By Alastair Campbell
Philip Gould, whom God preserve, has a theory about me: that today's irritation becomes tomorrow's obsession. (I freely admit to being both irritable and obsessive). So up to the age of 40 odd, I had no time for joggers. Once I took it up myself, I couldn't stop. I hated dogs. And what's that next to me on the sofa as I tap this into my blackberry (irritant 2004)? Yes, it's Molly the Cavalier King Charles Spaniel.
So it may prove to be with all this online malarkey, in which I am a late developer. At the Hutton Inquiry in 2003, some of the conspiracy theorists imagined there was some great mystery to the fact there were no emails directly sent by me. That was because I never sent any. I used to scribble out notes on print outs and my poor PA would have to reply for me. I know, I know, not exactly cutting edge, but there we are.
So I am conscious of catching up from a rear position as I seek to embrace all this. I have joined John Prescott onboard the virtual battle bus that the campaign we launched last year, Go Fourth, is becoming. He, his son David and Mark Bennett, who has worked for me in and out of Downing Street, have finally got me signed up to Facebook. Mark likes to say that the population of Facebook is two and a half times bigger than that of the UK. And it felt like a foreign country the first few days as I attempted to navigate my way around it. But I have enjoyed some of the exchanges and debates that kick off on there, also the generally hopeful and optimistic nature of a lot of the contributions. It is always nice to bump into people who dislike the idea of a Tory government under Dave as much as I do.
I'm also putting the finishing touches to my own website where I can bring together all the various things I do - writing, public speaking, charity, politics, media and so forth - and a video blog will be an important part of it, with Dave Cameron a regular feature. If I was doing it today for example, I might draw attention to the clear contradiction between what Kenneth Clarke said about the economy yesterday - grim but not as grim as Dave is saying - and Cameron's increasingly shrill and juvenile attempts to talk Britain down.
Or I might talk about the three people I spoke to yesterday who had been canvassing in Camden, Southwark and Dulwich, who said that for all the worries about the economy, they found next to no desire for a Dave Premiership, and more understanding of GB's handling of the crisis than some might imagine.
And I might conclude that for all their cockiness as GB gets hit by one economic blow after another, and the media goes into another of its 'Labour can do no right' phases, the Tories frankly ought to be reflecting on why they are not much much further ahead in the polls. For the answer, they need look no further than a shallow, lightweight, superficial leader whose heart and values are on the country estates of the upper classes not the housing estates of urban Britain, and who is praying each night that the economy gets worse, all the pressure stays on the government and he can get away for even longer without coming up with any serious policy proposals that might take an averagely intelligent civil servant more than five minutes to put in the 'does not stack up' file.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
StumbleUpon
Come on, credit where due.
I think politics can do without this level of cynicism:
Implying that David Cameron, as a human being, prays each night that the economy gets worse - is cynical, cheap and unwanted. You also state that your video blog will have 'Dave Cameron a regular feature.' Deeply personal attacks of this nature only end up deepening the already high levels of political apathy in this country.
I think it is quite noble that you have continued to contribute in domestic politics (unlike megabucks Tony...), although my opinion is that you have had your fight - 1997 was your fight and you helped Labour towards a very substantial win. You should let others do the fighting this time. If you doing this because of your hatred of Cameron and 'threat' of a Conservative government, then I suggest you move on and cheer from the sidelines. Should you wish to remain active in frontline politics, then at least put in a positive and constructive contribution - looking more at correcting where Labour has gone wrong / what can be learnt from past and present failures of policy rather than just slinging mud at 'those nasty Tories' all the time.
I - and a seemingly increasing number of people responding to polls - do need telling what's right about Labour.
Parroting slogans like 'Real Help' ain't the answer. No Government can seriously pretend it can actually have much influence over an economic event of this magnitude (which means a 'Do Nothing' response isn't as damaging as it might seem). What matters more than anything is having a plan for a shape we need to be in so that we can come out of the other side walking rather than staggering.
Beyond the usual technocratic wonkery, I've seen nothing of that nature from Labour that is likely to chime with voters wondering where this is all leading. Park the hollow sloganeering - let's see and hear some substance.
While the Tories have no answers, my local Labour Council have been looking at what they can do to help the creit crunch. See the report here: http://www.lambeth.gov.uk/ . . /CreditCrunchTaskforceReport.pdf"
Hmm, a Lambeth neighbour of mine has a small business around which all parking spaces have been suspended indefinitely, 24/7, for road works. His pleas last week to Lambeth council about how he can get his daily deliveries of supplies (all it needed was a single loading bay) were met with the suggestion that he close his business down for the time being. Perhaps they are not all on message after all?
The point I would like to make is that during discussions with people online I do find that many people, some of whom are former labour voters, feel that the party is not working for them. The good news is that even the most dedicated conservatives are agreeing that Cameron is not doing that well and that they have no real policies - to their despair. Into this vacumm come the likes of the BNP. They almost won a County Council seat in Cumbria last month. Our majority in what ought to be one of our safe seats is 16. As a party activist I reckon that has got to be a great big wake up call. In the North West we are aware that the BNP Leader could become elected to the European Parliament in June.
We therefore have to re consider our message and reach out to those former voters who feel let down by us. There needs to be some honesty as well. The business with the 10p tax band hurt us. Could we not see the bus heading towards us? Then there was the nonsense of announcing post office closures ahead of local elections. The consultation was a sham, a bloody disgrace because very few post offices on the list were saved from closure. People do not think we are listening or that our front line in Westminster care.
The dreadful truth is that despite all the facts some of us have at our fingertips and for all the campaigning we do we are simply not getting our message across. There is no simple solution to this. It seems to me that the Go Fourth Campaign has potential but is not on the lips of most Labour members and many of our elected labour people are not on Facebook or twitter or engaged with internet activity either. This is a problem.
For my sins I am the PPC for Penrith and the Border. Its the largest geographical constituency in England. With such a widespread area I am now looking at how my campaign can use internet activity to reach out to potential voters. It is the way forward.
by the way Richard, my mother in her late 70's is now using the internet and instant messaging, I have not yet introduced her to Facebook. However my kids are on Facebook and many of their friends have become my friends - and some of them have joined the Go Forth Campaign after I invited them to do so.
As for Mike, I don’t think even David Cameron's best friends would deny he talks Britain down. Broken Britain. Heading to the IMF. Even Kenneth Clarke seems to think Dave has been going ott. And, yes, I can think of a lot of people who agree that Gordon and Alistair's approach is the right one: the President of France and the President of the United States to name but two. But that's good, because to get through the first global financial crisis, we will need a global consensus on leadership, something GB is well suited to help build, and which Dave doesn't buy in to.
You say "I can think of a lot of people who agree that Gordon and Alistair's approach is the right one: the President of France and the President of the United States to name but two. "
Why would Brown care about what a 'novice' thinks?
BTW, I'm sure Obama loves Brown for that 'novice' comment - and for blaming everything on America - when they do eventually meet (which will only be after Obama has met all the non-lame duck leaders).
They represent the pre-credit crunch status quo of Anglo-Saxon, New Labour/Thatcherite market fundamentalism.
New Labour tried to offer social democracy with a Thatcherite economy. That is what the Conservatives thought they could do ('heir to Blair' etc.) but it is no longer possible. The world has changed, leaving the Tories floundering.
The challenge for Labour is to offer an alternative Britain, not a return to the pre-2007 years.
In my view, that means:
1. A European social market with a more balanced economy (exports, technology, innovation).
2. A responsible attitude to personal debt (effective mortgage, credit card and loan regulation).
3. Investment in public infrastructure (transport, energy).
4. Decentralization of local government, policing and education.
5. A more progressive tax system.
This is nothing new, of course, France and Germany have been doing it for years.
They may not have had the same spectacular growth of the past 10 years that Britain enjoyed, but they aren't having the same spectacular bust either.
Cameron is not talking Britain down, the whole City of London and international institutions doing far, far more. Have you seen the exchange rate lately? UK sovereign debt is a whisker away from being downgraded to AA.
Selling pounds because no one fancies our chances in the short-term and in the medium-term cannot see where the growth is going to come from to pay back the biggest ever national debt in our history. Such is Labour's excellent stewardship of the economy, or is the City blaming America for our recession?
What would be a travesty is a complete lack of honesty from the government as to this country's very stark choices. The UK Government has led the way in living beyond our means and even now, cannot bear to speak the truth.
Fat chance of actually doing what is required as UK households and those 'hard working families' you constantly refer to tighten their belts, is this government tightening their belt?
Is it 'using all the weapons we possess' to fight this recession?
I read today that schools and hospitals building has been stopped yet Labour is happy to raze 'hard working families' home in the interests of letting the rich fly.
So who's favouring the rich now?
Gordon didn't see this economic catastrophe coming? Really? How about he turned a deaf ear to the countless warnings from the IMF and OECD over the last two years? Or was he blind to the M4 broad money growth figures since 2000, 10-15% A YEAR as our banks hoovered up what turned out to be largely complete tat.
A government that will spend billions to nationalise a giant Ponzi scheme to save 6,000 jobs in a Labour constituency but won't loan a viable business hundreds of millions and offer business guarantees to save 30,000 jobs in a marginal constituency.
That Cameron and Osborne have been asking questions about the UK economic performance for three years - did they get a straight answer?
This recession is Labour's folly, not Cameron's. Your folly means hardship, job losses and repossessions for millions.
Wow, that's social justice in action.
And if Cameron's non serious policy proposals that do not stack up, then why did the government steal IHT, non-doms and business loan guarantees?
If Cameron is such a shallow, lightweight and superficial leader, Labour being the big tough battle scarred party of government for over a decade would swat him like a fly?
Why did Brown bottle the election when he was in lead?
So Cameron's a toff, don't vote for him, vote for us again; we are toff-free.
Brilliant, what a truly totemic carefully constructed behemoth of an argument against him and his party.
So where did Harriet Harman come from then? Well, despite her enormous personal wealth and aristo-family, she alright because she really wants to be working class instead.
As for Labour's not really getting to grips with the internet.
Now where did that 'intelligence' about WMD come from again?
That the risk of a UK sovereign default is so tiny a risk as to not be a realistic possibility? Even if our sovereign debt is downgraded from AAA to AA that means some pretty nasty things.
It is more of a risk of default, so you have to make it more attractive to get people to hand over their money for your debt.
If interest rates hit zero, where does government get the money from to offer a return?
Borrow more money? That would be moronic.
Print more money and raise taxes. Really? Healey and Challaghan did it. They inflated the debt away and saddled the economy with awful inflation, so all those poor pensioner on fixed incomes, those on welfare.. how are they going to survive?
Not exactly social justice is it?
And what did Lord Healey tell Brown recently about hiking taxes?
Ol' Sunny Jim himself said: "We used to think you could spend your way out of recession by boosting government spending.. I tell you, in all candour, that option no longer exists."
Those that fails to learn the lessons of history are condemned to repeat them.
Low inflation, we've already had the high inflation part that precipitated the high interest rates. So much Brown changed the measure and then the BoE complained it lost it's key weapon in keeping house prices under control.
Now we are having the bust part...
How is that any different to 1976-79?
Right now, I would rather have the IMF setting economic policy because Brown/Darling are making a total dog's of it.
We had the boom, then the inflationary controls, now it's the low inflation, possibly deflation and bust.
Also the 1970s, there was a global element...
Oil price shocks (my, didn't we have one of those recently? Only it is us this time at war in the Middle East, who's idea was that?)
America in economic trouble...
A House price boom (mmm.. wasn't there two of those in the 1970s?)
Rocketting commodities (again, didn't that happen too in the 1970s)
Followed by high inflation (pray what did it reach in 1977/8? 20%+ ?)
So is it much different?
The Times article is neither here nor there as for Clarke's approval of Darling's handling of the economy, there's not a mention of it.
Actually, I struggle to see anyone agreeing with Darling's handling of the economy, especially the bit about recovery in the autumn.
about the so-called AAA downgrading:
"There are others ways in which the "Reykjavik-on-Thames" suggestion is
ridiculous. I am told there was never a possibility ratings agencies
would downgrade the AAA rating of Britain's sovereign debt and, sure
enough, Moody's reaffirmed it, saying the UK was not even an outlier
among AAA economies. But the rumour was reported"
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/columnists/article2459789.ece
I'd certainly put him slightly above Anatole Kaletsky in terms of economic credibility who said government should legislate to make savers spend their savings to stimulate the economy.
Barking.
Of course, if we had an economy built on savings not debt we wouldn't be in this mess.
Now if we did pursue a Keynesian spending splurge like Japan...
Your the one stating that things in the 1970s were different to now?
Was there or wasn't there the same problems in the 1970s? Oil shocks, massive government spending and borrowings, rising food and commodity prices, a run on Sterling, inflation volatility, the US in economic trouble followed by the UK going bust?
Each time met with a Keynesian inflation of the economy paid for by more borrowing and ever higher taxes?
Yes or no?
Or are you going to argue about key facts in modern post-war history?
Oh yeah, Gordon didn't see it coming on Friday and then tells us today he delivered a speech at Harvard a decade ago saying he did.
Jesus wept.
Lastly who said in September '08 that the recession would be "more profound and long-lasting than people thought."
Oh yes, Alastair Darling.
Say what you like about Cameron talking down the economy, the Chancellor was way ahead of anyone. That remark pushed Sterling down to a record low at the time.
I too went canvassing recently and while people are finding it hard the good people of Brixton Hill are not turning to the Tories.
While the Tories have no answers, my local Labour Council have been looking at what they can do to help the creit crunch. See the report here: http://www.lambeth.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/32D355EF-D9E6-4B60-AE4F-E83A22782089/0/CreditCrunchTaskforceReport.pdf
On the one hand we should be grateful that these people are moving with the times but for now it just seems to highlight just how far out of touch the upper echelons of the party have been with the great unwashed.
But here on the "blogosphere" you'll find a much more involved and informed generation and with a wealth of real facts, incisive opinion and though provoking debate less that a few clicks away. LabourList and its numerous partner sites will have to match this level of honesty and transparency that can easily be found elsewhere. If not then I'd seriously have to consider a swift rejection this friend.
For the record my Dad is on Facebook, but he cannot see my full profile.
Labour needs to significantly enhance its rapid response towards Davey boy's claims, particularly the hysterical and completely inappropriate claims about Britain needing an IMF bail out. We should take him to task and show the public that yes, he is indeed overwhelmingly out of his depth and that the decision to bring Ken Clark back smacks of desperation.
Cameron knows that he has not yet sealed the deal with the electorate and as long as that remains the case; Labour has a chance. The people will have a choice between a reactionary, inept, inexperienced and narrow minded Conservative Party and a Labour Government led by a man that, for all his foibles, truly understands the depth of the crisis we face.
Go forth, Alastair, and spread that message.
Is not 15% enough?
Of course there are always people who vote Conservative or Labour irrespective of what the party says or does.
The rest of us just float..
And what is coming clear is that the banking system has not yet been saved, Gordon's Bailout 2 has not been thought out despite being announced and we are going to have a really nasty recession..
And "it's all the US's fault".
Keep saying that and the Conservative lead will grow as only economic illiterates (and Labour supporters) believe it.
The Leader of the Oppoisition is a lightweight...
The Oppostion is only 15% ahead in the polls they should be doing better..
Where have I heard this before?
1995, 1996 and up to May 1st 1997.
Peers altering legislation and Labour attempting to block FOI requests on MP's expenses hardly ring true on that basis.
May I suggest instead of attacking the Conservatives you attempt to put your own house in order. To me the whole thing sound like 1977-78 mixed with shades of Conservative sleaze from 1992-97.
That's a toxic mix: all of Labour's own making.
Address that first and THEN attack the Conservatives. Until you do that,you are going to suffer the fate of both the Governments referred to. People in glass houses etc.