91Èȱ¬

Lord Ashdown was in Cambridge yesterday evening in order to promote his new book. Perhaps surprisingly, it was deemed necessary to have bodyguards present - the same bodyguards as were present when Peter Hain, the current Northern Ireland Secretary, came to Cambridge the week before.

Would that kind of fuss ordinarily be afforded to a former Lib Dem leader and former UN High Representative in Bosnia? Despite his protestations to the contrary, might Lord Ashdown have already accepted a post that would justify the security detail?

If you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem.

A hissy fit from the Lib Dems means that everytime they have a go at Brown in the commons, he can say well I offered you the chance to be involved in the process, and you turned me down.

The Lib Dems have missed a great opportunity here to be involved in policy making, although it has to be said that Brown could have handled it much better.

It's hardly credible to think Brown would have made the offer if he thought there was a snowball in hell's chance that it would be accepted.

It's all very well to talk about an attempt to "break out of tribal politics", but personally I can't see it happening. The yah-boo-us-and-them attitude is just too deeply entrenched at Westminster. Anyone else remember David Cameron saying he wanted a new style of politics with more constructive dialogue and less mudslinging? Hard to believe when you watch him at PMQs, where all that happens is he trades insults with Blair amid a 100% absence of constructive dialogue.

I really hope I'm wrong, but I suspect we're not going to see any end to yah-boo politics in the next decade or two.

Sadly, however audacious and attractive such a cross-party decision may be in simple terms of getting a candidate with gravitas and experience, there are always political overtones or dimensions.

What Brown has certainly been facing is a serious lack of experienced candidates for office and so was forced to search outside his Labour tribe.

At the same time,of course,if Labour memebers fear that jobs can go outside the tribal circle, Brown increases his power and patronage.

Plus ca change, but at the same time he changing perceptions of his style and is setting his own agenda.

He still lacks sufficient humanity to soften his moral and intellectual arrogance.

This is a bold and visionary offer by gordon Brown that both breaks the mould of British politics and offers a real opportunity to secure a progressive consensus for the next decade.

Not without controversy in my party, Labour, and obviously highly divisive among Liberal Democrats nevertheless it would have harnessed significant talent on the Lib Dem benches and set the scene for wider joint working. While there are understandable divisions between Labour and Lib Dems largely historic and tribal, there are common value sets and a policy spectrum within each party which largely overlap.

The presence of Ashdown et al may even have helped the new PM set a more European and multialteralist course in foreign policy, less afraid to stand out from the Bush neo-cons than Blair has and thus far more in tune with Labour and UK puiblic sentiment. Nevertheless, it is a positive signal that the new PM is capable of thinking outside the box and rebuilding the big tent that was so successful in the first Blair Government.

Mr Cameron may yet be another footnote in the history of Conservative leaders that never darkened the door of No.10.

Once the Blairites have been thrown out, and excluding all the disgraced former ministers, a Brown Government is going woefully short of talent.

If its a choice of bringing back Stephen Byers and Patricia Hewitt (oops - she's still there!) or bringing in Paddy Ashdown, the choice is obvious.

Political game playing. You wait, if he runs out of time and is in trouble in the polls there will be an offer for Proportional Representation to try and keep Cameron out.
Everything that Brown has done has been "me " and "I" nothing consensual about it. Leopards and Spots?

I don't really understand why the LibDems are getting so upset about this. They have shown their willingness to go into coallition as minor partners in City Councils across the country. In Birmingham that have been serving in Mike Whitby's Conservative administration since 2004 (in fact one of the LibDems concerned is also LibDem MP!).

I thought they wanted to have mature politics of cooperation - clearly I misunderstood them.

For all NuLabour bluster against the Tories, they are clearly scared by the threat of Cameron.
NuLabour tried to stitch up a secret agreement with the LibDems in 1997 and they are simply doing it again, but with three years left until the next election.
Vote LibDem get Labour. This is a political disaster for the LibDems, will Ming be in office in a weeks time?

Probably both audacious and inept, perhaps we will now have "Dave" Cameron offred the new portfolio of minister for media affairs.

I think that whatever the outcome of this it is a shrewd by move by Brown to mark himself out as someone different and not just a boring money man. A move that could well be genuine, but doesn't need to be accepted to achieve one of its goals.

Um, Nick, a bit of consistency in your story please. First you say:

"[...] it was suggested that there could be junior - not Cabinet - posts for Lord Ashdown"

Then you say:

"It is not known what Cabinet post Gordon Brown had in mind for Paddy Ashdown."

Are you muckraking as usual or just half asleep today?

Whilst I personally think that Ashdown is one of the best politicians never to have served in government, this must be a huge blow to Brown's supporters. They have waited years for Brown to take power, and they must have all been eyeing up these sorts of positions all during that time. To hear that the opposition have been offered not just ministerial positions, but one that would be part of Brown's Cabinet, must be immensely disappointing to Labour and perhaps highlights either a lack of talent in the party or lack of trust that Brown has for those Blairites he has inherited.

The Lib Dems have been foolish. The departure of tribal politics in Westminster would have been a wonderful thing for this country.
In Scotland and Wales this is already happening - in Wales, Labour seem about to enter into government with old rivals Plaid Cymru; but it seems Westminster is kicking and screaming to avoid this approach.

I congratulate Brown for trying to break the mould. I very much hope he continues along this path and is not put off by the lib dem rejection.

As for the Lib Dems...I'm seething. A huge opportunity missed (for now). Paddy Ashdown would have made a fantastic cabinet minister. Hes an expert on international affairs.

I like the American approach of appointing a cabinet, appointing experts to positions they actually have some knowlage about. Bill Clinton appointed a republican as defence secretary because seemingly he was the right man for the job.

I hope British politics can follow the same path...but I fear no time soon.

i think brown is genuinely trying to get the best people or process for the job. he handed interest rate management to the bank of england, because they should be the expert in managing that aspect. Paddy Ashdown is great at handling tricky international situations - did well with bosnia - so it makes sense to get him in as NI sec.

Poor PM-in-waiting, it must be a real slap in the face for all those Labour MP�s to find out none of them would quite as welcome in the new, new Labour cabinet as, well, a Liberal Democrat! Personally, I would be quite delighted to have a Lib Dem cabinet so if Gordon Brown would like to call a general election I�m sure a lot of the electorate would back him all the way to a new, new Lib Dem cabinet (and government!). Proportional representation works best if we, the voters, get a say in it Mr. Brown�.
(You can�t help feeling the longest day might be followed by the shortest leadership in Labour history if this is how he motivates his team.)

Brown has realised that the New Labour Party is without talent and lacks the drive to succeed.

This is definately Gordon out to cause trouble with the Lib-dems before a possible early election call. Ming is in trouble anyway - this could be the straw that breaks the camel's back. The Lib-dems in meltdown would only benefit Labour. Bring back Charlie!

Considering that all is (relatively) peace and tranquility in N. Ireland the last person you want to throw in there is Lord "Action Man" Ashdown.

Gordon is proving he has a sense of humour after all.

It's a pity the Lib-Dems have clarified that they are against co-operation between Parties. Promoting co-operation is one of the reasons people give for voting Lib-Dem rather than for the other two Parties. Now those many Lib-Dem voters will need to think again.

Nick, what a good start to Gordon Brown's premiership - not.

A few observations :-

1) Fine example of poor judgement.
2) Doesn't say much for Labour talent.
3) Ashdown's not that good anyway.

Now just waiting for the equivalent to the "75p for pensioners" announcement.

The whole approach from the Lib Dems seems wierd. Haven't these people spent their lives trying to get their hands on the levers of power? So to turn them down when they are offered seems a little odd, to say the least. There would, of course, be issues of collective responsibility, and I can see that they would need to be careful about being seen as complicit with everything the rest of the administration did, but even so.

Does Ming Campbell really think that he will have more influence being largely ignored on the sidelines than by getting one of his people into the cabinet?

A different style of politics, promised Gordon Brown. Well its certainly less subtle than his predecessor, and at the moment less effective. Perhaps he is trying to set a new standard for manipulation - playing politics with politics. I think the best we can say is that Tony would be proud of him.

This is a strange move by Brown. If the 'spin' was to make him look welcoming and consensual it has not worked. Rather he comes accross as desperate.

I fear the knives are already sharpening for Brown before he even has a chance to prove himself.

A monumental defeat in his own backyard to the SNP will beg the question from middle England: 'If he can't even keep his own house in order.........'

It's not inept. It may well be duplicitous. But it's a good ploy.

Brown has set down a marker, to make it more acceptable for the Lib Dems to walk through the door next time (it also tells the nation and the Tories that there will indeed be a next time).

And it creates the necessary stir in the Lib Dems. All hands to the pump! Knives at the ready! The man means business!

Ooh! What a nice little mess Gordon Brown has made here.

This doesn't look like an attempt at power-sharing or diversity, but rather as a sort of political stroke to cause chaos in the LibDems. It reminds me of the similar (although foxier) attempt in 1982 by Irish Taoiseach Charles Haughey to cause chaos in the opposition Fine Gael party by apointing Fine Gael TD as Euro Commissioner. That backfired on Haughey; and this one looks set to backfire on Brown by making him look sneaky.

After all the hints of an end to Blair's spin-driven style of politics, it's a bit of an own-goal for Brown to start off with what looks like a cheesy attempt to split the LibDems.

It does however raise the point that the job of Secretary of State for Northern Ireland is an anomaly. When Northern Ireland has devolved government there is little to do. When devolution is not working then the Secretary of State runs the place like a colonial governor. As well as having the job of trying to get devolution working again.

The old Stormount system was swept away in 1973 by the introduction of direct rule, because it was seen to have failed on a number of levels. (Most immediately Law and Order had broken down ) however one bit of the system that could have been made use of was the exoistence of the office of Governor of N. Ireland. The Governor, who like the Secretary of State today had little power when the Stormount Parliament was functioning, could in an emergency, and on the instructions of London, take over. Direct Rule could have been introduced by following the ending of Stormount, (which was technically done by the Governor anyway ) with putting the Governor in charge and reporting to London.

Instead it was done by putting in a Secretary of State partly, as we now know, because it was thought to be a short term measure.

Perhaps the time has come to replace the job of Secretary of State, with a new kind of office (Executive Commissioner ?) who is not, as such, a politician. Not in the cabinet. And appointed for a fixed term (five years?) so that they dont change everytime there is a government change. Paddy Ashdown would have been really good at THAT job.

There is the point that the job of Secretary of State for Northern Ireland is an anomaly. When Northern Ireland has devolved government there is little to do. When devolution is not working then the Secretary of State runs the place like a colonial governor. As well as having the task of trying to get devolution working again.

The old Stormount system was swept away in 1973 by the introduction of direct rule, because it was seen to have failed on a number of levels. (Most immediately Law and Order had broken down ) however one bit of the system that could have been made use of was the exoistence of the office of Governor of N. Ireland. The Governor, who like the Secretary of State today had little power when the Stormount Parliament was functioning, could in an emergency, and on the instructions of London, take over. Direct Rule could have been introduced by following the ending of Stormount, (which was technically done by the Governor anyway ) with putting the Governor in charge and reporting to London.

Instead it was done by putting in a Secretary of State partly, as we now know, because it was thought to be a short term measure.

Perhaps the time has come to replace the job of Secretary of State, with a new kind of office (Executive Commissioner ?) who is not, as such, a politician. Not in the cabinet. And appointed for a fixed term (five years?) so that they dont change everytime there is a government change. Paddy Ashdown would have been really good at THAT job.

This just shows how far sighted G Brown is. Clearly he fears that the next election will provide a hung parliament with the probability of more Conservative members. Getting a sort of LabLib coalition now would influence the bargaining to come.

Govt knows that they will suffer a defeat in the next election irrespective any policy. So venure with libdem is beneficial in longterm.

Looks like win-win for Brown, if his kind offer is taken up then he has a broadly drawn cabinet and is an innovator in inclusive politics- wonderful chap

If his offer is refused the others look pusillanimous and he still looks as if tribalism is not his fault, but has been forced upon him by others, at least he tried to be a wonderful chap!

Duplicitous, I think!

Could it be that Gordon Brown is thinking ahead to the next General Election, and the possibility of a coalition with the Lib Dems?

Maybe he is building bridges now for later.

Whether intentionally or not, Brown has the best of both worlds now. He can claim to be taking a radically new approach to politics by making the offer, but without the inconvenience of actually having to live with a Lib Dem in his Cabinet.

No connection with the strong likelihood of Labour failing to gain an overall majority at the next general election, then? Better to start the horse-trading sooner than later, as recent events in Cardiff Bay amply demonstrate.

As an unelected prime minister, as least Gordon was on the winning side when the public were last consulted on who should govern, but I thought the Lib Dems came third? I knew Blair had done a good job of eliminating any talent existing in the Labour Party - I didn't realise it was this bad!

Very interesting choice even if it was duplicitous. Lord Ashdown has done a very good job working as High Representative in Bosnia so possibly a very good choice as Northern Ireland Secretary.

Seems a foolish thing to do for a part going no-where-fast to reject this oppertunity.

The only way to have saved faced on this was to be co-operative, bowing out gracefully at a more discreet time. Instead of strengthening his position by appearing to be playing real politics, Campbell did about the worst thing he could have done, because now he just looks incompetant.

The people of Great Britain elected Tony Blair and the Labour party as their leaders of choice.
Now the people of Great Britain are being offered a new Prime Minister (Gordon Brown), not democratically elected as such, who in turn wants to bring in members of a party (Lib Dem.) who didnt even get close to winning the election by the people.
What on earth is happening with the democracy of Great Britain.

Poor old Paddy Pantsdown. another victim of Gordon Brown's mendacity.
There will be more to come . This sad obsessive only thinks about himself and political manoevring, certainly not the good of the country. Watch all the politics of envy creeping back in in the last few weeks too, Browns cipher in the City Ronald COhen going on about riots in the streets if money inbalances are not addressed (having made millions from his own business). Welcome back to socialism.

Sentiment - 8/10
Execution - 0/10
Consequence - None.
Winner - Paddy Ashdown - direct, credible, worth voting for.
Loser - Gordon Brown - inept or duplicitous; perhaps both - therefore not worth voting for.

Not a bad idea on Brown's part - it shows he really has made an effort to bring about 'a new style of politics', even if he went about it in a pretty sneaky way (if he is such good friends with Ming, is often referred to, why didn't he clear this with him first?). Its a disaster for the Lib Dems - they couldn't really go into a quasi partnership with Labour without losing a lot of credibility, but now they show that they are unwilling to work with government, and are happy to be sidelined. What they need right now is a dynamic leader to come out saying "we have these great policies, and are willing to work with other parties only when they adopt a part of our agenda." Instead, although all the focus is on the Lib Dems right new they are unable to coherently get their point accross. Bring back CK - at least he was dynamic, as opposed to Ming who looks like he's sklowly losing control.

Could it be the Broon is thinking that come the next election and there is a hung parliament,he can quickly retain office with the Lib-Dems without much fuss.
Also the position of NuLabour in Scotland and Wales has seriously been weakened.Anyway that he can retrieve some power base in the future there has to be a good thing.With the Nationalists gaining at NuLabours expence he has to think long term.
He is already clutching at straws and he is not yet in power,makes you wonder what he will try to do to stay in if this does not work.
He will come in just at the time when his economic policy is falling apart,so there is no one else to blame but himself .

Brown is inept, roll on more of this complete incompetence and misreading of people and situations. This is the man labour wants to rule the so called UK, Alec Salmond will have him for breakfast, dinner and tea.
Brown will demonstrate to England why Scots should NOT rule over England and vice versa.
No doubt Brown will be in hiding today!

Aggie McNairn, Banchory, Scotland

When I heard about this I finally had some hope for politics. Naive I guess but a little of that would do us good. The problem we have is that so many people including to some extent the 91Èȱ¬ dramatise it too much. I can see why - but it makes it difficult for anyone ever do anything genuine in policitcs. I am not a Labour supporter and Gordon Brown has gone up in my estimation. Wonder what CK would have said

As a Tory I find this idea as a way of keeping out the Conservative party.

However as a resident of the UK, looking at the woeful state that Labour are in with a distinct lack of talent, maybe it is time to get outside help in to resolve this gap. Lord Ashdown has a good track record with difficult political issues that resolve around armed factions. A post to NI would be a boon to the people of NI, as I believe he would keep the current coalition honest.

However the big question here is,are there any politicians who would be right for any role in government. I think it is time for a re-think on who can become a politician. A lot of the current crop bear no relevance to running a department within the government.

Very good start for new blood why critise a good leader before you can see the wood for the trees.Brown has got a challange but surely his success will come where it be from former has beens or not there are plently of supporters in all parties

Gordon Brown would do good to remember that it's the Labour MP's that keep him Prime Minister - not the Lib Dem's.
If I was a Labour MP or peer I'd be very offended.
It's like England winning the World Cup then sending the trothy to Germany.

Mingin has to go, that's for sure, and the earliest he goes the better, both for the Lib. Dems. and for the country's politics as well.
Both the Lib. Dems. and the Tories had chosen the wrong leaders this time round. Watch them being kicked out and replaced in the very near future Nick!
As a politician, Brown does things with some lateral thinking, and that is doing what is best for the country, not for the party or the media. The results will then decide the party's fortunes in the election. I have a feeling that Ashdown might finally accept the position!

Isn't it funny. When David Cameron asked Greg Dyke (a man with no political affiliation) to run as the Conservative candidate for London Mayor, it was reported across the media as the Tories failure to find anyone competent in their own party. This reporting was coloured with such descriptions as 'humiliating', 'desperation', 'a plot backfiring', 'embarrassing', 'blew up in his face', 'ongoing failure', etc.

However, when Gordon Brown's astounding desire to have OPPOSITION MP's (plural) sitting in his Government 'blows up in his face', there is no talk of humiliation, ongoing failure or a lack competence in his party.

Rather it is reported:

'an audacious and high stake political gambit has, in the end, come to nothing'.

Generous? Or Maybe not so funny after all.

A very clever ploy by Brown, though its the right decision made by Menzies Campbell and Ashdown to turn it down - anyone who thinks otherwise isn't playing out the politics of this very well, bearing in mind this isn't a coallition - no concessions would be made to the LibDems as part of the deal.

If the LibDems accepted, they would gain very little influence, if any, on policy making. LibDems would hold little weight in a Labour Cabinet, and while they could exercise some minimal influence over their own ministerial portfolios, because Labour hold a majority and no concessions have been made as part of a deal to the LibDems, the ministers would have no weapon to defend their portfolios with, unlike in an actual coallition government. Yet the appearence of their presence significantly harms the Lib Dems' ability to criticise the government, tarring them with its failures and allowing Brown to respond to any attacks by saying 'well you are to blame too, you're part of the team'. It would have been an act of political atrophy for the LibDems to accept the deal.

On the otherhand, I agree that refusal isn't brilliant either. Brown can now come back and say 'well you should have accepted my offer' whenever the LibDems raise criticism on Northern Ireland etc. So it is the right decision, but a clever move nonetheless.

It reminds me of the saying, "around around the ragged rock, the ragged rascal ran" perhaps this is just laying the ground to asking Tony Blair to be Prime Minister again, again?

The cabinet post offers are excellent news for me. As a Tory supporter, this gives us plenty of ammunition to paint the lib dems as no different to labour. This could be vital in winning a close election, and really help us get back some seats in the south - just as it did in 1992 according to many analysts.

audacious and actually innovative.

silly politics has stopped someone of his talents - remember he was active in the SBS - and understands international politics to make an extra contribution instead of sitting in the Lords and doing what exactly?

What matters more than being a "liberal" or a "conservative"... is that Britain's leaders should be British. The way things are going with immigration, that might not be the case much longer.

A Cabinet of genuine talent rather than lightweight party hacks would make sense. Paddy should be Foreign Secretary. He would also be an excellent choice to mediate in the Middle East. But sadly, tribalism still rules.

Brown could have offered the post of NI secretary to Ratko Mladić - it might at least have smoked him out of hiding, and he too has an encyclopedic knowledge of fractured, factional politics.

What about Mark Oaten? Why wasn't he offered a cabinet post - he doesn't seem to be up to much these days.

Gordon must know the finances are so bad after 10 years of his bungling that he's planning a government of national emergency!

What about democracy?

Ashdown is not elected and therefore should not be in the cabinet. Labour are slowly undermining the convention that the cabinet should be devised from the Commons.

First Lord Amos and Lord Falconer, and now Ashdown. What a joke. What next? A chancellor from the Lords?

I wouldn't rule it out.

By offering a cabinet post to a member of another party, does this signal that Mr Brown believes he does not have enough Labour MP,s of the correct calibre to fill all his cabinet seats?

If I was a Labour MP I would want to know this.

Isn't it conceivable that Gordon Brown is simply looking for someone with a wealth of experience to bring to the table, particularly in a role of such importance and sensitivity as Secretary of State for Northern Ireland?

No doubt some of the political elite will bleat on about Brown's misguided manipulation and perceived crafting manoeuvrings in a bid to outwit future cries of nepotism. What about the rest of us that simply want the best person for the job, regardless of their political leanings!

Surely a meritocracy should prevail in all government jobs - wouldn't it make a nice change from the Blair error - sorry, era! Remember Mandelson!

By offering a cabinet post to a member of another party, does this signal that Mr Brown believes he does not have enough Labour MP,s of the correct calibre to fill all his cabinet seats?

If I was a Labour MP I would want to know this.

Well, well, well. Gordon Brown as Old Mother Hubbard.

For when he got there, the cupboard (cabinet) was bare.

Perhaps this is the clearest sign yet that the Blairites will not serve in a Brown administration and Gordon needs 'Blairite-esque' Lib Dems to fill posts.

As for consensus, how exactly will this woo back the Lib Dem votes that have gone Cameron's way over the last year?

As Labour lurches to the left, is this Gordon's way of at least having the drag of a centrist anchor?

As for policy overlap, Iraq, Trident, Nuclear Power and green issues? Hardly consensus.

The Lib-Dems are the same in Scotland, where they refuse all attempts to work with them, which is strange for a party supposedly all about PR.

Not a Brown fan but I think this is ingenious...

He gets the credit for trying to be innovative (as well as different to Blair) but can carry on regardless, business as usual.

He shines a spotlight on Lib Dem weakness and irrelevance at Westminster. He can claim the next election to be a two horse race so he can then focus his 'clunking fist' on the Tories whilst the LibDems faff about wondering whether it's time to get nasty with Ming.

Not a Brown fan but I think this is ingenious...

He gets the credit for trying to be innovative (as well as different to Blair) but can carry on regardless, business as usual.

He shines a spotlight on Lib Dem weakness and irrelevance at Westminster. He can claim the next election to be a two horse race so he can then focus his 'clunking fist' on the Tories whilst the LibDems faff about wondering whether it's time to get nasty with Ming.

The offer was made in the sure and certain knowledge that it could not, and would not be accepted.

The ploy carried the double advantage of confounding the Liberal's and scuppering Peter Hain.

Look at the timing - it's so obvious as to be laughable.

Political skills? - could do better, needs to be more subtle.

Surely the best candidate for the Northern Irish office is Mr Blair. He has sought and received international acclaim for his achievements there. Given that we now appear to be in the final phase of resolution, should he not stay on to complete it.

Surely this oversight on Mr Brown's part is a great mistake.

Having kept Mr Brown waiting so long, surely he could bear to be subordinate for a couple of years.

Or is it that, having left office and no longer being No 1, Mr Blair wants out of English politics, and his constituents and the people of Northern Ireland can fend for themselves.

Was there ever anything to this man other than personal aggrandisement?

I think the Lib-Dem leadership's reaction to this is just ridiculously paranoid. Why would Lord Ashdown not do a good job in the Northern Ireland office? He seems ideally suited to the role, after all. btw I do lean to Lib-Dem thinking on many issues, but I find their reaction to this matter simply embarrassing.

If Gordon Brown is truly serious about a cabinet of all the talents then why not offer Alex Salmond the post of Secretary of State for Scotland. I suppose since he at least can phone Scotland's new First Minister - unlike the churlish outgoing Blair - it may be possible!

I'm afraid to say Gordon Brown has been very clever here. He has, it seems, purposely sought to split the Lib Dems whilst looking to the public like he's trying to create a new style of "open politics".

This is nothing short of a cunning and ruthless plot, and that is why Lib Dems (like myself) are angry with Brown.

Ashdown would be the perfect NI secretary, and I would add to his obvious qualifications the fact that he wouldn't feel the need to cover himself in glory, and he wouldn't be automatically opposed by anti-Labour elements in NI.

I reckon Brown saw an opportunity to humiliate Ming - by putting his commitment to non-partisan leadership to the test - and grabbed it. He knows the Lib Dems in the event of a hung Parliament would jump into bed with Labour, but of course what he really wants is a Labour majority, which on this evidence he's in danger of getting by gradually giving Ming more and more rope until he hangs himself. (I think the predictions of an outright Tory victory underestimate the number of voters who'll put a peg on their nose and vote Labour, as they voted for the Tories in '92.)

Ming the Meaningless must go!

This strong and unexpected move by Gordon Brown is typical of his personality type, and the Liberal Democrat suggestion that it was duplicitous or inept, merely, reveals their own lack of range and flexibility, insight and generosity, or management skills and character. This habitual and reactive response of the individual and collective ego is something they would benefit from reflecting on as the lessons are quite valuable.

The over-competitive mentality in Parliament is something the country could do with less of, as others have commented. This has to begin somewhere. I think, there is the basic glimmer of light at the end of the tunnel but where ability fails to match opportunity, self-inflicted disasters like this will continue to unfold. The Liberal Democrats need to understand this if they are to be more a part of the solution moving forward.

Life is about achieving goals and working with people. While rhetoric is useful to a point the only thing that counts is delivery. In the middle is process, which includes policies, intellectual and emotional habits, and basic values. In one stroke the Liberal Democrat leadership and party show they’re all mouth and no action. This embarrassment will take time to correct but they could be more useful and relevant in time.

Zen Buddhism is helpful but nobody listens. Yeah, whatever.

As ever, a politician putting his party above the interests of a nation. Ashdown would have been an ideal candidate for Northern Ireland. He could have made clear his insistence to be kept apart from decisions outside his responsibility (i.e. Iraq). There was no offer to join the Labour Party, so Ashdown could still have spoken out and campaigned as he has done before - but he would also be involved in decision-making.

One question to Ashdown: will the country be better if you are in the Cabinet? That must be your prime concern.

Lord Ashdown has plenty of qualities that make him ideal for the Northen Ireland post (well respected, military background, integrity). I'm struggling to think of any current labour leading lights who are better qualified, but surely Mr Brown was naive to think that:
a) Lord Ashdown was likely to accept the post
b) that the offer would not get out into the public domain.

Personally I think Gordon is struggling to fill his cabinet rather than leading the way in cross party collaboration. This publicity is surely not the best beginning for the soon-to-be PM.

This move by gordon showed him to be a dynamic leader prepared to try things out. He will be a great PM

Well, given that Paisley & McGuinness now appear to happily governing in Northern Ireland, isn't the Northern Ireland Cabinet Post something of a bit of window dressing anyhow?

Might have been different if he'd offered Foreign Secretary, say.

If Gordon Brown were really trying to be consensual he would have accepted the rejection with good grace. How could Sir Menzies Campbell seriously consider such co-operation without any evidence of how Brown will behave as PM? If Brown had really wished to shift the political climate he would have waited a couple of months before making the offer. Seems some commentators have been taken in by this manipulative attempt though - so I guess that it has partly served its purpose.

If this is a prelude to forming a state bloc that will serve the interests of the country as a whole when it is governed by the EU then it is good forward planning. If, as would be more normal, it is a political thrust into the dark, then that's fine also. The ends are the same.
Farewell to Piccadilly.
Des Currie

I think this shows more about the lack of talent in New Labour than the desire to get 'best talent.' Having seen the intelectual desert offered up by most of the muppets in last week's Question Time of aspiring Deputy PM's I can see why he's worried.

This is proof if proof was needed how New Labour undermine our political system by openly taking from the opposition what is theirs and calling it their own leaving the opposition careful not to give away ideas. Some might say New Labour are eclectic in this respect, I say they are opportunists like Stalins communists.

The LibDems are committed to proportional representation where it is unlikely that a single party would dominate the political scene. If they have a fault, its pretending that this is already in place by assisting political consensus. Is this what has led the Second, soon to be First Lord of the Treasury to make his proposal to another Lord?

According to 91Èȱ¬1 news today, NI nobody wants it job on offer!

I am amazed at some of the comments posted here. It would seem good business to get the best people in to do the best job. If you want a proffessional job done by people that have knowledge and can contribute to the running and decision making, you sometimes have to look outside of your usual areas. It is how business works so why not government. Accept people's differences, embrace the diversity that people with different views can bring.

From a life long Labour supporter, it just shows how narrow minded the lib/dems and the torries really are.

Good luck Gordon, Tony Blair has been the best Prime Minister this country has seen in modern political history, he is leaving on a solid foundation and now you have the opportunity to build.

It's a strategic move as Gordon probably feels that with the declining popularity of New Labour he may not get a workable majority.

Consequently, thinking that the Lib Dems would be grateful for any chance at being in some form of power, he approaches them to bolster his voting power.

Unfortunately, this has backfired and now the Lib Dems and Conservatives can read from this that Gordon Brown is not confident of getting enough MPs.

Pity that Cameron & Campbell cannot come to some deal to exploit this weakness and keep New Labour out of power.

If Brown is going to appoint talented people into his cabinet, that will be the first time a Labour government has a cabinet without a labour MP - excluding Brown.
It is not difficult to understand his problem.
His Labour peers have screwed up everything they have touched, so it makes good sense to appoint MPs from the opposition parties.
That's what is going to happen at the next general election anyway.
Maybe he is trying to shift some of the blame for Labour's incompetence before the next election.

If Gordon Brown is genuinely trying to break up the Lib Dems (which is surely the only logical reason for offering a largely nominal post to Ashdown) then I think he ought to come clean and tell us what he's smoking. About two-thirds of Lib Dem voters are disgruntled ex-Tories, who might be looking for an excuse to go back to their old alleigance. And look at the huge number of Southern marginals the Lib Dems have (remember, Cameron is most popular in the south): Hereford, Cheltenham, Falmouth, Winchester, Brent, Taunton... The collapse of the Lib Dems would be worth 50 seats on the fly to Cameron, possibly more if he picked up some of the 100 or so Labour marginals where the Lib Dems are in close third as well. If just 30 of them fall, where is Brown's majority of 60-odd? And that's even before boundary changes are factored in.
The man is clearly desperate. Mind, that's not to disparage Ashdown. At the very least, he would be a vast improvement on Hain!

Huw Clayton, Aberystwyth

Here we were worrying that a man who couldnt win the position of leader in an election and so slowly smothered the man that could until that man resigned leaving noone else in the fight only to learn that the big man is human after all and it seems draws from that once popular American series The West Wing when deciding on policy and cabinet compadres. What superb "foresight" to offer an ex-leader of one of his parties enemies a prominent position in his new cabinet. And when its rejected he can gloat for years to come about how he "offered" those useless lib dems the opportunity to shape our countries future. What ever my opinion on Mr Browns ability to manage my country is and will most probably still be in years to come one thing is certain, he certainly is a shrewd character.

I think Gordon got this idea straight out of The Westwing

Lets just think for a minute.
We didn't vote for Brown as PM or for the Lib Dems as government and we definitely did not vote for Paddy Ashdown.

So what's all the fuss about - none of the the Brown camp have any legitimacy anyways...we might as well have Kermit the Frog and Miss Piggy to join the other overpaid, under talented muppets likely to jump on the ministerial gravy train

I'm not a big follower of politics being a firm believer that wanting to hold office should be enough to exclude you from election to office. However, I have often wondered why we don't put the best person in the job but instead put political followers who are ill equiped for the roles they are given. I believe it puts too much power in the unelected senior underlings - the so called mandarins.

In business, you put the best person in the role, regardless of whether you like them or not. If you can work with them and they're the best then why not utilize their skills regardless of their political tastes?

I remember Conservatives putting Lamont (who had a third class degree in economics) in charge of the economy and sure enough Soros took full advantage and it cost us at least a couple of billion pounds.

There are many good people in the liberal democrats (and the conservatives too) and whilst the rhetoric speaks of power, the chances are slight and so the talent wasted. The party politics are hardly distinguishable anyway these days to the bulk of the voting public.

I applaud Mr Brown for the vision.

He obviously expects the next election to result in a hung parliament and is trying to get the Lib Dems onside now rather than having to give away more in future. I think he's bungled it. If he was serious about including all talents has he made an offer to the Tories too, i doubt it.

Brown is attempting to shift the political decision making back to the left; by offering the candy of secondary level government jobs to the Lib Dems he is hoping to get them on board to vote for his centre-left ideas. Ideas that the Tories will oppose but for which Brown will get through. He also wants to stifle debate about electoral reform. By making hte Lib Dems appear ungrateful the ammo is there to shrug off requests for PR and coalition cabinets.

It is well known in labour circles that Gordon Brown cares only about attracting those who have talent to fulfill his ambitions for the country. Giving Independance to the Bank of England, asking business leader into policy directives incuded, asking someone as capable as Ashdown into the government is typical Brown! This is a man who put his own ambitions on hold to support Blair. While occassionally grumpy Brown is big picture. Shame on Ashdown for rejecting the offer to serve his country and maintaining the petty sqabbling status quo.

"Is Brown's gambit audacious or inept?"

This was the question the 91Èȱ¬ led us to believe that Nick Robinson would be answering on this blog. I can't find what Nick actually thinks in his blog.

So Nick...is Brown's gambit audacious or inept??

I would not trust the LibDems one inch. They are the party of lies, distortion and dirty tricks as particularly evidenced at election times. A Liberal at the heart of a Labour cabinet would just serve to provide a conduit of 'inside' information to a political party that attempts to destroy Labour.

By all means, Gordon Brown would be wise to bring into government people who have excelled in different walks of life, but under no circumstances from a rival party. The very fact that Paddy Ashdown leaked the offer of a cabinet post to the press is enough for me to rest my case.

McAvity Brown will deny all knowledge of this offer.

Note how he sent out total nonentities from the junior ranks of his party (the poor creatures who are clambering up the Labour Party career ladder, fearful of losing their seats at the next election), to 'stick up' for this inept and duplicitous wheeze.

For all his 'fine' words, the Brown bulldozer is well-serviced and ready to clunk into action. Stand by your beds !

It will be an unedifying ride.

Who are these Lib Dems who are 'angry'? Unnamed 'sources'? I do wish journalists would either name these anonymous 'sources' or admit they don't exist.

I am not anonymous. I am a Lib Dem. I am a source. And I am not angry. Quote me.

In times when the Liberal Democrats offer the only real opposition to Labour policies, it would have been strange and disappointing to see a Liberal Democrat helping to prop up the government in the interests of nothing more than Labour PR.

It is notable that the Conservatives seem to be the biggest cheerleaders for Government policy on controversial policies like Iraq, city academies, and the like.

As has already been said by Ed Davey on the Daily Politics, Ashdown would have had to publicly supported Labour policies, thanks to collective cabinet respobsibility. Therefore, a deal was never likely, in any case.

Here we go again I see Mr Brown means to go on just has Mr Blair did before him, underhanded tactics and needs to know basis, the way that Brown rape and pillaged the pension funds, and the way Mr Blair lied his way through his term in office makes Hitler and Goring look like saints. I wonder what are we in for next
HELP GET ME OUT OF HERE I AM BRITISH

It's a win-win if you speak to ordinary people and not the hacks that make up these sorts of blogs.

My own neighbour who normally votes Lib Dem remarked to me that she thought the Lib Dems were mad to refuse the offer. She thought that Brown was genuinely trying to reach out but was being stymied by old-style politics.

People like consensus and co-operation as long as it produces results.

As it stands the ordinary voter has a view of politicians not much higher than a sewer rat (or journalists) - Brown may just be th person to make people sit up and take notice.

I'm a late 40's well educated "liberal" who is tired of party politics and has almost stopped paying attention to current affairs after nearly 30 years of avid passion (I hate sound bite politics). I feel Gordon Brown (whom I met once and was very impressed with)was trying to be radical. Paddy Ashdown has proved himslef to be a rare commodity - a politician with wisdom and an ability to make people work together in challenging circumstances. I would have wanted him on my team too. What is needed are people who roll up their sleeves and get stuck in and do the job - Paddy has that skill - Gordon recognised that. What a pity for the people of Northern Ireland that petty politics got in the way. I am afraid that is all that people will remember of this attempt at trying to help imorve things - petty politics - marginalising democracy from every day experience. We need heroes who are prepared to put part politics second to doing what it right -please!!!!

A return to the idea of a Cabinet with representatives from more than one party? Now that's the kind of government I'd really like to see, and would make a welcome change from the current one-party Cabinets of recent PMs.

I find it incredible that the Lib Dems, who are so much in favour of proportional representation because it is more democratic, should turn down an offer to participate in government at the very highest level. That was a real chance to change the way we govern the country, and Paddy Ashdown turned it down. Gah!

It was, indeed, devisive and, one would hope from our future PM, the fact was not lost on Mr. Brown. That being, I'm certain, the case then Mr. Brown must have known that his offer would be refused. I would go further; Gordon has proved himself to be a very canny lad and he must have known that this offer would kick up a stink.
I'm going to vote labour. Any man good enough to give the Oxford Dictionary legitimate grounds to redefine "offer" is PM enough in my book. Great politics! One day we may know why.

I would dearly like to see an end to party politics and see Brown's move as a brave attempt to start breaking down the arbitrary grouping of people and ideas that this political form produces. I'm traditionally a Labour supporter (forced into choosing sides!) but some ideas coming from the opposition and the lib dems / greens are excellent, we need to change the system so that these ideas can get their proper dues without party loyalties getting in the way.

Respect to Mr Brown for this move!

Is any more evidence needed to show that Sir Menzies Campbell is regarded as political deadwood.

This was the chance for the Lib Dems to become part of the process. I think it a big mistake not to have accepted.

what is brown thinking of trying to get other people from other parties i would understand if it was a lib dem going to the tories that would be predictable but this is far from that. this in my view is the first battle brown has lost and got open up total war on the labour left and the lib dems if he tries it again.

maybe he did this because he may think there is now no new talent in the labour party who knows

now, why would a lib lab coalition be the end of tribal politics?

if anything, it's even more tribal than before.

the tories, and the will do anything to keep tories out tribe

i don't see anything innovative or groundbreaking either, didn't someone mention blair trying something similar all those years back?

now, if you are talking about labour + conservative, then that's groundbreaking and really the end of tribal politics

It seems to me highly undemocratic that Gordon Brown should be in such talks with the LibDems. He should remember that the electorate voted in the Labour Party, and therefore legitimately expects that party to form a government. If it wanted a LibDem government, it would have voted for one. I can't think of anything better to increase the distrust that many electors feel for policitians: vote for one party, see another helping form the government. This is not American politics: Gordon Brown is only the PM because he's in the Labour Party: he's not a president in his own right, free to appoint anyone he wants to the Cabinet.

At a time when decisiveness & leadership are needed on the International stage, the UK has some of the most unmemorable & below par people to choose from to represent them.
Whilst they waffle on about minor domestic problems, the threat from terrorism & fundamentalism increases exponentially.
We cannot even supply our troops with the small arms ammunition they NEED (as reported to me by someone who returned from Basra less than a month ago).

I lay the blame for this at Gordon Brown's door, as the holder of the purse strings.

So Gordon Brown is interested in the 'consensual' approach. In one Dictionary definition 'consensual' means "existing by or based only on consent". Gordon Brown asks Menzies Campbell for his consent. After consideration he declines to give it. Mr. Brown goes ahead and asks Paddy Ashdown anyway. Perhaps I've missed something, but that doesn't sound consensual.

It seems to me that the real reason Sir Menzies Campbell turned down the offer was that a) only minor positions were offered and b) on no grounds would Gordon Brown have changed policy on ID cards and the like.

There are in fact vast differences between all three parties and the clue is in the 'liberal' emphasis of LibDem policy. It makes any kind of coalition with labour unworkable.

This was clearly underhand as it went behind Menzies' back. The original discussions may have been genuine. But they were not based on any promises of actual policy change and so not worthwhile for any liberal to consider.

It's amazing that anyone has taken Brown's offer seriously.

It's quite clear that this was a muck-raking exercise to make him appear to be the injured party.

This episode starkly demonstrates the limitations of the conventional political 'party' system.

English people (outside of politics) instinctively know this, which is why a relatively tiny number of people now belong to political parties.

One day, we English will generate a new framework for 'the science of Government' and all will be well.

To me... "to lead a government of all the talents few" ...and having to try and attract Lib Dems to fulfil those roles, suggests that either a) There isn't such talent in his own party, or b) That he doesn't trust those with talent in his own party and that those he is attempting to recruit are the only people with talent around that he CAN trust.

So what does this say about his government, the Labour Party and the future... perhaps Gordon Brown had better join the Lib Dems!!

Although having the best people for the job regardless of party is a good idea, I think that it should be elected MPs that are offered positions not unelected peers (or anyone else unelected for that matter).

As an American I don't understand what all the fuss is about. Some 30 years ago it was not unusual for presidents to have members of the opposition party in their cabinets. Kennedy had Robert McNamara, a Republican, as his secretary of defense. Nixon, had Pat Moynihan, a Democrat as his secretary of housing and urban development. Then was a big improvement over the partisan rancor that now passes for public policy in Washington and I'm sure London could benefit from the same approach.