Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

The hunt is On.
Sponsored by
Can you track down Scotland's wildest beastie?

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the Scotland On Sunday site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Tom Brown - Only the spineless tremble in front of Alex the merely competent



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 24 August 2008
Fights are not won by building up your opponent
BART Simpson, that much-misunderstood under- achiever, was diagnosed in one episode of the anarchic cartoon series as suffering from 'Phobophobia' – fear of fear itself. In Britain, we have a whole political party of bed-wetting Barts.

The Labour
Party has allowed itself to get into such a funk that it is in danger of talking itself into defeat on all fronts, especially in Scotland. The current election of a Scottish leader and the impending Glenrothes by-election illustrate perfectly how a party that was super-confident 18 months ago is now having a mass nervous breakdown.

The language used by the leadership candidates is that of contestants who are vying for a poor second place, having already conceded the No 1 position to one Alex Salmond. And the nervousness over the timing of the by-election and selection of a candidate are symptoms of collective anxiety that Labour is in for another Glasgow East-style humiliation.

They are right to be concerned after months of disastrous by-election defeats, dreadful poll ratings, dire predictions from psephologists and panic-stricken near-mutiny in the Cabinet. But they have not a hope in hell of restoring their political fortunes if they run about like Private Frasers, gibbering: "We're a' doomed!"

Gordon Brown last week launched his political fightback, appropriately on a flight to the battlefront in Afghanistan, insisting: "We are going to go on and win." His trouble is that behind him he does not have ranks of determined ministers, MPs and MSPs; he has a bunch of self-obsessed Nervous Nellies, who are thinking of their own seats while wetting themselves at the prospect of fighting elections.

In Scotland, they tremble at the prospect of facing Alex the Terrible, the First Minister of their nightmares. The campaign literature for the three Scottish leadership contenders shows how he doth bestride political Scotland, including Labour, like a Colossus. Yet the truth is that, like the Wizard of Oz, he is not a terrifying figure but a rather ordinary individual hiding behind an outsize megaphone; it is only the mediocrity of his opposition that makes him look more than the competent but crafty politician he is.

Fights are not won by building up your opponent, yet the Scottish Labour leadership are taking the First Minister at his own inflated valuation of himself. Salmond is not SuperPol. As he preened in an over-revealing interview with Total Politics website last week: "You have probably noticed I am not short of confidence." That excess of confidence is leading him to over-reach himself in ways that are unappealing, nor will it obscure his government's failures to implement promises on police numbers, student loans or schools.

Just as pathetic is the gloom over Glenrothes from those 'insiders' who tell Brown the seat is already lost and urge him to concentrate on damage limitation. These doomsters recommend an early by-election to get it out of the way before his autumn relaunch. This is the counsel of despair, accepting that this long-held Labour seat will be lost and as one wet blanket said: "It's the SNP that have a 10,000 majority, not us."

Brown rejects this pessimistic prediction and prefers the diagnosis of Henry McLeish that, given the right attention, his former seat is still winnable for Labour. Glenrothes is not Glasgow East, and enough of the late John MacDougall's 10,664 majority can be held, depending on the Government's rescue measures for those hardest hit by the economic crisis, along with the selection of the right runner. Expect Labour to take their time to trawl for a local candidate, who is respected in the community and is untainted by past failures.

The real rot is at the centre.

Foreign Secretary David Miliband's blatant pitch for the leadership has done little for his own chances, but damaged his party's. Lesser MPs mutter that the party has a "death wish" and is "stumbling towards defeat" and Blairite Culture Secretary Andy Burnham says: "The problem for us is becoming too self-critical, defensive or defeatist… we should have more pride in ourselves."

How can Labour win back the confidence of the electorate if they cannot communicate confidence in themselves? How can they hope to win if they cannot convince themselves they can be winners?

Brown's urgent task is to graft a new backbone into his party and give them reasons to be cheerful (admittedly, a difficult task for one whose default expression resembles Don Quixote, the Knight of the Mournful Countenance). Labour's need to redefine what it stands for and what it can do for the people has become more urgent and is summed up by a Compass/Progress fringe meeting at next month's conference: "Winning for a purpose, what is a fourth term for?"

The hard-pressed Prime Minister should model his autumn offensive on Marshall Foch at the first battle of the Marne: "My centre is giving way. My right is in retreat. Situation excellent. I shall attack!" Foch's troops won and it became known as 'The Miracle of the Marne'.





The full article contains 868 words and appears in Scotland On Sunday newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

 
1

G.Campbell,

24/08/2008 02:01:29
"Gordon Brown last week launched his political fightback, appropriately on a flight to the battlefront in Afghanistan, insisting: 'We are going to go on and win.' His trouble is that behind him he does not have ranks of determined ministers, MPs and MSPs; he has a bunch of self-obsessed Nervous Nellies, who are thinking of their own seats while wetting themselves at the prospect of fighting elections."

This'll be the same Gordon Brown who was too scared to turn up in Glasgow East.
2

a proud doonhamer,

Dumfries 24/08/2008 02:12:15
Aye, Tom, I can hear him prowling the corridors of 10 Downing screaming at the top of his lungs,

"The Kingdom, the Kingdom, the Kingdom for a spine"

Unfortunately all he will do is keep company with that wee SHIVER that has spent the last year looking for one as well.
3

PL,

Glasgow 24/08/2008 02:31:46
Half of the Tom Browns and Kenny Farquharsons of my generation (ie half of the people Labour need to survive as a political force) are Nationalists. They lost the argument with the future, hence the bitterness.
Most of Labour's leading communicators in Scotland (including Tom Brown in this article) can't even write in sentences.
4

Richardinho,

24/08/2008 07:05:39
You might think that amidst all this fighting talk from Tom, that he'd have some constructive policy suggestions (as opposed to just advocating even greater belligerence)yet the best he can come up with is;
"Labour's need to redefine what it stands for.."
A pathetic effort, Tom, but you are merely reflective of a labour party that has utterly ran out of ideas.

5

Watson,

Irvine 24/08/2008 07:06:22
Does anyone buy this "paper"? With people like Tom Brown on it's payroll it must be in a bad way. Maybe Labour should look to America for a leadership candidate, I'm sure anyone from Loony Tunes would fit the bill.
6

First Minister,

Golf Course 24/08/2008 07:57:08
The bitterness in this newspaper is becomming embarrasing, remember Tom, you are supposed to be Scottish ad live here? Show some respect please. Decorum is required sometimes.
7

Spoot,

Third rock pool on the left 24/08/2008 08:35:49
If Alex Salmond is "merely competent", that places him a long way ahead of the the journos and columnists writing in the Scotsman.
8

Il Penseroso,

Inverurie 24/08/2008 09:04:20
Tom Even you must accept that NL is on the way out and Brown is a liability rather than an asset. I'm still baffled why you are now with the Scotsman and appear to have ditched The Record. Everyone except the "monkeys with the red rosettes" abhor the gutter standards of that Glasgow piece of toilet paper. Isn't the Scotsman a True Blue Andrew Neil publication? Which side of the political divide do you sit? I know you can afford to reject criticism with your massive income (bow tie and all). While the old, poor and deprived are struggling under a "caring Westminster Labour government" you are urging more of the same! How can you support such a discredited party?
9

ochone,

Sauchie, Clack's 24/08/2008 10:49:41
Tam didn't need to mentiona by-election, nobody did, we could all have guessed there was one coming by the increased hysteria in the tone of unionist hacks like Tam and co over the last few days, they have no doubt received their battle orders
10

InThePark,

Edinburgh 24/08/2008 10:55:16
#5 no, I stopped buying this paper about 6 months ago, I occasionally buy it, and instantly regret it. I think the main reason is I actually feel offended and insulted by the poor level of journalism. The Scotsman Group like Scottish labour seem so out of touch with public feeling and opinion in Scotland, its unbelievable really. We just read the guardian, but unfortunately its very England(London) based with not much Scottish content.
11

"Hoots" Fandango,

24/08/2008 11:20:54
"a rather ordinary individual hiding behind an outsize megaphone. It is only the mediocrity of his opposition that makes him look more than the competent but crafty politician he is."

Surely you jest Tom. Hasn't Salmond been voted one of the best debaters in Westminster?

ps - this paper sucks big time.
12

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 24/08/2008 11:29:13
Tom - are you not ashamed of the embarrassing depths this once-proud paper has sunk to recently? Today's main headline is shameful - the SNP are acknowledged to have fulfilled their part of the bargain and provided ALL the money needed for the new officers, yet the headline is of a "broken promise", rather than the truth of the Chief Constables blowing the cash elsewhere? It's like when your mammy gives you money for your school dinner but you spend it on marbles instead - according to the Scotsman, that headline would read "DEADBEAT MUM NEGLECTS KIDS", but even a five-year-old could see through it.

I expect the Scotsman to be pro-Labour, but for God's sake, I expect at least a little bit of professional guile about it.
13

Hugo of Garven,

24/08/2008 11:53:05
#4 Richardinho,
" he'd have some constructive policy suggestions "

I suspect Tom is playing the long game.

He knows that Scottish Labour have still to face up to the reality and implications of being the main opposition Party in the Scottish Government. They have to to this to become an effective Opposition and then, perhaps, become the government.

Then there is the problem of how they co-exist and interact with London Labour. (I almost said the dead hand of LL but I don't want to appear biased.)

If SL doesn't solve these problems then it will probably splinter away to ineffective internal warfare.
14

Tom Brown, Scotland on Sunday,

Edinburgh 24/08/2008 11:59:18
Rev. S. Campbell:
As I read the article, the point was that Parliament was told these extra officers had been recruited and the fault is in not following through or ring-fencing the extra money to ensure the bobbies are on the beat.
15

Tom Brown, Scotland on Sunday,

Edinburgh 24/08/2008 12:09:52
Resend:
Rather a predictable response from CyberNats; one always hopes for better. Still:
G. Campbell: I have written several times that if Gordon Brown had gone to Glasgow East, he might have won enough votes to save the seat. He cannot afford to make the same mistake in Glenrothes.
PL: That really hurts! You may say my politics are wrong-headed and my opinions are wacko, but do not dare to criticise my grammar.
Richardinho: Space di not allow repetition of what I have written previously about the need for Brown's government to introduce a windfall tax on oil company profits; a shake-up of the entire tax system to shake down the super-rich; a land tax on property speculators; instead of a minimum wage, a living wage; and an efficiency drive across the whole of government to ensure a better bang for our bucks.
Il Penseroso: A left the Record on 'retirement' and I have to agree that standards dropped after I left. Massive income? I wish - I'm having to make do with bow ties I bought years ago.
'Hoots' Fandango: There's a big difference between being a sharp-witted debater and a First Minister who delivers on promises.

16

"Hoots" Fandango,

24/08/2008 12:16:01
"'Hoots' Fandango: There's a big difference between being a sharp-witted debater and a First Minister who delivers on promises."

Eh? I was answering the point you made in your article where you said, "It is only the mediocrity of his opposition that makes him look more than the competent but crafty politician he is."

17

"Hoots" Fandango,

24/08/2008 12:16:30
No 16 to Tom.
18

"Hoots" Fandango,

24/08/2008 12:18:08
Tom

In case you don't understand my point, it was in response to your "In Scotland, they tremble at the prospect of facing Alex the Terrible."

I assumed it was in the debating chamber.
19

Tom Brown, Scotland on Sunday,

Edinburgh 24/08/2008 12:24:02
'Hoots': I understand; but the real craftiness is in giving the appearance of being a government that delivers, despite clear evidence to the contrary - and of heading a competent administration when a number of those in Salmond's Cabinet are clearly not.
20

Brian Hill,

24/08/2008 12:28:12
#4 Richardinho,
" he'd have some constructive policy suggestions "

Took the words out of my mouth Richardinho. So easy to say WHAT has to be done, a bit more difficult to say HOW it should be done. Labour has some excellent people in its ranks, they just need the freedom to operate without having to look over their shoulder all of the time.

As for Salmond being 'ordinary' whose success can be attributed only to an 'outsize megaphone', that's the language of the political playground.

Leading commentators all over the UK have conceded that Salmond is an A Class politician, way up there with the best the UK has to offer.
21

Tom Brown, Scotland on Sunday,

Edinburgh 24/08/2008 12:35:42
Brian Hill: See 15 and 19 above
22

"Hoots" Fandango,

24/08/2008 12:37:31
Tom

Thanks for the response. I still think it's more difficult to deliver when it's a minority administration. Labour had the built-in support of the LibDems, so it was somewhat "easier" for them to deliver - apart from the education part!

I was a bit surprised with the slant on police numbers in another article. Money was given but some police chiefs spent it in a way not expected. This was reported as another "broken promise." Then again - like new teachers - they can't magically appear. It will probably take another year or so to get the numbers up to strength.

Getting away from you SNP jibe (ahem), you're correct about what you say about Milliband. He is seen as divisive.

Back to Holyrood. Do you think a new leader will make any difference? Labour only lost by one seat and Jack McConnell was blamed. UK labour are currently in the doldrums, yet G Brown stays.

As long as labour in Scotland are forced to look over their shoulder for the nod from Westminster, they're doomed.
23

Hugo of Garven,

24/08/2008 12:48:26
Tom,

Are you a socialist or a Labour Party member?

No matter. I still enjoyed your article.
24

"Hoots" Fandango,

24/08/2008 12:49:47
23 Hugo

"Are you a socialist or a Labour Party member?"

Hee hee - you can't be both.

25

Tom Brown, Scotland on Sunday,

Edinburgh 24/08/2008 12:50:23
Hoots: Q: "Do you think a new leader will make any difference?"
A: No - not from the three on offer and not until Labour get better calibre of politicians in Holyrood (a legacy from Donald Dewar's 'Dollies' selection policy. Nor until the party in Scotland is led by people who are accepted by Scottish voters as capable of making a difference. They are still in a state of denial from last May and it is a criticism of everyone in a position of responsibility in Scottish Labour that it has taken them so long to come to terms with reality.
Meanwhile, for the rank-and-file the only consolation is that the Scottish electorate keeps rejecting separation and the hope that Gordon Brown is right in his belief that the economy will recover in the early part of next year.
Meanwhile, the choice of candidate in Glenrothes will show whethere Scottish Labour is ready for change and new faces.
26

"Hoots" Fandango,

24/08/2008 12:55:29
25

Thanks again Tom. Regarding the economy - it's the same in most of Europe, but I haven't seen much condemnation of the ruling governments there. Zapatero isn't being blamed in the Spanish press. (Apart from ABC*).
Maybe it's a moaning British thing.

*Dreadful right wing gibberish.
27

Winters,

Glasgow 24/08/2008 12:59:00
Hoots Fandango: I don't know who voted Alex Salmond one of the best debaters in the House of commons. I watch BBC Parliament a lot and know who's who there. Alex Salmond (even before last year's Scottish election) didn't say much. The best debater on the SNP bench is Stuart Hosie who is well respected in the chamber. Neither are as good as the leader of the Welsh Nationalists. I would think there are hundreds
of MPs who are far better debaters than the First Minister when he ventures outside Holyrood.
28

Tom Brown, Scotland on Sunday,

Edinburgh 24/08/2008 13:12:08
Hugo of Garven: I've never made any secret of the fact that I'm a left-of-centre Socialist - including control of the 'commanding heights of the economy', a safety-net welfare state, market control and internationalism, which is the opposite of narrow nationalism. You can't have everything in this world, so I go with the party that seems to supply most of that.
29

"Hoots" Fandango,

24/08/2008 13:16:13
28 Tom

Ach Tom. You've stuck in a "internationalism, which is the opposite of narrow nationalism" in your post. Cheap.

How left of centre are New Labour?
30

Tom Brown, Scotland on Sunday,

Edinburgh 24/08/2008 13:18:38
'Hoots':
Q: How left of centre are New Labour?
A: Not very. In a previous column, I told how I was asked on radio if I was 'Old' or 'New' Labour and was bleeped for answering: "Neither - I'm pissed-off Prehistoric Labour."
31

Tom Brown, Scotland on Sunday,

Edinburgh 24/08/2008 13:30:14
I have to end this session now to answer the call of well-fired rolls and square sausage. Thanks for an entertaining and stimulating session, despite my opening comments. Keep posting if you want and I'll check the site regularly in coming days. Meanwhile, if you're in Glenrothes, say 'hello' to the old and well-worn chap wearing the old and well-worn bow tie.
32

David reporter on another paper,

24/08/2008 13:49:28
there are now a number of orgnisations interested in johnston group. Most of them intend to boot out all the present duff writers and bring in new writers. Its a tight market with plenty of talent.
33

"Hoots" Fandango,

24/08/2008 14:03:11
Thanks for your time Tom.
34

Colkitto,

River Clyde 24/08/2008 15:20:09
'The Miracle of the Marne'
Aye, one thing we can agree on is Labour definately need some kind of miracle ha ha ha
35

Itchy,

24/08/2008 16:00:17
"28 Tom Brown, Scotland on Sunday,Edinburgh 24/08/2008 13:12:08
Hugo of Garven: I've never made any secret of the fact that I'm a left-of-centre Socialist - including control of the 'commanding heights of the economy', a safety-net welfare state, market control and internationalism, which is the opposite of narrow nationalism"

Translated into plain English, this means you are unaware that socialism was a total failure throughout the last century and you write your column from the dark side of the planet Mars.
36

Buckpool Loon,

Cheshire 24/08/2008 16:33:15
I suppose someone somewhere made the same remark on the mere competancy of the Roman legions.

Pity the same competency cannot be allied to the performance of the Labour governance in either Westminster or Holyrood.

If competence is all we can expect it is preferable to the incompetent obscurantine hegemony of 'inner temples'so beloved by Nu-Labour in its pursuit of vain glories and alliances.

Scotland does and will need a Labour party, but one that will put the soveriegnty of the Scottish people first. Well before party dogma or parliamentary esoterica.

Perhaps Mr Brown, rather than ruminating on the state of your wardrobe, you should be ruminating on a Scottish Labour Party.
37

Miss H,

24/08/2008 17:20:44
Tom Brown is almost right. But it is not so much personal confidence that is lacking in Labour it is confidence in their message.
38

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 24/08/2008 17:56:03
Hey, Tom.

"narrow nationalism"? Your nationalism is a reserved matter.
39

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 24/08/2008 17:56:51
Wonder if I can write "pissed off" on here?
40

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 24/08/2008 17:58:10
My Goad, I can. Automaton must still be switched off.
41

,

24/08/2008 18:59:28
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
42

Conan the Librarian™,

24/08/2008 19:15:31
Tom, you are well known for your anti-monarchy views.

What is wrong with an Independant Scots Republic?

43

Miss H,

24/08/2008 19:16:26
Whar is interesting for me is to see how closely Labour's behaviour opposition is to the SNP's behaviour in opposition between 1999 - 2003 i.e being negative and focusing more on what is wrong with the administration than on what alternative was being offered. We did all the things they are doing and it didn't work for us and it won't work for them. What happened to change that in the SNP is that the party was prepared to honestly analyse where we were going wrong and to embrace positive politics. Which is quite difficult actually because the culture of politics is very negative and you are taking a risk in not being negative.

Labour have not reached their lowest point yet but when they do they are going to have to decide what they stand for not simply what they are against. Of course the difficulty that they face in doing that is that their Scottish message must always be fitted into the wider UK agenda. That's not a problem for the SNP which gives us a permanent advantage.
44

Hugo of Garven,

24/08/2008 19:30:25
#28 Tom Brown, Scotland on Sunday,
"You can't have everything in this world, so I go with the party that seems to supply most of that."

So you are an SNP supporter!

As to your un-enlightened eating taste, why not try the food of the gods- a fresh soft white roll with butter and slice.

With, of course, a glass, or two, of cava.

Salud, dinero, y amor.
45

Brian Hill,

24/08/2008 22:23:05
Must say having the journalist argue his case in these columns is much appreciated. Thanks Tom, we might not agree on all things but I believe your beliefs are genuine and therefore as valid as ours....even if they are wrong.lol
46

Ken W,

Fife 25/08/2008 03:54:18
Thanks for appearing to argue your case Tom: It makes a refreshing change.

You write:
I've never made any secret of the fact that I'm a left-of-centre Socialist - including control of the 'commanding heights of the economy', a safety-net welfare state, market control and internationalism, which is the opposite of narrow nationalism. You can't have everything in this world, so I go with the party that seems to supply most of that.

- A matter which leaves me and I'm sure many others rather perplexed and wondering what party it is you do support. Certainly the present Labour party are not to be confused with socialists of any form, being rampant free marketers and PFI privateers, so it can't be them, can it? Likewise you talk of 'Internationalism'. Doubtless you don’t need reminding that to be an Internationalist you need to have nations in the first place.
Thus the only apparent difference between your Internationalism and mine is that my nationalism is Scottish and yours is apparently British.

No, the real problem with your outlook Tom, is that you identify with a non-existent socialist party and have sacrificed your Scottish identity for Britishness, which you then proceed to confuse with some kind of broad Internationalism.

You may of course chose to water down or indeed abandon your Scottish Identity if you wish, but many of us see no benefit in doing so, merely to grasp a vague 'British' identity, nor indeed do we see benefit either in pretending that the Labour party is or will ever be in any way, socialist.
47

glassbenmhor,

25/08/2008 08:03:02
Tom,

it is to your credit to have joined in here after your article,
however your approach is that of a dinosaur-
loud ungainly and coming from history.

It amazes me that someone of your IQ could still support the union and not the independent dividend, all 75 billion of it.
Another point London labour or Scottish labour to support the concerns of the people of Scotland.

I really feel your days are indeed numbered as with the political movement within this nation called Labour.

There will in a few years be a 'phoenix from the ashes' but it will not be recognisable from its past.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.