Goodbye Blair, hello Brown

Two questions are being debated in Britain today: how will Tony Blair be remembered by posterity and what difference will Gordon Brown make to the administration?

Hasan Suroor

RESIGNATION: Unless something dramatic and unpredictable happens over he next three weeks, Tony Blair will hand over the keys of No. 10, Downing Street to his designated successor, Gordon Brown, on June 27 and walk away into the political sunset forced on him by his own party, which once regarded him as its biggest star and the most charismatic vote-winner.

But 10 years is a long time in politics and as Blair himself admitted, while announcing his resignation plans on May 10, he had perhaps stayed on too long.

Such is the level of Blair-fatigue not just in the Labour Party but across the country that his fall from “hero to zero” is not likely to be mourned beyond a close circle of shrinking loyalists.

One of Blair’s last official acts before he drives down to Buckingham Palace to submit his resignation to the Queen will be to attend the Prime Minister’s Question Time (PMQ) in the Commons, known in the media as a “Punch-and-Judy show”, at which the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition trade verbal blows across the Dispatch Box. Some of Blair’s most memorable parliamentary performances have been during PMQs and even his critics acknowledge that this is one act that the tongue-tied Brown will find hard to follow.

Struggle to catch up

This is not the only area where Brown might struggle to catch up with his predecessor. His lack of charisma is a big worry for supporters. Even those who can’t wait to see Blair leave find Brown distant, dull and boring.

According to a Yuvgov poll for The Economist, Blair was more popular before he came to power in 1997 than Brown is on the eve of becoming the Prime Minister.

The magazine said: “Mr Brown scores poorly on empathy, which is why he will be spending the next few weeks doing lots of public meetings in swing seats, raising his eyebrows and nodding in a way that signifies listening. This strategy worked for John Major in the 1992 general election campaign, when he swapped television studios for a soapbox.”

Whether it will work for Brown remains to be seen, but we did see a glimpse of the “new-look Brown” when he launched his leadership campaign on May 11. (He has since been elected un-opposed.) Dressed in a smart bespoke suit, which was unusually not crumpled, his famously unruly hair neatly trimmed and his trademark red tie replaced by a more eye-caching shade of blue, he looked every inch the “Brown mark-II” that he was meant to on his first outing as the leader-in-waiting. A takeover he apparently owed to his “sensible” wife Sarah Brown who made sure that he looked appropriately prime ministerial on this occasion.

But there was more to Brown that day than a mere change of physical appearance. He even sounded different in a determined bid to defy the image of a nail-biting, shy and inarticulate man, ill-at-ease with the media. This was not a man whom a senior colleague recently described as “difficult”, “non-collegiate” and prone to bouts of bad temper.

For a man who seldom smiles, he actually grinned. And who said he was humourless? Seeing him cracking jokes, bending over with guffaws of laughter, and making light of awkward questions from journalists he looked and sounded like an altogether different man.

But then, as cynics noted, one swallow doesn’t make a summer and the jury is still out on whether he will be able to “connect” with people on a personal level the way Blair did.

The truth is that hugging babies and blowing kisses don’t come to him naturally. When he tries to “do” a Blair he looks awkward, as we saw later the same day when, on a walkabout, he tried, hopelessly, to humour a bawling child. “Tony can charm even his worst enemies, Gordon struggles to impress his own supporters,” said one Brown watcher.

Meanwhile, as Britain approaches the end of the Blair era, two questions are being debated. What will be Blair’s legacy? What will posterity remember him for ? And how will Brown be different ? Will he be a “new version of Mr Blair, one capable of delivering on his promises, or just the old model without the charisma?” as The Economist asked.

On the first point, there are no two views that Iraq will heavily define Blair’s legacy. Every time his name is mentioned, Iraq will inevitably come to people’s minds. However hard he tries to defend his decision to join the invasion of Iraq, it will remain a blot on his leadership.

As The Guardian pointed out in an editorial, his otherwise “impressive” record in office was marred by Iraq: a “dark folly (that) will poison the way he is remembered”. It was one decision which “more than any other .... Can be tied to Mr. Blair personally”. In other words, he cannot get away by simply claiming that it was a collective decision, and approved by Parliament. He has been accused of misleading Parliament into supporting his decision.

Whether or not he did so deliberately, the act remains that he relied too heavily on doubtful intelligence about Saddam Hussein’s supposed weapons of mass destruction. “There is good case for thinking that Mr. Blair should have quit office thereafter - not just because there were no weapons of mass destruction, but because the cause for which Britain was misled has failed,” The Guardian argued.

Blair remains defiant insisting that he doesn’t regret going into Iraq because he believed what he was doing was the “right thing” to do and in national interest. In his resignation announcement, he admitted that his decision had proved “deeply controversial” but maintained that “I did what I thought was right”. Elsewhere, he has said that if history were to repeat itself, he wouldn’t hesitate to do it all over again.

More tolerant

But minus Iraq, Blair’s record looks pretty good. It is generally recognised that the Britain he is leaving behind is a better place - a fairer, more tolerant and happier society than the one he inherited back in 1997 after 17 years of Tory rule. Introduction of a minimum wage; uninterrupted economic growth; massive rise in jobs; devolution of power to Scotland and Wales; the Good Friday peace accord that brought peace to Northern Ireland; and heavy investment in public services even though the results have not matched the spending are some of the highlights of the Blair era.

But more importantly Britain, under his watch, became socially and culturally a more tolerant place. Today, gay partnership is legally recognised; multiculturalism, for all its downsides, is accepted as a fact of life; and racism no longer gets you a vote.

“There is only one government since 1945 that can say all the following: more jobs, fewer unemployed, better health and education results, lower crime, and economic growth in every quarter.....” Blair has claimed.

And, for once, few would disagree with him. Only if he had not blotted his copybook with Iraq, Blair would have gone down as one of the most successful Labour prime ministers in living memory. And he would not have been saying his farewells just yet....

And, how will it be under Brown ? There is too much expectation because of the hype created by the Brown camp, as though Britain is on the cusp of a historic change.

More sober observers however warn against expecting dramatic changes. For, it is important to remember that what is blithely referred to as the Blair era was as much a Brown era: a joint “Blair-Brown” partnership, a double-act, if you like.

A fellow architect of the New Labour project, Brown has been at the heart of the Blair Government, closely involved in all major decisions from the controversial private funding of public services to the invasion of Iraq for which he has publicly admitted “collective responsibility”.

And he has given no indication of a significant shift in the agenda pursued under the Blair Government.

There will, of course, be a change in tone and emphasis but not because he has a radical new agenda. The new tone will simply reflect his personality, which is very different from Blair’s.

Brown’s promises

He has said, for example, that there will be less emphasis on “presentation” and that he will “listen and learn” alluding to criticism that the Blair government did not listen to the people. He has said that he would strive to “meet people’s aspirations” and lead a government that would be “humble enough to know its place”.

All this makes for good sound byte but where is the meat ?

Brown’s big test will be Iraq. Will he signal a shift by withdrawing British troops earlier than planned ?

Despite growing pressure (at a party meeting recently, he was heckled by a woman activist who wanted him to bring the troops back), he has refused to give any assurance.

All he has said in response to calls for an end to Britain’s military involvement in Iraq is this: “I am going to go out to Iraq and look at the situation on the ground, and I will come back and say what I think is happening there.” Hardly the words of a man contemplating a radical policy change.

If anything, he has reiterated Britain’s “commitment” to Iraq arguing that Britain is there under a UN mandate; and although he has admitted that “mistakes” have been made in Iraq, he has not indicated how he intends to make up for them beyond emphasising the need to do more to win the “hearts and minds” of Iraqis.

On the domestic front, Brown has promised a more open and accountable government. He is said to be toying with the idea of a written constitution and giving Parliament the power to approve the Prime Minister’s decision to go to war. These will be important and welcome moves, and likely to help him win people’s “trust”.

Blair is accused of running a “presidential” - style government. Will Mr. Brown be less “presidential”?

His supporters say “yes”, but sceptics are not convinced pointing out that, according to his own former colleagues, he likes to work with a small inner circle of close confidantes, and hates to delegate power.

Brown’s first 100 days in office will be crucial. If he is not able to demonstrate soon enough that his government represents real change there will be questions not just about his own leadership but about Labour Party’s ability to govern.

And, with resurgent Tories already knocking at the door, the party could be in for a nasty surprise at the next general election.

Courtesy: The Hindu