Prime Minister: U-Turn If You Want To

I am about to break a cardinal rule of politics; I am in favour of U-Turns.

Yes, you should read that again, because its true.

I am in favour of U-Turns. Or, as I like to put it, I am in favour of government's admitting they don't always know best, don't have all the solutions, will get somethings wrong, will have to listen, will have to adapt and change proposals and won't always push and barge things through because they know best and you don't.

Of course, British politics adhors a U-turn. We like "first past the post" because it - usually - gives us strong and stable government with a majority in parliament to put through the manifesto on which they were elected. So in the real world of politics, once you have your Commons majority and the people (well, 40% of them) love you, then you can implement what you like.

But, when suddenly we are left hung, what then happens? Well I think u-turns are a natural - and almost progressive - side effect of a hung parliament. No longer can the government use the whips to ram stuff through parliament no matter what people say. They have to build a coalition from amongst their own MPs; satisfy the Simon Hughes of this world and also those on the Tory right such as Cash, Jenkins and Redwood. They are much more fragile and therefore people power and the press will have a much bigger say on what the government does.

So when you see the left-wing press (the Mirror in particular) and opposition MPs gloating about the U-turns, I would ask what they would like instead. Would Miliband, Balls, Harman - or Toynbee or Maguire - really prefer the NHS bill in its original form, or the sale of the forests to go ahead? They see the political chance to hit the government without realising they are getting more of what they want - so the U-turn must be a good thing. Aren't these proposals betetr after the u-turn than they were before (well, if you from the left)? More grown-up politics, perhaps?

I like the idea that a government puts forward an idea, gets feedback and then changes its mind (or not) depending on what happens. Dare I say, a "listening government".

So yes, I do like u-turns. And I hope that a future majority Conservative government keep that way of working as it is one of the best features of government.

And p.s. To those who say the government should have it right first time, every time. Name me a government of any political hue, anywhere in the world, at any point in history, that has done this. Cameron isn't perfect and people will respect those who got it wrong, put their hands up, admit it, apologise, move on and learn fromt it.

Balls to the Treasury?

There has been a call today to whoever the next Labour Leader not to appoint Ed Balls as their Shadow Chancellor. I think that the leadership election has shown that Balls runs an effective attack-dog operation but I do agree that his attitude would not suit the Treasury. I believe that, whoever wins, Yvette Cooper will be the next Shadow Chancellor (Darling will, IMHO leave the frontbench). However her husband would be an effective Shadow Minister for the Cabinet Office - it would leave him a free hand to roam around government and be horrible to the coalition; say what you like about Balls, he's a good opposition man.

Darling & The Bully

Aside from being away when this story broke I haven't really spoken about the Prime Ministerial bullying row because I am not sure if the truth is really ever going to be known and this could decend into allegation, discrediting blows and coutner-allegations. The PM says he didn't do it, Darling says someone else did it, Mandelson blames the Tories and an aide says he did do it afterall. It's probably too late for my two-pennies about this but I would say two things about what has come out of it.

Firstly I don't believe this is what is moving the polls, if indeed they are being moved. We've spent day-after-day on the doorstep afetr this came out and nobody has mentioned it to me at all; the expenses row still comes up more than the bullying one. My experience on the doorsteps - and yesterday I spent the whole day talking to hundreds of people in Earlham - is that Labour are still seriously in trouble. I haven't felt the poll movement shift here in Norwich at all.

And the second is a theme which has been picked up by today's PB thread - the future of Darling himself. Darling has proved to be unsackable, both last year when Balls wanted his job and now when he has slagged off his boss in public. His words will chime with both the Labour Party and the public. If, after Gordon has gone, the Labour party may well seek an experienced head rather than youth and dynamism. If they do, the conventional wisdom is that Straw is the man, but I think darling may well have staked his claim this week.

Brown's Critics Go Wobbly

According to the BBC, the meeting of the PLP went by without note and the rebels stayed silent. I warned they wouldn't have the nouse to go through with the task of removing Mr Brown. Labour MPs have chosen their captain to go down with the ship.

However, what I thought was interesting was the degree to which Brown now relies not just on his cabinet as a whole but a few figures within it.

Note during today's photocall with the Prime Minister launching a stratgey to give out free laptops and internet access to low income families, there lurking in the background was ... Lord Mandelson and Ed Balls. The 2 men currently keeping Brown where he is.

Oh, and during all of this tonight's polls show significant Tory leads. Thank God Labour MPs don't wonder why!

It's Cruddas vs. X (where X is any moderniser)

Gordon Brown is not going to resign; no matter how low they go in the polls, or how much local or by-elections they lose or how much he destroys the country. He slogged through the Blair years, yearning for this job and he will not go down in History as one of the shortest serving and most useful Prime Minister's ever.

However ... if he were to fall under a (political) bus, what is clear is that it's Jon Cruddas who will carry to flag of real Labour forward. His excellent showing in the Deputy Leadership contest - coming from nowhere to winning on first preferences - plus the dignified way he has handled himself since has put him in poll position. With all of the other Deputy Leadership candidate pretyt much humiliating themselves (including the eventual winner), he still holds a place in the heart of the Labour Party membership and the Trade Union movement if not the PLP.

So, if its Cruddas then who will he be against? I believe that the deal will be done to ensure only one candidate emerges from the Blairite right of the party; they won't want to split the vote and will want to be seen to be united. They may find themselves against a self-styled "unity" candidate like Jack Straw, but the Milliband-Balls-Burnham-Purnell alliance will be at work.

If I were in that alliance, I'd be working out who is going to be doing the challenge in the next 2 years - because they'll need all the traction they can get to beat Straw out of the traps and beat Cruddas to the votes.