Gordon Brown is playing deathbed politics
By
Contributing editor
Emily Hohler Sep 11, 2009
Print this article
The "dire events of the past few weeks have proven what many were already coming to suspect," says Peter Oborne in the Daily Mail. Gordon Brown is "simply not up to the job".
The problem lies not with the decision to allow Abdelbaset Al Megrahi to be sent home to Libya – which was, I believe, "genuinely patriotic" – but the way in which Brown has handled the controversy. He could have explained openly that major commercial contracts, and Libya's cooperation in fighting terrorism, were at stake. Instead, he chose to hide himself away and allowed his ministers to issue a series of deceitful statements. In short, his "instinct for duplicity" turned a controversy into a crisis. The irony, says John Rentoul in The Independent on Sunday, is that in spite of David Cameron's "high punitive tone", had he been in power, I believe he might have sought to free Megrahi using the same "unlovely calculations of national interest". But he would have been "more adroit" in avoiding the blame.
Unfortunately for Brown, "the skills he honed in opposition are not suited to being in power", says Rachel Sylvester in The Times. As chancellor he was known as Macavity because, like the mystery cat, he was never at the scene of the crime. He was equally careful not to be "pinned down politically". But a leader has to take responsibility. Brown is now losing the faith even of Cabinet ministers who remain publicly loyal. "It's farcical," said one. "We're going from one fiasco to another and government by fiasco doesn't work."
Meanwhile, the list of those our ministers have offended grows ever longer, noted the Daily Mail. It includes the Scottish Executive, to whom they attempted to pass the buck, the US Lockerbie victims and the US government, to whom it was promised that Megrahi would serve his full sentence in Scotland. And as of last weekend we can add the families of the IRA victims who were killed by Libyan-supplied explosives and are seeking compensation. Plus the Libyans, who are "enraged" by those demands. The overall result for Brown is pretty damaging. The latest mess has harmed the 'special relationship' between the US and Britain. On top of that political and diplomatic relations with Libya have suffered, even if "a more serious setback may have been avoided".
Hang on a minute, says The New York Daily News. The 'special relationship' hasn't just been harmed, it is, "in a word, gone". Brown's "manoeuvreings to get into the good graces" of Gadaffi have broken the bond beyond his ability to repair it. Brown has "given grounds to believe that today's British are a cowardly, unprincipled, amoral and duplicitous lot". On this side of the Atlantic it is inconceivable that an elected official could remain in power after "sanctioning an oil-for-terrorist deal".
Yet he probably will, says Mary Riddell in The Daily Telegraph. The chance of Brown stepping down of his own volition "remains vanishingly unlikely" and a forced removal looks "almost as improbable". And despite the PM's "inauspicious start to autumn", Labour has actually risen in the polls. The party could still exploit the Tory weaknesses identified by voters, but only if Brown or his "supine" ministers extricate themselves from "deathbed politics".
Published in
News & charts
| More
articles
by
Emily Hohler
FREE - MoneyWeek's daily investment email
Our free daily email, Money Morning, is an informative and enjoyable analysis of what's going on in the markets. Written by our Editor, John Stepek, and guest contributors.
Sign up FREE to Money Morning here.