Tony Blair in 2004
16 December 2004 - Charles Clarke's Castle
Yesterday Charles Clarke took over as Home Secretary from David Blunkett. It gives me an opportunity to play amateur psychologist.
I believe that there is a pattern in Clarke's behaviour. It is to be a skilled operator, but with one major flaw - a tendency to be overly impressed by the dominant political figure in his immediate environment. I'll try to explain what I mean by a couple of examples.
In Tony Benn's diary record for November 23, 1978 he notes:
"At 9.45 Charles Clarke, the son of my former Permanent Secretary, Otto Clarke, came to see me and we had a pleasant talk. He had just returned from Cuba, where he was British representative on the Preparatory Committee of the World Youth Congress. He said Cuba was most impressive ... Fidel Castro was very much an authoritarian but a most impressive man.... Clarke was critical of the British Labour Party, which he thought was inactive and without influence. When he applied to work in the International Department at Transport House, he hadn't even been shortlisted."
I suppose on reading that the fact that Clarke found Castro impressive is not significant in itself, but let me present exhibit 2.
In Bryan Gould's autobiography, Goodbye to All That, he writes:
"Charles Clarke was a powerful figure. He undoubtedly enjoyed Neil [Kinnock]'s confidence, which gave him considerable influence. His effectiveness was limited only by the fact that he always saw issues primarily from the viewpoint of what effect they would have on Neil. This somewhat restricted him in taking the wider view of the party's interests ..."
Now, surely I'm on to something here. I believe that Clarke is in the habit of taking the viewpoint of his leader rather than his party. The crucial thing is, of course, that as his role becomes more senior that he does neither! That, instead, he takes the viewpoint of the country.
Charles Clarke is a great fan of chess (his father was an excellent player). Clarke told The Times that chess "forces thinking. It's a game which develops logic and strategy."
All sorts of people have given their view on the psychology of chess, bringing in connections to patricide and repressed homosexuality - I don't want to expand on that twaddle. Instead I want to emphasise that "King Safety" whilst important is only one of the elements of the game.
So Mr Clarke, by all means castle early. Keep your king protected and shield him, but don't get bogged down in looking for real or imagined threats to him.
Bobby Fischer once said: "This little thing between me and Spassky, it's a microcosm of the whole world situation. They always suggest that the two world leaders should fight it out hand to hand, and this is the kind of thing we are doing."
As it happens Fischer turned out to be a bit of a 'nutter' but he didn't win the metaphorical war by being obsessed by protecting his King.
23 November 2004 - Prime Minister's Briefings
On the day of the Queen's Speech and with the general election not far off, it strikes me that the Prime Minister's Official Spokesman's Press Briefings seem to be becoming less and less illuminating.
Witness today - which I copy verbatim from the official Downing Street website:
Queen's Speech
Asked how many Bills the Government hoped to get through before May the Prime Minister's Official Spokesman (PMOS) told journalist that that was a matter for the business managers.
Asked if the Prime Minister intended to amend the animal welfare Bill to delay the Hunting Bill, the PMOS reminded journalists that Peter Hain had said this morning that if there were a serious proposal emerging from the House of Lords then obviously the Government would look at that. As things stood, whilst the Government had been in favour of a delay, the reality was that it had to decide whether there was any realistic chance of it getting through the House of Lords.
Asked which of the Bills announced today were seen by the Government as priorities, the PMOS said that we should wait and see what happens in the debates.
Asked if any one measure was particularly important with a General Election looming, the PMOS wondered aloud why he didn't think this would be the last time he would be addressing that sort of question. He said that obviously there would be speculation about the Bills. It was best to leave it to the business managers.
Northern Ireland
Asked to comment on the talks between the Prime Minister and the Taoiseach tomorrow, the PMOS said that he would not give a running commentary, neither would he get into the optimism-pessimism game. Everybody involved recognised it would be an important week. Let's see where we were at the end of it. He didn't anticipate any big announcements tomorrow.
6 November 2004 - Blair, Cook and how times change
On reading Blair's words of congratulation for President Bush on his re-election (as reported on 4 November), I became curious to see how the statement compared with Bush's election first time round.
It was difficult to track down anything substantive because of the drawn-out nature of determining the victor in the Bush-Gore fight.
However, the Lobby Briefing of 8 November 2000 is illuminating if only for reminding us that there was a time that Robin Cook welcomed George W. Bush with open arms:
"Asked if the Prime Minister had phoned Mr Bush or Mr Gore today, the PMS said he hadn't had any contact with anybody. Questioned as to whether the Prime Minister or Mrs Blair had spoken yet to Hillary Clinton to congratulate her on her election to the Senate, the PMS said no. Asked if the Prime Minister shared the Foreign Secretary's 'enthusiasm' for George W. Bush, the PMS said that what Mr Cook had been saying this morning was that we would work closely with whoever won the election. That remained the position. The Foreign Secretary had pointed out that that the result had not been confirmed when he did the interviews."
4 November 2004 - Tony Blair congratulates Bush
Here is the text of the statement Prime Minister Blair made congratulating George W. Bush on his re-election:
"Good Evening everyone. I have spoken today with President Bush, and just in the last few minutes to Senator Kerry. I congratulated President Bush on his victory, and said to Senator Kerry that I thought he fought an outstanding campaign that would help make the election a true celebration of American democracy, and he should be proud of that.
"Such is the strength of the United States, that the election of the President is an event of genuine significance right around the world. It is of particular significance to Britain, not least because America and the United Kingdom have a unique bond through our shared history and traditions, and above all, through our shared belief in the values of freedom and democracy. It is an important part of our own British national interest that the British Prime Minister protects and strengthens the bond between our two countries. I sought to do that first with President Clinton, and then with President Bush, and I look forward to continuing that strong relationship in President Bush's second term.
"President Bush's re-election comes at a critical time. A world that is fractured, divided and uncertain must be brought together to fight this global terrorism in all its forms, and to recognise that it will not be defeated by military might alone, but also by demonstrating the strength of our common values - by bringing freedom and democracy to Iraq, as we have done to Afghanistan; by pursuing with the same energy peace in the Middle East between Israel and Palestine; by accepting it is our duty to combat poverty and injustice on the continent of Africa and elsewhere in the world.
"In particular I have long argued that the need to revitalise the Middle East peace process is the single most pressing political challenge in our world today. Therefore we must be relentless in our war against terrorism, and in resolving the conditions and causes on which the terrorists prey.
"We should work with President Bush on this agenda. It is one which all nations of goodwill can surely agree. In particular, Europe and America must build anew their alliance. All of us in positions of leadership - not just President Bush - have a responsibility to rise to this challenge. It is urgent that we do so.
"Once again I warmly congratulate President Bush on his victory, and thank you."
26 October 2004 - Tony Blair not for sale!
I have noticed that an ad sometimes comes up on this site saying "Prime Minister for Sale. Discount Prime Minister. Check out the deals now - ebay"
Please note that this site and I'm sure ebay is not implying that the Prime Minister is open to any back-handers or deals!!!
26 October 2004 - Tony Blair Microsite launches its new prediction model
Today we have launched our prediction model. The graphs here show our prediction of
- percentage of the electorate's votes; and
- percent probability of gaining most seats.
Psephologists should beware of making month-by-month comparisons at the moment as the model has been slightly amended and comparisons are not like for like. For reference, Series 1 refers to September 2004 and Series 2 to October 2004
19 October 2004 - Blair condemns the culture of the civil service
At a speech last night to the CBI, Tony Blair again continued the theme that he has applied elsewhere to his government: things have improved but we must work harder as there is still room for improvement.
Discussing over-regulation in business, Mr Blair pinned much of the problem on the civil service and Europe, as illustrated in this extract from the Prime Minister's speech:
"You have heard a lot of speeches from successive Prime Ministers about dealing with regulation, without, I would guess, being as impressed with their actions. The problem is cultural. For decades civil servants and politicians have prided themselves in dotting every i and crossing every t when legislating administrative rules. We need to change that approach to end gold-plating of European regulations, and rather than assuming everyone is a criminal who needs to be inspected to see if they are breaking the law, adopt a flexible approach to ensure we achieve our targets.
"At the moment there is no downside for civil servants in making regulation overly thorough, only a downside if they leave a loophole. Therefore, as part of our civil service reforms, we want to start rewarding those who devise ways of meeting our policy objectives without regulation."
15 October 2004 - Exclusive extracts from an interview with Martin Bell
It seems so long ago that Blair came to power and then faced his first major controversy, 'The Ecclestone Affair'. And yet some people would draw parallels with the current debate over Iraq and the public's perception of Tony Blair.
Here in a previously unpublished extract from an interview for a C4 programme, presented by Michael Crick, that I worked on, Martin Bell recalls his first question in Parliament, in which he asked: "Does the Prime Minister agree with me that the perception of wrongdoing can be almost as damaging to public confidence as the wrongdoing itself? Or have we slain one dragon only to have another take its place with a red rose in its mouth?"
Crick: Martin Bell, take us through the Ecclestone affair, which I suppose was the period when everybody was surprised by your comments in, in the Commons, which was only about six months after you were elected.
Bell: I suppose that the Labour Party believed that having stood their candidate down for me in, in Tatton, I would then be an obedient pawn on their chess board, though I have to say the local Labour Party was under no illusions, they knew I was an independent and I'll, I spent a long time working myself in. It's not easy being an independent if you're the first on in 50 years, but then when this Ecclestone thing came up, I suddenly said to myself, you know, this is wrong. This guy goes to see the leader of the Labour Party, as Tony Blair then was, gets £1 million, Tony Blair becomes prime minister, the government then adjusts its policy on tobacco advertising to fit in with Formula 1's business agenda, what's, what's going on here, so I just managed to attract Madam Speaker's eye at sort of 29 and a half minutes into a PM Qs and I put this question about, about the dragon, and it caused a bit of a furore, and I think it cost me quite a little bit of money in the end, but it was, it was worth putting, I think, because MPs of parties don't want to embarrass their party, and in a curious way they don't want to embarrass the other party into attacking their party, so there's a certain kind of connivance goes on on all kinds of, of issues of ethics in parliament.
Crick: Was that a moment of disillusionment for you?
Bell: It, the fact that I could put a perfectly reasonable question like that and then on the way out I start being nudged by Labour back benchers of, of those very strong Blairite persuasion, saying oh you're very popular with the Tories aren't you? You know this, this kind of game like, like a minor public school in the 19th century, you're in one house or another house, a total common sense and, bypass, and sometimes even an ethics bypass as well.
Crick: You say it cost you money - in what way?
Bell: Well it was curious, because about four months later the Daily Mirror came up with a report that my legal fees in my campaign had been paid for by the parties who had stood their candidates down for me. I hadn't known it at the time, and when I discovered, I paid it myself, £9,400. The report was written by somebody who'd come from the, the Hartlepool Mail, and I thought that's funny. Can't prove anything, but I had my suspicions.
10 October 2004 - The amazing case of Blair and poodles
I am very grateful to the excellent wikipedia, where I found this story. I had been searching around the web for some information about Tony Blair when I stumbled on this wikipedia story about 'googlebombing'.
At first, I couldn't believe it, but, yes it was true, if you go to the UK google site and put in the search term 'poodle' then Tony Blair's biography from his official site comes out first when searching the UK, and second searching the world!
Maybe, I was right not to believe it - I tried it again today, 11 October and Blair was nowhere to be seen.
7 October 2004 - Blair Still Favourite
Nowadays you can bet about pretty much anything - in the UK, at least. Paddy Power and Betfair, for example, have markets on who will be the next Pope! As far as politics goes, there have been some market movements this week, following on from the Hartlepool by-election.
William Hill have shortened Labour's General Election odds from 1/4 to 1/6, lengthened the Tories from 11/4 to 7/2 and shortened the Lib Dems from 50/1 to 40/1.
One extraordinary jump is that Hills now make the Lib Dems 4/1 from 7/1 to poll a higher percentage of the votes than the Conservatives!
Understandably the betting markets show strong favouritism for Blair to lead Labour into the next election. Brown is huge odds on to follow Blair, and the only other candidate the markets have anywhere near close to Brown is Alan Milburn.
William Hill, who temporarily suspended their markets when it was announced that Blair was going to hospital, have an interesting market on which year Blair will leave the office of Prime Minister. But, on reflection, who would want to tie their money up for years.
I think the most interesting market at the moment is on Bet365 regarding the British referendum on Europe, where they have:
No - Reject Constitution Question 1.44 (ie a profit of 44p on a £1 bet
Yes - Agree To Constitution Question 2.62 (ie profit of £1.62 on £1 bet).
I would be interested to find out what others think. Does this reflect the real probabilities?
30 September 2004 - Mr Blair to be admitted to hospital
Tomorrow, the Prime Minister will undergo a procedure in hospital to correct an irregular heartbeat.
In an interview with the BBC, Mr Blair said he still intended to serve a full third term in office if elected, but he told their political editor Andrew Marr he had no intention of serving a fourth term.
According to the BBC, Mr Blair's cardiologist says patients usually spend the night in hospital and are back at work within two to three days.
The PM first exhibited symptoms of an irregular heartbeat in October 2003. At the time it was treated with a different procedure.
28 September 2004 - The Prime Minister's Speech to the Labour Party Conference
Note: The full speech is posted on the Blair speeches page.
As Mr Blair himself said he has just had a tough week, but as he also said - he's used to it. Generally the audience at the Labour Party conference appeared supportive.
Mr Blair was however heckled by a lone anti-war protester during his speech.
As the man was removed the Prime Minister said: "That's fine sir you can make your protest - just thank God we live in a democracy."
Mr Blair also made a couple of opening remarks not on the offical transcript of the speech. One was to sympathise with the family of Kenneth Bigley, the British hostage in Iraq and the other was to make a joke about bumping into Rodney Bickerstaffe who told him not to worry about making a long speech, making reference to a media report that a speech of Mangosuthu Buthelezi, the leader of South Africa's Inkatha Freedom Party, had lasted several days.
There was a large protest by pro-hunt demonstrators, which took place some 15 minutes into Mr Blair's speech.
It's a curious cross-section that are demonstrating aginst the Prime Minister at the moment. Fathers who want access to their children, people on horseback with dogs who want access to foxes, and an assortment of types against the war in Iraq.
17 September 2004 - The Prime Minister's Official Spokesman: Sky's the Limit
The mind boggles at the official report of yesterday's Prime Minister's spokesman's press briefing on fox hunting.
The record of the briefing was rattling along quite nicely until we get to this passage:
"Put to him by Sky News in language not appropriate for the lobby note, that it was wrong to say the Prime Minister had supported a compromise, the PMOS said that it was not helpful to inject emotion into questions, and that we must debate this in a rational manner without losing tempers, especially as there was so much strong emotion out on the streets."
What I find curious is the 'naming and shaming'. Up until that point, the five previous paragraphs had begun: "Asked what ..."; "Asked if ..."; "Asked whether ..."; "Asked about ..."; and "Asked if ..."
Whoever took this note, could simply have continued the trend with something like: "Asked whether it was wrong to say the Prime Minister had supported a compromise ..."; instead of which we are specifically informed of the broadcaster involved and that they used inappropriate language.
Perhaps the Prime Minister's office wanted to involve themselves in a bit of 'naming and shaming' of Sky News but as with most censorship they have simply aroused our interest in the offending question.
So a plea to government officials, now that our appetites are wetted, is it possible for the record to show the full question? With asterisks , if needs be!
16 September 2004 - Did Tony Blair think of quitting? In Blair's own words: "Mmmm"
The claim by prominent Labour Party donor, Lord Bragg, that Tony Blair considered resigning this year because of "family considerations" and the "colossal strain has set the cat amongst the pigeons.
On the day that pro-hunting campaigners were able to intrude upon the House of Commons and disrupt proceedings, I was expecting a high number of 'hits' to this website. I got them, but I was wrong about the reason why. Nearly everybody was searching for "Tony Blair family crisis" or other such keywords and phrases.
Obviously this was prompted by the remarks of Melvyn Bragg, whose wife Cate Haste has just co-authored with Cherie Blair a book about No 10 spouses, as mentioned elsewhere on this site.
Bragg claimed in an interview on ITV that the Prime Minister had considered resigning, saying: "The real stress was personal and family, which matters most to him."
It's not a subject that I really wanted to dwell on it. But I did explore it and have worked out whether Tony Blair really did consider resigning. It's a matter of logic.
We have, firstly, the official report of the Prime Minister's Office press briefing yesterday morning:
"Asked if John Reid had been confirming in an interview this morning that the Prime Minister had been under a great deal of stress earlier this year, the PMOS observed that any Prime Minister experienced tough times while in office. That was a fact of political life. However, as he had made clear yesterday, he did not recognise the stories being reported and had nothing further to say about the matter. Asked why he didn't say that the stories were 'not true' as John Reid had underlined this morning, the PMOS referred journalists to the Prime Minister's words when asked about this matter in his July press conference. Had he considered moving on? Answer: no. End of story."
I decided to look at the original of the July Press Conference. The only part that looks vaguely relevant is:
QUESTION:
Given what you said about the JIC assessment, isn't it nevertheless the case that Lord Butler did talk about a collective failure by government, and as head of the government you ought to have considered resigning. And assuming you are here to stay, have you set yourself any personal targets that you want to achieve before you do quit, as it might be joining the euro?
PRIME MINISTER:
Mmmm.
So, the Prime Minister did not say 'no' as stated by his office yesterday, he said 'Mmmm"
I have to admit to not knowing the definition of "Mmmm"! Nevertheless I would insist it doesn't mean "No". Maybe it's best for readers to decide for themselves.
Blair Needs to Make Himself Heard
7 September 2004: Thoughts on the Prime Minister's Press Conference Today
Many serious questions were discussed in Tony Blair's conference. The keywords in the source code of the full transcript give a flavour: "reshuffle, Beslan, Olympics, School, Siege, Milburn, Smith, Andrew".
They are not comprehensive as, for example, the thorny subjects of the IRA and of hunting came up. With regard to hunting, we had the following exchange - as recorded in the official transcript:
QUESTION:
You have said you want to tell Parliament first about your plans for hunting, but on the other hand we are reliably informed that you are going to allow your own instincts for a compromise to be overruled by your back-benchers who want it banned. That doesn't sound very much in character with you, but let that pass. At the same time as you are being intolerant on hunting, you are being wildly permissive about boozing and gambling, you are moving towards legislation which would allow round the clock drinking, a huge extension of gambling in this country. Many people are worried about that as a priority for government, especially for a Labour government. What is it all about?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well on the first I am afraid you are just going to have to wait. On the second, I don't agree that is what we are doing, but we are liberalising ...
QUESTION:
... the small print.
PRIME MINISTER:
I have studied the small print, I haven't quite figured you out, but never mind. But actually that is not what we are doing. In respect of licensing, we are going to extend licensing hours, but why shouldn't we? Over the rest of Europe people are perfectly able to have extended licensing hours without it leading to all these terrible things. And in respect of gambling, actually we are trying to make sense of up-dating what is an out-dated legal framework. It is not a question of saying there is going to be boozing and gambling encouraged by government, it is getting a sensible legislative framework, and I think if you actually look at the details of it you will find that that is right. I am not persuading you, am I Mike?
QUESTION:
You are trying to stop us drinking more. John Reid, how does he square with this policy? You ask why we are doing it, we are puzzled Prime Minister.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well let me try and remove the puzzlement. In the end it is your decision, right, as to how much you drink. We can tell you what the health difficulties may be if people drink too much, I think they probably know that. But why on earth should we, virtually alone of any European country I know, have extremely restrictive licensing laws when actually surely we should be telling people about the need to drink sensibly, not to abuse alcohol, but actually allowing them the greater freedom. That is what I think.
Inaudible...
Well, what interests me is: since when has Mr Blair used the argument that we should fall in line with our European partners? It was not immediately obvious in his stance on the war in Iraq. And, indeed, whatever one thinks of the individual issue, since when has following like a sheep what our peers do ever been a valid argument for any action.
More beguiling, though, than that is the very last word: "INAUDIBLE". Fortunately my days of being a conspiracy theorist are far gone. Twenty, or even, ten years ago I would have been trying to find any way I could to discover what the words were that were conveniently replaced by 'inaudible' in the official transcript.
I would be searching for journos who attended, in particular, 'Mike'. I would be on to the news broadcasters for access to their feed. But, nowadays, I prefer merely to wonder.
Wonder not so much what was inaudible, but more why. The Prime Minister is normally a clear speaker. It is the only point at which he wasn't heard. Was he tentative? Unsure of what he was saying? Or, was it simply that the stenographer or typist couln't make sense of what he seemed to say and rather than commit the Prime Minister to some absurd gobbledegook, preferred to leave it simply aside?
I presume that it was only a few words - a sentence at most. Maybe, it was just that Mr Blair's words were muffled by the sound of 'Mike' huffing and puffing as he stormed out.
6 September 2004: Roy Hattersley, in The Guardian, concludes that Blair is a disciple of Milton Friedman.
According to Hattersley: "Twenty years ago, when he worked for me, I attempted to convince Tony Blair that the rejection of ideology is an ideology in itself and that contempt for political philosophy is the political philosophy of the jungle in which life remains solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short. However, it must be admitted that, though Thomas Hobbes has passed the prime minister by, John Maynard Keynes has him bang to rights. "Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influences, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist."
Hattersley continues: "Tony Blair, whether he knows it or not, is a disciple of Professor Milton Friedman."
1 September 2004: In Today's Yorkshire Post, Bernard Ingham assesses Greg Dyke's criticism of the Blair government.
Ingham comments: "The Blair Government's entire being is driven by the profoundly undemocratic notion that the winner takes all and that, if you are not for them wholeheartedly and uncritically, you are gaianst them."
He continues: "The result was not just the early politisation of the Government Information Service I once led, by the departure of 25 of those occupying the top 44 posts within 12 months of Blair coming into office; it was the systematic assault on the independence of the media and the targeting of 'unreliable' journalist, even to the point of seeking their dismissal.
"The Mandelsonian concept of government is 'to create the truth', flog it for all you are worth and marginalise, if not eliminate, all those who perceive another reality ..."
Greg Dyke's autobiography will claim Downing Street started to take on the characteristics of Nixon's White House
29 August 2004: Extracts from Dyke's book are published today in The Observer and the former BBC director-general has some harsh words for Blair and his colleagues. Amongst other things, Dyke's book, Inside Story, claims that Phillip Gould, a close Blair ally told a Labour peer: "Don't worry we appointed the right judge." Phillip Gould denies the claim.
I believe the criticisms in the book will be damaging because Dyke is so widely respected amongst the media and the public.
29 August 2004: Last year I worked on a documentary about The Labour Party. I will from time to time post extracts from the interviews we conducted - in some cases these will not have been transmitted in the final programme and therefore visitors to this website will be treated to completely new material.
To kick off with here is an excerpt from the interview with Lord Heseltine:
"I think that Tony Blair with a slight shift of the political spectrum could have been in the Conservative Party. He, he's had an immense capacity to move his political position, I mean you realise he was a member of the CND, he was backing a Labour Party that wanted to get out of Europe, he was against NATO, I mean this was the Tony Blair background. Well you wouldn't recognise the guy in number ten Downing Street today, so, so there was a dramatic change as far as he was concerned".