Curiouser and curiouser
Downing Street sources insist that the Chinese government were never in any doubt that Gordon Brown intended to attend the closing ceremony of the Olympic Games. They say that the prime minister made this clear to China's Premier Wen when they met recently in Beijing. What's more, a letter sent by China's ambassador to London on the 5th of April informs No 10 that the Chinese premier was looking forward to welcoming the PM at the closing ceremony.
The plan, they insist (and the back this up), was always for Brown and the mayor of London to go the closing ceremony and Princess Anne and the Olympics Minister, Tessa Jowell, to go to the opening ceremony. Maybe, but that's not the impression they created right around the world.
It was explicitly stated in China's official agency reports on several occasions that Brown was going to the opening ceremony. Xinhua is not known for its Downing Street sources. It gets its information from the Chinese government.
British newspapers have repeatedly reported calls for Brown to abandon plans to attend the opening ceremony.
Last night Hillary Clinton praised her friend for boycotting the opening ceremony.
Sources claim that the public confusion about Mr Brown's plans stems from the fact that he regarded the only important question as being whether countries boycotted the Games or not - whether that be this or that ceremony or, indeed, the Games themselves. The PM feared that an answer pointing out that he wasn't, in fact, planning to go to one ceremony but was planning to go to another would look like he was trying to have it both ways.
He spotted the right danger but made a huge miscalculation about how to avoid it.
I'm 
Comments
Typical Brownian miscalculation.
In attempting to make us all believe he was the holding up the moral 'stick' and setting what could have been deemed a 'stance' he has in fact made himself look more scheming than before.
Despite previous statements to keep the Olympics non politicised, he has jumped in with both feet by allowing the flame to be brought through the PM's street, and under such shameful conditions.
Add to that this current episode, well, more woe to him, I say.
He treats people like fools; sooner or later people will return the favour.
'Mon the Monks!!!
Either the governments communication is so poor that it can't even commuicate the PM's attendance effectively, despite the massive global public interest and news coverage.
Or the government are still so devoted to spin that they deliberately set out to retain the option of 'plausible denial' whatever the outcome.
Either way the government are showing complete contempt of the british people, and the british media have some serious questions to answer of themselves in their service of the british public as the 'third estate'.
Can the media be trusted to give these answers?
He could have made it clearer if he wanted to, but by deliberately introducing ambiguity to give himself more breathing space he has ended up looking like a fool.
The competitors claim that the Olympics are not political - if that is the case why are any politicians going to China in an official capacity?
Leave the Olympics to the competitors. Politicians keep out.
Nick
Ref your comments on the Olympic Ceromonies.
Please stop giving the PM the benefit of the doubt in what he meant or didn't mean. The man is devious and always uses language which is couched in such a way as to be arguable one way or other when he wishes to worm himself out of something. We should all know him by now.
I suggest you analyse any statement that he makes on any subject and I'll be very surprised if you don't find it ambiguous with some form of get out clause or other.
They think it's a clever game they play when in fact it simply demonstrates weakness,indecision and lacking in character.
GJ
Brown is - in Churchill's immortal words - "... decided only to be undecided, resolved to be irresolute, adamant for drift, solid for fluidity, all-powerful to be impotent."
Good grief! Yet another 'story' invented by the press as the basis for yet another story. It makes it worse that these inaccurate press reports are then believed around the world; perhaps in other countries they actually have a press that only prints the facts, and they assume that it's the same in the UK.
It really does come to something when a prime minister has to tell people what he is NOT going to do; it wouldn't leave much time for getting on with the job, would it? Perhaps you could show the way Nick - what are you NOT going to do over the next six months?
This does appear to be a complete fuss about nothing.
In Nick's entry yesterday he said that the journalists travelling with Brown to Beijing knew he wouldn't attend the opening ceremony, so why are all these jounos on TV and in the press claiming they didn't know. Sounds like the media trying to make a story out of nothing.
And really Nick, you have been around far too long to think Brown's statement at the Sarkozy press conference meant he was going.
Since the journos knew he was going to the closing ceremony (as you stated yesterday) several weeks ago, was it really likely he was going to make two trips to China in 2 weeks?
DITHER!!!!
The PM lacks courage of his convictions
The man is incapable of even deciding whether or not to go to the Olympics. What's he doing running the country?
2 key problems here, both being serious ones:
1) Journalistic incompetence:
ie the media should have forced an un-ambiguous answer from Gordon Brown about this months ago.
If GB refused to give an unambiguous answer for such a simple question then the journalists should have said to him publicly during the monthly meetings that an ambiguous answer means by definition that the worst-case scenario is assumed and that if he didn't want that to be reported as being his words then he must clarify. (ie if GB doesn't answer then the journalists should explicitly tell him that they'll put whatever words they want in his mouth; same applies to any other questions to which there's only a simple yes/no answer with no security implications.
2) A sociopath Prime Minister:
GB is so obviously a sociopath that he never should have been given any public post, let alone being prime minister. He's unelected and doesn't understand basic logic or maths, and he has absolutely no understanding of the real world as he's never lived in it. (tax credits being a classic example; he still doesn't understand why hardly anyone claims it or why people would rather simply have less money taken away from them in the first place)
Nick, this is a complete non-story that only people who take a rather obsessive interest in the dull goings-on of Westminster and Whitehall find even slightly interesting. You're a talented man - could you not find something useful to report on? There's a hell of a lot of horrible things happening unnoticed in the world.
Evidently the French media had understood Downing Street's messages in the same way as Nick Robinson, because it was the lead item on French state radio this morning (France Inter). There was even a discussion later in the programme about the etymology of the word boycott.
David Miliband, Gordon Browns Foreign Secretary, was under the impression that Brown would be attending the opening ceremony.
"Foreign Secretary David Miliband has flatly rejected pressure for a Europe-wide boycott of the Olympic Games in response to China's crackdown on Tibet.
He said he had no plans to attend the opening ceremony himself, but Prime Minister Gordon Brown would be there - along with many other EU leaders.
Mr Miliband was speaking on arrival for weekend talks between EU foreign ministers in Brdo pri Kranju, Slovenia."
etc...
This is a complete non-story.
Nick, I'm not a fan of GB, and occasionaly I tend to a bit in favour of the 91Èȱ¬ on things, however on this one, the phrase "mountains out of mole hills" comes to mind. The Ambassador and LOCOG all seemed to know he wasn't going to the Opening Ceremony. I read in the press that he wasn't going to the Opening Ceremony. How you missed it, is somewhat beyond me, but nonetheless this talk of "Britian being at both ceremonies", is completely correct. Team GB will be there, and as such Britian will be there.
It's one thing to say "I'm going" and then U-Turn, but completely another to do what Gordon did. Surely this is a complete non-event. If you're so concerned, Freedom of Information Request the documents! Goodness knows, next you'll comment on Tony Blair going to both ceremonies in Athens 2004, forgetting he went to both to ensure we won London 2012 by glad handing the IOC members!
From Stalin to Mr Bean and fairly soon to Mr Has been.
I hate to say you read it here first( well I have to say that even though I may exaggerate slightly) but within a month of GB's elevation I predicted in this very blog that he would be in serious trouble come this years party conference.
Might he be on his way before the GB across the pond?
Sounds like Brown's dodging of the recent European signing ceremony all over again.
He would have been better ignoring the torch fiasco than boycotting the opening ceremony. At least with the opening ceremony, it could be argued that he was supporting the Olympic Movement rather than China.
Any normal human would have his or her plan and stick to it. Like a "vision".
Gordon Brown is clearly a man confused by doubt and uncertainty... hardly ideal leadership material.
I note the attempt to spin his way out of trouble.
Don't you journalists realise we - the intelligent public- can see that? All it does is make GB look indecisive (so what is new?) and you look like lickspittles.
"He spotted the right danger but made a huge miscalculation about how to avoid it."
That's not like him at all, is it?
How, in all that is holy, is it possible in this day and age for it to be unclear at any point from when it was first an mentioned as a dairy date, what one leader of a country was/is going to do in relation to another?
This is not mano-a-mano vague 'maybe catch you in the pub for a pre-Xmas bevvy' territory!
I have certainly seen 91Èȱ¬ reports that he was going. Now he is not. Were they wrong... er.. mis-remebering/speaks/writes/information?
Mcavity Brown strikes again:
"And when the Foreign Office find a Treaty's gone astray,
Or the Admiralty lose some plans and drawings by the way,
There may be a scrap of paper in the hall or on the stair -
But it's useless to investigate - Mcavity's not there!"
At his Downing Street news conference on 1 April, Mr Brown said: "I think President Sarkozy said himself that he expected Britain, because we are going to host the next Olympics, to be present at the Olympic ceremonies (NOTE THE USE OF THE PLEURAL) and I will certainly be there."
Source 91Èȱ¬ News
Not only is this "non-story" a waste of time, but sadly the majority of readers seem to lap up this anti-Brown vitriol. there are far more important issues to deal with today rather than whether or not the Prime Minister of the fifth largest economy in the world said or did nt say that he was not going to the opening ceremony of the olympics.
Nick. The Olympics are due to begin on Friday eighth of August. The PM has not had a change of heart. He has a prior engagement. According to my diary we are due to have a Lads night out on the 8th. Nothing special. A few pints of Bass in tha Clarance & then off to the Magic Spices for a Curry. He would much prefer a decent night out in New Brighton rather than poncing about in Peking or whatever it's called now.
I hope that this clears up the confusion.
This isn't a non-story. Neither is it an affair that will bring down a government.
An impression was allowed to persist that GB was attending the opening ceremony. That impression may have been falsely created but it was allowed to persist.
The No10 machine could have quite easily issued a clarification much earlier on - but they didn't.
So we are left with another situation where the inhabitants of Downing Street do not seem fully in control of the information coming out of the building.
That, to my mind, is a story worth reporting. It is part of a wider picture that needs to be brought to the attention of the electorate.
Gordon Brown only intended to attend the closing ceremony and this was widely reported weeks ago in British media including the 91Èȱ¬. Now for anyone to claim otherwise is either suffering from amnesia or plain ignorant of this fact.
As for Hillary Clinton we all knew about her credibilities after her stories over her visit to Kosovo.
Nick you surprise me, maybe you should reconsider your position as a journalist?
Curiouser and curiouser... Let us hope that when does go he takes his weird Cheshire cat grin with him!
I too have known that Brown intended to attend only the closing ceremony. This is because it has been reported as so, by the 91Èȱ¬, among others.
Thus I fail to see the point of this report.
However it seems to follow the current media methodology of creating the smoke and allowing the public to assume there is a fire.
The people saying this is a non-story are right in a way - it's a fairly minor issue in it's own right. But for me it is another piece of interesting evidence about GB and his way of operating. He appears completely incapable of making a plan & sticking to it, he will not make a decision when he can leave it to another day to do so, and he (presumably) will not accept advice from anyone about his public image.
Which is why we have all the messing about on the election, all this nonsense on the Olympics, and all the Peter Hain saga (amongst other things).
There was once a PM called Brown,
who spent most of his days with a frown,
when the Olympics came round,
he was nowhere to be found!
That curious Prime Minister Brown.
Another case of the Media(91Èȱ¬) creating news!!!!!!
When did Gordon Brown say he was going to the opening ceremony?
The 91Èȱ¬ goes by the expectation that its the responsibility of the concerned person to correct the wrong interpretations it cooks up!!
How fair is that?
Sort of the same thing that happened to the elections that never happened.
Gross abuse of the trust the people place on the media.
We need to stop making apologies for GB's apparent clumsiness, and start accepting that the man is a devious & cunning manipulator.
He OBVIOUSLY knew he was never going to attend the opening, but hushed it up with ambiguous language so he could later claim credit (as he already has from Hillary) for his apparent 'boycott' of the opening ceremony...which China already knew about. Therefore China is not offended, and GB seems a moral hero.
Failed.
He will forever be remembered as the PM who never won an election and merely served out the fag-end of Blair's third term.
GB does not live in the real world. I only learned the other day that GB cannot drive. I know this is the law because he is blind in one eye, but I can't help thinking that a man who is not a motorist and has presumably never filled up & paid for a tank of petrol has no ability or understanding to be a modern 'representative' PM.
Such a bore we have to wait until May 2010. Here are the latest odds, 2010 is a dead cert!
2010 4/6
2009 5/4
2008 20/1
There is simply no confusion at all.
No 10 said a short while ago that the PM would be attending the Olympics. He would be attending the closing ceremony.
Fine, kind of has to, we have the next Olympics.
Well, that all seems clear to me. He hasn't "dithered" as the the kid Cameron would have it. He hasn't been confused or unclear.
They have simply said what they WILL be doing.
If journalists and the opposition are too stupid to work out from that what WONT be happening, that is their problem, not ours.
He didn't miscalculate - you can never win against pure stupidity.
I'm confused, so is David Miliband.
Foreign Secretary David Miliband has flatly rejected pressure for a Europe-wide boycott of the Olympic Games in response to China's crackdown on Tibet.
He said he had no plans to attend the opening ceremony himself, but Prime Minister Gordon Brown would be there - along with many other EU leaders.
Typical NULab trying to please everyone all of the time.
When Brown took over at No 10 he made great play about being a 'conviction' politician a al Thatcher.
What rubbish, he's spineless.
Mr. Robinson,
As a news reader I appreciate your reports on current political issues. But when it comes to the Games in Beijing this August, I don't think many British people understand 1.3 billion Chinese people, who have done so much to prepare and to show their warm-heartedness to the people all over the world. It's true, there are lots of differences and most Chinese people are silent because they speak a different language. This doesn't mean they don't deserve hosting the Games and their human rights as well. If one knows a bit more about Chinese history and the progress it has made in recent years, one would re-think about boycotting the Games. Go to China and listen to what they say if you'd like an unbiased survey...
Let me suggest another reason that Brown has finally come out with this.
He has been desperate to avoid the opening ceremony as political pressure has mounted in recent weeks - but couldn't commit himself to it.
Why?
At the closing ceremony the Olympic flag will be passed to the Mayor of London. In recent weeks it has looked like that will be Boris Johnson (based on opinion polls).
Brown would hate to have to attend, and perhaps stand next to Boris Johnson to collect the flag.
Yesterday, a poll in the Guardian suggested for the first time that Livingston would win.
With pressure mounting and a decision having to be made, this for the first time gave some comfort in saying that he would only attend the closing ceremony.
He has reluctantly had to nail his colours to the mast, but had little choice.
This PM would get dizzy if he walked in a straight line.
He's becoming a joke figure; he gets lost on the way to dinner at Windsor Palace; turns up late for the Lisbon Treaty signing; stumbles over his words at PMQs; can't take simple decisions about when or whethter to travel; sends advisors out of meetings in tears; misses Mme Sarkozy when he goes to kiss her.
It's all very well talking about 'Brown detractors' but even his supporters are cringing with embarrassment each time he appears or speaks.
This is not a good place to be after nine unhappy months in the job.
OK, Nick, you have stated Bottler's intention to attend the closing ceremony only, but whether you have convinced us of that is open to question.
The way he has dithered and prevaricated during the time he has been (unelected) PM, it wouldn't surprise me if he bows to pressure from the Chinese, and attends the opening ceremony also.
I watch with interest.
The comments do not seem to consider China's point of view. Loss of face is an important matter for the Chinese. We might regard Brown as a joke, but to China he is a world leader who has promised to attend their opening ceremony. What is the likely effect of this havering on Anglo-chinese relations? I would not be at all surprised if the good work done by the recent UK trade mission to China is undermined by this nonsense. The Chinese take these things very seriously.
"Last night Hillary Clinton praised her friend for boycotting the opening ceremony."
That should just about do for the both of them...
Nick, don't you think that we've entered a new phase with the way that this government is viewed by the media and the public in general? What we now see is that what ought to be the main topic for discussion in this instance (i.e. the rights and wrongs of Brown attending any ceremony at the Games, given recent events in Tibet/Darfur) is now totally eclipsed as we concentrate on the way that the government manages (or rather mismanages) the minutiae of the matter.
It strikes me that the subtext to almost any news story now is that this government is incompetent: with that basic theme, it's always going to be possible to find faults in the presentation or management of an event. I think something very similar happened towards the end of Major's premiership.
This being the case, it's as if the media is not wondering whether the government should go but when - and the country at large is probably thinking the same way. The electoral numbers may still not add up to an utter thumping at the next election but it's impossible to believe that Labour will be the largest party after the next election because I can't see them being able to generate a single good news story between now and then.
I don't get this. He has only acted exactly as he said he would. Where is the confusion except for being generated by Robinson et al?
If journalists didn't know if he was attending or not they should have simply said this, rather than speculating...
Seems like a story out of nothing.
As has been stated previously and in the the previous thread's comments at his April Press Conference Gordon Brown was asked whether or not he was going to the Opening Ceremony. If he was always only attending the Closing Ceremony why didn't he say so?
What he said was "I think President Sarkozy said himself that he expected Britain, because we are going to host the next Olympics, to be present at the Olympic ceremonies and I will certainly be there."
Remember this was an amswer to a specific question about the Opening Ceremony and he has left the impression that he is going.
Why is this important? Because this is not the first example of the Prime Minister dithering over issues. He dithers over every thing. He lacks leadership. He lacks the courage of his convictions (mainly because he has abandoned most of them to get to where he is).
I couldn't stand Thatcher but at least she wasn't a ditherer. She made her mind up and got on with the job. Gordon Brown is a poor man's John Major.
The real problem with this shade of Government - which is turning out to be worse than when Tony Blair was around - is its propensity for double-speak. It reminds me of the times that Alistair Campbell was being quoted as telling journos (off camera) what Tony really meant in the speak he had just given (on camera). OK - so linking sport and politics always happens - but this level of shrieking is starting to get boring and one is left to wonder why have the Games at all. What really is the point. There are lots of nutters with "causes" and scenes such as those we have witnessed in relation to these Games is going to encourage all of them. If we had a vote on dropping the London Games, I feel pretty certain now that there'd be a big vote against. If Gordon Brown really wants to pin his flag to the mast of the protestors, then all I can imagine is that he doesn't expect to be PM in 2012. And wouldn't it be just ironic if someone snatched the Olympic torch from his at the closing ceremony.
Who cares Nick. We are more interested to see how Cameron implements the naughty step procedure!
Ah well, he's not alone I guess. Looks like other World Leade...er, um, ers, such as the Head of the UN didn't check their MySpace calendar well enough either to avoid a schedule clash to give a proper RSVP to the party ('scuse pun) invite.
So it seems were all confused, still. I certainly am. The British government seems to be. And our media. Even the 91Èȱ¬...
/blogs/thereporters/mihirbose/2008/04/brown_becomes_an_olympic_champ.html
To infinity... and beyond!
But many posters are right, this pales into insignificance compared to such vital high-profile prime ministerial outings on pressing issues such as football manager selection, plastic bags, George Clooney and US charity phone ins.
Brown "bottles" things so regularly that I needed to produce a for him.
This Prime Minister will go down as one of the weakest ever to rule this great country. After ten years of being the bridesmaid he truly has turned out to be the ugly sister. Dither, dither, chew nails, dither, dither. And now that his legacy of being chancellor is unravelling before a disbelieving Alistair Darling,will this country stand up at local elections et al and say " enough is enough?" Hope so......