Everyone knows that politicians avoid awkward questions. And when they can't they usually rely on verbal creativity to dodge any unwelcome headlines. The daily jousts with Paxman, Humphries and co. are part of our political culture and most of us, regardless of our politics, accept that this is just what politicians do. We see through it and don't like it - but, because it's so common and they all do it to a broadly similar degree we don't judge anyone too harshly on it.
Given that context it's quite astonishing then that Gordon Brown has still managed to garner a reputation (and not just among critics) for failing to answer the simplest of questions. That the most senior politician in the country should be so poor at something so basic and fundamental to his profession (responding to tough questions) is quite remarkable. Have a look at the Jon Snow interview below, about 8mins in, when Brown is tackled on scrapping the 10p tax band:
Jon's trying to get him to acknowledge that some people (perhaps as many as 5m) lose out financially as a consequence of scrapping the 10p rate, regardless of any other changes or tax credits available. They do battle on this topic for almost 4mins and even as someone not well disposed to Brown I was screaming at the TV on the simple, straightforward way to 'answer' the question and kill the issue:
Brown's supporters have a standard device they use to dismiss this - we're told Gordon's not a '24 hour news' politician, he's 'serious' and 'intellectual' and the skill we're talking about here isn't anything noble but a slippy, PR-type thing that Brown even deserves credit for not doing. But this is nonsense - at best it's a basic political skill that the lowliest MP should have at their disposal so there's no excusing it's absence in the Prime Minister. At worst (and this is where my money is) it's a legacy of his years at Number 11 stalking Blair (who, ironically, was probably the best communicator of his generation). It's as though the reluctance to be defined or pinned down on anything that he needed to observe for those 10 years is now so ingrained and reflexive that he can't bring himself to be straight with anyone (and I mean 'straight' even by normal political standards) lest he trip himself up.
I'm among those who think the media storm of the last few days has been overdone and Brown is certainly not the 'utter disaster' his more manic critics claim. And it's certainly not the case that there's an overwhelming public view that Cameron would make a better fist of running the country yet. But Brown really needs to watch this habit and address the reputation he's getting for blatantly ignoring awkward questions. It might be a function of language, mannerisms or his political history but whatever prompts it it's seriously undermining his integrity and whatever store of public trust remains.
Given that context it's quite astonishing then that Gordon Brown has still managed to garner a reputation (and not just among critics) for failing to answer the simplest of questions. That the most senior politician in the country should be so poor at something so basic and fundamental to his profession (responding to tough questions) is quite remarkable. Have a look at the Jon Snow interview below, about 8mins in, when Brown is tackled on scrapping the 10p tax band:
Jon's trying to get him to acknowledge that some people (perhaps as many as 5m) lose out financially as a consequence of scrapping the 10p rate, regardless of any other changes or tax credits available. They do battle on this topic for almost 4mins and even as someone not well disposed to Brown I was screaming at the TV on the simple, straightforward way to 'answer' the question and kill the issue:
"Of course not everybody benefits from every change we make Jon - the tax & benefit system is complex and these decisions require trade offs and priorities. So yes, this particular change might not make everyone better off and I'm more than happy to work with my backbenchers to look at what more we can do. But I'm confident people will judge my government in the round and over 11 years we've introduced tax credits, increased pensions and benefits.. blah...blah..."Brown is essentially trying to make this same point (and in political terms he broadly right) but he does so in such a tortured and clumsy way that the exchange goes on for far too long and the impartial, apolitical observer would leave with the impression that he's really struggling here and Snow managed to skewer him on something. This happens again and again with Brown and there are plenty of examples since he took office - calling off the election, the Lisbon Treaty, going to the Olympics etc. - all slightly awkward questions that any politician worth their pay would've been able to parry and diffuse easily but Brown seems to trip on these all the time.
Brown's supporters have a standard device they use to dismiss this - we're told Gordon's not a '24 hour news' politician, he's 'serious' and 'intellectual' and the skill we're talking about here isn't anything noble but a slippy, PR-type thing that Brown even deserves credit for not doing. But this is nonsense - at best it's a basic political skill that the lowliest MP should have at their disposal so there's no excusing it's absence in the Prime Minister. At worst (and this is where my money is) it's a legacy of his years at Number 11 stalking Blair (who, ironically, was probably the best communicator of his generation). It's as though the reluctance to be defined or pinned down on anything that he needed to observe for those 10 years is now so ingrained and reflexive that he can't bring himself to be straight with anyone (and I mean 'straight' even by normal political standards) lest he trip himself up.
I'm among those who think the media storm of the last few days has been overdone and Brown is certainly not the 'utter disaster' his more manic critics claim. And it's certainly not the case that there's an overwhelming public view that Cameron would make a better fist of running the country yet. But Brown really needs to watch this habit and address the reputation he's getting for blatantly ignoring awkward questions. It might be a function of language, mannerisms or his political history but whatever prompts it it's seriously undermining his integrity and whatever store of public trust remains.
5 Comments:
There used to be a joke when Brown was deputy to John Smith in Labour's Shadow Treasury Team in the early 90's, that he'd spend the first 10 minutes of any interview refusing to confirm that his name was in fact Gordon Brown.
This trait is nothing new. What's perhaps more surprising is that so many otherwise savvy and intelligent people were prepared to suspend their critical faculties, and take at face value the exaggerated claims made for Brown's abilities by his courtiers in the PLP and the press. He still gets away with it in Scotland (though not so much as he did) - I'm just surprised that it's taken people in the Westminster village so long to get wise to him.
What sort of poll lead do you think would constitute an overwhelming public view that Cameron would make a better fist of running the country ?100%?
The problem is Cas that the abandonment of the 10p rate is entirely defensible in terms of reforming negative incentives and the millions on benefits. Brown has relied on ever expanding receipts on the back of which he thought it was safe to over -borrow .
Any sort of slow down not only kills revenue but also swells uptake of welfare this isa pincer that is really far more politically explosive than the housing market. He knows he has created a burden he cannot afford and he is trying to introduce a little stick to go with the carrot. Its all perfectly sensible given the mess he has got himself into .BUT He cannot lay claim to the Thatcherite narrative now and cannot admit his mistakes , so he has to talk nonsense
You do not in my opinion get the Brown topple at all. I know it is the Cassilis thing to comment on
the comment from a laconic mount Olympus where things like “No now and come come “ crop up
a fair bit , but in this case you are not looking at the big picture yourself . Its not that Brown
has suddenly become awful its that people have realised he was never any bloody good in the first
place . The re writing of his role in the last tens years has removed the whole point of Brown and
What you should be asking is why a relatively minor perturbation in the economic mill pond was all it
took to make Labour implode. It was pushing an open door Cas . Look at the surges in Tory support ,
IHT was the pivotal point and from then on Brown has shadowed Conservative moves.
Now he is going snivelling and begging without a shred of reputation left. Good .
In answer to your first question - a poll lead comparable to Blair from about '94 onwards. i.e. polling 50%+ with a 20pt gap. Cameron's never achieved that.
As for:
"a relatively minor perturbation in the economic mill pond"
..two things.
(1) You call it 'minor perturbation', most of the world's economists call it a serious contraction. Split opinions then but I think I err with the latter view. Only just of course... you're a clever man. And
(2) Who created the mill pond...?
In answer to your first question - a poll lead comparable to Blair from about '94 onwards. i.e. polling 50%+ with a 20pt gap. Cameron's never achieved that
John Major never achieved parity prior to his glorious victory and the unreliability of opinion Polls , especially their left bias was a problem which has been tackled since . Furthermore the extent of the Blair victory goes far beyond a settled belief that he would, make a better job of it and can only be understood in relation to the 80s and the real economic upheaval of that period . Now we have a settled view that the Conservatives would be better
"a relatively minor perturbation in the economic mill pond"
It is minor compared to the realignment of the 80s or the stagflation of the 70s or the ongoing problems from the war through the 60s . These were the political events that shaped the country this by comparison should be possible , for a government to ride out . Not this one;which is my point .
Whose Millpond ?
We have enjoyed the lowest growth in the Anglosphere under Brown whose high tax polices have inhibited the step change in affluence that we could have had . It is exactly this new realisation that has profoundly re written his character.
Whose Millpond ?
This is the 16th consecutive year of growth
Do the maths .
Whose the Daddy ?
Newmania
:)
Interesting stuff. But Jon Snow is an annoying man, no? And not very bright?
All the polling just now is quite odd really. Uk has bene coping best worldwide with the slings and arrows these last ten years but Brown has temporarily got the lowest confidence to continue to do well with the economy. That's odd.
Three and a half times as many people allegedly think he is going to mishandle the alleged global mess than have any personal blowback from alleged mess.
Sentiment is a funny thing. Measuring it is difficult. Results are not binding and often temporary. My view is that the world will come back to the view that Brown is a good bet for difficult times. And Darling.
Sir George Osborne on the other hand is a clown with a track record of fibs and yah boo.
Bank moves, Zimbabwe moves, Iraq moves, employment figures, ongoing improvements in public services ... all will bring sentiment back in time to secure a fourth term IMO.
If Boris wins this will become more certain I think, though for the sake of London I hope he doesn't.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home