James purnell

The Labour leadership battle: tribalism vs anti-tribalism

While we’re on the subject of the Labour leadership, it’s worth reading James Purnell’s article in the Times today.  I know, I know – he’s left Parliament now.  But Purnell is close to Team Miliband (the Elder), so I imagine some of his thinking might show up in the campaign.  In which case… One thing that jumped out at me was Purnell’s attitude to the coalition government.  Sure, he attacks it as “only symbolically progressive,” but he doesn’t dismiss it out of hand.  Indeed, he even suggests that coalition might be a good thing: “Gently, too — we should give credit to Mr Cameron and Mr Clegg for the way

The Labour Party Must Look to the Next Generation Now

I have just watched the last images of the election campaign on the Ten O’Clock News on the BBC. David Cameron was surrounded by some seriously off-putting party apparatchiks (why not choose some of the perfectly presentable and normal-looking young people for CCHQ rather than these awful gargoyles?), meanwhile Gordon Brown was struggling to fill a room and Nick Clegg was being mobbed.  I remember a Labour spin doctor (OK it was Damian McBride) telling me that he knew Gordon could never win a beauty contest against David Cameron. He didn’t seem to have twigged that modern elections are beauty contests – that is one of the reasons Tony Blair

The Tories’ Unite strategy is paying unimagined dividends

The Tories Unite strategy has been so effective, even Peter Mandelson is peddling it. Led by Mandelson, Labour’s isolated right has questioned Unite’s influence over candidate selection. James Purnell’s preferred successor, Jonny Reynolds, was omitted from the Stalybridge and Hyde shortlist, compiled by the NEC, which has two Unite members on its board. Mandelson and Purnell have urged Downing Street to reopen the race. For its part, Unite responded. One of its preferred candidates for the seat, Glyn Ford, who failed to make the cut, demanded a right to appeal also. The Tories’ must be ecstatic. Their strategy, initially conceived to nullify the Ashcroft scandal, is paying unimagined dividends. Brigades

David Miliband would set the people free

What is it about the Blairite passion for abstract nouns? I ask, not out of facetiousness, but because I want to know what they mean by loose terms such as ‘empowerment’. David Miliband joins James Purnell among the progressive left’s thinkers who are reimagining the relationship between state and citizen, and he gave a concept heavy, substance light speech to Demos this afternoon. I’ve read it a couple of times and can’t get my head round it. Peering through the glass darkly, the central concept is attractive: Miliband wants to give more power to the people. Some valid policies season his argument. For instance, the 1 week cancer pledge would

Purnell leaves parliament but not politics

The news that James Purnell is to stand down is a shock. It is clear that Purnell was disenchanted with Brown’s continued leadership and with the direction in which the Labour party was heading. Purnell was marginalised in parliament and his much vaunted alliance with John Cruddas came to nothing. Plainly, he believes that he can exert more influence outside the parliamentary Labour party than within it. The Tories stole the limelight this week with their commitment to public sector co-operatives; Purnell’s response fell flat, caught in the contradictory statist language that even the most uber-Blairites cannot escape. Purnell’s journey into the wilderness is the firmest evidence that the Conservatives

Purnell’s ‘empowerment’ pledge falls flat

James Purnell envisages a society of ‘empowered’ voters left to make decisions for themselves. It is an attractive concept – individual responsibility displacing state directives will save money and, providing those running the institutions are competent, improve public services. Writing in the Times, Purnell acknowledges that these concepts can become lost in the abstract terms in which they are expressed. What a pity he didn’t take his own advice – his article is an extended abstract noun. Not that it’s all bad. What power is there for parents who can’t afford to move close to a good school, he asks. His answer is broadly similar in tone and substance to

The Tory wobble is over, for the moment

The media are obsessed with a Tory crisis. And why not? It’s a good story. The Telegraph is cheerleading the circus. It gave exhaustive coverage to the absurd hen-fight in Westminster North; on Monday it reported on more ‘rumblings and grumblings’ in the shires; yesterday, their subject was David Cameron’s heavy handed response to the ‘backwoodsmen’; and today Simon Heffer collates these events into the conclusion that ‘even if  Mr Cameron doesn’t see how disenchanted the public is by its lack of lack of choice and his lack of definition, many of his MPs do. The ride is about to get rocky.’ By accident or design, the Telegraph’s analysis is

Will faith prove Cruddas’ undoing?

What intrigues me most about the Cruddas/Purnell axis is their commitment to faith in public life. Many politicians discuss faith carefully and define its role in society as essentially passive – remember David Cameron’s recent interview with the Evening Standard. Cruddas and Purnell envisage faith and the civic mutualism it engenders as an active ingredient to renew both party and country. Writing in the Guardian earlier this week, Purnell wrote: ‘The Labour movement was built upon organisation, the practices of reciprocity and mutuality that, if successful, led to a shared responsibility for one another’s fate… There are deep conservative elements in the Labour tradition, and we should honour them –

Getting around Gordon

Ok, ok, I get the message: you CoffeeHousers don’t much care for James Purnell.  But this exchange between him and Nick Robinson, to be aired on Radio 4 later, is still worth a read: “I asked James Purnell how you could get radical policies past a reluctant prime minister. Here’s his reply: James Purnell: The other thing that you could do is outflank and No 10, by trying to be more radical…you could just unilaterally go out and commission someone to review the system for you, and then the prime minister would be left with the choice of either firing you or pretending that they were into that idea all

Strange and Getting Stranger

It is just plain bizarre that Gordon Brown has announced that he will serve a full term if Labour wins the next election. He should be playing down his role in the forthcoming election (difficult I know, when he is Prime Minister) not reminding people that he will be around for another four years. It is also strange that he has written off the Hewitt-Hoon coup attempt as silly. This is the one thing it is not. It may have been unwise, badly organised and poorly timed. But the idea of giving the Parliamentary Labour Party the opportunity to save Gordon or the party was perfectly sound. Indeed, they were

James Purnell’s third way

Guess who’s back.  Yes, James Purnell, the man who tried his best to topple Gordon Brown last year, has emerged from the relative obscurity of the backbenches and Think-Tank World to set out a new prospectus for the Labour party in today’s Guardian.  David nodded towards it earlier, but it’s worth looking at in a little more detail.  Why?  Well, because it’s an indication of how things could go for the post-election Labour party. The first thing that strikes you is how Purnell tries to defuse the controversy of his resignation last year.  “What?” you might think, “resigning from Brown’s government is controversial? Sane, more like.”  And, yes, I see

Purnell’s enjoying the freedom of the backbenches

James Purnell has just spoken at The Spectator’s Paths to Prosperity conference, with sideburns bushier than ever after the summer. He was doing an on-stage interview with Andrew Neil and was quite firm on the release of al-Megrahi. “He should have died in jail” said Purnell. “I would have left him in jail.” I suspect the freedom to say such things is one of the reasons that Purnell quit government. He later took questions (quite often rude ones) from the floor. Sir Richard Sykes had been on earlier, talking about the dismal state of British education, and Purnell was asked why he couldn’t just agree that schools had gone downhill

Why the Reshuffle is Not the Solution

As I wandered through parliament on Monday evening I bumped into a former minister who had just come out of the do-or-die parliamentary Labour Party meeting. He reached in his pocket and showed me a text message on his mobile from a constituency activist: “So it’s a slow, lingering death then,” it said. This was the week the Labour Party finally, definitively admitted defeat. The European elections demonstrated that Labour can’t win under Gordon Brown’s leadership. James Purnell’s courage in being the first Cabinet minister to voice what his colleagues know to be the case was met with shuffling feet and bowed heads. The expressions of loyalty from those who

The Least Democratic Cabinet Since the War

I didn’t think Gordon Brown’s narcissistic statements of principle could get more embarrassing. The idea that he is driven by his presbyterian conscience was bad enough, but this Washingtonian nonsense about being taught by his father to always be honest is just hide-behind-the-sofa excruciating. It’s been my experience that people’s own mythology of themselves is often completely out of kilter with the way other people see them. Gordon Brown appears to have no self-knowledge at all. Richard Reeves, the director of Demos put it very well on Newsnight tonight when he said that James Purnell has simply said what he believed to be the case and that this is a refreshing change for

Moving from Crisis to Catastrophe

Perhaps James Purnell was at Hamlet last night as well. There is a kind of tragic inevitability to all this now. Until tonight there was at least the appearance of a government. Now even that thin veil has been removed. There is nothing left with which to govern. Think of the already vacant Cabinet posts: Home Secretary, Communities and Local Government and Work and Pensions. Then imagine who, with any talent,  you would put in those posts. It’s hopeless. The idea that Gordon Brown will simply fill posts with newly-elected peers is part laughable, part terrifying. I went on Sky News tonight and said James Purnell’s letter was an act of unusual honesty.

The Sky Has Fallen In

We blithely say that politicians are despised even more than journalists. But those who work closely with MPs generally end up thinking they are a pretty decent lot. The revelations of the past week have changed all that. Speaker Martin’s intervention today was a new low point. Beyond embarrassing, it verged on the seriously chillling. Poor Nick Robinson looks like he has had the stuffing knocked out of him. Those columnists who have made a career out of saying we should have more respect for politicians look pretty stupid now. In a previous post I found myself saying that the expenses scandal would not have made such a splash in less desperate

New Deal of the Mind at 11 Downing Street

I don’t think it’s quite right for me to keep promoting New Deal of the Mind here on my Spectator blog. That should happen elsewhere and will. But just in case readers are interested, the launch meeting at Number 11 Downing Street was a fascinating affair. Cabinet Ministers Andy Burnham and James Purnell pledged their support as did opposition culture spokesman Ed Vaizey. It’s probably best to let others who were there speak about this so check out Lynne Featherstone’s report of the event. Lynne has been a great supporter of the initiative, designed to harness the innovative potential of the creative industries during the downturn. She made the following key point: “Admiration for