Selected excerpts from Charles Clarke's interview with John Humphries on the Today programme this morning: John Humphrys: In what sense is Gordon Brown leading the party badly at the moment? Charles Clarke: There are two types of evidence which indicate that there is an issue. The first is the political evidence, both in the actual election results, local elections, parliamentary byelections, opinion polls, where we have been achieving lower scores than have been recorded in history. And then in the economy there are a lot of concerns, many, as Gordon rightly says, as a result of the international situation, but also we have not had a sureness of touch in the way that we have dealt with those economic issues over the last year.JH: So what should he do that he's not doing? CK: The key thing is he has got to establish his authority and set a very clear leadership direction which makes it clear how he sees the issues will be resolved. The question is can he get his team working as a team, can he establish an economic programme which is about more than relaunches and odd policy initiatives, can he establish a political direction which is very clear to the country about why Labour is in office and what it seeks to achieve? JH: But so far Brown as prime minister has failed to turn things around? CK: Certainly as far as the political polls are concerned, that's the case. As you rightly said in your introduction, the question that people up and down the country are considering is what is his capacity to do that over the coming few weeks and months? JH: And you clearly have doubts that he's capable of doing it? CK: Well, I've always had some doubts. In fact, I was one of the very few MPs who did not nominate Gordon Brown for leader a year or so ago. I thought I was wrong. I thought he did very well at the beginning of his period of premiership. However, I think there are many, many, many people now who are very concerned about out direction and about our capacity to win the next election. JH: Many, many, many. Who are they? CK: Throughout the Labour party. Talk to almost any member of parliament, any party activist and you will find deep concerns about where we stand and what we do. I think that is almost a universal feeling. What there isn't is clarity about a particular course of action to change that. And what I believe is that there are two essential possibilities, both of which are perfectly honourable. The first is for the performance of the government to improve significantly, which is what I think many, many people would like to see. The second is for Gordon Brown to stand down as prime minister with honour and to have a proper leadership election to address the proper issues. Both of those are perfectly reputable courses of action. What I think is disreputable is people who believe we are going to a very bad election result, that we are going to lose in historically bad terms, but who don't believe there's anything we can do about it. That kind of fatalism is, I think, very bad indeed. JH: How long do you give Mr Brown? CK: I think it is a question of months, really, it's a question of how it works forward and whether he can deal with the situation. I'm personally a sceptic, I always have been, but I also believe that it's entirely possible that he could turn it around. But I think what many people will be wanting to see very soon is clarity about his actually doing that. JH: So, if he fails to provide that clarity, if he fails to turn it around in a matter of months, and he fails to say I will go with honour, what should happen then? Should a group of senior party figures go to him and say, "Gordon, the game is up"? CK: I think the best for the country and the party would be if Gordon made his own mind up. That is what a whole string of national and party leaders have done in past decades, decided that there came a point where it was better for them to go with honour. If that didn't happen, then I think it would be down principally to the cabinet to decide what to do and to do that in an expeditious way. JH: And is there a mood in the cabinet to do that at the moment? Do many in the cabinet share your view on that? CK: I think many in the cabinet share the view that we are in great difficulty and they are doubtful about our capacity to get out of it. There isn't a view in the cabinet at the moment that they should go and speak to Gordon in the way I have been describing. JH: Do you believe there will be that view within a matter of months if things do not improve? CK: I would expect that, yes. JH: If that doesn't happen, are you prepared, or is somebody else prepared, to stand against him as a stalking horse? CK: I wouldn't do that myself and I wouldn't counsel anyone else to do it either. The party's constitutional procedures in this kind of circumstance are very cumbersome, they would lead to bitter division and bitter problems, and I certainly don't think it's the kind of thing that I would be ready to do. One of the reasons I wrote this piece in the New Statesman today was my very strong view is that this is a matter that needs to be openly discussed, rather than discussed behind hands the whole time in a way that isn't good for public politics at all in my view.
No comments:
Post a Comment