91Èȱ¬

It's hard to know who looks most out of place at Downing Street these days. Is it Gordon Brown on the street outside gretting Mrs Bush with a handshake and then realising he should be kissing her? Or is it those invited in for the final acts of Brown's premiership who realise they have backed completely the wrong horse.

Lordy me, is this the best thing you can come up with as a topic to discuss? Surely there are considerably more important issues out there at the minute?

Hi Nick

Man watching that press conference you thought they'd have been better getting a room!

So Gordy has rolled over, and promised more troops for Afghanistan, wouldn't it be more helpful if more of the NATO countries cough up more troops?

Gordy also beefed up the rhetoric on Iran regarding sanctions etc... Which ultimately just "Starve innocent people".

It's quite interesting how GWB didn't spend much time talking about Zimbabwe?

In my view the situation in Zimbabwe is in need of immediate action, and would probably warrant military action, to overthrow Mugabe the dictator, who has even said that despite any electoral win the MDC will never rule!

Nice question by the way, but you must have forgotten your stetson :P

Bit odd, this post. Irish referendum vote blocks the Lisbon Treaty and Nick decides to do a piece on "who's in and who's out"of Gordon Brown's inner circle. Surely this is just more fuel for the tittle-tattle, personaility driven politics that is infecting our political system like a cancer.

Fair enough, if there's nothing important to talk about then a few "silly season" posts are probably in order. But please, in some small way you help to set the broader political debate, so let's talk about real issues and leave the gossip / speculation in the gutter where it belongs.

I see that the British Embassy has put out a 'high' terrorist alert to UK citizens in the United Arab Emirates, ie. Dubai, Abu Dhabi.

Now there's a surprise with Brown and Bush meeting and the info coming from the Foreign Office.

One can't help thinking that GB is worried by DD and needs to put the gear of God up the public to help justify 42 days.

The word here is 'reshuffle' and I should be very surprised if there is no reshuffle in the offing. Defence, yes, because with George back on the plane, foreign policy be free to will take on the new look it needs. But there is surely more. When the Cabinet was last constituted, there had been none of these U-turns and concessions, no talk of a weak leadership, no fuel crises and tax shambles, no 42 days dust-up, no Davis-as-stuntman. Gordon has a few goalposts to shift.

Re 2

I agree about the choice of topic.

I can't help thinking that Nick has taken such a battering over David Davis together with the changing views in the papers and other media regarding civil liberties that this topic has been put on the shelf not to be revisited until the by-election.

And don't expect any reasons why DD's resignation was bad for Labour.

The result is obvious from the Sunday Times poll where the Conservatives moved a further 2% ahead of Labour following the vote on 42 days.

Nick,

D- : Must try harder.

Really, at least have the courtesy of *pretending* you read the comments to your last post.

Of course, as you won't read this it's a fairly moot point ...

Shame George Bush didn't learn a little history before taking office. Would have saved a lot of lives.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

After due consideration, I think it was very sensible of Nick to choose this topic as it is so uninteresting that it won't get many posts.

I see that "divisive Davis" is up to 473 posts and still rolling!!!

It's all very incestuous, isn't it. MP's who shared a flat with the Business Secretary and people who went to the same university..........

It just reinforces the fact that it's who you know, not what you know. Jobs for the boys, totally regardless of whether they can actually do that job or not..!!

A great pity Sir Geoffrey Lawrence the chief judge at the Nuremburg Trials was not there!

"Gordon Brown faced a fresh challenge to his authority last night after a leading Labour rebel promised to campaign for David Davis in the renegade Tory's forthcoming by-election."
-- Observer

!! Interesting news !!

Shame that you consider the guest list of the Bush No. 10 dinner more important, Nick?

Where are your blogs on 42 days / on David Davis / on the Lisbon Constitreaty?

I am not usually one to comment on this blog (just a lurker), but please don't let your usual high standards slip!

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Do you think they discussed the fact that they were in a room with the least popular British PM and the least popular US President of all time? I'm surprised there wasn't some sort of seismic event!

Can you please focus on what is important here though? Oil prices/food inflation/global warming/anything other than who had dinner with these two lame duck leaders

My #10 got pulled so apologies if this is a re-run bloggers.

Politicians are obsessed with their legacy and the public are obsessed with them doing time. I know I am.

Brown seems to be doing a Churchill - think it was "history will be kind to me because I shall write the history". OK Brown is busy and will get a lackey to do it but thats the gist.

Bush is his guest and the topics will probably quitely include why is it the public can pick up JIAC documents and the like as easily as a Metro. It will also probably include some Formula One/Mosely sting "issues" if you saw those reports. They probably have the missing Inland Revenue data CDs as recycled mug mats at no 10.


Bush is thinking of posterity too and wants to be remembered as somebody who stuck to high principles in policy as opposed to poll bias.

Could he one day have to use the Texas charm to sway a jury vote on Iraq oil and rebuilding contracts? Panorma/Jane Corbin (I think) did not say that but I would have thought it is an implication of over-riding Government standards.

If McCain/Obama decide that US interests are not served by protecting him and Cheney then the fur will fly.

Will Gordon "Macho" Brown go down as the man who took Bush to task for having a wimpy 8 days without detention where as we are aiming for 42 days? Will Murdoch bring Fox into battle as he has the Sun against Davis? Fox could probably afford an independent Presidential candidate.

Brown presides over a leaky Government machine. But I know nothing about the funding inquiry. Quiet could mean something - or it could mean nothing. If its been a while I would have thought there was "something".

Labour have pretty well alienated most of their activists in favour of Sun readers, they are allegedly badly funded - if they're not where did the money come from, Party membership is probably in freefall. Donors are probably negotiating the best cells in Belmarsh.

10 years of the Tories produced a couple of perjurers. Will Labour give them a run for their money?

I think this topic actually has a lot of mileage in it - Labour lacks talent at the top, which makes any summer reshuffle intriguing.

So, where does Browne go if Hutton moves to Defence? Darling has taken a lot of flack for Gordon, but still hangs on whereas Harman has been a liability throughout - Maybe Des for Leader of the Commons?

Have you opened this blog to bury bad news for Bottler?

There are some questions that we are anxious to know the answers to, ie:

What is he doing about:-

1 fielding a candidate to stand against David Davis

2 declaring that the Lisbon Treaty is dead, and if he now intends to allow us a referendum on the original constitution.

Yawn yawn yawn. perhaps if you had said that it was laughable sending yet more troops to Afghanistan whilst at the same time starving the defence budget, you would have a point!.
I wouldn't want to be in HMS Exeter or Southampton who have been sent to sea whilst their sea dart missiles have been removed from their ships in order to save money. (ie they are virtually defenceless from air attack) .
This Govt is beyond parody.

I think that Nick is actually right on this one. It would be interesting to know if those historians who are so critical of Bush and American plocy actually stood up and said I don't agree with you Bush, i don't think you are right, that Bush and his ilk are the real threat to society and freedom and that our troops should be withdrawn immediately from Iraq and ask exactly how many more will be sent to Afghanistan. As I have said on other blogs I think we will soon be seeing the body of Bin Laden.
Did the esteemed historians show the same courage of their convictions as DD. I think the soldiers sent to Afghanistan will mainly be special forces and that we, the Americans and the Afghans themselves will be making bigger excursions into Pakistan. The battle is getting bigger!

As for the government reshuffle the Des Browne must go. He has lost control of the MoD and something must be done. The whole department is leaking like a sieve and is not fit for purpose. Browne can concentrate on Scotland and Hutton can wipe the slate clean.
There is an interesting court case this week about freedom of speech and you should watch this space because it will have national repercussions.

John Hutton for Decence Secretary? Apart from being an MP, the only job he has had was lecturing in law at Newcastle Poly. But then again, on reflection perhaps, exposure to the Friday night social life of Central Newcastle in the 1980s might make him eminently well suited to the defence brief.

Oh Nick…. given all that is going on at the moment, do you really think we are interested in whos been invited to dinner. Whos in with who and who might be the next defence secretary. D- from 8 was generous.

I disagree about the 'name that stands out' on the guest list.
Why is there little or no mention or analysis of the presence of Rupert Murdoch ?
Lets have a detailed investigation into, and publicity about, this person's influence on politics and society. Much more important than speculations about Hutton.
(As regards politicians there, according to the Guardian, David Miliband and Alistair Darling were also attending.)

Nick,

Anglo-American history eh , but I doubt they were chewing fat, that is the diet of the mere mortal taxpayers.

History is good for discussion, especially for the axis of incompetence of Bush and Brown.

We should be grateful that discussion of the future will never materialise under these two useless leaders of the free world, they are both history themselves. I wonder if they talked about what has gone wrong or do they still live in cloud cuckoo land oblivious to how history will record their abysmal failures. ?

Has there ever been a female Defence Sec? I was very impressed (as usual) with Yvette Cooper in front of the Select Committee last week. She seems to me to be more impressive than her husband, certainly. She would make an interesting difference at Defence.

More long-term, IF Jacqui Smith ever got the top job, Cooper would be a good option for Chancellor. A Smith/Cooper line-up would be fantastic in electoral terms I would have thought.

Castles in the air! - back to the day job.

Hi Nick
Are you sure its DD who's divisive?

I agree with some of the other posts who think your choice of topic is a bit odd.

Are you sulking because people are asking for less Westminister spin on the important issues or have you just forgotten what true political debate is about?

Nick its your blog, so you talk about whatever you like.

But is this really the most politically interesting story of the day?

Irish voting no perhaps,
42 days trundling on
Bush admits no communication over iraq withdrawl
DD resgining
more security docs left in a public space

none of those better then... John Hutton attends dinner?

Zzzzzzz.

#22 At 1:10 pm on 16 Jun 2008, T A Griffin (TAG) wrote:

"As for the government reshuffle the Des Browne must go. "

I agree somebody should get a SEVERE rollicking and/or the sack.

In fairness its more Jacqui "42 days for now, more maybe before the next election" Smith at the 91Èȱ¬ Office in charge of most of the security/spooks people.

I could be wrong though.

Damn it sack him anyway - never liked him. Two jobs whilst our people get shot up!

I'd laugh.

Interesting item. Especially the choice of historians as guests. I wish some of your bloggers, especially those commenting our rights and Magna Carta would get their facts right. Is this perhaps an indictment of the quality of history taught in schools?

Jimbrant

A Smith/Cooper line-up would be fantastic in electoral terms I would have thought.

God Help Us All.

Jimbrant @27, No wonder Brown's options are so limited: He's captaining the Titanic and the best officers he can call upon are Cooper and Smith.

I do, however, agree that Cooper is better than her husband. He's Balls.

Murdoch's attendance is important. Brown needs the News Corp. media muscle behind him again.
Maybe Rupert is is coming to his senses at last accepting there is no choice between Brown and Cameron.
This may well be the critical outcome of the 42 days issue - not the David Davis "stunt".

# 5 mikepko Gear of God mike whats that all about, only joking, I know old tories dont have much of a sense of humour but here's another one mikepko and sceptic max have just come out of the closet and become Tories. Of course those that read there posts would never of guessed that would happen.

#14 three monkey dust hardly news that the biggest traitor to labour bob marshall should support DD he led the labour revolt against 42 days and of course jus about everything else labour have done.

#21 T A Grriffin why would you care where british troops are being sent, you have no respect for them as you said in other blogs recently.

he should ahve raised the usa greenhouse gases, and ,why did they act to stop the usa lending fiasco,qn ,and wht doe`s he really want fform iraq.