No briefing?
"Remind me, what is the route to the Commons press gallery?" Thus joked one of my colleagues when they realised - and you may find this shocking - that they would have to go to hear the prime minister speak to the House of Commons to hear what his plans were for the constitution. What, I hear you cry, no briefing, no interviews in advance, no quiet word in the ear. The answer is no, no and no.
Now I have some thoughts about what might be in this statement but have to go and film the Magna Carta. So bear with me and I'll let you know my thoughts later.
I'm 
Comments
What a refreshing change. I have many reservations about Gordon Browns premiership but anything that regalvanises the House of Commons, especially the media coverage coming from it gets my vote.
Will be interested to see what he has to say.
No briefing, no interviews in advance, no quiet word in the ear. The answer is no, no and no.
Nick, now that you have less work, does that mean that your remuneration is being reduced? Ha Ha!
Joking apart - Looks like a very serious Govt. Nick! what are your views?
is this the end of spin as we know it?
And about time too. I am probably not the biggest fan of Gordon Brown, but announcements should be made to the house of commons and reported on by journalists. I was totally fed up with being told at 0700 that 'the prime minister or whoever will announce such and such this afternoon'
Now journalists will have to report tthe news instead of telling us what the news is going to be. Mind you, you are still not totally in the dark as you know the main thrust of the announcement and not the detail, so you have been second guessing for the past few days. When that stops, it will be even better.
what are you saying Nick?.........is this the end of corridor politics as we know it? .........you better start looking for a proper job.
We now have a Prime Minister who was appointed by MPs without a vote (fair enough) he was elected as a labour member and is appointed as PM as allowed by previous precedent, BUT he was apointed to be the Prime Minister of a Government elected to office to fulfill an election manifesto. He has absolutely zero electoral mandate to do anything else.
He cannot be allowed to come into power this way and start the sort of constitutional vandalism that his predecessor did not have the guts or ability to complete.
IF he wants to start changing things, in ways that were not in the manifesto, he must get a mandate from a general election, otherwise we are living under a dictatorship without any democratic accountablity. What Brown is doing now is NOT what Blair told the nation he would serve a FULL third term to do.
Nick, if you or your co-workers are ever interviewing the labour front bench, Or Brown himself on any of these issues, please please please ask them where in the manifesto these policies are laid out, because if they are not in there, he has NO right to implement them.
The style may be different, I doubt the policies will be much different - indeed some could be a good deal less appealing.
For example, when the British people see Parliament making war, not the PM, those in Wales, Scotland and possibly England Northern Ireland will ask 'why the UK parliament?'.
And when they see one G Brown putting the question of war or no war to Parliament, they'll ask 'why does he get to put the question...and in that form?'
Being novel and being 'different' only works as a way of securing an electoral advantage if, in fact, you are different. Brown isn't. He's old Labour remade rather than new Labour held together with sticky tape - but the effect is much the same.
About time you journalists had to put some effort into reporting these announcements instead of being "spoon fed" the line the politicians want you to portray.
"...Have to go and film the Magna Carta..."
Don't we all?!
The plans announced by the new so-called non-spinning Prime Minister were leaked to the Sunday Times. It's just that alot of the media want to give Gordon Brown a honeymoon.
'Brown to curb powers of PM':
Also let's stop this rubbish that there is no spin from the new Brown regime. We had on the first few day's, the announcment of the Cabinet was one of the most leaked in years.
One just had to read the Sunday broadsheets and the various focus pieces about the Blair-Brown handover to see how the Brownites had being spinning and leaking to journalists. Take this one example in the Observer:
"Brown was 'annoyed' and 'surprised' that no official had woken him to pass on the news that Britain had faced one of its most serious terrorist threats since the bombings of July 2005. Unlike the new 91Èȱ¬ Secretary, Jacqui Smith, who was woken with the news that a massive car bomb had been found in central London, Brown was left in bed by his officials."
Will Gordon Brown really change the face of British politics?
How would the Observer's political editor know that unless a 'source' from Brown's office had spun that? Interestingly the same the sort of story appeared in the Sunday Times, Sunday Telegraph and Independent on Sunday.
It seems that many in Parliament and the media are determined to give Brown a honeymoon in the same way Blair was in 1997. People regretted that, I've no doubt many people will regret this.
It's time all the "rubbish" about Gordon's Brown's supposed "lack of mandate" was firmly knocked on the head.
The system is based on you electing an MP to represent you and the party with the most MPs chooses the PM - usually in advance.
After all Winston Churchill never had a mandate from the People for "Blood, Toil, Tears and Sweat" in a change from Chamberlain's "Appeasement Policy".
Interestingly when they did finally get a direct vote on Winston as PM - they chucked him out.