Digitising Gordon

Today sees the launch of the Prime Minister’s latest attempt to reconnect with the public. He has initiated what is described as “an online version of Prime Minister’s Questions” on YouTube.

Gordon was, notoriously, badly stung by David Cameron’s jibe that he was “an analogue prime Minister in a digital age”. The YouTube venture is, it would appear, his attempt to give the lie to Cameron’s taunt and show that he is more than able to tune in and get down with the kids. Oh yes.

Or, to be more accurate, the attempt of Mark Flanagan, former managing director of LBC radio, who is the new head of digital communications at No 10. Under Flanagan, Downing Street has established presences on Twitter and Flickr. The YouTube wheeze would appear to be Flanagan’s latest effort to digitise Gordon.

Unfortunately, Gordon’s first outing on YouTube is less than propitious. The PM looks as uncomfortable and self-conscious as ever, and delivers his 38-second message in a dull, sotto voce monotone.

Gordon’s problem is that Cameron’s description of him is absolutely spot on, which is why it hurt him so badly. He is clearly uncomfortable with new technology, digital or otherwise. Digitising Gordon is a bit like the peculiar innovation of putting Marmite in a squeezy container. It probably works, but everyone wonders what is the point.

The PM’s first YouTube answers are, we are told, to be posted some time around the end of June. I am looking forward to the occasion immensely, if only to see if Gordon begins his broadcast with the words:

“I am speaking to you from the cabinet room at 10 Downing Street.”

McCabe on Mars

An ICM poll for tomorrow’s News of the World shows the Conservatives 8 points ahead in Crewe and Nantwich, and on course to turn a 7,000 plus Labour majority into a Tory gain by a margin of over 1,000.

This may, of course, be entirely wrong. Opinion polls frequently are. But the poll follows the pattern of other recent ones (indeed, tomorrow’s Sunday Times YouGov poll gives the Conservatives nationally a 20 point lead).

It is absolutely impossible to overstate the importance of the Crewe and Nantwich contest. If Labour hold on, Gordon Brown will have some ammunition with which to keep his detractors at bay. If they lose, then all hell will break out in an already fractious Parliamentary party and Gordon’s personal position will be under further attack.

Labour’s desperation is highlighted by the ludicrous, 70s-style, campaign they are waging in the by-election, seeking to characterise the Conservative candidate as a “Tory toff” - a tactic unlikely to succeed almost anywhere in twenty-first century Britain, but least of all in such a place as Nantwich. It appears to be the brainchild of diminutive Glaswegian hard man, Steve McCabe, MP for Birmingham Hall Green, who has been seconded from the Whips’ office to head up the Labour effort.

Even seasoned Old Labour stagers appear embarrassed by McCabe’s Life on Mars tactics. On Thursday, Frank Dobson, the genial veteran who was the unsuccessful official party candidate for London Mayor in 2008, and who was once kind enough to offer to buy me a coffee in Portcullis House when I discovered that I had forgotten my money, made it reasonably clear on BBC TV News that he considered the class warfare tone struck by the campaign to be a load of risible, juvenile baloney.

What’s the betting that, if Labour do lose Crewe on Thursday night, McCabe will be first in line feel the rough end of the Prime Ministerial tongue, to say nothing of the Prime Ministerial boot?

On the other hand, possibly not. Wee Stevie’s partner is none other than Fiona Gordon, the PM’s political secretary, so his bacon may yet be saved.

To the point

The transcript of the Prime Minister’s press conference has now been published on the 10 Downing Street website, and what a joy it is.

I strongly recommend it for the insight it provides into the workings of the Prime Ministerial mind and its succinct incisiveness.

The following gives a flavour of the PM’s admirably spare and economical use of the English language:

Question:

Were you really as persistently disobedient and impertinent to your predecessor on public sector reform as is suggested by John Prescott and Cherie Blair? And what do you really make of that woman - Mrs Blair?

Prime Minister:

The public sector reforms, many of them were proposed by the Treasury, many of them were pushed forward by the Treasury and many of them are there as a result of the initiatives such as all the Gershon changes that have reduced the number of civil servants by I think nearly 70,000 to make way for other uses for resources. I think that the issue that has been raised in the book is foundation hospitals, the only issue on foundation hospitals - so that none of you start re-writing history - was whether hospitals could run up huge borrowings at a local level. The Treasury obviously was worried about the implications for debt if individual institutions were able to borrow substantial sums of money and someone - because a hospital could not easily close if it had an accident and emergency facility or something like that - had to pick up the bill. And that was the only issue in relation to foundation hospitals. It was a perfectly sensible issue; how do you deal with a situation where an institution that is not actually the Government itself can run up huge borrowings. And of course we reached an understanding on that and I think the result is that we do not have these huge borrowings, that was the only issue.

Clear enough for you?

Huge Misunderstanding

You know the statement Alistair Darling made on Tuesday about income tax?

Well, you thought it was all about avoiding a Labour backbench rebellion that might have resulted in the Government being defeated on the Finance Bill, didn’t you?

I have to admit I certainly did. I even thought it might have had something to do with the Government’s concern about losing the Crewe and Nantwich by-election.

Well, we were all wrong. How wrong we were. In fact, we were so wrong, we should all e-mail the Prime Minister a fulsome, grovelling, Frank Field apology. I'm going to send mine right now.

You see, the real reason that Alistair made his statement when he did was because he wanted to help people. Help everyone, in fact. He and Gordon had noticed that things are getting a wee bit pricy out there and wanted to do their bit.

This was made clear by the Prime Minister’s official spokesman in his press briefing on Wednesday:

Asked if the Prime Minister regarded yesterday's announcement on tax return as an equivalent to the American tax rebate to help the country through hard times, the PMS replied that the Chancellor had addressed this point in his statement yesterday when he said that as well as providing compensation to those affected by the removal of the 10p band, there would be a family tax cut to provide support this year for families on middle incomes at a time when they faced increased bills, so supporting the economy.

And that really is why it was done. Indeed, the Prime Minister was at pains to reiterate the point when he gave his press conference yesterday. This is how the Times, our premier newspaper of record, reports it today:

Mr Brown, managing smiles and laughs despite a torrid week, rejected the “defeatist” idea that there was little he could do to influence rising oil prices and world commodity trends. “I actually believe there is a great deal you can do. Good economic decisions can help people through difficult times,” he said.

Yet he insisted that the £2.7 billion package announced on Tuesday was not only to help those hit by the 10p rate abolition but was also in line with action taken by other countries, including the United States, to pump money into the economy to help to ward off the recession.

So there you have it. Set out in black and white in the unimpeachable pages of the Thunderer. It was all part of Gordon’s masterplan to save the economy.

And as for the timing, well, it was the right timing. In the US, the measure was announced in January, when it became clear that there was a real threat of recession. But in the UK, it was right to wait a few months, until May; the coincidence of the by-election was just that - a coincidence. You can't rush these things, you know. Which is also why you'll have to wait until September to see any of your money.

Which may also be why the poorest taxpayers won't get all the money they lost when the 10p band went. I'm a bit vague on that point, actually.

Anyway, that clears that up. All a huge misunderstanding.

And I bet you all feel pretty darn ashamed of yourselves, don’t you? I know I do.

Journey Home

Very long and messy day.

Started with breakfast with other Welsh MPs and vice-chancellors of Welsh universities. Very interesting and instructive.

Later, in the afternoon, the Welsh Select Committee took evidence on the Vulnerable Children legislative competence order. The procedure is appallingly Byzantine and serves only to underline what a dog’s breakfast the devolution settlement is. It is slow, ponderous, time-wasting and clunky. Peter Hain lashed it up in an attempt to paper over the internal cracks in the Labour party. It works very badly indeed.

Received BlackBerry e-mails from my PA all through the meeting, reporting on the state of the railways. There were signalling problems at Bletchley, meaning that I might not be able to get home tonight. Turned up at Euston nonetheless and was relieved to find that the Holyhead service was running.

Collapsed in the train with the Evening Standard. The journey started well enough. Then the train manager announced that there was a circuit failure at Nuneaton. The service was being diverted via the Midlands, meaning an extra 50 minutes at least.

As I type, the train is waiting to pull into Stafford. Another miserable journey home, relieved only by the glory of the British countryside, with its green fields, Hereford cattle and hawthorn hedgerows heavy with blossom.

This is the worst bit - indeed, the only bad bit - of being an MP. But, looking out of the window on such an evening, I have to say that even this is pretty good.

Pedants(') Corner

On my way to my office this morning, I spied, in Westminster Hall, the most ancient part of the home of the Mother of Parliaments, where, if nowhere else, the English language should be maintained, fostered, cherished and upheld, a sign reading:

House of Commons’ Queue.

I think it is solecistic.

Discuss.

Exercise in cowardice

Today’s announcement by the Chancellor of the Exchequer of a £600 increase in the personal income tax allowance was an unabashed act of political expediency. It was also deeply cowardly. As such, it had Gordon Brown’s fingerprints all over it.

The purpose of the announcement was, ostensibly, to restore equity to poorer taxpayers. However, it has manifestly failed to do so. The measure gives £120 extra to every basic rate taxpayer, whether or not affected by the abolition of the 10p band. The majority of beneficiaries hadn’t lost out in the first place, so it will be a windfall for them.

At the same time, some 1.2 million of the very poorest taxpayers will still be poorer, some by well over £100 a year. So no equity there.

Gordon clearly hopes that the exercise will have bought him some temporary respite from the unremitting pounding he has been taking over the last few weeks. I doubt, however, that it will. After the likes of Frank Field have given some thought to the matter, they will realise that they have, once again, been conned. They are unlikely to be best pleased.

As for the British electorate, it is likely to conclude the following:

1. The Government is either cynical or incompetent - probably both;
2. The Government is not above racking up the national debt by £2.7 billion in order to bribe its way out of a hole;
3. The Government is distinctly gutless, scared stiff of its own backbenchers, to say nothing of the electors of Crewe and Nantwich;
4. The Government is consequently not to be supported; indeed it should be booted out as quickly as possible.

There will be no let-up for Gordon Brown.

TMI

Speaking of Mrs Blair’s memoirs, her account of the circumstances of little Leo’s conception is more than I would ever have wished to know, especially over the breakfast table.

Too much information. Really much too much.

Albatross

A beautifully warm day in London, where the high temperatures on the streets are exceeded only by those generated in the civil war that is now raging within the Parliamentary Labour party.

The weekend extracts from the memoirs of Cherie Blair and John Prescott could, just about, and by those of a charitable disposition, have been explained away as mere publishers’ puffery. However, the attack by Lord Levy, in which he suggested that Gordon Brown should consider his position as Prime Minister, was deeply damaging in its force and directness.

Today, Frank Field, leader of the Labour backbench awkward squad which is making life so difficult for Mr Brown, unleashed an even more direct attack on the Prime Minister and his character. Speaking on the BBC World Service, Mr Field said that he would be very surprised if Mr Brown still led Labour at the time of the next general election (which Mr Field is pretty certain won’t be held until the last possible moment, two years and two weeks from now).

In the interview, Mr Field refers to Mr Brown’s “rages” and describes the Prime Minister’s “unhappiness inside his own body”:

"That's clearly part of the tragedy - on a personal level as well for a party, government and country level - that somebody whose real aim in life is to be Prime Minister, now has the task and seems so lacking in enjoyment in trying to carry it out.”

Frank Field’s comments will overshadow Mr Brown’s attempts this week at yet another relaunch, with a big announcement on long-term care and a preview of the programme proposed for the Queen’s Speech.

To make matters even worse, the BBC News website has taken to illustrating its increasingly frequent reports about the Prime Minister’s difficulties with what must be the least flattering photograph ever taken of him. In it, the PM, with hair dishevelled, looks disconsolately down, his features (whether through a trick of the light or otherwise) appearing to melt away southwards, like a great, ancient glacier afflicted by climate change.

This is an unlucky man. Very, very unlucky indeed.

And, more rapidly than anyone could ever have predicted, a man now regarded as an albatross by the party he was, for so long, so desperately anxious to lead.