Denied! Clarke vs. Mandelson

The Business Secretary is due to give a statement in Parliament at 3.05pm today on the car industry.

Pretty important one might think.

Unfortunately, we are denied the prospect of the shadow Business Secretary holding the Business Secretary properly to account.

This is because Gordon Brown has deemed fit to appoint a peer - Lord Mandelson - to the important position, especially in a recession, of Business Secretary.

We should be able to tune in to see Ken Clarke going head to head with Peter Mandelson but that is not to be.

More...

This is part of a wider problem. The Business Select Committee has recently voiced concern that the government has more Business ministers in the Lords than in the Commons.

LORDS

• Rt. Hon. Lord Mandelson - Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform
• Shriti Vadera - Minister for Economic Competitiveness and Small Business (jointly with Cabinet Office)
• Stephen Carter CBE - Minister for Communications, Technology and Broadcasting (jointly with the Department for Culture, Media and Sport)
• Mervyn Davies CBE - Minister for Trade and Investment (jointly with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office)

COMMONS

• Pat McFadden MP - Minister for Employment Relations and Postal Affairs
• Gareth Thomas MP - Minister for Trade, Development and Consumer Affairs (jointly with the Department for International Development)
• Ian Pearson MP - Economic and Business Minister (jointly with HM Treasury)

It speaks volumes about how Brown perceives the ministerial qualities and business experience of his MPs that he has had to rely on the Lords to fill most of his business ministerial positions.

And as Peter Oborne has pointed out, not a single member of the Cabinet has ever occupied a wealth-creating job.

The Commons is the primary and democratically elected chamber and Gordon Brown would do well to remember this when appointing his ministers.

All governments don't like leaks

Well, that is not strictly true. Governments like to leak themselves to drive the news agenda and to make their enemies - whether in opposition parties or within the party of government - look bad. But governments do hate leaks that go against them because leaks reveal embarrassing material, make them look not in control of events, and not in control of the news agenda.

Mandelson has told Sky News today: "I also have to say I think that for many Conservatives, it is a self-serving smokescreen, behind which to hide their own apparent collusion with a Home Office official who was allegedly systematically leaking Home Office papers to the Conservative Party, in order to pursue his own personal political ambition. I would like to know from the Conservatives whether their frontbench and their leader knowingly colluded with that civil servant in riding a coach and horses not only through the Civil Service code but also through the law."

Talk about a smokescreen of his own! Oppositions have to use leaks because of the secretive nature of British government. The Freedom of Information Act is no where near as open as in the United States and thus oppositions need to supplement the information they can acquire officially via FOI requests with leaks. Leaks can also prove far more timely as this government often fights the release of information under FOI. When the information finally does get revealed, its political significance is often diminished. Mandelson has taken the high and mighty approach talking about the Civil Service code but he will be acutely aware that Labour hugely benefited from leaks when opposition, and no politician more so than Gordon Brown.

Mandelson is therefore being disingenuous. This post is not intended to make an overtly party political point other than to highlight the Labour government's hypocrisy towards leaks. The point is that when in opposition a party will embrace leaks. When in government they will rail against them. The Conservatives, like Labour, will no doubt turn against government leaks when they return to government. They will try and stop them and no doubt will criticise them to. But hopefully the next Conservative government will not take leak inquiries to the extremes Labour has and seek the arrest of civil servants and MPs who have not violated the Official Secrets Act.

The Osborne-Mandelson-Russian-Rothschild-Superyacht story

The Osborne donation-that-never-was story has been whipping political journalists into a frenzy.

My view is that it is pretty much a non-story and one big yawn.

The media are clearly bored – obviously the last day or two have been slow news days. They are making a mountain out of a molehill.

Mandelson seems to be getting revenge on Osborne.

Rothschild seems very upset that Osborne had released details of a private dinner - breaking the old boys code - and has made his displeasure public, no doubt egged on by Lord Mandy - time to grow up, it's called politics.

The BBC, particularly Robert Peston, seem to be waging a vendetta on Osborne.

There has been a ping pong of versions of events between a politician and a hedge fund manager - who to believe? At least the politician has published a full version of events.

At most, Osborne has shown an error of judgement getting on bored the superyacht.

But nobody has done anything wrong. No law has been broken. Osborne neither solicited funds nor accepted them. The story seems to now revolve around whether the Russian billionaire was being encouraged to donate via one of his own British based companies and for the paltry sum of £50 grand. £50,000!!! Absolute peanuts. Why would such a small amount have been asked for? Moreover, the practice is not even illegal. What a non-story!!!

For those who want to read more, check out Iain's Dale's post on the subject.

Other than that this is definitely a case of 'Nothing to see here, move along…' Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Mandy's return is political

Gordon Brown claims he has recalled Peter Mandelson from his position as the EU Trade Commissioner to take up the position of Business Secretary because in these difficult economic times the UK needs experienced people in government and Mandelson has experience in abundance as he was also a former Secretary of State for Trade and Industry. The government spin is that Mandelson is back simply because of economics.

However, his appointment should be seen in political terms. Brown has brought his enemy back because it has allowed him to do several things:

• First, Brown is correctly seen as a factional politician who holds grudges against his enemies. This appointment allows Brown to play against type as an inclusive leader who puts the country first.
• Second, it is a defensive and slightly desperate move as Brown is trying to shore up his position in the Labour Party. Brown realises that one fairly decent conference speech is not enough to keep at bay the Blairites within his party and government who have been undermining his authority by briefing the media. By bringing back the arch-Blairite it sends out a message to the plotters that he is willing to compromise. It is undoubtedly defensive because a strong Brown would have preferred to banish Mandelson to the Falkland Islands rather than make him a peer and a powerful Cabinet minister.
• Third, it helps a disunited Labour Party look united. He can say he has a Cabinet of Blairites and Brownites which will work together in harmony. The people that founded New Labour - Brown, Blair (who is in regular contact with him), Mandelson and Alastair Campbell - are also said to have put aside their differences to work together again to help Labour cling on to power.
• Fourth, it provides Brown with cover. Bringing the Blairite Mandelson into government has allowed Brown to promote his cronies. Thus, those responsible for the "balti house plot" to oust Tony Blair in September 2006 which Brown claimed he knew nothing about have been promoted. Step forward Chris Bryant (Deputy Commons Leader), Sion Simon (Skills Minister), Kevan Jones (Defence Minister), Wayne David (Wales Office), Tom Watson (Cabinet Minister) and Huw Irranca-Davies (Defra). With the exception of Kevan Jones, the only meagre talent the others have is loyalty to Brown. One of the biggest rewards though goes to Nick Brown who has been promoted to Chief Whip. Brown would not have been able to get away with this had he not have had the cover of his Mandelson appointment because Nick Brown was seen as pivotal in helping force Blair out and is fiercely loyal to Brown.
• Fifth, and finally, Brown is attempting to drive home his current political message against David Cameron – that “this is no time for a novice.” Mandelson (and Margaret Beckett) are old hands and old faces which add some gravitas to what was quite a young Cabinet.

Mandelson's return is a shrewd political move but it is also defensive, desperate and not without its risks. Mandelson is an incredibly divisive and polarising figure in the Labour Party. Mandelson has a reputation for playing fast and loose with truth and honesty. The fact that he has had to resign twice from Cabinet positions means he has shown questionable judgement at times. Mandelson has an incredibly high media profile which means his every word will be scrutinised – Mandelson has a long track record of briefing against Brown – and any lapses of judgement will be seized upon. Brown is taking a huge gamble by bringing him back. Mandelson will be the only person in a Cabinet of pygmies who can stand up to Brown. Given the history of bad blood between the two, Brown will find it very difficult to deal with a dissenting Mandelson. But Brown has given himself the problem of appointing an almost unsackable Cabinet minister. If their relationship broke down again Brown would be in big trouble. As Fraser Nelson has noted: "... Peter Mandelson, a world-class plotter and intriguer. He put the skills to great effect in Europe, and it's an incredibly bold move by Gordon Brown to appoint him into his Cabinet because if things get pretty tough for Brown six months down the road, say if he loses this Glenrothes by-election, people will immediately look to Peter Mandelson to be the man who organises any kind of plot or coup."

Bringing Mandelson back is a very risky, some would say reckless, move from a Prime Minister known for his innate cautiousness.

Will Europe like Brown recalling Mandelson?

Interesting one this. Mandelson was very pro-trade and pro-free market. Accordingly he polarised opinion within the EU. The protective instinct of the French and their President Sarkozy meant Mandelson was their Public Enemy No. 1. They won't miss him - other than losing a figurehead to vent their anger at.

However, when countries put forward Commissioners for the EU Commission, they are supposed to do so in the interest of the EU, not their own nation state. Thus, once appointed the EU Commissioner operates in the EU, rather than national, interest.

The reason I raise this is that Michael Crick has just done so in the PM's press conference that has just taken place. The PM had argued that Mandelson had been brought back into government because of his huge experience in business and interenational trade etc, vital at such a difficult economic time. Crick then said to the PM that he would have a lot of explaining to do to his EU partners about why he had recalled Mandelson if his experience was as important as the PM was saying - surely it would be better for the EU as a whole if Mandelson's talents were utilised as a Commissioner, not selfishly by the UK government? [Not Crick's words, but that was the gist].

To which Brown replied saying it was right for British interest...

Not a very good European, Mr Brown (though me knew this already). This will further disappoint the Europhiles...

Brown: Watch your back!

Fraser Nelson has made a good point about Mandelson's return to government, saying it's a brave move by Brown:

"... Peter Mandleson, a world-class plotter and intriguer. He put the skills to great effect in Europe, and it's an incredibly bold move by Gordon Brown to appoint him into his Cabinet because if things get pretty tough for Brown six months down the road, say if he loses this Glenrothes by-election, people will immediately look to Peter Mandelson to be the man who organises any kind of plot or coup."

Watch your back Brown...

Mandelson back in the Cabinet

Amazing! The enemy of Brown has just been brought back into the tent! No official news about what job he'll get, but looks likely that he'll be made a peer and then become Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform. Mandelson has formerly been Secretary of State for Trade and Industry.

Looks like Brown is trying to send out the message that he runs a united team of Blairites and Brownites and that he has appointed someone with international experience - given his current role as EU trade commissioner.

I can imagine the Tories having fun with this. Mandelson has been forced to resign twice from Cabinet during the Blair years and there are many anti-Brown quotes from Mandelson over the years.

This move would mean John Hutton will have to be moved - looks like defence - and also looks like the Unions have got something for all their money! They absolutely detest Hutton calling him the 'CBI's man in government'.

Also means Brown needs a new Commissioner - Geoff Hoon? Would Brown be bold enough to move his Chief Whip and appoint his deputy, Nick Brown, in his place - that would upset the Blairites given his role in forcing Blair out!

UPDATE:

• Mandelson will become Secretary of State for BER.
• John Hutton becomes new Defence Secretary
• Hoon is likely to become new EU Commissioner but not for another year. Will stay in the Cabinet in some capacity for the time being.
• Des Browne may become Secretary of State for the Nations.

Derek Draper has just said that the Tories will be really worried now Mandelson has come back in government. Hahahahahaha. Draper is a comedian!

UPDATE 2:

• Geoff Hoon to be Transport Secretary
• Nick Brown to become Chief Whip - a lot of crap about 'balance' coming from the spin doctors.
• Margaret Beckett - you remember, that outstanding former Foreign Secretary - is rumoured to be returning to government.

Looks like Brown is trying to ram home the experience vs novice point. I'd expect Cameron now to follow suit and bring back Malcolm Rifkind and Ken Clarke to give his own Shadow Cabinet a couple of its own experienced heavyweights...

UPDATE 3:

• Hillary Benn looks set to stay in his job at DEFRA.
• Des Browne to return to backbenches
• Sir John Bond to become 'Business Ambassador' - window dressing this. As Matthew Paris has just said, government can get advice from whomever it wants.
• Damian McBride - Brown's spin doctor - is to take a more backroom role. He has been blamed for briefing against Cabinet Ministers. He's quite a diversive figure known as Damian 'McPoison'!

UPDATE 4:

• New Department for Energy and Climate to be formed - to avoid conflicts of interest between securing energy supply and fighting climate change.
  

UPDATE 5:

• Plans for a possible merger of the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish departments to create a "ministry of the nations" have been put on hold, according to BBC's James Landale.
• Beckett to be a "Cabinet Enforcer"
• Ed Miliband to head up new Dept of Energy and Climate Change.

Thinking about the reshuffle, it seems to me that another message from it is that it is supposed to show government unity. Brown hopes that having a Cabinet that represents all wings of the party will help unify the party behind his leadership. This looks as a direct response to Cameron's repeated claims in his Conference speech that only he led a united party. Interesting to see whether this fragile unity will hold.

Still think the main message is that of 'experience'. Cameron will have to rise to the challenge and bring some big beasts of his own into his Shadow Cabinet. Alternatively, he needs to brand the reshuffle a desperate move bringing tired, has-been politicians back. Can't see the Daily Mail liking the fact that Mandelson, the Prince of Darkness, has been brought back... that should help Cameron. And some Labour backbenchers do not appear that happy with Mandelson's return either. Backbench Labour MP John McDonnell has said the Labour movement will be "perplexed" by the shock move and regard it as "extraordinary step backwards" for the party.