BRITISH Prime Minister Gordon Brown has put an end to all speculations about another general election only 17 months after Labour secured a record third term in government under former Prime Minister Tony Blair. Many pundits had predicted that Brown would decide to go to the people on Nov. 1.
Ever since the Labour Party’s annual conference two weeks ago, there had been rising speculation that Brown would seek to emerge completely from the shadow of Blair by seeking his personal mandate from the voters. Yet until now, from Gordon Brown there was no comment. The new premier has just completed his first 100 days in the top job after 10 years running the Treasury. He has faced and weathered a series of challenges including terror attacks in London and Glasgow and the outbreaks of foot and mouth and blue tongue diseases among UK farm stock. Though he absolutely lacks the charisma of his intense and plausible predecessor, Brown has set out his political ground as a dour, no-nonsense leader who looks to the core values of his youth. He makes much of his being the child of a Scottish preacher. In comparison with the Blair decade, the Brown administration has promised to be less flashy and more focused on reality than presentation.
Yet in the very speculation that was unleashed about a possible election — something that could not have happened without Brown’s approval — there was evidence the media-manipulative Blair days have not gone away. When the rumors began, the opposition Conservative Party under its young leader David Cameron was languishing far behind in the opinion polls. A fourth Socialist victory seemed inevitable. But Labour’s lead over the Tories has been slashed in the wake of Cameron’s impressive personal performance at the Conservative conference last week, when he gave an over-long but impassioned speech entirely without notes.
Cameron had a point when he accused Brown of “great weakness and indecision” Saturday by failing to call the snap election. Brown had built himself a dilemma. If he decided against an election this autumn, he would be charged with political cowardice. If he went ahead, his opponents would accuse him of acting before bad news starts to hit the economy, over which he had charge for ten years. Unrest among many government workers — postmen are currently on strike — is growing. The recent banking liquidity crisis and run on Northern Rock has rattled investors large and small. The economy could be in trouble. Brown’s iron chancellor reputation may be starting to rust.
There doesn’t have to be another general election until June 2010. Unless a major political issue arose between now and say autumn 2009, the only plausible reason to hold a snap election is to give Gordon Brown his own mandate and the only good time for that was now. Latest polls show that the time is no longer there. A Guardian ICM poll put the parties on level pegging at 38 percent Friday, compared to an 11 point lead for Labour just 10 days previously in a Channel 4 News television YouGov poll after Brown addressed the Labour Party conference.
