Labour MPs want heads to roll over Donorgate

Published on Wednesday 12 December 2007 00:37

NO-ONE has ever accused Gordon Brown of irrational exuberance before. Observers would say he was more likely to be teetering on the brink of manic depression than over-the-top optimism. But the man whose critics pin him down as a forlorn Fifer actually has some worrying tendencies to look on the bright side.

Irrational exuberance was the phrase coined by Alan Greenspan, the former Federal Reserve chief, to describe the euphoria surrounding the dotcom bubble. (Never mind the fact that the guru of US economists was responsible for this with his rampant rate cutting.)

Brown is precariously prone to being equally Pollyanna-ish about the economy and public sector finances. He has some reason to be, having proven wrong gloomy economic forecasts for the last few budgets.

But he is equally unaware, insiders say, of his own diminishing returns for the party.

While the PM may explode with rage at the misjudgements of his spin doctors, who allowed what started as a flirtation with election footsie to come close to a full-blown affair, he is not being told the truth about the fury on the backbenches.

Labour MPs are incandescent at what they see as a squandered chance to build on the misery of David Cameron, who has gone from zero to hero in a matter of weeks, largely at Brown's expense.

At a meeting of the Parliamentary Labour Party last week, the questions were hand-picked and the welcome for the PM was polite. Where was the firm but honest warning from his own MPs? Are things so bad that Brown has become the elephant in the room? This was the height of the Donorgate controversy, where just months after the incoming leader had pledged to put the sleaze of the Blair era behind Labour, the party found itself at the centre of possibly two police investigations into its finances.

Worse, there were allegations that officials had colluded with secret donors on how to funnel the gifts through proxy givers.

It is not just the Bob Marshall Andrew "wreckers" of the party who are angry. A member of the government revealed that even the whips are considering unleashing some of the criticisms in the New Year if Brown does not pick up on the clues.

"Gordon urgently needs a reshuffle. The party want to see someone pay for this; preferably Douglas Alexander," a source said.

"There is a clamour for the International Development Secretary to lose his job as Brown's election supremo, although not his Cabinet rank and salary."

Just like his predecessor, Brown is accused of surrounding himself with a small coterie of advisers who, with the exception of Ed Balls, tiptoe around him too much to tell him the truth. It is believed that Balls is juggling too many of his namesakes in the air, as the new children's secretary and de facto prime minister.

With such a small pool of those in the know, this has an impact on the briefing to press and hence the message being relayed to the public. Voters can't connect with Brown at the moment, even if they wanted to.

Meanwhile, civil war is brewing on the government's plans to impose up to 42 days detention with charge on terror suspects. There is a certain irony that Brown's embattled home secretary, Jacqui Smith, is making the case for it just seven days ahead of the sale of the only privately held copy of the Magna Carta - in the US.

It is owned by Ross Perot, a billionaire and former candidate for the US Presidency. Indeed, the document underpinning the values of freedom and democracy is even more feted in America than it is at home.

The whips say that Brown cannot take their support for granted on this one.

Even with the daily skirmishes otherwise known as "events", Brown has another problem: a lack of flak jackets.

When the battleship Blair was going down, he had his own heavy beasts willing to inflate the lifeboats for him.

Where were Brown, Balls and Ed Miliband at the height of the lost disc fiasco/donor row? Indeed, Alexander pulled out of the BBC's Question Time programme at the last minute, just days after his older sibling Wendy was implicated in taking a gift from a tax exile.

Likewise, during the controversy over botched figures about immigration, the government pulled out the equally robotic Caroline Flint to defend it.

What the party needs is a similar tonic to that which put Barak Obama back in the race to win the Democrat nomination - the Oprah effect, or someone whose likeability factor eclipses the "loser" tag.

Brown alas has no-one immediately around him like this. Even Alan Johnson, the affable Health Secretary whose greatest (printable) vice is his self deprecation, has remained on the sidelines, only making one weekend TV appearance in which he defended Brown.

With so few people in the loop, and those who are failing to speak to the vertebrae of the party, there is little wonder that there has been a communication breakdown. Arguably, No 10 could defend itself on this claim alone if the latest donations are ever hauled before the courts.

Unlike his predecessor, the party does not yet wish Brown any harm. Indeed they have a respect and loyalty to him that Blair could never inspire; there is no question of Brown being anything other than a Labour man.

That makes it even sadder that it took Blair the best part of a decade to get into the bunker, while Brown is unwittingly already being detained there.