The Staggers

The New Statesman’s rolling politics blog

Will Brown face one last rebellion?

Rebels explore the "Aznar option"

By George Eaton Published 31 December 2009 12:06

Barry Sheerman, once described as the leader of Labour's internal opposition, is at it again in the Independent today, calling for Gordon Brown to resign. He writes:

No one would wish to underrate the significant contribution that Gordon Brown has made to our nation's politics. We all understand that, at heart, he wants the very best for Britain. However, now is the time for those around him who also care about our country's future to convince him that it is time for him to make way for a new leader.

Sheerman's intervention follows that of Charles Clarke, who in a typically robust article on Wednesday declared:

All the evidence suggests that Brown's leadership reduces Labour support, that alternative leaders would improve our ratings, and that an election determined by voters' answers to the question "Do you want Gordon Brown to be Prime Minister for the next five years?" would further shrink Labour support.

The psephological case against Brown is a strong one. No prime minister has been as unpopular as him and gone on to win the subsequent election. A recent Times leader revealed that Philip Gould has told the cabinet that Labour could win only if it replaced Brown.

This said, I'm rather sceptical of polls showing that Labour would do better under almost any alternative leader. To most voters, Harriet Harman and David Miliband are mere names. They don't know enough to dislike them.

The latest idea canvassed by the rebels is the so-called "Aznar option". Under this scenario, Brown, like the former Spanish premier, would remain Prime Minister until the election but Labour would elect a new leader to fight the campaign.

Matthew Taylor, who first explored the possibility back in August, points out:

In this way the internal contest within the party for its next leader is not about foisting a new prime minister on the country, but about choosing someone about whom the voters can make up their own mind.

The main stumbling block to any rebellion remains the absence of a definitive, Heseltine-type challenger to Brown. This is something of a pity, as the narrowing of the polls may actually strengthen the case for replacing Brown. In a hung parliament, a pluralist figure such as David Miliband would be far more likely to cut a deal with Nick Clegg than the tribal Brown.

History suggests that Sheerman and Clarke aren't likely to rouse a rebellion, but I'd be surprised if large parts of the PLP aren't considering all options as we enter 2010.

Follow the New Statesman team on Twitter

Special Offer: Get 12 issues of New Statesman magazine for just £12

Tags: Labour leadership

More from George Eaton

8 comments

Thu, 2009-12-31 12:19 — undercoveragent (not verified)

fascinating post. labour should have toppled Brown and, perhaps, still have a chance to do so. i like the idea of the aznar option. clarke and sheerman, however, are discredited. the anti-brown faction had its chance when purnell made his move. they should have mobilised. they did not. the fear now is that brown will stay, lead labour to defeat and then make sure that ed balls succeeds him. if that happens, labour will be out of power for a generation.

Thu, 2009-12-31 16:19 — swatantra nandanwar

Shut it Clarke. Either put up or shut up.

Thu, 2009-12-31 22:55 — scotleag (not verified)

Ah, yes, the "Aznar option." The one that has led his successor Mariano Rajoy to two successive election defeats and still trailing in the polls despite the recession in Spain being much worse than in the UK.

Clever thinking.

Thu, 2009-12-31 23:12 — Andy Walsh (not verified)

Ah yes...the "narrowing of the polls" meme makes another appearance. The Linas' blanket of the leftist commentariat.

Clarke explodes this myth quite effectively in that piece.

Thu, 2009-12-31 23:34 — Nick (not verified)

Labour are out. The question is then what the Tories do to pin the blame on Labour, and not get blamed like Thatcher for years to come for fixing Labour's mess.

1. A doomsday book of government debt, including all the pensions mess.

2. A bill each year to every voter setting out the size of the problem. Your share is 300,000 pounds etc.

3. A Labour tax on every payslip to show you contribution to the mess.

Seeing that Labour politicians will be in exile.

Nick

Fri, 2010-01-01 13:00 — Chris (not verified)

It's probably too late for a new leader to make any real impact, unfortunately.

Fri, 2010-01-01 14:45 — markcrossley

No. He will face hundreds more attempts to rebel against him but Mr Brown has waited over ten years to become PM and is unlikely and foolish of him to give in now regardless of how much political, personal and media pressure is placed upon him and one thing for certain it will get more intense as the weeks build up to May 6th as the General Election arises.

He could possibly win the next election however should this occur I think the Labour Party will impose an internal leadership battle to replace him so politically this would be the most appropriate option to try and keep power but not the current leader after the election not before although Blair and Thatcher survived over a decade as Premier so who knows Brown might too. Who would be a better replacement to Brown if He goes is questionable?

The next person who receives the keys to number 10 will have a huge task on his has as did President Obama when He took over from George Bush, ultimately the final decision will be with the voters dependant upon how much money can be raised for a political campaign from each party and what how they handle this.

I wish the person well whoever it is that becomes the next premier as it’s by no means and easy task for that individual but as long as they have the best interests for the majority of people in the country then that’s all that really matters.

Fri, 2010-01-01 15:39 — swatantra nandanwar

I think you are asolutely right. Even if we win the next GE, speculation about Brown will continue from Day 1, and it is very unlikely that he would complete a full 5 years. I have a feeling he would go after one year, on his own terms, having proved that he can win elections.