Gordon Brown’s responses to the failed terror attacks, the floods and foot and
mouth disease left him looking stronger. But his reaction to the death of
Rhys Jones, the latest young victim of teenage gang killers, makes the prime
minister look merely foolish.
Brown promised “tougher enforcement”, “a crackdown” and more police. “Where
there is a need for new laws we will pass them,” he blathered, as though
murder were not a crime. Jacqui Smith, the home secretary, promised to
quadruple the number of acceptable behaviour contracts, claiming they would
nip disorder in the bud.
Brown is discovering that prime ministers are obliged to speak even when they
have nothing sensible to say. Every ludicrous promise he makes adds to the
pile of vacuous commitments given by his predecessor.
If tougher enforcement and cracking down were the answer, the morgues would
not now be receiving the shot and knifed corpses of murdered boys.
Governments have been cracking down since time immemorial. If 25,000
acceptable behaviour contracts have failed to do the trick, 100,000 will not
secure the breakthrough.
Two decades ago Charles Murray, the American social analyst, contended that
over the decades the American black community had steadily climbed the
ladder of opportunity but its progress was brought to an abrupt end in the
1960s by the well intentioned but foolish welfare policies of presidents
Kennedy and Johnson. Out-of-work payments destroyed the work ethic among men
and subsidies to unmarried mothers undermined the traditional authority of
those women’s mothers.
Brown will not say that he thinks violence in the black community is rooted in
the welfare system, but it would make more sense than promising extra
policemen. David Cameron, for the Tories, hints that welfare is at the heart
of the problem by advocating policies that strengthen families. Encouraging
marriage through fiscal incentives may seem like a nonsequitur to a spree of
child and teenage killings, but Cameron might argue that you have to start
somewhere. At least the state must shift from welfare payments that
encourage couples to split towards incentives for staying together.
Disappointingly, the Rev Jesse Jackson on his current visit to Britain offered
no solutions, although he called for better prenatal care and more education
and urged blacks to empower themselves by going into business. He and Trevor
Phillips, chairman of the Commission on Equality and Human Rights, urged
black senior army officers to mentor young men. But there are so few black
officers that such a scheme would merely condemn them to being full-time
mentors and only token military commanders. Jack Straw called on the black
community to do more to sort out its problems.
Evidently nobody has the answer but Cameron, Jackson and Straw managed at
least to sound more intelligent than the prime minister and his hapless home
secretary.
There is a strategic danger for Brown in feeling obliged to say silly things
on serious subjects. He has claimed to be more honest and transparent than
Tony Blair. To a surprising extent the media have accepted that at face
value and this is a key reason why his first two months have gone so well.
But his reaction to the killings is not honest. “Cracking down” is beside the
point. A straight answer might be that the government can do nothing. Or
that the problem is so deeply rooted in modern political and popular culture
that society needs to be overhauled, a painful process in which government
can play an important but limited role.
It was unlucky for Brown that last week the case of Learco Chindamo reminded
us that new Labour has always been a government of spin. A tribunal decided
that the Italian passport holder, who murdered Philip Lawrence, the head
teacher, in 1995, cannot be deported to his country of birth on completing
his prison sentence.
Straw fulminated against the tribunal, but it is hard to see how it could have
reached another view. It based its judgment on European Union law dated
2004, introduced into UK law last year by this government. That would be
around the time that Blair was promising that foreign convicts would be
deported on release.
It is unfortunate, too, that the case provides an excellent example of the
unintended consequences for British governments of European legislation.
Home Office ministers have repeatedly cursed the day that Labour
incorporated the convention on human rights in UK law. But the point is
broader. European laws creep into Britain’s constitutional fabric. In the
fullness of time they turn out to be no respecters of the defensive “red
lines” that Blair or his predecessors claimed to have won at European
summits. The European Union is, after all, a process and the decisions of
its courts push member states towards “ever closer union”, as enshrined in
successive treaties.
Yet Brown reiterated last week that Blair’s red lines, secured at last June’s
summit, are one reason why he will not grant the British people a referendum
on the new draft treaty. Thanks to those lines, no vital British interests
are at stake, he says. But the Chindamo case is not reassuring. Brown’s
other reason is that the treaty agreed by Blair is, he says, different from
the draft constitution on which Labour promised a referendum in its election
manifesto.
Nobody can believe that, least of all Brown. Numerous European leaders have
stated that the old document and the new are extremely similar and according
to Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, author of the original, the changes are
cosmetic, designed only to avoid the need for referendums.
Our European leaders have connived to produce a document so long and opaque
that voters cannot understand it. An English translation has been delayed
until the autumn, presumably hoping that, too, will frustrate debate in
Britain. The leaders’ behaviour is cynical and even tyrannical.
The prime minister could indeed open a new era of transparent government by
denouncing the whole plot. He could say that a Europe built in fear and
defiance of its voters is the wrong sort of Europe. Or he could claim simply
that his party is committed to a referendum and now that other leaders have
made plain that the old and the new drafts are in effect the same, Brown’s
famed integrity obliges him to keep Labour’s manifesto promise.
Instead he is falling victim to the lure of European camaraderie, as his
predecessors did, including Margaret Thatcher who signed the Single European
Act and installed sterling in the exchange-rate mechanism. Although at close
quarters I have watched this syndrome repeatedly, why it happens remains a
mystery.
Conrad Black, former owner of the Telegraph newspaper group, observed acutely
that over the Maastricht treaty John Major behaved like the British colonel
in the film The Bridge On the River Kwai, who defends the railway that
British prisoners of war have been forced to build for Japan, even when our
commandos try to destroy it. Major defended Maastricht, an edifice not
designed to further UK interests, choosing solidarity with his European
counterparts over keeping his party intact.
Brown surely has no wish to see a European foreign minister usurping Britain’s
policy-making autonomy (which is what the treaty’s French and German backers
intend). But he defends the treaty and by refusing a referendum he
jeopardises his claim to be honest and transparent, the rock on which his
success to date is based.
His European policy is also the one thing that complicates a decision on
whether to call an early election. Much of the press is hostile to the
treaty. Blair thought it too difficult to call an election and have to
explain daily why he was refusing a referendum, which is why he promised one
in 2005.
Whether there is an election or not, by the time the new European treaty has
made its way through parliament, where its similarity to the old document
will be made wholly apparent, it is unlikely that anyone will think Brown
more honest and transparent than Blair. It is a pity for him, because the
prime minister could choose a much easier path.
michael.portillo@sunday-times.co.uk
"it is unlikely that anyone will think Brown more honest and transparent than Blair."
It was obvious long before he became PM that he was no better than Blair. How could he be? His deceit over taxes in his last budget and the fact he was number 2 in the government through all its policy making years proved that. What is amazing is the way he has been allowed to get away with his deceit.
Neil Murphy, cromer,
The reason UK leaders side with EU leaders is that they provide each other leverage back on their own internal opponents, diplomatic cover if you like. It is a similar process that sends US presidents on foreign adventures. For example Bush says he cannot leave Iraq because he will let down the allies, rather than admit he was wrong.
Of course in doing this leaders betray their own people and Brown has very quickly shown that self preservation is far more important to him than the destiny of Britain.
Britain can only servive when it is free to react normally, its current EU encumberances are choking the country to death.
John W, Oldham,
Reading this column is like travelling back in time to the 1980s - when Mr Portillo was the poster boy of the hard right in the Tory Party. It is either wilfully ignorant or deliberately misleading to imply that the proposed "European foreign minister" would "usurp Britain’s policy-making autonomy". In fact the "High Representative" - currently Javier Solana - only represents the European Union on issues where the Member States have already reached agreement. He has no power to prevent the UK from making and pursuing its own Foreign Policies - as we are currently doing in Afghanistan and Iraq, to mention but two examples. Fortunately, our new Foreign Secretary seems to understand the value of working together with his counterparts in the other 26 Member States, to build consensus and achieve common goals. The idea that the UK could be more effective by acting on its own - without seeking support from our partner countries - simply doesn't stand up in the 21st Century.
Ben Carlin, Northumberland, UK
A correction, the Comment with the heiroglyphics for an
attribution, between John Lonesdale's and JM of Hemel's
comments was me. Sorry but I don't know what caused the
glitch. I don't like posting under a pseudonym, even an
inadvertant onem hence this correction.
Denver Watt, Osaka, Japan
The EU spews out sillyness by the boat load, all of which is absorbed by Labour.
Silly Brown, is as silly as silly Blair and it's time UK had the sense to get shot of of Labour altogether!
hil, Perth, Australia
Yes, reform the Welfare State, reform schools, reform the prisons and the penal code - reform parents and parenting too.
But who is really going to do this? Not the Tories!! All they'll do is give back more money to the rich and remain obsessed with the economy...
Ted, abu dhabi, u.a.e.
We may not like it, but J Fletcher and Brian Sloan of are quite right.. Imagine an even worse scenario - there is currently under investigation in England an alleged recidivist paedophile who, if he is sent back to prison, will not be let out for a long time. But unless he dies in jail, he will walk free one day. Although it's not very likely, he might then opt to spend his sunset years in France or Spain and there would be nothing the French or Spanish authorites could do to stop him.
England has been far more successful at exporting its lager louts and criminals than France or Spain have ever been. How very unfair!
Frank Schnittger, Wicklow, Ireland
I think we now have, the blind leading the blind, leading the blind, leading the blind.....
Judy , Liverpool, england
It is too true that our PM is driven by headline news, and he makes pointless statements as and when required. But we need tough action not sentimental words. Instead, we have been told that gimmick tools of ASBO to ABC will deter criminals. Where is the action of ‘tough on crime and its causes’ the Labour’s flagship policy? Crime griping Britain is dominating everyday headline news. Where is law abiding Britain?
h.marph, London ,
There will absolutely be a referendum on the Constituion, only it will be called a General Election. 11-2-10 must really fancy his chances.
david Masu, Zürich,
Sarkozy has shown that France will always have an independent foreign policy whatever EU treaties say. There is no reason why the UK government should not behave in exactly the same way. The European Human Rights rules have nothing to do with the EU and Michael Portillo is well aware of this fact.
Alan Frommer, Brussels, Belgium
It would be nice to have a believable Conservative party alternative to vote for. In he last three elections the Conservatives have looked as believable as Labours 1980 offering. The real secret of Blair and now Brown is no credible opposition. This is very bad for democracy.
Paul Mc Groary, Kettering, Northants UK
Not as silly as Dave looks almost every day, when are the Conservatives going to get a good leader, not an ex Eaton fop who wouldn't know real life or some caricature that makes the Cartoonists day.
Joe , Crewe, Cheshire
Britain appear to becoming a more violent place to live these days.No cmmunity is a safe place any more, be it white, black, or mixed, and the whole of society must take the blame. Society has turned a blind eye for far too long, and we must take our communities back from the minority gang culture morons who roam our streets up and down this country. Laws must be put in place to deal with these young people who apparently does not fear the law as it stands because it is too soft. Those young people who flout the laws and terrorise the neighbourhood should be dealt with firmly-no pussyfooting.
All hooded tops should be banned from all shops, as these are used to hide their identities.More police should be patrolling the streets ,and yes, more parents taking their responsibilities more seriously also. These so-called do-gooders have got a lot to answer for. The old adage of sparing the rod has never rang so true.It never did me or my siblings any harm.
Edmund Forde, Livingston, West Lothian
I find it weird that Mr Brown seems to have been held captive, so quickly, by the pro european liberals who are slowly but surely destroying this country. I had hoped he was a man of character.
Ah well another politician lets us down! What's new?
John Lonsdale, Gateshead, UK
I have got to say I agree wholeheartedly with your article. There is something fundementally flawed about the way children are now raised in this Country which is corrupting them from the oldest child soon. I blame, and laugh if you like, the trash media such as internet, youtube, etc as well as big brother trash tv ,plus of course camera phones that are abused and much worse than the "happy slapping" and far far worse in some cases. This cannot be good for healthy minds. On top of this is the very poor diets of many children ,where even the supposed meals are full of e numbers. Plus we have no discipline in schools. I saw the C4 program where the kids went back to 50/60's type schooling and although they hated the discipline at first once they got into it they loved it. THAT is the type of discipline that we need to get back into schools, QUICKLY. Perhaps there should be consideration to allowing children to stay in primary school much later ,maybe even to 14 years to avoid being
Patrick, Brighton, Sussex
I find it weird that Mr Brown seems to have been held captive, so quickly, by the pro european liberals who are slowly but surely destroying this country. I had hoped he was a man of character.
Ah well another politician lets us down! What's new?
John Lonsdale, Gateshead, UK
Mr Portillo, there is onlly onr point on which I must disagree. "Famed integrity" If this is integrity it is surely a mirage which will dissolve under the glare of media scrutiny in
the not too distant future. The first cracks in the media honeymoon with the press are already beginning to appear. As you imply his position on the European Constituion, sorry Treaty is absurd and rhe longer he maintains it the more irrational and rediculous he will become.
As your colleague, Matthew Parris, has argued with some justification his best chance to gain a mandate is to hold a snap election in the autumn. However I think Marcus
Linklater`s arguments are more apposite. As he points oot
Labour, in Scotland are laggiing 16 points behind Salmond`s
Scottish Nasty Party and this would imperil the current 38
Scottish seats it would need to hold to ensure a working
majority. Thus he argues Brown will ultimately decide against
an early election. Therefore Brown`s fate is Callaghan`s.
Ｄｅｎｖｅｒ　Ｗï½ï½”ï½”, Ｏｓï½ï½‹ï½, Ｊï½ï½ï½ï½Ž
Funny how all these failed politicians seem to have all of the answers when they are no longer in the job. Bit late now, Michael.
JM, Hemel Hempstead,
I thought Brown speaking of the shooting , came across as pompous & oh so preachy , it was a case of less would have been more.
This referendum question will be Cameron's ace, he should play it up as much as possible, then if Brown does a U turn he will look the indecisive whimp he is.
Maggie Millington, Brittany , France
Blair promised a referendum on the understanding that Britain would never 'go first'. On that basis he knew that the referendum would be one promise he would never be forced to deliver on. He may even have had the foresight to have seen that it would present Brown with an initial dilemma of huge proportions right at the start of his reign (for that is what the PM'ship is more akin to these days).
No British PM has had the guts to be treated as a leper by other European leaders, least of all one from the Labour Party, that has been trumpeting its benefits in the face of overwhelmingly negative headlines about petty, interfering regulation and corruption originating directly from the EU.
It would be a refreshing sight indeed for a British PM to refuse to indulge in the horse-trading that has become the hallmark of every EU negotiation and instead make a robust stand to give his co-operation only when the EU's institutions agree to minimum standards of genuine transparency.
Edwin Thornber, Bucharest,
The tribunal came to the correct decision irrespective of European legislation.
How could it be sensible to send this person to Italy when he can't even speak the language. Sometimes we have to take responsibility.
European legislation is there to prevent abuses of power by cowardly home secretaries.
richard mullens, London, Europe
This is a really confusing article. It starts off by talking about a young white boy being murdered and then pointing the finger solely on 'black gangs' and balck culture? Should we include balcks in our War on Terror?
I think the plainly obvious truth is that politicians do not have the experience or the skills to deal with such issues. And there is no way a politician will ever admit to that. Instead they lie, lie and lie... making things worse for us in the process.
Perhaps some truly qualified social analysts (uni profs) could shed some light on the CAUSE of these problems and then leave it to the 'politicians' to implement the solution (i actually think the uni profs would have to spell out the solution as well).
seth taylor, cambs, uk
We may not like it, but Brian Sloan of Cambridge is quite right. Iamgine an even worse scenario - there is currently under investigation in France an alleged recidivist paedophile who, if he is sent back to prison, will not be let out for a long time. But unless he dies in jail, he will walk free one day. Although it's not very likely, he might then opt to spend his sunset years in Worthing or Torquay And there would be nothing the UK authorites could do to stop him.
J.Fletcher, Canterbury, UK
A well argued and temporate analysis.
Robert, London, UK
Is this the man who couldn't cope with looking after three children for a week, who looked and sounded ridiculous when he gave his SAS speech and acts like a schoolboy on the Andrew Neil show? Tlak about people , houses, glass and stones!
Dave b, york,
The easier path will also, in the end, lead to a general election. Gordon Brown, having lost the referendum, would have to go to the people again. I'm afraid he has no choice but to stick it out. More interestingly, I was surprised by Mr Portillo's - a former cabinet minister - frustration with the UK's approach to the EU. Join the club! The UK should either get in or get out. Its current position is ludicrous. In his penultimate meeting with EU leaders, Mr Blair surrendered £7 billion of Mrs Thatcher's cache when Ms Merkel and M Chirac, quite rightly, pointed out that the UK was the strongest advocate for EU expansion. No doubt in say 2013 EU leaders will again point out that the UK is Turkey's strongest supporter of EU entry and that it is time to cough up another £13 billion to cover Turkey's expenses. With policies as Alice-in-Wonderland as that I often wonder if the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office - and the Cabinet - are peopled by March Hares!
Dr David Green, Athens, Greece
It is nonsense to maintain that France and Germany wish to usurp Britain`s foreign policy autonomy - they could hardly expect to do this without losing autonomy over their own policy decisions. The reality is that it is sensible to put forward an EU policy position when, and if , the member states can all agree. A pity that Portillo seems to have joined the ranks of the Europhobic tabloids.
phil, Market Drayton, UK
Michael Portillo writes well, or at least the person who ghosts for him does - fact. Gordon Brown is Prime Minister - fact. Michael Portillo wished to become Prime Minister - fact. Michael Portillo failed, miserably, in his attempt to become Prime Minister - fact. "The violence in the black community is rooted in the welfare system" - balderdash! Violence in most of our communities is rooted in ill-education and poverty .
A well-written article can fool some of the people, some of the time etc. etc. etc.
Obvious really!
Marc, St. Barthelemy, France
It's hard to have true trust when no one believe in you,this means that we as people will just have to do harder work to get what we want!....
MYLES ROSENTHAL, KANKAKEE, U.S.A. / ILLINOIS
Portillo is pedalling back to the right - anti-welfare, pro-family, Eurosceptic, quoting Conrad Black(!!) - at just the time that the Tory party is trying to reinvent itself. He is danger of becoming the Roy Hattersley of the Conservative movement.
Tim Dodds, Edinburgh, Scotland
The clarity of your views is missing from both parties. Stand again Michael or would that clarity be obscured by the clouds of Westminster... political backers, lackeys, financiers, pressure groups, self interest... black clouds indeed.
Tom Edwards, Taunton, Somerset
Yes Michael Portillo makes another very good point here. We
all got a bit carried away with Brown he seemed more
substantial than Blair and was a breath of fresh air. But this
European constitution a done deal behind closed doors and
Brown's unwillingness to defend British interests shows that
we are still being betrayed by our leaders. Brown is a paper
tiger tough on casinos, but a poodle in Europe. The Europhiles used to tell us Europe is not a superstate and
Britain should be at the heart of it. What lies and rubbish that
was, we would be better off regaining our independance. The
tradegy is that l don't believe Cameron would be any different
to Brown.
Peter, Dorset, England
The recent spate of youth shootings and stabbings has left Gordon Brown looking like a man who is hostage to events, while at the same time David Cameron is seen as a man who not only has been predicting these events with his analysis of a 'Broken Society' but is a man who is also serious about resolving these problems.
Tony Makara, Manchester,
I'm very uncomfortable that the xenophobia in some quarters increases so exponentially where criminals are concerned. If Chindamo had been born in England, Mr Lawrence's relatives would have had to live with the possibility that he could be released from jail in the future. The fact that he is Italian does not change this to any great extent. Moreover, it is not the case that Chindamo has the same rights as any other UK citizen. Rather, he has similar rights to a UK citizen convicted of murder, which are obviously highly restricted.
The case is a straightforward application of free movement of persons, a long-standing principle of of EU Law that has been bolstered by Conservative governments as much as anyone else.
Brian Sloan, Cambridge,
The EU spews out sillyness by the boat load, all of which is absorbed by Labour.
Silly Brown, is as silly as silly Blair and it's time UK had the sense to get shot of of Labour altogether!
hillus, Perth, Australia
It's true that Brown felt he needed to say something "statesman like" and ended saying nothing valuable or constructive.
Portillo has missed a chance here as this article says nothing valuable or constructive either. He starts off with the PM's weak statement about the murder of Rhys Jones only to have an irrelevant dig at the government over Europe and the Human Rights Act.
Has this been a quiet week for the news or has Michael Portillo been persuaded to join in the Conservative Party offensive to stop Labour calling an October election?
Steve Fraser, Portadown, Northern Ireland
What you did not say is that a European level of law, administration and commission is necessary for our politicians to go to when they are no longer acceptable in UK. Hence the camaraderie. When future high earnings, privilege and pensions are at stake, forget what is good for Britain. If that thought had crossed their minds, we would not now be in the state we are in.
Findlay, Cluj,