There’s no doubt Brown put up a bravura performance and sold himself well. The fatal weakness was in its content. Almost every single proposal was a rehash of old proposals, or wildly expensive in a time of financial crisis, or merely addressing some of the damage his government has caused.
And he completely failed to address the greatest problem of all - the imminence of the world’s judgement on the British economy and whether our economy will be downgraded with dreadful consequences for borrowing costs and the future of us all, unless we take swift action . Swift? Will after the election be swift enough. Excuse me if I say I can’t be sure about that.
Here’s a selection of what four of tomorrow’s daillies have to say
Christina
==================================
TELEGRAPH 30.9.09
1. Tired ideas from an exhausted Labour Party
Telegraph View:
Gordon Brown showed that he has learned nothing from Labour's record
Rarely has a Prime Minister addressed a party conference from a weaker position than did Gordon Brown yesterday. With one opinion poll putting Labour in third place, behind the Liberal Democrats, the mood at Brighton has been one of weary resignation, rather than anger. After 12 years in power, the party appears exhausted; activists talk not about winning but about limiting the scale of defeat.
As a consequence, while his charismatic predecessor had the luxury of being able to talk over the heads of activists to the country at large when setting out his vision for the future, Mr Brown had a more parochial political task to perform. He had to close down any lingering threat of mutiny from a party that knows it faces defeat in the general election. He did so by showering it with tasty morsels from the election manifesto, giving demoralised activists some meat to take to the doorsteps as they struggle to prevent a defeat next spring turning into a rout.
Within these narrow confines, Mr Brown succeeded. It is not quite a question of being at one bound free, more of being allowed to survive until polling day. Yet in the process of shoring up his personal position, the Prime Minister demonstrated once again why the Government he leads has little to offer this country. He talked endlessly about change, but his overriding message was that a fourth Labour term will be little different to a third Labour term – and who wants that?
First, he showed he has learnt nothing from Labour's record. The terrible fate of Fiona Pilkington and her daughter Francecca, hounded to their deaths by lawless young thugs, stands as a grim emblem of the failure of this Government to make us safer. During a decade of great prosperity, when it enjoyed an unassailable political mandate, Labour poured money into endless new laws, initiatives by the dozen, sound-bites by the score, crackdowns without number. And it failed. What is erroneously termed low-level criminality – it is actually the type of crime that affects and frightens most people – still defaces too many inner-city estates. The only thing that sets the Pilkington case apart from thousands of others is that it ended so tragically. Mr Brown's remedy? More of the same.
Second, while the squandering of political and economic capital to little lasting purpose has been the hallmark of so many of Labour's policies, the Prime Minister made clear that it will continue. A new care quango, forcing young single mothers into hostels, more subsidised childcare – big government will just get bigger. At the same time, the state will continue to act as the great benefactor: the minimum wage, child benefit, tax credits will carry on rising ever upwards.
Third, he chose to ignore the single biggest issue facing everyone in this country – the staggering level of public debt that will plague us for the next decade. Mr Brown, whose profligate spending over the past decade helped create this crisis, did not even deign to acknowledge it, let alone offer his thoughts on how it should be cleared.
Some of his speech was risible – notably his promise to "crack down" on the 24-hour drinking his own Government enabled. Some of it was cynical – scrapping compulsory ID cards, for example, when the Government has never planned for them to be compulsory. Some of it was desperate – offering a referendum on proportional representation. And some of it was glaringly inauthentic – notably his new-found concern for the middle classes.
There was no new thinking at work here; it was business as usual. And while it is desperately difficult for a party in power for so long to re-invent itself, the impression given by Mr Brown yesterday is that Labour is not even trying.
"We are not done yet," claimed the Prime Minister in his peroration. Come polling day, the voters are unlikely to agree.
================================
THE TIMES -Leading Article 30.9.09
Gordon Brown misses his moment
The Prime Minister had the chance to make a strong economic argument and claim vindication, but his speech failed to rise to the challenge
Ernest Bevin taking on George Lansbury, Hugh Gaitskell defying CND, Neil Kinnock assailing Militant, Tony Blair abolishing Clause Four — Labour conferences have seen drama, tension, turning points, memorable moments. And yesterday was not one of them.
For a few electrifying moments at the beginning of Gordon Brown’s speech it seemed as if perhaps it would be. He was standing in front of the words “Securing Britain’s economic recovery”. He was well placed to make what is his strongest case against the Conservatives, namely that he has taken the bold economic decisions in the teeth of a financial crisis and been vindicated. He ordered emergency bank nationalisations and fiscal stimulus. Time and again, the Tories took the opposite view.
Mr Brown's stewardship has been far from faultless, but he can certainly make the argument that he has shown superior judgment on the biggest issue affecting every family in Britain. And he began with a list of the party’s achievements that brought his audience to its feet. As he did so, it became possible to recall what can so easily be forgotten — that for more than a decade Mr Brown dominated his party and during that decade it was one of the most politically successful forces in British history. The combination of new Labour beliefs — free markets, social justice, internationalism — remains potent. Could the Prime Minister once more press these ideas into service behind a cogent argument and an attractive platform?
Unfortunately, he could not. For he was not able to continue as he started. The first few paragraphs of his speech, with their power, were not on his script. And the moment that he turned to his script it rapidly became possible to wish that he had not.
Partly this was a matter of style. Mr Brown appeared to have involved about 25 people in the writing of the speech and none of them, with the exception of the person who penned that opening segment, appears to have been by vocation a speechwriter. Such stylistic shortcomings could have been overlooked, might even have been endearing, if they had been flaws in a speech of substance. But they were not. The three big challenges that Mr Brown needed to tackle — the country’s dire fiscal position, the collapse of confidence in the political system and the difficulties faced in Afghanistan — were left, by the end of the speech, untackled.
The most astonishing omission was a serious acknowledgment of the need to cut public spending. A section berating the Conservatives for refusing to show their hand might profitably have been followed by the Prime Minister showing his own. Instead he announced a string of new, unfunded spending programmes, as if this was the moment to be adding to what Government does. Naturally, each of his announcements will need to be carefully examined, and it remains to be seen if the more populist proposals stand up to scrutiny. But even if they do, it is hard to see how they can be afforded.
The section on the political crisis was better, although it was too short and too late in the speech. Mr Brown’s support for the idea of providing the power to recall errant MPs was welcome. He was also right to be against holding a referendum on electoral reform on the same day as the general election.
And then there was Afghanistan. A war in which British troops are dying every week and that is rapidly losing public support merited, apparently, only four paragraphs of bland support for the Armed Forces. This was not good enough.
We began the week arguing that Labour would not make political progress under its current leader. This speech changed nothing.
===============================
THE GUARDIAN 30.9.09
A beta performance from Brown
Although delegates willed their leader to succeed, Brown did little but confirm that he will be the one who leads his troops towards the guns next year
Plenty of applause for Gordon Brown in Labour's Brighton conference hall a few minutes ago, but no electricity in the room, no discernible surge of political adrenaline. They willed their embattled party leader to succeed, but it was a beta, not an alpha, performance.
New policy announcements? The tougher line on what Brown called "chaotic" families had been pre-briefed. The promise of a referendum – after the election – on the alternative vote system for the House of Commons will disappoint PR enthusiasts. The pledge of social care for the elderly needs to be spelled out in detail to have force or meaning.
Most of the rest we knew already, though Labour plans to trumpet its successes and its plans more effectively between now and polling day. It also hopes to goad voters and the media into asking more penetrating questions about David Cameron's policy plans – or lack of them.
What was striking was that, while he repeatedly assured his audience – at home and in the hall – that he was being "frank", "candid" and "honest" about past failures and tough choices ahead, the prime minister said far, far more about spending pledges to come than the cuts that British public services are braced to feel.
"Where has the recession gone?" listeners must have asked themselves more than once.
Brown pushed Labour's emotional hot buttons – notably on the NHS – for all they are worth and, rare for him, praised key colleagues Alistair Darling and Peter Mandelson, whose own speech on Monday remains the conference winner.
He even managed to pat Tony Blair on the back – three times. Needs must when electoral defeat looms.
Most promising for party activists, many half-resigned to defeat on 6 May – the likely election date – was the line of attack developed by colleagues this week against the rampant Conservatives. Brown broadened out the argument.
He accused Cameron and George Osborne of failing the great test of the economic crisis, which broke in August 2007 and nearly toppled the global banking system 13 months later. More than that, Brown told his 5,000-strong audience, they don't have answers to important questions. "Ask them," he told voters.
Sarah Brown, dragooned into service for the second year running, introduced her husband in what some will see as toe-curlingly sugary terms. She was at his side at the end as he took his bow.
As Britain's top tweeter Mrs Brown humanises him; she has emerged as a polished asset to Team Brown. He will need all the assets he can muster. The election isn't over, but now we know for certain that it will be Gordon Brown who leads his troops towards the guns.
"Our abiding duty is to stand and fight – and win," he said. Resigning before the battle is not a Brown option.
===============================
DAILY MAIL 30.9.09
Sarah Brown's warm-up for her 'hero' Gordon outshone the main event by a mile
By QUENTIN LETTS
What a pity Sarah Brown isn't prime minister.
She did the warm-up for her 'hero' husband again and looked as trim as a BOAC trolley-dolly, all dinky hairdo, spangle smile, floral-splodge dress. What a winner.
Menfolk of Britain, she's even sassier than Margaret Beckett, and you know I do not say that lightly.
The lady speaks: Sarah Brown's endearing introduction of the Prime Minister made his keynote speech sound something of a letdown
Mrs Brown, the supposed shy violet who is meant to be less political than Cherie Blair, performed like an old hoofer.
She talked of her Gordon like a mother discussing a difficult child. 'He's messy, noisy, gets up at a terrible hour,' she said, voice professionally emotional.
We were assured that he was 'intense, intelligent' and that that was why 'I love him as I do'. Mess orderly, pass that fire bucket - I think I might need it.
She flashed her little Kirk Douglas dimple at the media flashbulbs, showed us a film. Various famous people spoke about Mr Brown.
Sealed with a kiss: Sarah Brown's sentimental proclamation of her husband as her 'hero' at the close of her speech was worthy of a Disney weepie
Bono, looking like a tramp, said something incomprehensible. There was also a contribution from an economist called Joseph Twiglets. Or Stiglitz. Something like that.
And then Sarah Brown was done, yielding the stage to 'my husband, my hero'.
Ewwwwww. Worthy of a Walt Disney weepie.
But it was probably excusable, such is the dire state of Labour's opinion poll ratings. The Prime Minister's memsahib is immensely presentable and they are playing every card they hold.
The only trouble with Mrs Brown's introduction was that she made him sound so interesting, such a titan of honesty. I'm not sure that the speech matched the hype.
All eyes on Mr Brown: Despite a strong start, the PM's speech was devoid of economic reality, with references to spending splurges but little talk of cuts
He got off to a strong start, with a crescendo of Labour policies. It won a boiling roll of applause.
For a moment I thought, 'good grief, he's going to make a speech in a million'.
But after a few jokes it abated to a simmer. And then to a slow stew.
We were back to lumpy old Gordon in his boring tie, bog-brushing away for what seemed like five hours of Lego-speak.
He plunged us deep down, way round the U-bend, with that stodgy voice and over-familiar grimaces and hand gestures. Predictable slogan was clipped on to political platitude.
Economic reality was absent as he promised a spending splurge.
Bankrupts, in their last hours of liquidity, often go mad with the credit card.
It could be the same thing with our national finances under Mr Brown.
He gave only cursory mention to cuts.
Instead there was stuff about setting up a new National Care Service. Whacking up the minimum wage. Ditto child benefit and child tax credits.
More, more, more money to go glugging down the plughole.
A tremendously irritating young woman near the media enclosure kept whooping and slapping her hands together. A BBC radio operative had sharp words with her.
Then a Labour matron had sharp words with the BBC radio operative. All this was what we call off-the-ball violence.
It at least gave one something to watch while Mr Brown was droning away about his 'vah-lues'.
Did we hear once again about the parable of the talents? You betcha. No Brown speech is complete without it.
Did we hear about his eyesight, about his clergyman father, about how Labour would not 'pass by on the other side'. Yep. Stuck record time.
There was repeated applause, not all of it convincing.
He intended to conquer cancer, just as he said he would pass a law committing future governments to spend a certain share of the national wealth on overseas aid.
I don't think you can do that, Prime Minister.
The good ship had lost its moorings with political truth.
'Dream not small dreams because they cannot change the world,' he cried. 'Dream big dreams and then watch your country soar.'
Plenty of this speech was the stuff of dreams, certainly. Lah-lah land.
He finished with three chops of the hand and then it was over. Nurse Sarah bounded back on stage to retrieve her Gordon.
No doubt he will long remain her hero. 'We'll be together for the rest of our lives,' she had said earlier.
Mr Brown's relationship with the electorate may prove less enduring.
Posts
