A Prime Minister at the mercy of events and people he cannot control
Daily Mail, 27th April 2004

Through thick and thin Neil Kinnock has remained steadfastly loyal. So it did not go unnoticed in Downing Street yesterday that the former Labour leader has become the latest public figure to join in the growing national pastime - speculating about Tony Blair's future.

Everyone, it seems, is doing it. Talk to ministers or civil servants in Whitehall and the subject invariably comes up. It is the same with the Prime Minister's own people. The cause can be summed up in one word: judgement. The issue is not, and never has been, whether or not you agree with the war in Iraq, Europe, public service reform, immigration or any other policy. By definition, any leader who seeks to lead will antagonise many people. The question being asked ever more frequently at Westminster is: does Blair know what he is doing?

The most alarming aspect to last week's U-turn over the referendum on the European constitution was that Blair allowed himself to look extremely fallible. Even as a staunch pro-European, he could have shifted his ground towards a vote in a way that could have caused less damage. After all, the issue did not suddenly spring up on him. He could have several weeks ago summoned his cabinet to discuss a change of strategy, to pick the brains of his ministers about how best to do it. Instead he allowed himself to be bounced into a last-minute announcement by Jack Straw in particular, whose growing alliance with Gordon Brown is being carefully watched throughout the Labour party. "Tony was ambushed by a fifth column from the Foreign Office," says one seething cabinet minister. "I never thought I'd see that day." In his early years, when his power went unchallenged, Blair rode roughshod over his cabinet. As real politics resumed after the 2001 election, he promised to change, to consult more. He tried, but it went against his instincts. His haphazard approach to decision-making no longer smacks of arrogance but of weakness.

Blair's foreign policy is close to tatters. His pro-Americanism has failed to deliver. His pro-Europeanism has failed to deliver. Both are potentially laudable concepts. They are not contradictory. But they have rested on rhetoric, not on strategy. Blair and his people know that Iraq will be his legacy. The mess goes far beyond the streets of Baghdad, Basra and Fallujah. Blair mortgaged Britain's entire national interest on his camaraderie with George W Bush and his rush to war. In so doing, he helped to weaken the United Nations, to sideline NATO, and to drive a wedge through the heart of Europe. Trust me, Blair said time and again, I can secure a broader Middle Eastern settlement, using Iraq as a beacon to introduce democracy across the region. Crucial to Blair's vision was the road map for a settlement between Israel and the Palestinians. That was contemptuously torn up by Bush and Ariel Sharon, the Israeli Prime Minister, without so much as a phone call to warn Downing Street. So much for the special relationship. All the while, British diplomats - the professionals - have watched with horror. In an unprecedented move last night, 52 eminent former envoys issued a public letter urging Blair to show "real influence as a loyal ally" of the US. "If that is unacceptable or unwelcome, there is no case for supporting policies which are doomed to failure." Their criticisms will have resonated among their serving colleagues as well.

And then Europe. Cast your mind back a decade ago to John Major's travails, to the many rebellions of the Eurosceptics. Would anyone then have countenanced that Britain would be as far away as it still is to adopting the Euro currency, or even to accepting the need for the European Union itself? What are two landslide majorities for if not for setting the political agenda? The point of the referendum U-turn was to provide clarity, to pre-empt accusations that the government was fighting shy of a debate on the future of Europe. But will Blair really summon the courage?

All the while, the Chancellor waits impatiently. He is presiding over an economy that, for all the dire warnings of overheating, refuses to buckle. His growth forecasts are being revised upwards. Unemployment and inflation remain at record lows. As one government official puts it: "How on earth could we be in such a mess given that personal wealth continues to rise just about across the board?" The picture in the public services remains mixed, but ministers are hoping that people's good individual tales of the National Health Service in recent months can be translated into a national picture. And yet, comments one senior adviser: "We seem to be doing our best to talk about all the difficult subjects and not about areas where things are going well."

For the moment Brown is observing a tense truce with his nominal boss. The Chancellor believes his turn should have come already, but he knows he has to sit out the final instalment of the Blair era. Will he have to wait until late 2005 or even spring 2006 (possible dates for the referendum)? Or could it come as early as this summer? The answer lies in Blair's hands. In the meantime, Brown has nothing to gain from a dismal performance by Labour in this June's local and European elections - some ministers talk of an anticipated "caning". He has nothing to gain from Labour's majority being cut at the next election, let alone Labour being swept from power (although even senior Conservatives do not believe that will happen). Nor does he have anything to gain from picking up the pieces after a referendum defeat. That is why Brown and his allies have to tread carefully.

Last Thursday Blair very briefly apologised to the cabinet for bungling the referendum decision. Those still close to him hope that they can move on after their "wobbly" week. But these miscalculations are becoming the rule rather than the exception. In one year Blair has presided over Iraq (and even supporters of the war could hardly call it a great success); he presided over the events that led to the Hutton enquiry and Alastair Campbell running rampant over television studios; he has presided over the tuition fees imbroglio (and even those who support the principle say it could have been handled better); he has presided over the botched attempts to reform the judiciary ... and now this. Blair excused his caution in the first term, promising radicalism in his second. That second term has gone off the rails, and a Prime Minister who projected himself as the master of all he surveyed is now at the mercy of events - and people - he cannot control.


This article first appeared in the Daily Mail and may not be reproduced without permission.