News of their plot emerged as Mr Brown gave an upbeat performance at Prime Minister’s Questions, provoking supportive chortles on the Labour benches with jibes at David Cameron’s incomplete grasp of his party’s proposals to bring about a tax advantage for married couples.
It should have been a positive sign to the country that the Prime Minister had found a way of attacking the Conservatives on policy issues and was relishing the coming election campaign. Instead, it was immediately undermined by emergence of the plot by the hapless Hoon and Hewitt.
Their public confirmation of the depth of despair over Mr Brown’s leadership among MPs ensured that it was the Tories who were laughing. Nevertheless, it raises important issues about the electability of the Labour Party, given the lack of support for Gordon Brown’s leadership.
That is nothing new; it has been deeply damaged by the Blairite/Brownite faultline. Five months before the final cut-off for a General Election, however, is no time to force a leadership challenge.
Two former ministers who are not seeking re-election and are said to be disappointed at not being offered a European job will carry little weight, but their debacle has inflicted unnecessary damage to their party. The length of time it took senior cabinet ministers to express support for the Prime Minister and their failure to do so resoundingly suggests that Labour MPs have yet to close ranks, despite the approach of the election.
As the country struggles to cope with the disruption caused by the exceptional winter conditions, the people are looking for firm, practical leadership to ensure roads are kept open, danger is minimised and the vulnerable are protected. In the longer term, they want fiscal policies to take us out of recession and provide economic stability, and the polls suggest Labour still has significant support on those issues.
The expenses scandal angered voters because it demonstrated how out of touch many MPs are with the reality of their constituents’ lives. Their confidence will not be regained by a political party which indulges in political navel-gazing at such a crucial time.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article