Europe needs to get real on defence; Britain needs to get real on Europe
13 February 2025
Post
3 June 2009
4 minute(s) read
Recent Posts
156. Defence Secretary, John Healey: Is Britain Ready For War?
What tactic did Donald Trump steal from Gordon Brown? What can we learn from when Labour beat UKIP in the 2012 Rotherham by-election when it comes to taking on Farage? As a New Labour alumnus... Continue6 October 2025
Posted by Alastair Campbell
455. Question Time: Is Europe Already At War With Russia?
Is Europe already at war with Russia — without admitting it? Are the Netherlands still a serious player in Europe? And, should national parks be reshaped for the modern age? Join Rory and ... Continue2 October 2025
Posted by Alastair Campbell
Alastair Campbell’s diary: Don’t take Curtis Yarvin seriously
Yarvin believes liberal democracy has failed and that monarchy should replace it. He just has absolutely no idea how to achieve this... Continue1 October 2025
454. Starmer’s Farage Fightback and Trump’s Unworkable Gaza Plan
Is it too late for Starmer to turn things around? Is Labour talking too much about immigration, and not enough about the cost of living? How can Trump's 20-point plan for Gaza lead to a Pales... Continue30 September 2025
Posted by Alastair Campbell
155. Mike Pompeo On Russia, Trump, and China
Why does the former Secretary of State think the US is going too soft on Russia and China? What was it like working closely with President Trump? Why did Putin invade Europe under Obama and B... Continue29 September 2025
Posted by Alastair Campbell
453. Trump’s Far Right Allies in Germany: Is History Repeating Itself?
Just how close is the far right to taking power in Europe and the UK? Why is Germany the perfect starting point for far-right agitators? Is Europe’s lacklustre response to an unfolding geno... Continue26 September 2025
Posted by Alastair Campbell
452. Question Time: America’s New Martyr and Westminster’s Hidden Spies
Is Charlie Kirk becoming America’s new martyr for the far right? How deep does Chinese spying go in Western politics? And, is Moldova the next target for Russian meddling? The Rest Is Po... Continue25 September 2025
Posted by Alastair Campbell
451. Is Trump Destroying the UN?
Is it time to move the United Nations headquarters out of New York? Will recognising Palestine as a state make any difference to the plight of Gaza? Why does Reform UK get so much more covera... Continue24 September 2025
Posted by Alastair Campbell
AC.. you missed Billy 16 pints squirming over Lord Ashcroft’s residency status, a bit of a Michael Howard moment for me.
Agree with the comments on Hattersley and Denham though and Peter Kilfoyle did well too.
You are right the media is all about impact, but that does not negate the fact that Gordon Brown has been a disappointment. I agree as well that it is rich for all these people who slagged off Blair so much, and saw Brown as the saviour, now to be going for him too. But something has to give.The situation is terrible for Labour and even though I agree with Mr Beecham, we cannot limp on like this.
The perspective you share here is compelling, Alistair, and I, also, find the attitude of Labour’s supposed allies questionable at such a challenging time. The problem is, dear GB is sowing his own demise by being deafeningly silent in the greatest crisis parliamentary democracy has seen in a generation. I cannot see a certain TB or indeed an MT allowing this saga to run in the absence of clear and dynamic leadership.The only good news for Labour is DC is almost as lacking in such dynamism, for the reasons you identify, among others.
Keep up the good blogging. MB
The reasoning in the Guardian editorial was spot on.
It isn’t a right wing/left wing – that’s so yesteryear – it’s about many human beings observing another human being who is not suited to the task.
Shame you cannot be candid and express a view on the matter yourself
I too felt glad to see Denham and Hattersley at least show a bit of fight. There is far too much meeting the media half way. Yes expenses is terrible, but not for all of them,, and not to the exclusion of all else that is important. Planes dropping out of the sky – but oh no, someone claimed wrongly for a bathplug. Hold the front page.
As for Cameron, he keeps strange company indeed
Do all the papers given out free count in their circulation figures? I always take a Daily Mail if offered it, and then bin it, then take another one.
Would that be Jeremy Beecham – former chair of the LGA? Hokely dokely. I’m not sure if you’re criticizing the Guardian for trying to sell newspapers or because they aren’t supporting Brown.
I went to college in Hull – marvellous town – have a gud un.
Spot on Alastair. My first thought on reading this last night was that Polly has been passing the superstrength valium around the leader writers. Dinner party attention seeking aside however, the Gould and Beecham points are what every Labour activist or advocate need to shout about. We might have made mistakes along the way – especially in terms of getting our priorities wrong – but if people think that carpet-bagger Cameron and his merry band of Trustfarians have the answers, they’re not only asking the wrong questions, they’ve lost all sense of political perspective.
One of the reasons I am so cross about the expenses scandal is precisely the reason Jeremy Beecham gives-those who need a Labour Government most will be deprived of one because people either won’t vote at all, or will vote for minority parties or will vote Tory-Labour won’t win again for at least a decade unless there is a miracle.
These greedy, hubristic MPs (both Labour and Tory) have fed the apathy and disillusion that were embryonic allowing people to find yet more ‘reasons’ not to engage in the political process.And that means the Tories win and it’s another victory for the Daily Mail. How irresponsible!!
One of the joys of moving to the sticks (and of travelling steerage rather than in the wide seats) is that it’s easier to escape what passes these days for news. But I do miss London!
Bryan Gould and Jeremy Beecham are spot on.
The most distressing result of the expenses scandal seems to me to be that it gives an excuse for the borderline apathetic to tip over into non voters. I guess that suits the Telegraph just fine.
It’s all part of a poisonous cocktail of envy, cynicism and simplistic solutions peddled by those who know they can’t beat Labour on policy. Similar to what was done to Clinton in the US – but the real disaster is that so many on our side have, just as he did with his dalliances, handed out free ammunition…
The Guardian seems totally lost at present. By following the Cameron agenda so eargerly, it seems to have created for itself a vacuum in responsibility.
The biggest disappointment for me of New Labour’s reign has been the inability to communicate by getting the left-leaning media on side after Blair’s departure, the vast improvements to Society we have lived though since 1997. Brown has singularly failed to do this.Andy Beckett’s piece in the Guardian today brings it all home to me. GB had the chance and the foundations to build upon the Blair years.
Saying all that – I still question the Guardian’s direction – hanging onto Dave’s every word.
But t’is the Left media who led the charge to get rid of TB n’est ce pas? Hasn’t the Graud been sucking up to David Cameron for some time now?
Being in Oz, it’s been quite hard following the nitty gritty of the New Labour (Tony Blair) vision’s collapse under Gordon and the Brownites, but this Tom Watson? Would be good to know how many of the Brownite members who signed the letter have been involved in the expenses scandal to add to their sins of unfathomable political inepitude?
Ironic that as we get to the end of the New Labour ‘project’ (which I’m afraid tomorrow’s election results will surely, and sadly, underline) the epitaph will read as large as the epithet used at the beginning, with one critical, and desperately misunderstood adjustment…
Things Can Only Get Worse
Forget the editorial, look at Freedland urging folks to vote Green, like it’s some pleasant dinner party game of cluedo or charades. What are the Greens going to do to tackle inner city crime? What is the Green policy on Welfare? Doesn’t matter too much to the Lumley’s and Freedland’s – let’s hug a tree instead, it’s a cool cause.
You’ve got it wrong on the BNP piece. The headline was unfortunate – and the whole notion of devoting most of a page to them questionable – but the article seems sober and well written. To say the writer has ‘fallen for’ anything about them seems a bit bizarre. Did you read it?
Look, Brown is a good guy and an effective operator (and clearly intellectually superior to the vast bulk of MPs that i witness each day). That said, Labour are heading for an absolute crushing if they are not careful and this is more important than any leader. The party needs to quickly work out the fastest, most effective way of getting on the front foot and challenging the Tories where it matters (the minute they have attention focused on their policy ideas and principles they are on a pretty sticky wicket indeed). If the majority of the Cabinet and party think they can do this with Brown, so be it – they should shut up now and get to work fast. Equally if there is a majority in the PLP and Cab who think any message associated with him won’t be heard by the electorate – then they regrettably have to be as ruthless with him as the Tories were with Thatcher. The Guardian raised a thorny issue perhaps to suit their own sales, but i feel necessary nevertheless.
Is it only me that’s wondering why there have been no questions asked of the Daily Telegraph’s relentless campaign to bring down the British government? Surely not, but it seems to have succeeded on every front! Those terrible twins, the leader of the conservative party and his shadow chancellor are sitting smirking on the opposition benches waiting for the axe to fall at the next election. Strength of purpose, unity and sheer bloody minded-ness is what’s needed now more than ever. The poor, the disabled, the elderly and all those that`are vulnerable are about to be thrown to those two wily wolves and those honorary conservatives, the Liberal Democrats!
I read somewhere yesterday that it’s to the media’s advantage to foster regular changes in personnel and how you, Alastair, took advantage of that reality in the mid-nineties. Fair enough, but the difference is that New Labour was to provide new, long lasting change, whereas the Tories now have few palatable items on their agenda. Where they are not vague, they are reactionary. Unfortunately, too many media outlets have already anointed Cameron, and day after day, the British public are told that the next government will be Conservative.
In reaction to the Guardian editorial, I’ll echo your already oft-quoted “and then what”? If you were Miliband or Johnson, would you jump into the fire right this minute? I’m not an expert but I’ve noticed that politicians who capture the public’s imagination, the ones with whom the public will go the distance, tend to be leaders whose image as leaders have been built up over time; the ones that appear out of thin air as mid-crisis replacements rarely last.
Capturing the imagination of the public is what matters. In this, the public are tyrannical. It seems the British people were never interested in GB being a man of substance, an intellectual, a thinker. Blair and Obama have that plus the “it” factor, which some seem to think GB is lacking. In the end, it’s the electorate that loses when it demands not only an effective government but a Camelot dream to dream alongside it.
We blame the government, we blame the media but I believe both are consistently lowering themselves to appeal to the most juvenile aspects in all of us. To cannibalise one of your mottos about governing in prose AC, the public refuses to accept that governing is done in prose and, in the end, we pay a dear price for our superficiality that requires a flashy leader with freshly-pressed suits.
…just to add.
After seeing PMQs earlier today, Brown did himself and his chances of winning over the doubters, no harm at all. Strong performance, compared to Cameron’s lacklustre attempts to pin him down.
The blog nails a lot of key points and other people have summed up why it felt so right for today. I still feel – sorry to say this – that GB needs to move aside, though.
So two quick other thoughts from me:
– campaign update. Still no Labour communique through our letterbox despite one day to go, local elections as well as euro, and several from Dave. This isn’t right. We look like we gave up already. The ginormous UKIP poster in Oxford has been vandalised to shreds.
– tactical voting. I keep hearing people say they are going to be doing it tomorrow, so LibDem (or even Green) rather than Labour. Why? You end up with the candidate you don’t want representing a party you don’t belong to, or believe in. I shall be voting early tomorrow, and voting Labour, on each and every ballot paper I get.
I’ve been watching news all day and PMQ—Gordon Brown was excellent–showed up “Hoodie Cameron”
BBC 6 O’clock News reporting on Hazel Blears said nothing about her expenses rearing it’s ugly head again in tomorrows Torygraph–Also nothing about the letter to her from Brown saying he understands why she is resigning but he hopes that she can return to the Cabinet in the future
I don’t believe Hazel was harming the PM or the Labour party. The events on expenses was the reason she had to go.
It is understandable that people watching the edited version of the events don’t get the truth.
@Em
The flashy suit/bright smile/charisma persona is a hard one to attack. People who have it, or have had it (Obama/Blair/Clinton et al) know that if you need to put a message over, a personable messenger is all.
It may be shallow, it may be vacuous, it may be idiotic, but voters buy people, and secondly as a result, the policies they espouse.
This is why Dave endeavours to position himself as a “nice guy” : love me, love my (soon to be determined) policies.
Anyway, happybirthday 🙂
*is tipsy, sorry for what follows*
@Jane
The problem with appearances is that not all who have charisma have substance to back it up. Clinton ONLY became president because he could pass for a bubba (definition: a working-class white male from rural American South). Some charismatic characters are positively vacuous, see David Cameron.
Jane, you seem resigned to what the lower common denominator will accept. I want people to see past GB’s rumpled suit. Am I reaching for the stars here?
@Em
I don’t think you’re reaching for the stars in wanting people to see past GB’s demeanour and see the strong and capable politician. That’s how politics should be – substance over style. I was just trying to make the link between strong communicators/politicians who can carry the day in tough times.