New politics?
On Newsnight my phone rarely rings at 6.14am. But it did this morning. It was our deputy editor Robbie Gibb, who was looking after Gordon Brown: Prime Minister's Questions, a for News24 and Newsnight in which the soon-to-be-PM was to face questions from a panel of the ±«Óãtv's sharpest minds. Robbie was involved in a last minute flurry with Mr Brown's people over the exact seating arrangements for the programme, which - because of the EU summit - could only be recorded at eight in the morning. It was symptomatic of a process of negotiation to get Mr Brown onto the programme which was at times tortuous and always subject to change.
But when Mr Brown swept into the studio - at roughly twenty past eight - he was a vision of relaxedness. The make-up lady remarked how warm and chatty he was - more so in fact than Blair - his warm-up small talk was easy, his jokes surprisingly good.
And when the intense and wide-ranging grilling from Martha Kearney, Evan Davis, Nick Robinson, and John Simpson began, the old Brown, sticking rigidly to his sound bites, seemed to have disappeared. No prudence, no steering a steady course, not even much listening and learning.
Could it be that Mr Brown - famously uptight and brooding as Chancellor - will, like Nicolas Sarkozy, find the top job strangely relaxing?
Comments
I'm looking forward to seeing how many times Brown says "hearts and minds".
As for looking relaxed, maybe Brown is a better actor than anyone supposes he is.
Just a brief question: Why the pretense, on News 24 at least, of it being a live style of interview?
I do not believe that anyone could think that Gordon Brown is a relaxed individual.
I hope you asked him whether he thinks he has a legitimate mandate on English domestic matters given that he is elected in Scotland, and even then only on reserved matters.
After all Gordon Brown has had two terms to learn the ropes as under-study to Tony Blair. He is also determined to outshine Blair:this would be extremely difficult but not totally impossible. The more Gordon relaxes the better are the chances for Labour to stay in power. Voters love a smiling winner, a smart PM who is astute and relaxed. Gordon will not need to be dour after the 28th July as a new Chancellor will take the financial weight off his shoulders.A successful PM needs to be a good cheerful communicator: Gordon has most certainly the best communication tutors to get him ship-shape for the top Prime Ministerial duties.
So Gordon has realised there is ability behind rosettes of another hue? Next he might become aware of a vast mass of talent that is allergic to rosettes? Then it is but a small step to waking up to the stupidity of PARTY politics. Will he then outlaw factional politics, and pre-selection of MPs? Will he call an election where constituents choose their own representative locally? Will this group of true representatives converge on Westminster to form – taraaaaaaaa! – a government of all the talents? What! And spoil the nihilistic fun of a bunch of bizarrely motivated weirdos? Now that WOULD be a "New Kind of Politics" but I predict the same old stuff, with the punters getting stuffed.
I watched the programme with interest.Gordon Brown very smartly coiffured,lots of hair spray.He has abandoned "prudence' for "obfuscation"
His many answers to questions was "Not Guilty" Guv" even though he has been sat at the table for ten years.It was a good performance ,but I have little hope for a change in the future.Brown is Brown !!!
I watched the programme with some fascination - especially after coverage/consideration of the Bridcut report into impartiality of the ±«Óãtv.
My observation is this:
For a producer of a flagship ±«Óãtv news programme the blog comments seems to be somewhat opinionated biased subjective rather than analytical objective. It's a matter of conscience for Peter Barron but my concern is Browns fitness for leadership and not whether he is chatty with the make up lady. I grant this is probably important in some respects but there is something that makes me uncomfortable about Peter's need to blog this in particular. I'm prepared to accept it as honest observation but having read it a few times I am not convinced.
In many stages in the interview Nick, Evan, Martha and John seemed to have got our new Prime Minister bang to rights and just as it got interesting.......lets move on to the next subject. I understand that this was probably a limited opportunity in terms of time and the need for breadth but I was really concerned that our future Prime Minister was allowed to get away with insubstantial, contradictory and elusive answers and I sensed that Evan and Martha, at least, were somewhat unconvinced. My perception is that editorial direction did not allow them further scope to probe when answers were less than convincing.
On the ±«Óãtv news site today one of the leading articles is "Brown pledge to cut state control" (inferred from this interview) but the interview didn't really substantiate this except for some unquestioned glib statements. How is state control to be reduced? I can't figure it out from the interview and if you can then please let us all know.
I don't question the integrity of the journalists involved because they asked the right questions. Something is bothering me, however, about the editorial approach and I am disappointed in the Newsnight team on this occasion. You often set the standards of impartiality but in this case I fear you have let yourselves down.
Sorry - but that was nothing like a "grilling".
In fact if you look at the "have your say" where the public were asked to submit questions for Gordon Brown you'll see that 50% of those questions were about devolution.
Yet your journalists chose to ignore that and asked only one lame question about devolution. And Brown got away without having to make a proper answer.
How long will the ±«Óãtv keep ignoring this issue? It's not going away - far from it, as resentment in England grows every day.
Continued failure to address this issue will end up with exactly what the ±«Óãtv doesn't want - i.e. the end of the Union.
I am a Labour member and he did not impress me. The questioners did quite well except that they failed more than once when they had him on the ropes, to throw the final punch. They allowed him to charm them just like Blair. When he was backed into a corner they changed tack. Why was'nt Paxman an interviewer?
Worth the effort though, it was a very good interview. Thought he looked a bit discombobulated at times. And why does he look less happy when he is smiling than when he is frowning ? My own view is he will make a good PM, given time to settle in. Thought the 4-1 style was very good, as Brown is clearly not as comfortable with people as Blair - and gave more revealing answers as a result.
Although I thought his body language said as much as his answers. Was I the only one who thought he was avoiding looking at Martha Kearney and giving some of her questions short shrift ?
His reply to Evan about the euro was a study in avoiding getting tangled in the real issues. And he didn't acquit himself very well with Nick's point about working with others.
Of course, if such an interview was done in Wales it would involve only Betsan Powys, but with 4 interviewees who might all be in with a chance of being First Minister. So let us just be grateful we don't have Proportional Representation..
But after discussions with Ming, well, I suppose anything is possible..
Peter Barron....reading the foregoing posts I believe the concensus is obvious...IT DIDN'T FOOL MANY VIEWERS!
GB was given an easy ride dressed -up to appear( Frost like)a serious probing debate.
Please please ask what are these EU Fundamental Rights that we are being protected from having? I am sure I am not the only one who is mystified by the government not telling us - and by journalists not explaining.
A couple of the posts above referred to the questions that were submitted on Have Your Say. I don't know why Newsnight bothered to go through the exercise of asking for questions as most of the questions asked bore no reference to the concerns written up on HYS. As for a grilling, well a gentle warming might be more appropriate as most of the responses were taken at face value and on to the next one rather than being probed.
Were the ±«Óãtv warned off certain topics? And was Gordon given sight of the questions ahead of the interview? There were loads of posts about robbing the pension funds and cost of housing but neither question came up. I would give Newsnight a C+ and Gordon a B-. Just a bit better than average by the ±«Óãtv, new PM not sounding at all inspirational.
It doesn't look like anything was asked about ID cards/NIR but the same old subjects of "climate change" and Iraq were brought up. We know what his answers to those questions are going to be, ask something else.
When the $hip is $inking, and nobody can $ave it, the captain of the $hip might as well relax.
Let us hope that Mr. Brown does not become George Bush's poodle.
I hope you asked him what he felt about the fraud which has been rife in Brussels and has cost the UK taxpaper billions. Will he 'turn a blind eye' just so that he can change our Constitution and get rid of the Lords?
I was very pleased to see Gordon Brown asked about the unfair balance of taxation and spending between Scotland and England.
I was really hoping to see this fully answered but Gordon Brown was allowed to get away with the answer "if Scotland spends more of its budget in one area it has less to spend elsewhere" - which, of course, is not an answer but a diversionary tactic.
I was expecting an immediate reposte with a question about the tax income and tax spending per person in Scotland and England. But there was nothing more from your interviewer. Gordon Brown was simply allowed to get away with a meaningless answer on an issue that is a serious concern for those of us living and paying taxes in England.
I wonder why we we have to pay for the ±«Óãtv if this is the best you can do. Why wasn't this question properly researched before it was put to Gordon Brown?
I was very pleased to see Gordon Brown asked about the unfair balance of taxation and spending between Scotland and England.
I was really hoping to see this fully answered but Gordon Brown was allowed to get away with the answer "if Scotland spends more of its budget in one area it has less to spend elsewhere" - which, of course, is not an answer but a diversionary tactic.
I was expecting an immediate reposte with a question about the tax income and tax spending per person in Scotland and England. But there was nothing more from your interviewer. Gordon Brown was simply allowed to get away with a meaningless answer on an issue that is a serious concern for those of us living and paying taxes in England.
I wonder why we we have to pay for the ±«Óãtv if this is the best you can do. Why wasn't this question properly researched before it was put to Gordon Brown?
The effort, man-hours and expense that appear to go into these performances are frightening.
They are very unlikely to represent reality: both sides being anxious to make their point come what may. The licence fee would be better spent on entertainment.
I think that I will wait to make a judgment based on facts.
Building and Society. A mutual organisation of importance. This is how a country is built. With strong ties. No yuppies. No third parties. If the politic ignores housing it is a negligent politic. A Great Britain is built with sound construction foundations.
Obviously Brown is a very good actor, so was Blair. However, he cannot remove himself from the happenings of the past 10 years. Although he is trying desperately to distance himself and Ministers from the past (Ministers in different posts - not my fault it was the previous holder), lets ensure that he is constantly questioned on the past as well as the mess he will create as he blunders along. He is totally predictable and is doing exactly what any embarrassed MP would do. Although Blair failed to win a war credit (lets not forget that Brown was deeply involved in this), Brown is likely to try for one. This is also predictable. Run down Iraq more quickly and send the cream of our forces into Afghanistan, in great numbers, for his credit rating. This war seems to be a better option, more respectable and has a better international backing. Let us all hound this man at very stage, question his every move and expose every Socialist MP for what they really are.