Previously loyal MPs have joined rebels in threatening to defeat his plans to take schools out of local authority control and to increase the private sector’s role in the NHS.

Of the 61 backbenchers who responded to a Sunday Times survey, only 11 actively supported the proposed changes in education, 25 were opposed and 16 had doubts. On the NHS reforms, 21 were against and 10 had doubts. On Blair’s proposals to increase to 90 days the time police can hold terror suspects without charge, 20 were opposed and one had doubts.

Graham Stringer, the MP for Manchester, Blackley, is among those who have so far been loyal on contentious issues but are now prepared to voice their opposition publicly, with Blair’s majority down to 66.

“Tony Blair’s authority has diminished for a whole series of factors,” he said. “The education paper is almost universally unpopular, and not just among backbenchers. It’s as close as you can get to zero support. What’s being trailed on the health white paper I suspect will face universal opposition. I am opposed.”

Referring to the government’s near defeat last week on a key vote on the terrorism bill, he added: “Getting a majority of one doesn’t leave you with a lot of confidence.”

The threatened rebellions came as:

It followed a week when Blair saw his authority undermined by the resignation of David Blunkett from the cabinet, and a rebuff to his anti-terrorism legislation. Blair will tomorrow attempt to persuade backbenchers to accept his plans to extend the detention period for terror suspects, despite a warning by Labour whips that the move faces defeat in the Commons.

It is understood Hilary Armstrong, the chief whip, warned Blair last week he would lose the vote if he pressed ahead with the proposal.Labour rebels have indicated they will not back an extension of the holding period beyond 28 days from the current 14. Sources close to Charles Clarke, the home secretary, hinted the government would seek to win over rebels with concessions on civil liberties, such as judges reviewing cases.

If Blair insists on putting the proposal to the vote on Wednesday, a defeat could trigger calls for a vote of confidence in his government.

Blair last night accused critics of his anti-terrorism law of “woeful complacency”. He said it would be a “defeat” for the security of the country if the powers were blocked and said Labour rebels were simply giving ground to the Tories.

Allies of Gordon Brown, the chancellor, who will be in Israel on a long-arranged official trip on Wednesday, insist that he will phone rebel MPs to urge them to back down.

Even if Blair survives a difficult week, there are other challenges ahead on education and health reforms. The resistance mounted by John Prescott, the deputy prime minister, to Blair’s education plans has emboldened MPs to voice their disagreement.

Clive Betts, MP for Sheffield, Attercliffe, an ally of Blunkett and a government supporter, said: “I am very unhappy. The white paper [on education] is unfortunately another example of the government producing a set of proposals with no attempt to win people over inside the parliamentary party.”

More rebellious MPs, such as Clive Efford, Eltham, were blunter. “I will do everything in my power to stop us destroying our education system by allowing schools to use these new powers,” he said.

In the survey of MPs a majority were also opposed
to the plans to increase private sector involvement in the NHS. Ronnie Campbell, MP for Blyth Valley, said: “This is very dangerous. I think Blair is in trouble on this one. It is a botched job.”

Criticism by Meyer will carry weight. The former ambassador contradicted Blair’s comments on the July 7 attacks by claiming “there is plenty of evidence” that “home-grown terrorism was partly radicalised and fuelled” by Iraq. “Don’t tell me being in Iraq has nothing to do with it . . . To say otherwise is barking mad,” he said.

Referring to Blair’s troubles, he added: “It reminds me so much of those [Major’s last] days. Somewhere along the line, you reach the point of no return . . . I wouldn’t be surprised if this was it.”

Blair also faces criticism today from Sir Alistair Graham, the chairman of the committee on standards in public life, for failing to show leadership and giving “a rather obscure and muddied message about ethical standards”.

In an interview with The Independent on Sunday, he asks why Blair, as enforcer of the ministerial code on conduct, took no action when it emerged that Blunkett had broken the rules.

“If you sign up to a foreword in the ministerial code in which you expect ministers not only to sign up to the letter but the spirit as well . . . then if your actions don’t live up to those words you’re in danger of getting criticised and being perceived to be weak on these issues,” he says.

“In the end it is a matter of the style, tone and leadership of the prime minister,” he adds.

Calling for a review of the code and possible full-scale inquiry by his committee, he warns that “the whole political class” faces a lack of public confidence over standards.

Additional reporting: Tom Baird, Ed Habershon, Laura St Quinton and Holly Watt

Explore UK News

• Crime News

• Education News

• Health News

• Science News

• Scotland News

Times Recommends

• An officer and a gentle woman
• Dame Helen Mirren is worthy of the Epidaurus
• Foods that can help to prevent swine flu