It’s nine days since Nick Clegg challenged Gordon Brown to volunteer to appear before Sir John Chilcot’s inquiry into the Iraq war this side of the general election “before people decide how to vote on his record in government?” And now it seems that Nick’s pressure has paid off – the BBC reports:
Gordon Brown will give evidence to the Iraq Inquiry before the general election, the BBC understands.
Mr Brown, who has said he is “happy” to face the inquiry whenever called, had been under pressure to do so before the election, which must be held by June.
The inquiry’s chairman is expected to confirm later that the PM will be asked to appear but will not set a date. However, the BBC understands he will appear in late February or early March.
You can re-live the exchange between Nick and Mr Brown, either on video courtesy the BBC or via the Hansard transcript, here on LDV.
Nick has welcomed the Prime Minister’s decision to face the Chilcot Inquiry:
It is well known that the Prime Minister was a key figure in Britain’s decision to invade Iraq. It is only right that Gordon Brown should explain his role in this disastrous foreign policy failure before asking the British people for their vote.”
This is an excellent result for Nick. Good in its own right: the Prime Minister should be asked about his role in the invasion of Iraq. And good for Nick’s growing stature as leader: once again, as over the Gurkhas and Michael Martin, it is Nick who is making the running, and punching above his weight at Prime Minister’s Questions.
This in stark contrast to David Cameron, whose string of lacklustre Commons’ performances are beginning to be noticed even by his friends at The Spectator. Here’s how the magazine’s Coffee House blog compared the performances of Nick and the Tory leader at this week’s PMQs:
The LibDem leader took a pop at Labour with a very smart weapon. He wondered why the government hadn’t acted to stop RBS lending tax-payers’ money to Kraft which is about to sack Cadburys staff. That’s three bogymen in one. … hate him because they can see he’s capable, plucky and politically shrewd. The house has strange ways of honouring talent. …
Cameron risks turning into the Rafa Benitez of Westminster. He’s living on a reputation which is rapidly fading from memory.
US firm Kraft’s proposed takeover of Cadbury’s has made headlines in recent days. First, because it’s a major, historic British brand being snapped-up by a non-UK business (or ‘foreign predator’, as Vince Cable labels them). Secondly, because of the fear that job losses will result. And, thirdly, because of the role of the Royal Bank of Scotland – in which the British government has a majority stake-holding – in lending the money to Kraft which will fund its acquisition of Cadbury’s.
The Lib Dems – in the shape of Nick Clegg and Vince – have sharply questioned the role of the Government in the takeover. At Prime Minister’s Questions yesterday, Nick asked Gordon Brown:
… there is a simple principle at stake. Tens of thousands of British companies are crying out for that money to protect jobs, and instead RBS wants to lend it to a multinational with a record of cutting jobs. When British taxpayers bailed out the banks, they would never have believed that their money would be used to put British people out of work. Is that not just plain wrong?
In a weird display of the mutual weakness at the top of the Labour Party, the Prime Minister and Chief Whip are in disagreement over Gordon Brown’s plans to legislate for a referendum on AV (which would be held after the general election).
Whilst Gordon Brown and, rather surprisingly given his views on the Liberal Democrats, Jack Straw are both in favour, prominent opponents include Chief Whip Nick Brown. He seems to be particularly motivated by fears that under AV he would lose …
By Sara Bedford
| Tue 19th January 2010 - 12:15 pm
Last weekend, the Fabian Society held their New Year conference, entitled ‘Causes to fight for’. I was fortunate to attend the conference on behalf of Liberal Democrat Voice, at the invitation of the Fabians. Over the next week, I will share with readers of LDV some of my thoughts and observations from the day. Today: the keynote speech from Gordon Brown.
Just over 30 months ago, Tony Blair made an over-emotional and stage-managed resignation speech. But as Brown’s long march to his inevitable anointment as party leader began, behind the scenes at Labour HQ a more rapid changeover took place, …
Mikey, The Terror Suspect gets a write-up from Stephen Glenn. There’s just one problem with him being a terror suspect as the photograph on the blog post reveals.
Spotted any other great posts in the last day from blogs that aren’t on the aggregator? Do post up a comment sharing them with us all.
Tories claim Labour is using taxpayers’ money to fund election advertising campaign – Telegraph, 15.1.10
“The Conservatives accused Labour of “raiding” taxpayers’ money to fund their election campaign. New figures uncovered by the Conservatives show that spending on advertising has increased to £232 million, which is a 39 per cent increase on the previous year.”
A tenth of schools fail to meet GCSE targets – The Guardian, 14.1.10
“One in 10 secondary schools in England failed to meet basic targets for GCSEs last summer and academies were disproportionately represented among the failing institutions, government statistics published today reveal.
Nick Clegg pressed Gordon Brown to volunteer to appear before Sir John Chilcot’s inquiry into the Iraq war this side of the general election “before people decide how to vote on his record in government?” The Prime Minister replied that it wasn’t a matter for him. (Odd how when you become the most powerful person in Britain, you seem to lose the power to volunteer to do something inconvenient).
So Nick asked again, telling the Prime Minister he “should insist on going to the inquiry now”, and asking “What has he got to hide?” Again Mr Brown said, “Sorry, guv, more than my job’s worth” (or words to that effect).
Nick still wasn’t happy, so has now written to the Prime Minister, chalenging him to do the decent thing:
Dear Gordon,
I am writing to urge you to indicate immediately to Sir John Chilcot that it is your strong preference to go before the Iraq Inquiry ahead of the General Election.
Following developments yesterday at Alastair Campbell’s hearing, your personal role in the decisions that led to the war in Iraq has now come under the spotlight. The notion that your hearing should take place after the election in order that the Inquiry remains outside of party politics therefore no longer holds. On the contrary, the sense that you have been granted special treatment because of your position as Prime Minister will only serve to undermine the perceived independence of the Committee.
As I said to you across the floor of the Commons today, people have a right to know the truth about the part you played in this war before they cast their verdict o n your Government’s record. I urge you to confirm publicly that should Sir John Chilcot invite you to give evidence to the Inquiry ahead of the election you will agree to do so.
Nick Clegg
Well, I don’t suppose Mr Brown will change his mind – but Nick has at least exposed the Prime Minister’s relief-cum-satisfaction that he can dodge the Chilcot bullet, dominating the main political headlines as a result. And by the time Mr Brown does eventually appear he will be a genuinely powerless ex-Prime Minister so who’ll care what he has to say any longer?
Meanwhile David Cameron asked some windy, unfocused and instantly forgettable questions of the Prime Minister who gave at least as good as he got. Score-draw for theatrics; no-score draw for content.
Here’s Nick’s questions, courtesy the BBC. The Hansard transcript’s below it.
First up, there’s a report from the Hansard Society which has surveyed MPs and their use of the internet (“A study into how MPs use digital media to communicate with their constituents”):
Brown sees off the plotters…just – The Daily Telegraph, 7.1.10
“Gordon Brown was forced to rely on lukewarm backing from senior Cabinet colleagues last night to see off an attempt to oust him as Prime Minister.
“By last night, the attempted coup, which had begun at lunchtime, appeared to have failed as no senior figures were prepared to back it. But while every senior minister issued a statement condemning the letter, few voiced strong support for Mr Brown.”
MPs could be in line for £15,000 pay rise – Daily Mail, 6.1.10
Fresh doubts about Gordon Brown’s authority surfaced last night as rebel Labour MPs claimed that most of his Cabinet came close to backing the attempted coup against him.
One ringleader of the revolt told The Independent: “My understanding was that only three or four Cabinet ministers were absolutely determined to die in the ditch for Gordon.” Suggesting that Cabinet members were fomenting the revolt, the rebel MP said that: “We were asked to do something and we did it.”
LDV’s co-editor Mark Pack was one of three bloggers asked by Channel 4 News for their take on today’s extraordinary bid by two former cabinet ministers to unseat the Prime Minister. You can watch Mark’s minute-long clip here. Here’s a quick excerpt as a taster:
Today’s events have all the makings of a fantastic political farce because if you were to launch a coup against the prime minister now is just about the worst time to do it.
“I guess it’s just desperation because Labour know that under Gordon Brown they are facing a very heavy election defeat and they
Unpopular government seeks fourth general election victory in a row in midst of a recession. Sound familiar? Welcome to 1992.
Back then it was the Conservatives in power facing a Labour opposition and David Cameron was working for the Conservative Party, as head of the political section of the Conservative Research Department.
I suspect it’s memories of 1992 that help explain the vagueness of Conservative tax and spend plans this time round. In 1992 the Labour opposition had spelt out its spending commitments in advance in some detail and so, when Chancellor of the Exchequer Norman Lamont sprung a surprise in the …
New Year, old sabre-rattling. Gordon Brown and David Cameron are parading their leadership credentials, with a view to capturing an entire nation – the UK, that is.
David Cameron made a speech (transcript here) in Oxfordshire today saying that the country needs a change of direction and a new leadership:
“We can’t go on in these difficult times with a weak prime minister and a divided government.”
You can almost hear the Tory munitions factory roar as they forge this, strengthen that and defeat the other.
“The Detroit plot thankfully failed. But it has been a wake-up call for the ongoing battles we must wage not just for security against terror but for the hearts and minds of a generation.”
It’s a common political (and journalistic, and marketing) technique to play to people’s fears, but what next in the Prime Ministerial arms race – Brown and Cameron appearing on the decks of rival aircraft carriers, squeezed into military uniform à la George Bush?
Neither leader, for all their fighting talk, seems to have heard of liberty.
Over 1,000 LDV readers (who, I never tire of reminding folk – especially any journos on the look-out for an easy story – may or may not all be Lib Dems) voted, and here’s what you said:
Day 3281 (again): DOCTOR WHO: The End of Ten (Part One): rumour has it that some Lib Dems are Doctor Who fans; rumour has it too that some believe an elephant is talking to them. If you are in both groups, then this post is for you.
Spotted any other great posts in the last day from blogs that aren’t on the aggregator? Do post up a comment sharing them with us all.
By Stephen Tall
| Wed 23rd December 2009 - 10:50 pm
At long last, what was widely known in Westminster Village circles has rippled out beyond: John Hutton was the cabinet minister who told the BBC’s political editor Nick Robinson in 2006 that Gordon Brown would be ‘a fucking disaster’ in the role of prime minister. Well done to BBC Radio 4’s Eddie Mair for wringing the admission from a reluctant Mr Hutton.
But it prompts two questions.
First, if this was Mr Hutton’s view – albeit one from which he has subsequently resiled, in public at any rate – why did he choose to become one of the 308 Labour …
The Times’s Danny Finkelstein has a good perspective on the issue today:
“In every election I have been involved in, there has been a last-minute rumour about an early poll date. And every one has involved a mad dash to get things ready, all those little practical details that you were going to get round to but hadn’t. Followed by anticlimax.”
Quite.
It’s sensible to err on the side of caution and be prepared (who has ever regretted being prepared in …
By Rachel Smith
| Sat 12th December 2009 - 3:45 pm
Hat-tip and sincere apologies to Master Shakespeare.
In a thunderstorm, three witches decide to meet again on the heath “after the deed is done.”
Next, a captain reports to King Dunblair that Macbrown beat MacMajorwald in battle. Darling adds that the Thane of Cawdor was traitorous to them during the battle.
The three witches confront Macbrown and Banqleson (the Dark Lord) on their way home from the battle. They predict that Macbrown will be King of Scotland, and Banqleson, though never King himself, will beget rulers.
The witches leave and Darling informs Macbrown that he has inherited the title Thane …
I’m pretty sceptical of the chatter about Gordon Brown calling an early general election*. Here’s one the reasons which hasn’t been much talked about.
Imagine we have an early election. Imagine too that Labour manages what is probably the limit of its hopes – largest party in a hung Parliament. (Witness Labour MPs going round telling Liberal Democrats how much they now love voting reform.)
Labour then hangs on to power.
But in May along comes a round of local elections, in which Labour will – almost certainly – suffer massive losses. If you’ve got experience of a no overall majority council, you’ll …
By Philip Young
| Fri 11th December 2009 - 1:40 pm
A look back at the last few days of news and comment in the National newspapers, by former Fleet Street News Editor (and former Editor of Liberal News), Philip Young… including a few clippings you may have missed.
Sunday Times, 6.12.09:
“A Tory peer has been caught using someone else’s home address to claim tens of thousands of pounds in expenses. Lord Taylor of Warwick, a 57-year-old former barrister, told the House of Lords that his main home was a terrace house in Oxford, which he neither owned nor lived in. Taylor has lived in his family home …
Welcome to December 11th – only 20 days to go until the end of the year. Four years ago today the top story was the fire at the Buncefield oil depot which injured 43 people and was said to have been the biggest fire of its kind in peacetime Europe.
2 Must-Read Blog Posts
What are other Liberal Democrat bloggers saying? Here are two posts that have caught the eye from the Liberal Democrat Blogs aggregator:
I’ve run a number of blogging workshops in the past, mainly for councillors, but this one is a bit different. It is aimed at people who want to provide a counter-balance to some of the more aggressive extremist and terrorist-supporting views that can be found online.
The Government has today made a U-turn over plans that could have left low-income families £780 a year worse off, after proposed changes to the Local Housing Allowance (LHA) were scrapped in today’s Pre-Budget Report.
Quietly sneaked into the last budget was a proposal to claw back £780 per year from some of the country’s poorest and most vulnerable families. At present, households receiving Local Housing Allowance (LHA) are able to keep up to £15 a week if they choose a home with a rent below the maximum payment for their area. Alistair Darling’s plan to prevent this excess payment being kept by the claimant would have left some of those already struggling to get by on the lowest incomes losing up to 20% of their income. The Government’s own figures calculated that around 300,000 of the poorest households would have been affected.
There’s no doubt today’s PMQs belonged to Gordon Brown. It’s not necessarily that he answered the questions any better than usual – that seems to be an acknowledged superfluity for the Prime Minister – but his performance was miles more energetic and confident than usual.
Mr Brown was also helped by an over-defensive David Cameron, who seemed to have no quips prepared for the inevitable assaults by the Prime Minister on the Tories’ tax cuts for millionaires, and the tax-avoiding non-dom status of Tory candidate Zac Goldsmith. Especially effective were the Prime Minister’s withering put-downs – “The more he talks, …
Gordon Brown has confirmed he will send 500 more troops to Afghanistan, taking the total UK deployment to over 10,000. He told MPs all conditions had now been met to send the extra personnel and that eight other countries had also offered additional troops. The UK force level will reach 9,500 but special forces takes this to 10,000.
Here in full is Nick Clegg’s Commons response to Gordon Brown’s announcement:
I join the Prime Minister in recognising and commending the enormously impressive work of our Armed Forces in Afghanistan.
Finally it has become mainstream to talk about the need for a big shift in strategy in Afghanistan.
When I first questioned the effectiveness of our action there six months ago and called for this kind of step-change, I was told it was unpatriotic.
The Prime Minister’s change of tone since then has been dramatic – and welcome.
The Liberal Democrat approach to Afghanistan has always been simple: we should do this properly or not at all.
By Stephen Tall
| Wed 25th November 2009 - 9:05 pm
Ah, the joy of PMQs – Nick asks Gordon a question, Gordon fails to answer a totally different question to the one Nick asks. It’s a regular pattern, but today it was clear to everyone that the Lib Dem leader had floored the Prime Minister over the issue of Sir John Chilcot’s inquiry into the events leading up to the invasion of Iraq.
Nick laid the trap neatly, asking the simple and straightforward question:
It is vital that the Iraq inquiry, which started its work this week, is able to reveal the full truth about the decisions leading up to the
By Iain Roberts
| Sun 22nd November 2009 - 8:11 am
The latest Ipsos MORI poll for the Observer has Labour support jumping by 5% at the expense of the Conservatives and narrowing the gap between the two biggest parties to just 6%.
The poll has the Conservatives on 37%, Labour on 31% and the Lib Dems on 17%. That’s well into hung parliament territory and really quite surprising just six months out from a General Election.
As the graph on page three of this “getting opinion polls right” pdf shows, the Labour lead over John Major’s government from August 1996 to Februrary 1997 was consistently between 12 and 25% across …
By Stephen Tall
| Sat 21st November 2009 - 8:30 am
Welcome to the latest LDVideo instalment, featuring three of the most memorable video clips doing the rounds on the blogosphere.
First up is Ed Balls – the guy might have a debating style reminiscent of a school bully demanding tuck money, but here he completely out-smarts tongue-tied Tory education spokesman Michael Gove:
The second clip shows Rupert Murdoch furiously denying suggestions that he alleged President Obama made a racist remark, followed by Rupert Murdoch alleging that President Obama made a racist remark:
The Government has long had a knack of turning a good idea into an operational nightmare. One case in point is the Queen’s Speech proposal for personal care at home. The Prime Minister has given an undertaking to find a way of ensuring that older people with the highest needs can remain at home, regardless of means.
The bill will attempt to help 400,000 people (‘guaranteeing’ free personal care for 280,000 and providing assistance to 130,000 others). Difficult to argue with? In the small print not covered by the nationals screaming about the General Election is the fact that this will …
By Stephen Tall
| Mon 16th November 2009 - 9:00 pm
Oooh, here’s a nasty ‘forced choice’ question to thrust upon LDV’s readers … let’s assume for a moment that, by some quirk of electoral fate, the Lib Dems do not storm to victory at the next general election, and Nick Clegg is not asked by Her Maj to form the next government. A far-fetched scenario, I know, but go with me on this. If those were the circumstances, who would you rather have as Prime Minister: Gordon Brown or David Cameron?
And, yes, those are your only two choices in this poll. We’re not giving you an easy ‘neither of …
Mick Taylor @Lawrence Cox. To read your comment one might want to believe that the Triple Lock has ensured pensioners have decent pensions. It hasn't and UK state pensions ...
Chloe A Blue Labour response recent events in Hampshire. Well worth a read.
https://www.paulembery.com/p/for-the-race-obsessed-british-state...
theakes A new strategy/approach requires a new leader...
Kira Collins You use the phrase “fiscal federalism” and “financial autonomy” but have not used the phase I had hoped to see that is drawn out of both: fiscal autonom...
Peter Martin @Iain,
"Without financial autonomy, political devolution is incomplete......."
The problem, from a macroeconomic perspective, is that full finan...
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
The Joy of Six 1529
Liz Saville Roberts to Give the David Lloyd George Memorial Lecture at Gwyl Cricieth Festival
Labour deputy claims that Farage is a threat to democracy
We do have a two-tier policing system but it is not what our homegrown racists think it is.
Mick Taylor 
Chloe 
theakes 
Kira Collins 
Peter Martin 