"We are now looking at a watershed election, à la 1945, à la 1979, more so than 1997." So says Alan Johnson, the Home Secretary, of a 2010 contest that sees Labour seeking an unprecedented fourth term in office against an optimistic and revitalised Conservative Party. All this against the background of an expenses scandal and a financial crisis that has engulfed Britain since 2008.
Sitting in his office, Johnson is talking to us during a week when speculation has grown about the possibility of a hung parliament next year. But, rather than indulge that idea, the bullish minister - who some still say should lead Labour into the next election - insists David Cameron is "unchanged" and the Conservatives are "beatable".
“Never underestimate the seriousness of the British electorate," says Johnson, who predicts that people will turn towards Labour closer to the election, as they recognise the "real choice" between the government and a "Thatcherite" opposition. "What are they offering? The 'age of austerity' and - if you want a bit of fun - the return of fox hunting."
Throughout our interview, Johnson is at his most convincing and articulate when attacking the Tories. But surely Labour's standing - still roughly ten to 12 points behind in most polls - would have improved had Gordon Brown promised the "game-changing", election-day referendum on proportional representation (PR), first advocated by Johnson in the summer. Not only would Labour have set the agenda on political reform, but it would have done more to win over the Liberal Democrats, in the event of a hung parliament.
Reforming instincts
Instead, Nick Clegg, the leader of the Liberal Democrats, said on 22 November that he will side with whichever party wins the biggest share of the vote. This - though apparently neutral - is a break from the party's position under Charles Kennedy and Paddy Ashdown, who preferred an alliance with Labour over one with the Tories.
“He's a strange man is Clegg, isn't he?" remarks Johnson, before pointing out that the Lib Dem leader failed to support the campaign for a PR referendum on voting day. However, Johnson says he has read, and agrees, with the view expressed by Ben Bradshaw, the Culture Secretary, who told the New Statesman earlier this month that the Prime Minister's pledge on the non-proportional Alternative Vote system is not "set in stone". Johnson is emphatic: "I don't think the argument [on a PR referendum] is over . . . the debate still goes on."
So, too, does the debate over the future of Labour under Gordon Brown. Electoral reformers are not the only faction within the party who might prefer the Home Secretary as leader rather than the cautious Brown - even this late in the parliamentary term. Johnson, naturally, is reluctant to discuss the issue with us because, he says, "it's been talked about so much" and "no one" is talking about it anymore. And yet, asked to give a "cast-iron guarantee" that he will not be leading Labour come polling day next year, Johnson chooses instead to praise the Prime Minister: "Gordon Brown is the best man for the job".
Certainly, Johnson is busy as Home Secretary, a post to which he was appointed in the summer in part, according to some, to "lock him in" behind the troubled Brown premiership. He has jokingly repeated the former incumbent Jack Straw's warning to him - that at all times in the Home Office, "someone, somewhere" is doing something that could end the secretary of state's job. So far, Johnson, Labour's sixth home secretary since 1997, has not slipped up.
In a speech to the Royal Society of Arts (RSA) on 2 November, he conceded that successive governments, including his own, have been "maladroit" in their handling of immigration and asylum. Is this a populist tack to the right, in the run-up to the election? From a centre-left point of view, Johnson's position might seem depressing.
He rightly told BBC1's Question Time that there was no "constitutional obligation" to invite the British National Party leader, Nick Griffin. But then, in his RSA speech, he unashamedly declared that he wanted to talk about immigration "today, tomorrow, next week and on any occasion I can".
Isn't this meeting the BNP halfway? Johnson repeatedly emphasises that immigration "has been good for this country". Intriguingly, he also says he wouldn't have "permission" to talk about immigration unless he first highlighted the concerns that opinion polls suggest many people share on the issue. Who must grant this "permission"? Johnson laughs, and says: "Me!" adding: "The public."
Or does he mean the press - in particular, the Daily Mail? No, he says, but "Daily Mail readers", among others. Johnson even chooses to defend the Tories on immigration, saying they represent a "mainstream, centre-right" party engaging in a "decent, centre-ground debate on immigration". This, despite the Tories having stuck to the 2005 pledge, under Michael Howard, for an immigration "cap", which - along with campaign posters asking "Are you thinking what we're thinking?" - led to accusations of "dog-whistle" politics.
Populist note
The Home Secretary talks of Labour's policy as being in the "centre", but if there is so little difference between the two main parties, it is arguably "centre right".
Clearly, however, Labour politicians have decided there can be no flirtation with a liberal line on this issue, and Johnson instead chooses to emphasise the "gulf" between the two parties on matters such as public spending, inheritance tax, trade unions and the EU. (On that last point, he likens Cameron's new far-right allies in the European Parliament to characters from the "bar scene in Star Wars".)
Johnson is a natural communicator, funny, amiable and down-to-earth. He knows how to strike a populist note and court public opinion - essential qualities for a modern home secretary, but also a modern Labour leader. The Prime Minister is lucky to have "locked him in" to this difficult and demanding department. How long he stays there is another matter.
