Gordon Brown's press conference -- live blog

Live coverage of the PM's regular press conference

10:46am David Cameron has had his monthly outing in front of the press. Now it's Gordon Brown's turn.

Follow The Staggers from 11am for full coverage.

11:01am Brown begins with Afghanistan. He says the London conference will see new Nato and Afghan troop levels announced.

11:03am He says he's confident the economy is emerging from recession but warns that the UK and the world economy remain fragile. We must not cut the deficit this year in a way that threatens growth and jobs, he says.

11:04am Brown announces that 100,000 unemployed young people are now eligible for a guaranteed job or training programme. He says they must accept the jobs on offer or risk losing their benefits.

11:06am He says that the government's economic plans will "expand the middle class not squeeze it".

11:08am The questions begin with Sky's Adam Boulton. He asks Brown if he really believes he can trim the Budget deficit yet avoid cuts to "front-line services". Brown says that the biggest threat to the recovery is not continuing with the action the government is taking, the reverse of Cameron's position.

11:10am Nick Robinson asks if the PM can be honest about the risks of not tackling the deficit. Brown says his judgement has been proved right throughout the economic crisis. He says he is right not to withdraw fiscal stimulus now.

11:14am After Bob Ainsworth let the date slip yesterday, Brown is asked if he can confirm that the election will be on 6 May. He replies by joking that Ainsworth suggested we need to prevent the Conservatives from winning the "council elections" (also on 6 May).

11:19am Nick Watt from the Guardian asks Brown if he agrees with Alistair Darling's statement that cutting the Budget deficit will lead to the toughest spending round in 20 years. Brown insists that, unlike some other countries, his government has already made key decisions on tax rises and restructuring the economy.

11:21am Brown is asked if he is taking a big risk by giving evidence to the Iraq inquiry before the election. He replies that he isn't, "because I stand by all the actions I have taken". He adds that he welcomes the chance to explain the decisions the government took.

11:26am Brown is asked how the Afghanistan conference will persuade President Karzai to commit to specific measures to tackle corruption. He says that action is being taken through the introduction of an anti-corruption task force on which external advisers will sit.

He says the coalition's strategy is to "split the Taliban" by persuading mercenaries to leave the group.

11:30am The PM is asked how would he characterise the differences between Labour and the Conservatives on national security. He says the government has trebled the national security budget since 2001 and has taken legislative action to respond to the terrorist threat, though he concedes this has been "controversial". He adds that the defence budget was cut "savagely" under the last Tory government.

11:37am Bloomberg asks Brown for his response to Goldman Sachs's decision to the cap the pay of its partners at £1m. He says there is a big danger that the banks want to return to the "bad old ways", with rewards unrelated to risk.

11:41am Channel 4's Gary Gibbon asks if windfall money from lower benefit payouts will go towards deficit reduction. Brown says that the government is prepared to make "difficult decisions" and cut the deficit, but it will not be distracted by people "shouting" that we need to cut the deficit today.

11:44am Brown says that the Tories produce policy documents whose one characteristic is that they "contain no new policy".

11:46am Asked if he supports the campaign to save general election night, Brown says that the timing of the count is a matter for returning officers.

11:49am Brown refuses to confirm whether he supports abolishing the law allowing firms to force people to retire at 65.

11:56am Asked about the defence budget, Brown says there is "no danger" the Afghanistan campaign will be underfinanced.

11:57am Pressed on where spending cuts will fall, Brown says that due to uncertainty over economic growth it would be premature to allocate money to departments now.

12:00 noon A rare question on climate change. Brown is asked if some of the mistakes made by the IPCC undermine attempts to secure international agreement on climate change. He replies: "No, because I think the academic evidence as a whole leads to one conclusion: that we need to tackle climate change."

12:04pm A Middle Eastern journalist asks if Brown believes the Yemeni government is committed to tackling terrorism. Brown says that he believes the government can be trusted.

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

Why a Labour split may be in the interests of both sides

Divorce may be the best option, argues Nick Tyrone. 

Despite everything that is currently happening within the Labour Party - the open infighting amongst party officials, the threat of MPs being deselected, an increasingly bitter leadership contest between two people essentially standing on the same policy platform – the idea of a split is being talked down by everyone involved. The Labour Party will “come together” after the leadership election, somehow. The shared notion is that a split would be bad for everyone other than the Tories.

Allow me to play devil’s advocate. What the Corbynistas want is a Labour Party that is doctrinarily pure. However small that parliamentary party might be for the time being is irrelevant. The basic idea is to build up the membership into a mass movement that will then translate into seats in the House of Commons and eventually, government. You go from 500,000 members to a million, to two million, to five million until you have enough to win a general election.

The majority of the parliamentary Labour party meanwhile believe that properly opposing the Tories in government through conventional means, i.e. actually attacking things the Conservatives put forth in parliament, using mass media to gain public trust and then support, is the way forward. Also, that a revitalisation of social democracy is the ideology to go with as opposed to a nebulous form of socialism.

These two ways of looking at and approaching politics not only do not go together, they are diametric opposites. No wonder the infighting is so vicious; there is no middle way between Corbynism and the bulk of the PLP.

I understand that the Labour MPs do not want to give up on their party, but I don’t see how the membership is shifting in their favour any time soon. Most talk around a split understandably comes back to 1981 and the SDP very quickly yet consider this: the most defections the SDP ever achieved were 28. If there was a split now, it would probably involve the vast majority of the PLP, perhaps even 80 per cent of it – a very, very different proposition. There is also clearly a large number of people out there who want a centre-left, socially democratic, socially liberal party – and polls suggest that for whatever reason the Liberal Democrats cannot capitalise on this gap in the market. Some sort of new centre-left party with 150+ MPs and ex-Labour donors to kick it off just might.

Of course, a split could be a total disaster, at least in the short term, and allow the Tories further general election victories over the next decade. But let’s be honest here – given where we are, isn’t that going to happen anyhow? And if a split simply results in what happened in the 1980s recurring, thus eventually leading to a Labour Party capable of winning a general election again, would members of the PLP currently wondering what to do next not consider it worth it just for that?

Nick Tyrone is Chief Executive of Radix, the think tank for the radical centre.