of a possible slightly spiv-like image may, regrettably, now append for a while to anyone of likeable earnestness, appearing to try to do the fair thing in a political context.
The halo effect can ensure that when associated qualities rub off on anyone with perceived outward similarities, such halo may not necessarily always be of an angelic nature if all such qualities were not originally apparent.
It takes a while for memories to fade, especially if there is some kind of vague feeling of having been taken for a ride in some way.
Although it could be that most people are generally willing participants in any kind of magic ultimately turning out to have undesired outcomes, that can add to any eventual sense of let-down.
There can be downside to feeding the dreams of others.
dr venables preller, Warminster, UK
Were we taken in, or just to lazy to combat this evil man.
From day one, the New Labour party said, we will safe-guard the interest of american companies & for the Brits?
Further more, what happened to effort's of "DUMP BLAIR" lost in the mist, of the UK news media.
And what of his side kick's, Hoon MoD, buys new USA helicopters, when the old one's laid to waste due to lack of spare parts.
Mandelson, twice dismissed some financial problems, then appointed EU Commissioner, who was fast tracking GM products to be used in Europe for their american friends.
What of Blair's address to the American Senate, when he stated, "The World want america to Lead" this brought the senate to their feet..
And now Brown on his last visit to the US, stated "The World is in debted to America for it's fight against terrorist" little does he (Brown) know who the real terrorist are?
Criminal charges should be brought against the action of these people, for the protection of the English public.
Ray Smith, Alicante, Spain
"In retrospect, it all looks so tacky. The Berlusconi villa holiday, the air-guitar, the tight trousers, the grinning poses with George W. Bush; the Ecclestone affair, the Hinduja brothers, the Mittal affair, the air of inappropriateness that still clings to those secret loans and surprising honours nominations; the Dome, the supercasinos, the arms deals; the funny people in Downing Street... Somehow at the time we kept drawing a veil over things, giving him the benefit of the doubt."
I never drew a veil! I never gave him the benefit of the doubt!
Personally, I always thought he was a Thatcherite Anglophobe up to no good.
I was right I reckon..
Jack Black, London, England
i never was fooled by Tony Blair just as I never believed that television reality programmes were in any way real .
his era will be remembered as tacky , celebrity obsessed and shallow . Tony Blair , Hello magazine , Big Brother , the Dome , C list celebrities at Chequers , fake sincerity , Princess Diana , spin etc it was all of a piece .
The tragedy was that the one major decision that he made , to invade Iraq ,has resulted in thousands of dead , a ruined country , instability in the region and an increased threat from terrorism .
But somewhere he is still grinning away .
No wonder " Blair - lite " David Cameron seems to alienate the voting public .
paul gillan, oxford, uk
Blair phobia, you’ve got it bad. Reminds me of that guy Irving who denies the holocaust.. Overwhelming evidence to the contrary is airily dismissed as 'lies and spin’ and a selective memory of events and opinions regurgitated as established fact. But the world continues to turn, a PM departs with full military honours (sorry but there’s still a large body of opinion in Britain which never demurred to your Iraq views) another arrives with a seamlessness that few predicted.
Iraq.. endless enquiry’s driven by a rabid media, misinformation regarding the intelligence knowledge worldwide at the outset of the war and a naïve ‘see no evil’ ignorance of the pre-war sufferings under Saddam which otherwise would continue to this day. Looking for evidence of hidden agenda's, cover-ups and complicity? I've a message for you! it aint there because it didn't happen! Britain changed immensely for the better under Blair, Matthew as you know! Envy and hostility are unattractive traits.
Steve R, Exeter, Devon
Sitting here in Canada, my impression of Blair is "bolshevist": a man convinced that if he passes enough laws and enforces them ruthlesslyt enough he New Soviet Man (ooops, make that New British Man) will arise from the ashes of improper thought. Thus ASBO's, fines for minor offenses far in excess of their significance, attempts to bureaucratize and regiment the medical profession, and utter disrespect for true expertise and experience. To say nothing of the endless lies, propaganda, and spin! It's as disgustingly mechanistic view of human nature, and given the historical difficulty of governing England, the nation that cut the head off a king they disliked, doomed to failure anyway. Instead of strengthening the social contract, all this hardline approach has done is bring the UK significantly closer to anarchy. It will take a long time to undo the damage that Blair Thought has inflicted.
RW, Victoria, Canada
Good of Mr Parriss to admit his mistake. But why did he wait until it was safe to do so before admitting? Self preservation seems to be first on the agenda of columnists. Telling the real story can wait. Thank God for the blogs, where bloggers have no such need to maintain a relationship with government at all costs.
Tapestry, LONDON, SW15
"Better, perhaps, for the Tories to present themselves as the party (with the leader) best able to carry on Mr Blair’s work."
Which is exactly why Dave won't be the next Conservative Prime Minister.
Andy Myers, Shrewsbury, UK
Despite his innumerous errors, duly listed by Matthew Parris, Tony Blair has been the outstanding politician of the last decade. He was Teflon Tony right up to the last day, even the long drawn out police inquiry on "cash for honours" refused to stick. Eventually even the strongest glue wears thin and it was time for him go.
Gordon Brown is the complete antitheseis to his predecessor and never believed the day would come when he would be described as a breath of fresh air. On the other hand, David Cameron has taken on the mantle of Blair mark 2. without the teflon finish.
As for Brown describing Cameron as being a "proper Conservative," one could be easily fooled. Cameron demands the centre ground to the extent that he has even managed to offend his centre right supporters, let alone the traditional shire Tories. When he takes off his Blair blinkers, he will see that the centre is the very place that Brown inherited, intends to stay and will be even harder to move.
M. Fishman, London,
If you really are such a poor judge of character that you fell for Blair's tacky act, then your enthusiasm for Cameron doesn't recommend him to me. Cameron's a lightweight. Playing student gesture politics with a windmill on your house doesn't cut the mustard if you want to be taken seriously for the top job. And he has poor judgment too. Hug a hoodie springs to mind.
Redcliffe, London,
The great unlanced boil is Iraq and where was the Opposition on that matter. Where are they now? People don't like Cameron trying to out-bulldog Blair when they hate what Blair did. Cameron is on a hiding to nothing on his present tack.
Pete, St. Leonards,
While I never felt that some kind of fondness for the Blair years would linger in my heart I must say that you describe my current feelings about the Blair years very well up to a point.
However you missed out the intense revulsion I felt and still feel whenever I see his cheesey grin on the front page. This was a prima donna whose endless ability to spin was realised by a casual disregard for the truth except when it could hit him fully in the face.
The act of government by such a person is bound to be a hit and miss kind of business.
David Cameron is too intelligent to want to be another Blair. At least, dear God, I hope so.
Marek, London,
Oh get over it, will you?
The fact is you cannot deny Blair's influence because you're obsessed by him! You obviously just can't leave it alone.
Move on, and try to find something other than Blair to moan about - how about David Cameron?
The Tories' Neil Kinnock, only without Neil's cojones.
Seasider, Seahaven,
Tony Blair wasted his energy and popularity by trying to be just populist in his decisions, without thinking about long term impacts. He was mostly guided by the immediate public opinion poll results!
Iraq, "cash for honors cases", reckless immigration, especially from troubled nations such as Pakistan, Bangladesh and some more issues have dented his popularity and Britain's badly.
The terrorism in Britain has dented Britain’s image and shows Britain as a soft state! It will take many years of corrective measures to be sure that one can live/visit Britain without being caught in the middle of some terrorist actions!
He has a big mouth too. In some cases, we felt that he did not know what he was talking.
To sum up: globally he has a poor image and lowered Britain's image very badly.
Regards,
Krishna R. Kumar, Udupi, India
The only reason Blair and Brown got their spin across for ten years was that the media was taken in.
jj, Cambrisgeshire, UK
very bitter and twisted... as always from this writer
sam, london,
Are you sure that the real Mr Cameron is a traditional Conservative? From what he has told us to date he is a sort of woolly Liberal with a green heart. I notice elsewhere in the Telegraph that John Redwood is about to present a Conservative strategy document that calls for tax reductions and an easing of regulations on business. We will know what Cameron is made of when we see his response to a 'real' Tory like Redwood. Meanwhile the Brown juggernaut careers on, taking Britain with it to the edge of an economic precipice. How very Labour. How very 1979.
Adrian Gilbert, Tonbridge, England
Without wishing to indulge in 'I told you so!' antics. I still remember with a deep shudder the election in 1997. I sat, the morning after with the papers and was filled with a deep foreboding!
Here we are 10 years later with a transmogrified Britain and one that is deeply scarred too!
It wasn't all down to Blair. He may have been instrumental but remember that "I was only following orders" was trashed as a defence at Nuremburg!
The effects of the last ten years will only slowly surface over the next ten. At the end of which Britain as I know it (and want to know it) will no longer exist!
Last one out turn the lights off!
Tim, Bournemouth,
I recall with some amusement watching parliamentarians march into session with fire and brimstone and then later walk out, arms at their sides, their eyes glazed over, and mumbling about "working for consensus" Ha! As if !
The sudden fall from grace of such leaders however has less to do with mana, or voodoo powder, then with cognitive dissonance. Do you see the irony? If he had been more in line with the publics wishes he would have been far less popular.
glenn schaefer, holbrook, usa
There seems to be a no-go discussion area in UK politics that is accepted by all three political parties - IRAQ.
What was the real physical detail of the WMD over which we had to go to war ion 2003, and could not find?
Even Alastair Campbell in his Diaries dared not tell us.
Where are those WMD now?
Can the US Neo-Cons again drag us into another search for them?
Michael, Bristol, UK
Mathew, the problem with Cameron is that he publicly stated his admiration for Blair, and he led the dismal clapping in the Commons....
Brown is the opposite of Blair, dour, serious and apparently listens...
Cameron appears to be cocerned with image, style over substance,,,, like his alter ego.
Tom Edwards, Taunton,
Some of us were disgusted enough by the Blair/Brown duo to leave the country. And we're not going back for Cameron, either.
Frank W., Prague,
As an expatriate of 20 years standing, I've never been able to fathom what my erstewhile fellow countrymen and women saw in the ridiculous, self-obsessed show pony who's just exited from 10 Downing Street.
Disraeli's famous description of Gladstone always came to mind: "A sophistical rhetorician inebriated by the exuberance of his own verbosity"!
On a trip back to the UK in 1997, just after this walking absurdity had achieved supreme office, a friend of mine in the UK referred to the new set-up as "Lionel Blair and the Dancers" . Many a true word etc..
Why anyone should wish to be hailed as "the new Blair" is quite beyond me, and would be so, even if the Sword of Achilles had not turned to custard in the sands of Iraq.
Ian Morrison, Auckland, New Zealand
Yes indeed, Mr Parris got it badly wrong with pretty well all the commentariat barring those smeared 'Daily Mail readers' and their columnists.
And the so called satirists: remember Rory Bremner's malevolent depiction of Howard - 'I won't hurt you', as bodies are flown back daily from Basra!
Ugh - shame on the lot of them, and all voters for Tony have a smidgeon of blood on their hands, but deny it...they were 'sincere' three times over
Tim, Oxford, UK
I find it hard to believe that a writer of clear intelligence, such as Matthew Parris, could ever have been 'taken in' by Blair. Does he not realise that the latter day increased disenchantment with politics, in part, and with politicians generally is largely due to the fact that in all those 'spins' and outright lies and ,probably, criminal deceptions, Blair has never been held to book. That under his rule countless Ministers have got away with dodgey deals and incompetence, often to be rewarded with promotion, is yet another aspect of his appalling years of office.
The mystery to me (Ha!) is that he has yet to be indicted as a war criminal.
alan burden, Mijas Malaga, spain
Tony Blair. Yesterdays man.? or a man that could have been the best PM since when.?
The Labour Party with Blair, virtually bounced the Conservative Party into oblivion and could have consigned them to the benches below the gangway, if it had not been for his criminal partnership with the United States and the Iraq War.
David Cameron, a pale imitation, but still a hard faced Tory in sheeps clothing.
Gordon Brown.? a refreshing change from all the glitz of the last 10 years.
Despite all the earlier protestations of the Media I suspect that Gordon Brown will be the man that will make the Conservatives un-electable for many years to come.
brian, chorley, UK
I was never taken in by Blair as I am not taken in by Cameron. Neither I would quickly add am I taken in by the media.
The general public are as gullible as can be and the media feeds this gullibility for its own purpose. When the public start to think their own thoughts I feel sure we will see a huge change in govenmental and media behavoir. Like everyone else Mathew Parris has his own agenda and follows the trend. Whatever happened to individual thought?
Kenneth Wheatley, St Pée sur Nivelle, France
"...the air of inappropriateness that still clings to those secret loans and surprising honours nominations"
Inappropriateness? Surprising? MP finds himself unable to speak the full truth about Cash for Honours because he knows what his own party have got up to. If he were honest, he'd admit the Conservatives have long been part of the problem of Britain's increasing corruption and fragmentation, not the solution. When has he ever challenged mass immigration, for example?
Lesley Davies, Manchester,
Tony Balir was a fairly trivial Prime Minister, in trivial times. We have no foreign enemies except for a rather badly-organised islamic terrorist group, and Margaret Thatcher sorted out the economy, so Britain, unlike Europe, has already adjusted to the shift of manufacturing to China.
Long term the collapse of family life has led to a collapse in education which is leading to a collapse in science, with huge cultural implications. But these trends were there long before Blair took office, and he merely failed to reverse them.
The housing crisis will be remembered as Blair's worst legacy. But the real problems will come when the bubble bursts, which will probably be over the next few days as the American mortgage crisis hits. It didn't happen on his watch.
Malcolm McLean, Bardford, UK
Mathew Parris says there is a "faint pong" now that Tony Blair has left off being a sort of president; I would call it a stench. And, like other commentators, I am amazed at how silly the bigwigs in London have been; most of us noticed early on how deceitful Blair was, and we longed for his dismissal.
Cameron lost many peoples' goodwill when he suggested that he was the heir to TB - and I am convinced it has lost him any chance of winning the next election, whenever that occurs.
H L Foxworthy, FORFAR, Angus, Scotland
Are you changing your mind about Cameron Matthew? I'm not but then I was never terribly impressed with him, apart from with that one speech which won him the leadership - very Blair.
What does Cameron actually believe? Is he a conviction politician or is he, as people are starting to suspect, someone who will say whatever is in vogue, whatever gets nods of agreement ,interested in power for power's sake? Much like Blair.
I thought that Brown would be a disaster but he hasn't been, at least from a PR point of view. His policies and initiatives are less impressive where they exist at all. But what change he has brought has been played to maximum effect. That's very Blair too, although perhaps more subtle.
Cameron's Tories should have gone on the attack from day one, when Brown tried to tell us we were getting change. They should have attacked the reneging on an EU referendum, they should attack the failures on prisons which could be laid at Brown's door. When will they start?
Paul Owen, Birmingham, UK
I thought it was obvious from even before Day 1."Tough on Crime" was what did it for me.And when you allowed the notion to creep in that Blair was a Charlatan,everything that followed disgusted and entertained in equal measure.
So how did he get away with it? Simple.All that was required was the complicity of large sections of the media who bought into the joke.Ludicrous speeches were lauded as meaning something.Policy failures were written off and excused.Outright lies covered for.Utterly shameful.
We appear to celebrate rank mediocrity in this country nowadays so Blair fitted the mould.Logical really.I always reckoned that Blair had absolutely no core beliefs,therefore he could never be properly held to account over anything or forced to explain.He just kept moving on to the next big thing.
An utterly useless man who happened to land the top job.Incredible.Now a Peace Envoy.Staggering.Maybe he'll treat the Palestinians to Smoke On The Water on his Guitar.Now that I'd like to see.
william Wait, edinburgh, u.k
Mr. Blair brought such an air of sleazy camaraderie I feel nauseous looking at the man. The question to be asked is how did he not manage to invite significant public opprobrium? Most people who have done something wrong feel guilty, because at some point in their lives their conscience was taught better. Mr. Blair's conscience never troubled him in the least, therefore the ability to look at ease where one would appear shamefaced.
IMO TB was incapable of feeling remorse for his actions. In an extreme parallel, a psychopathic killer knows it is wrong to kill, but lacks the feelings of guilt and remorse to prevent him from doing so.
Mr. Blair was intelligent in realising this shortcoming. He substituted instinctive morality for a tick box culture that claimed morality if certain well-sounding parameters were achieved. Ergo "how can it be wrong; look all the boxes are ticked - I'm in the clear". People of instinctive morality were silent or silenced.
Alfred Joseph, Weston-Super-Mare, UK
Edwin, me old mucker, can one ask what a gerrymandered public sector looks like? Or is this a painful personal issue? As for the article, this is a classic reaction by someone who bought a used car from the slick guy you wouldn't want engaged to your daughter. You were fooled, and now you have to whine about it. Well get used to the fact that everyone else feels the same, and that your posturing is neither eloquent, nor witty, nor wise. incidentally, if Cameron does become a real Conservative, you better accept the loss of the next three elections - and those are about all the time the Tories have left. After that, expect a Christian Democrat style blend to emerge. As the song nearly said: No more Tories any more!
Nick, London, UK
Brown on the floods:
we will work night and day to get things back to normal.
Brown on Foot & Mouth:
we will work night and day to find the source of the virus
Brown on the international credit markets crisis:
we have done everything possible to maintain economic stability.
I'm already tiring of these one-liners. Sooner of later, Gordon and the electorate will realise what Blair's skill really was (and it has nothing to do with competent government).
MarkS, Leeds,
Good that Mr Parris can admit his mistake - along with most other wordly media people who wouldn't recognise a "normal" person if they met them in the street. Brown is a decent, well meaning man. Blair was out for himself at any cost to others. Cameron is a disaster. As a previously lifelong conservative party supporter - who resigned some time ago because of the Cameron factor - I really wonder which party can take us mere mortals forward in Britain. I blame this uncertainty on the media, the Westminster village idiots and related. Welcome to the real world Mr Parris. Real people should contact Brown and Cameron with their real views. Will they listen?
Gordon, Woking, UK
The only reason Blair and Brown got their spin across for ten years was that the media was taken in.
Ure Fault, Peterborough, UK
The Blair years for me apart from the sleaze are a series of half baked policies not properly thought through to their logical conclusion, whether it be Iraq, GP's contract changes, Home Information Packs, the planning system, immigration, the dome, supercasino's, NHS reforms, Education, Education, Education...
Unfortunately my childrend will have to live with the consequences of this idiot and his useless bag of wind deputy prime minister.
Tim, Cambridge , UK
I think Tony was the master of finding the optimum political position and knowing what the public wanted to hear. He was a politian afterall!
Delivering the goods was a different matter.
He had a period of economic stability based on a net oil exporting economy. So he had the best chance to go on a world tour. He realised that the best vehicle for world wide power was to try to influence the US. There he failed. He became Bush's trophy partner because the Bush policies were not thought through. The pretty "queen" married to the imprudent "king".
Yes he therefore got himself and the Labour Party (and with them the UK ) into some fine messes like an overwilling lady with too much spirit but a good heart.
Instead of being a great man he therefore didn't quite make it.
I am so glad you mentioned the matter of David Kelly. That should now be re-examined in the press. That is what the press is for. (J'accuse!)
james, Shaftesbury, UK
Brown is just spinning every time he opens his mouth. Just wait till he gets his own mandate if we are stupid enough to vote for him, then the real Brown will assert himself. Blair’s hiding away playing a long waiting game, because this country will be soon feeling the full effects of his disastrous policies, for which he hopes a new PM will take the blame. In a few years Blair will emerge, hoping people will not associate him with Britain’s problems and vote him into office has President of Europe. Come on Tories lets hear from you now before its to late!
Michael, Sheffield,
I certainly wasn't 'taken in' by Blair. He looked from the first to be slippery and without principle. I shook my head is disbelief as the great unwashed kept voting him in. I have no love for the Labour party but Gordon Brown must feel very aggrieved by the long wait for power.
John O'Donnell, Bolton,
the faint pong is actually coming from mr. Parris. his obsession with Tony Blair knows no bounds and really is becoming quite tiresome. we know he hates Labour and loves the Tories,so what can we ever learn from his spiteful ramblings. T Mckay , South Tyneside.
t mckay, tyne & wear,
Matthew couldn't bring himself to mention Blair's standing ovation at the time, but now that he has had 7 weeks of sulking to think of a suitable adjective, he comes up with "absurd".
The article is headlined "Gone and Forgotten", but it is clear that Mr. Parris finds it almost impossible to forget the great Prime Minister and master politician. The article is a litany of all the tired old accusations against Blair, all of which have been proven under investigation to be false.
I do agree with Matthew on two points though.
1. We should let future historians judge Mr. Blair.
2. Some of the things Blair did were tacky.
However, tacky is a subjective word. We can all do tacky - some of us on Clapham Common and Hampstead Heath.
arnoldo, Coventry,
All goes to prove that the political class (in which I include the commentariat) are out of touch with the public. This is why about 40% of the public don't vote and increasing numbers vote for small parties. Then there is fashion. Dr. Johnson said 'a man might as lief be dead as out of fashion'. Gordon Brown will not make the mistake of being fashionable. Mr Cameron has made that mistake, worse, Mr Cameron has made the mistake of following a fading fashion.
Carol, London,
"At last the message has reached the London chattering classes. And they thought they were at the centre of things?
Why are the political classes and commentators so unaware of mainstream feeling in Britain? Most people had had enough two weeks after he had the keys for No. 10. Blair never achieved more than around 30% of the eligible vote. It's hardly surprizing there would be a reaction akin to a seasick voyager reaching dry land.
Even Brown's gerrymandered pubic sector tired of feeling the pinch of council taxes and an over-valued housing stock owned by credit companies, are beginning to doubt there will ever be a cigar.
Edwin Thornber, Bucharest,"
Elegantly put.
JQ, Greater Manchester, UK
Matthew, you really should be more careful what you imbibe on a Friday or you risk repeating the - I'll not struggle for a word, it would not be published! - copy above! "Faint pong" is a huge understatement; Iraq and Afghanistan alone are two of the most noxious smells ever seen in UK politics, unlikely to disperse for generations as we relearn our history there.
Turning to Mr B, events - as always - have thrust him onto centre stage - and he has fully passed the tests - thus far - and is quite properly positioning himself for his period in leadership. The only lead Mr C has achieved was to wave his party to its feet to cheer Mr Blair off the stage; polite maybe but utterly crass in politics! All we have seen from Mr C regarding positioning him and his party is lack of judgement of a high order, gut wrenching stunts but little sign or portent that he or his (my) party is going anywhere. Are we waiting for the Conference to hear it all? Nobody seems to know or is even hinting.
Terry Carlton, Chichester, UK
Matthew, I for one was never taken in by Tony Blair.
He was PR engineered from day 1 until the day he left office.
His slick, folksiness style was as sincere as the salesman down at the used car lot and cleverly masked what the man really was, a self serving, grabbing, celebrity wannabee.
The list of his failures & misdemeanours are well listed in your article and begs the question "why don't we have a higher authority in the UK who would have been capable of ousting him from office.
His most enduring legacy and I believe it will be enduring, whether we pull out tomorrow or not, will be Iraq and the utter shambles the man has left for others to sort out.
For that alone, Blair should be held to account and he should then ask the court to take the countless other offenses into consideration before sentencing him.
Leonard, Seoul, South Korea
You were "taken in" by Blair, were you, Matthew? Well I wasn't, and neither was anyone else on the right of the Conservative party. Why do you think we dislike Cameron so much?
Paul Holden, Northants, UK
So essentially everyone now likes Brown because he is everything Blair isnt, and vica versa to Cameron. However we should all just see that Cameron isnt Blair and like him instead.
All the article seemed okay, but the last paragraph seems like its been ill inserted with a crowbar. silly
Matthew, Enfield,
This opinion would read differently had the UK won a peaceful Basra within an Iraq protected under Coalition Forces. Had the West made good on its unique chance to pacify a wider Middle East to the Kyber Pass, then today this column would be a glowing adieu for TB, not heavy with censure. This never was the "colossal miscalculation" as which MP loves to paint it. Such is the random
roll of the dice in wars where losers in the end always come to rue their very existence. Michelangelo painted a nice picture of it on the wall of the Sistine.
Hermann Burchard, Stillwater, OK , U.S.A.
I didn’t buy it. I observed that Gordon Brown didn’t appear to be courting the position of Prime Minister, but in the event that it came his way I didn’t doubt that he would manage within the inevitable limitations of the general situation. The Press is as fickle and posturing as any politician they care to criticise. The obsession with leadership remains. I wonder why? Style does, of course, provide a lot more copy than substance, as it is open to wider interpretation, but perhaps you could broaden the focus to include other politicians. It could get a bit less tedious.
Henry Percy, London, UK
Even so, I notice this time round that Matthew Parris nowhere predicts that David Cameron is going to win the next general election, as he has done on previous occasions.
K Philips, London, UK
How refreshing for Parris to admit error and how encouraging to read his last sentence. Many, many of us have thought from the beginning that 'the collective wisdom of most thoughtful media commentators' was bunkum. All this nonsense about standing on 'the centre-ground' wherever this dangerous swamp was thought to be was daft. The Brown/ Blair legacy is awful. Let a genuinely Conservative Party put forward decent, common-sense policies to 'set the people free' (and that does mean significant tax cuts) and people will respond positively.
Dr J Findlater, Carnforth,
At last the message has reached the London chattering classes. And they thought they were at the centre of things?
Why are the political classes and commentators so unaware of mainstream feeling in Britain? Most people had had enough two weeks after he had the keys for No. 10. Blair never achieved more than around 30% of the eligible vote. It's hardly surprizing there would be a reaction akin to a seasick voyager reaching dry land.
Even Brown's gerrymandered pubic sector vote, tired of feeling the pinch of council taxes and an over-valued housing stock owned by credit companies, are beginning to doubt there will ever be a cigar.
Edwin Thornber, Bucharest,
I concur.
ben, London,
At last the message has reached the London chattering classes. And they thought they were at the centre of things?
Why are the political classes and commentators so unaware of mainstream feeling in Britain? Most people had had enough two weeks after he had the keys for No. 10. Blair never achieved more than around 30% of the eligible vote. It's hardly surprizing there would be a reaction akin to a seasick voyager reaching dry land.
Even Brown's gerrymandered pubic sector tired of feeling the pinch of council taxes and an over-valued housing stock owned by credit companies, are beginning to doubt there will ever be a cigar.
Edwin Thornber, Bucharest,