Friday, February 06, 2009

Brown's government in administration and likely to be wound up

The Brown bounce that arrived so unexpectedly in the autumn has gone. The partial recovery in the polls has turned again into a slump. Brown's standing is falling faster than the share value of a bank. Were Brown a financial services company, hedge funds would be selling him short.

Labour MPs however are not selling up. They are sticking with Brown, and will continue to do so until after the general election. Assuming Labour goes down to defeat (and much can happen in the space of a few weeks in politics, never mind the 15 months or so to the likely date of the general election) Labour will dump Brown faster than they can blink. And then comes the decision as to who will take over. Looking at the likely options, I can understand why Labour are in no rush to pack Brown off to his retirement home. They could have The Lady Harriet, but since a fair chunk of the Labour party wants to put the boot in on Tory toffs, they won't be able to do it without blushing if she we at the helm. Then there is Ed Balls, but he would really scare the horses. Then there is Milliband The Younger (The Older blew it last year) but no one outside Parliament knows who he is (which admittedly could be an advantage.) Alan Johnson is a credible candidate but lacks the suport (and probably the ambition).

So despite the collapsing share value of Brown, Labour will stick with him. The guy may be unsuited to the task of Prime Minister, he may never answer a question and he may be addicted to spin, but he is not an ogre or a buffoon. Assuming Labour are defeated in the general election, he will have the misfortune of being seen by history as the failure who followed the much more successful Blair.

Brown as Chancellor claimed to have delivered the successful ecomony which was the foundation of the Blair years. He must be feeling a certain degree of bitterness that almost as soon as he switched from Chancellor to Prime Minister, that apparent economic success evaporated. I guess the Downing St air must have been thick with expletives yesterday therefore when Brown lost out to Blair for the highly coveted position as the first major European politician to meet Obama.

Meanwhile, Brown's claims that he has saved the world and is showing Johnnie Foreigner how to save their economies took a bit of a roasting from the French today. President Sarkozy laid into the VAT cut though the Germans had beaten him to it. They went for the jugular on the economy a few weeks ago.

There is a feeling that the government has gone into administration and few believe it can be saved from bankruptcy. It is not a going concern. The millions who lent Labour their vote over the past decade or so, are feeling their investment hasn't paid off and may well be looking to have this Labour government wound up.

---
Sent via BlackBerry

11 comments:

Anonymous said...

And the PNB, sorry, the BNP should be lined up and more than wound up - that's the real reason their members were shitting themselves when the membership lists were revealed (quite correctly) by the person/press responsible

Andy Swaddle said...

IT SEEMS TO ME THAT ANONYMOUS IS TRYING TO INCITE VIOLENCE AGAINST B.N.P JONATHAN. I HOPE YOU HAVE LOGGED THEIR I.P ADDRESS AND HANDED IT ONTO THE RELATIVE AUTHORITIES. FOR AS I AM SURE YOU KNOW IT IS ILLEGAL TO INCITE ANY TYPE OF VIOLENCE WHETHER IT BE IN PERSON BY LETTER OR ON THE INTERNET. YOU AS THE BLOG HOST HAVE A DUTY TO REPORT THIS TYPE OF POSTING. MIND YOU THE LAST COWARD I HEARD OF SAYING THIS TYPE OF THING WAS A CURRENT SITTING LABOUR COUNCILLOR AT THE 2008 COUNT. THE ONLY THING IS HE WOULD ONLY SAY IT WITHIN EARSHOT OF 2 FEMALE B.N.P CANDIDATES SUCH A BRAVE MAN DONT YOU THINK?

ANDY SWADDLE.
(P.S Sorry about the caps I wasn't shouting)

Sandy Waddle said...

...HANDED IT ONTO THE RELATIVE AUTHORITIES

Might that be your Jackie?

Prat.

Anonymous said...

Well it seems you know my wife shouldn't be too hard to narrow this down. Hope you haven't got a fixed I.P addy. OOOPs you have:-) AWWW shame byeeeeee.

Andy Swaddle said...

Such a brave person hiding behind anonymous posts and childish anagrams. I wouldn't dream of mentioning your other half so kindly dont try to associate yourself with my wife you do not know her. Now back off.
Andy Swaddle.

Anonymous said...

"Church of England bans the BNP"
----------------------------------
Members of the General Synod voted to back a motion brought by Metropolitan Police civilian worker Vasantha Gnanadoss calling on bishops to formulate a comparable policy to the Association of Chief Police Officers' ban on police membership of the BNP.

Miss Gnanadoss, who received support at the General Synod from former Met Police commissioner Sir Ian Blair, said passing the motion would make it "much more difficult" for the BNP or other similar organisations to exploit the claim that they had support within the Church of England.

She said: "If supporting organisations like the BNP is inconsistent with Christian discipleship, it seems obvious that clergy and others who speak for the Church should not be members."

Acpo policy states that that no member of the police service may be a member of an organisation whose constitution, aims, objectives or pronouncements contradict the "general duty" to promote race equality. This specifically includes the BNP, the policy states.

The motion backed by the General Synod called for the Church of England bishops to draw up a similar policy to apply to all clergy, ordinands and employed lay persons who speak on behalf of the Church of England.

The motion received support from the Archbishop of York Dr John Sentamu and the Archbishop of Canterbury Dr Rowan Williams. Dr Sentamu told the Synod he was a member of the Baganda tribe. But he said: "As a Christian, I joined another tribe, it is the tribe of Jesus Christ, and in that tribe all are welcome."

The vote from the General Synod comes in spite of a warning in a background paper prepared by William Fittall, secretary general of the General Synod, warning of possible legal difficulties.

He said clergy could not currently be disciplined for lawful political activity and the BNP was not a proscribed political party.

He also warned that the Church could be open to discrimination claims under such a policy.
------------------------------

The BNP claim to say many a prayer on behalf of the British people. I wonder what their official response to this is ? ? ?

Andrea Cave said...

Oh shut up and stop squabbling - the lot of you! This is a great, genuine, community blog which I enjoy viewing regularly. Jonathan has already had to restrict comments prior to approval once. The way things are going he will end up having to do that again.

Do you really have to spoil things for everyone ?

Andy Swaddle said...

I agree with you 100% Andrea. That is why I always use use my name when posting. I think anonymous posts should not be allowed on here. If you feel strongly enough and wish to contribute to this blog (and a rather good blog it is)they should do it from behind the veil of anonymity. Whilst I may not agree with Jonatnan's politics. I do respect him for his dedication to his cause and for taking his time to keep this blog constantly updated.

Andy Swaddle.

Andrea Cave said...

Thank you Andy, that's important and appreciated support for my clear and delicate feelings on the disrespectful squabbling which threatens to bring this good community blog, which I enjoy viewing, into disrepute!

I don't agree with everything Jonathan stands for politically. However, like yourself, I respect him for the effort he makes and the information he provides on both sections of the blog.

Everyone else - please take note!

Anonymous said...

"Labour support in meltdown"...

http://tinyurl.com/c3uhqk

Anonymous said...

I found this site using [url=http://google.com]google.com[/url] And i want to thank you for your work. You have done really very good site. Great work, great site! Thank you!

Sorry for offtopic