sjhoward.co.uk
Simon Howard's personal blog about stuff
The end for Blair?
541 words posted by Simon on 6 May 2006
Hold up! Before you read on, please read this...
This post was published more than 14 years ago
I keep old posts on the site because I often enjoy reading old content on other people's sites. It can be interesting to see how views have changed over time: for example, how my strident teenage views have, to put it mildly, mellowed.
I'm not a believer in brushing the past under the carpet. I've written some offensive rubbish on here in the past: deleting it and pretending it never happened doesn't change that. I hope that stumbling across something that's 14 years old won't offend anyone anew, because I hope that people can understand that what I thought and felt and wrote about then is probably very different to what I think and feel and write about now. It's a relic of an (albeit recent) bygone era.
So, given the age of this post, please bear in mind:
My views may well have changed in the last 14 years. I have written some very silly things over the years, many of which I find cringeworthy today.
This post might use words or language in ways which I would now consider inappropriate, offensive, embarrassing, or all three.
Factual information might be outdated.
Links might be broken, and embedded material might not appear properly.
Okay. Consider yourself duly warned. Read on...
So Blair has come third in the local elections. That's not good for him. In response to this, and the scandals surround the Labour party for last fortnight, he's performed a reshuffle so huge that it begins to feel like he's got a whole new deck. Charles Clarke has been unceremoniously sacked, saying that he disagrees with Blair, and Prescott is angry too at the prospect of losing the bigger part of his responsibility whilst retaining his title and his salary. If that happened to me, I certainly wouldn't be angry, I'd probably be cheering, but that's Prescott for you.
Patricia Hewitt has retained her post, despite the service that she is trying to reform revolting against her, and losing all faith in her abilities. And Jack Straw, who's seemingly done nothing wrong, gets demoted. Sensible.
Earlier in the week, I couldn't understand why Clarke hadn't resigned. It would now appear that he genuinely beleived he could carry on. This was actually good news for Mr Blair, because it meant he had a big headline-grabber for election results day, so the fact that Labour have performed appallingly could be buried.
Yesterday, I was unsure whether he'd pulled off something incredible, and made a fantastic political play, or whether this really would be the beginning of the end. But the news today that in a week's time, seventy-five backbench MPs are to deliver a letter telling him to resgin or he will be challenged changes everything. This simply isn't how Blair wanted to go.
Blair and Brown are holding talks this weekend about the future of the party. Basically, it's pretty clear that they're talking about when Blair should go. On Monday, Blair has a press conference at which this topic surely can't be ignored. But what can Blair do now? If he resigned next week, he'd look pressured into it, which isn't what he wants to do – he wants to go according to his own timetable. If he leaves it much longer, he will be forced out by his own party. If he announces a future resignation date, perhaps there's scope for a few headlines now about him being forced out, but at the time of the transition of power, perhaps that will be more forgotten.
Could he announce that he'll stand down on his tenth anniversary as Prime Minister? That would give about a year for the transition to take place, satisfy most of the party, and make it look like he was going according to his own timetable. It would also allow him the honour of making an official 'final' conference speech without plotters murmuring in the background. If backbenchers are more insistent, he could always announce that he'll leave at the end of the year, which would have similar advantages.
But, of course, announcing in advance makes him a true lame duck, something that he and the party would probably object to over such a long period. So what can he do? Probably very little. He's been greedy, and left the transition too long for it to happen in any symbolic, pretty way.
The idea that he won't get his last wish after nearly a decade of leadership almost makes me feel sorry for him. Almost.
This 867th post was filed under: News and Comment, Politics.
Recently published posts
31 things I learned in December 2019 / 31 December 2020
My favourite books of 2020 / 29 December 2020
What I've been reading this month / 28 December 2020
Revisiting Middlesbrough's Community in a Cube / 03 December 2020
30 things I learned in November 2019 / 30 November 2020
What I've been reading this month / 27 November 2020
Random posts from the archive
The twelve funniest seconds of your day / 17 February 2006
Charles and Camilla wed / 09 April 2005
Preparing for Emergencies / 28 July 2004
Dasani / 02 March 2004
Brilliant offer on "24" DVDs / 05 March 2006
US attack on TV gay icon / 22 January 2005
The content of this site is copyright protected by a Creative Commons License, with some rights reserved. All trademarks, images and logos remain the property of their respective owners. The accuracy of information on this site is in no way guaranteed. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author. No responsibility can be accepted for any loss or damage caused by reliance on the information provided by this site. This site uses cookies - click here for more information. This site also uses affiliate links: if you buy something via a link on this site, I might get a small percentage in commission. Here's hoping.