Tony Blair/Addendum: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Nick Gardner
imported>Nick Gardner
Line 18: Line 18:
The rivalry between them did not end with Gordon Brown's endorsement of Tony Blair's candidacy. In the course of the following twelve years it seems to have developed into wariness, then mutual suspicion, then discord and finally acrimony.  There were some differences of political outlook and, although Tony Blair did not at first consider them to be serious<ref> ...while he was always off to the left of me, it was all within bounds (TB p103)</ref>, he concluded towards the end that Gordon Brown wanted to abandon some of the essentials of "New Labour"<ref>TB p605</ref>. Policy conflicts arose over the relative importance of equity and efficiency with Tony Blair attaching somewhat more importance than Gordon Brown to the market mechanism and the encouragement of enterprise, and Gordon Brown attaching somewhat more importance to the effects of policy actions on income distribution. However Tony Blair's successful opposition to Gordon Brown's proposal to introduce an upper 50 per cent income tax band<ref>TB p116</ref> was one of the few occasions when that difference surfaced as a direct policy conflict. Differences that arose over the millenium dome, ID cards and the Euro were not of that sort and did not cause any serious friction, but Gordon Brown's opposition to  university tuition fees and foundation hospitals was regarded by Tony Blair as obstruction. On the major domestic policy issues of raising the standards of education and health provision, however,  they agreed and their objectives were largely achieved.  
The rivalry between them did not end with Gordon Brown's endorsement of Tony Blair's candidacy. In the course of the following twelve years it seems to have developed into wariness, then mutual suspicion, then discord and finally acrimony.  There were some differences of political outlook and, although Tony Blair did not at first consider them to be serious<ref> ...while he was always off to the left of me, it was all within bounds (TB p103)</ref>, he concluded towards the end that Gordon Brown wanted to abandon some of the essentials of "New Labour"<ref>TB p605</ref>. Policy conflicts arose over the relative importance of equity and efficiency with Tony Blair attaching somewhat more importance than Gordon Brown to the market mechanism and the encouragement of enterprise, and Gordon Brown attaching somewhat more importance to the effects of policy actions on income distribution. However Tony Blair's successful opposition to Gordon Brown's proposal to introduce an upper 50 per cent income tax band<ref>TB p116</ref> was one of the few occasions when that difference surfaced as a direct policy conflict. Differences that arose over the millenium dome, ID cards and the Euro were not of that sort and did not cause any serious friction, but Gordon Brown's opposition to  university tuition fees and foundation hospitals was regarded by Tony Blair as obstruction. On the major domestic policy issues of raising the standards of education and health provision, however,  they agreed and their objectives were largely achieved.  


Problems are reported to have arisen from conflicting use of the machinery of government. Tony Blair considered his role to be like that of a CEO who, besides directing policy has to see it is followed<ref> TB p338 </ref>, and was at first surprised by the absence of an established  means by which a prime minister can give instructions to departmental ministers. Treasury control of annual departmental budgets  had always given a substantial degree to Chancellors of the Exchequer, and Gordon Brown's introduction of the  3-year "Comprehensive Spending Review"  and of a system of "Public Service Agreements"<ref>[http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/pbr_csr07_psaindex.htm ''Public Service Agreements '', HM Treasury, 2007]</ref> had greatly strengthened that control. Tony Blair's No 10 staff found it difficult to get access to that machinery, and he created his own "Delivery Unit"<ref> TB p338</ref>. The result gave rise to complaints  about conflicting instructions from the civil service<ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4061073.stm ''Warning on Blair-Brown 'battles' '', BBC News 2 December 2004]</ref>, and may have created  a further source of tension.
Problems are reported to have arisen from conflicting use of the machinery of government. Tony Blair considered his role to be like that of a CEO who, besides directing policy has to see it is followed<ref> TB p338 </ref>, and was at first surprised by the absence of an established  means by which a prime minister can give instructions to departmental ministers. Treasury control of annual departmental budgets  had always given a substantial degree to Chancellors of the Exchequer, and Gordon Brown's introduction of the  3-year "Comprehensive Spending Review"  and of a system of "Public Service Agreements"<ref>[http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/pbr_csr07_psaindex.htm ''Public Service Agreements '', HM Treasury, 2007]</ref> had greatly strengthened that control. Tony Blair's No 10 staff found it difficult to get access to that machinery, and he created his own "Delivery Unit"<ref> TB p338</ref>. The result gave rise to complaints  about "conflicting and competing agendas" from the civil service<ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4061073.stm ''Warning on Blair-Brown 'battles' '', BBC News 2 December 2004]</ref>, and may have created  a further source of tension.
 
   
   



Revision as of 09:40, 7 September 2010

This article is developed but not approved.
Main Article
Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
Works [?]
Catalogs [?]
Timelines [?]
Addendum [?]
 
This addendum is a continuation of the article Tony Blair.

Tony Blair and Gordon Brown

Introduction

Much of the contemporary comment on Tony Blair's premiership in the British press was about his strained relationship with Gordon Brown. Since much of what passed between them is known only to them, it is unlikely that an objective account of the matter will ever be available. Witness statements, in the form of memoirs[1] and interviews[2] by Tony Blair as one of the protagonists, and Peter Mandelson, their mutual colleague and confidante, became available for the first time, three or four years latter, in the Summer of 2010. There was no record available at that time of a corresponding statement by Gordon Brown.

"The Brothers" (1983-1994)

When he was elected as a Member of Parliament at the age of 32, Gordon Brown was already an established figure in the Labour party, having been elected to its Scottish executive at the age of 24. According to Tony Blair's biographer, Anthony Seldon[3] he was clearly the star of the 1983 intake of Labour MPs, whereas Tony Blair was a relative newcomer, having unexpectedly been elected in the same year. They soon acquired, what Tony Blair has described as "genuine and sincere liking for each other" [4]. For the next nine years they were virtually inseparable. They shared a tiny office at No1 Parliament Street and they were so often seen together that they became known as "the brothers". They were both recognised as high fliers by the party's seniors, but Tony was regarded as the protegé of the more experienced Gordon. In the early years of their relationship, Tony Blair was later to recall that he had obtained his grounding in politics from Gordon Brown: "he taught me the business of politics in roughly the same way as Derry[5] taught me the business of the Bar"[4].

Their political views at that time were virtually identical. Both wanted to shift the Labour party away from its close linkage with the trade unions, and away from its "tax-and-spend" economic policy. Both were convinced that the "New Labour" party that they wanted to create could form a long- lasting high-achieving government. In temperament, however, they were very different. Tony Blair was a family man, Gordon Brown was single. Peter Mandelson had the impression that Tony Blair "if he wanted to, could walk away" tomorrow [6], but he could not imagine Gordon Brown as anything but a Labour MP. Gordon Brown was an avid reader: Tony Blair was not. In their office Gordon Brown would usually be hunched over has computer keyboard while Tony Blair would usually be laid back with his feet on his desk.

Rivals (1994)

In 1994, when the leader of the Labour party died, Gordon Brown confidently expected to succeed him. He told Peter Mandelson that he considerd the other contenders, Robin Cook and John Prescott, to stand no chance, and he did not mention the possibility that Tony Blair would stand[7]. However, Tony Blair had by then formed a conviction that he had leadership qualities that Gordon Brown lacked, and that he himself could win the country over and lead a successful Labour government[8]. He knew that he was more popular than Gordon Brown among Labour Members of Parliament and with the public (in a MORI opinion poll he had scored 32 percent against Gordon Brown's 9 per cent)[9], but he decided to try to "cajole him out" of a contest rather than confront him[10]. In a series of discussions with Gordon Brown, he argued that he had by far the greater chance of success, but that they had a common objective and that Gordon Brown would in due course be his natural successor[11]. According to Tony Blair, their discussions were difficult but not unfriendly - rather like a loving couple trying to decide whose career should come first[12].

It was reported ar the time, and widely accepted thereafter, that a deal was done at a meeting on 31st May at the Granita restaurant under which Gordon Brown's agreement to withdraw from the contest was conditional upon an undertaking that Tony Blair would hand over the premiership to him during his second term as prime minister. That has been denied by Tony Blair[13] and Gordon Brown[14] (although they agree that such a deal was done later). Tony Blair has also denied that he agreed to yield full control of economic policy to Gordon Brown[15].

Uneasy partners (1995-2007)

The rivalry between them did not end with Gordon Brown's endorsement of Tony Blair's candidacy. In the course of the following twelve years it seems to have developed into wariness, then mutual suspicion, then discord and finally acrimony. There were some differences of political outlook and, although Tony Blair did not at first consider them to be serious[16], he concluded towards the end that Gordon Brown wanted to abandon some of the essentials of "New Labour"[17]. Policy conflicts arose over the relative importance of equity and efficiency with Tony Blair attaching somewhat more importance than Gordon Brown to the market mechanism and the encouragement of enterprise, and Gordon Brown attaching somewhat more importance to the effects of policy actions on income distribution. However Tony Blair's successful opposition to Gordon Brown's proposal to introduce an upper 50 per cent income tax band[18] was one of the few occasions when that difference surfaced as a direct policy conflict. Differences that arose over the millenium dome, ID cards and the Euro were not of that sort and did not cause any serious friction, but Gordon Brown's opposition to university tuition fees and foundation hospitals was regarded by Tony Blair as obstruction. On the major domestic policy issues of raising the standards of education and health provision, however, they agreed and their objectives were largely achieved.

Problems are reported to have arisen from conflicting use of the machinery of government. Tony Blair considered his role to be like that of a CEO who, besides directing policy has to see it is followed[19], and was at first surprised by the absence of an established means by which a prime minister can give instructions to departmental ministers. Treasury control of annual departmental budgets had always given a substantial degree to Chancellors of the Exchequer, and Gordon Brown's introduction of the 3-year "Comprehensive Spending Review" and of a system of "Public Service Agreements"[20] had greatly strengthened that control. Tony Blair's No 10 staff found it difficult to get access to that machinery, and he created his own "Delivery Unit"[21]. The result gave rise to complaints about "conflicting and competing agendas" from the civil service[22], and may have created a further source of tension.



References

The memoirs by Tony Blair and Peter Mandelson are denoted (TB) and (PM) and their interviews by Andrew Marr are denoted (TB/AM) and (PM/AM).

  1. See memoirs by Tony Blair and Peter Mandelson
  2. See interviews by Tony Blair and Peter Mandelson
  3. Anthony Seldon: Blair, Free Press, 2004)
  4. 4.0 4.1 TB p68
  5. Derry Irvine, later to become Lord Chancellor
  6. PM p155
  7. PM p160
  8. TB pp58-60
  9. Anthony Seldon: Blair, pages 660 and 188 Free Press, 2004
  10. TB pp65-66
  11. TB p69
  12. TB p71
  13. TB p69
  14. Extracts from the interview taken from Piers Morgan's Life Stories: Gordon Brown, to be aired on Sunday February 14 at 10.15pm on ITV1, The Times online February 12, 2010
  15. TB p71
  16. ...while he was always off to the left of me, it was all within bounds (TB p103)
  17. TB p605
  18. TB p116
  19. TB p338
  20. Public Service Agreements , HM Treasury, 2007
  21. TB p338
  22. Warning on Blair-Brown 'battles' , BBC News 2 December 2004