Gordon Brown thinks it's still 1992

Posted: Wed 24 Jun 2009 8 31 am

The Prime Minister is still haunted by Labour's last defeat. Knowing this, the Tories can beat his arguments on spending

I am not making this up. There is a government recipe for chicken drumsticks. It is personally endorsed by the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families.

Preheat your oven to 190C, remove the skin from the drumsticks and brush oil over them to stop them sticking. Then place the drumsticks in an oven-proof dish and roast for 30 minutes. Check that the chicken is cooked completely by piercing the thickest part with a clean knife. The chicken is cooked when the juices run clear. Well done.

This invaluable culinary advice comes from a new government picnic cookbook, designed, as Ed Balls has helpfully explained, to stop people serving soggy sandwiches.

As a matter of national importance, consumers must be advised on the constituent parts of tastier alfresco snacks. It turns out that, despite everything, Mr Balls thinks that there are other things, apart from revenge, that are best eaten cold.

Gordon Brown's suggestion that the choice at the next election is between Tory cuts and Labour investment is preposterous. It is a direct lie (not a word that should be resorted to often in political discourse, but needs must) to suggest that Labour would carry on increasing spending if it won the general election. It is a wilful distortion to claim that the Conservatives have announced different spending totals to Labour. The underlying intellectual error is that everything the State pays for at present, it should go on paying for, and that, therefore, all cuts will have to come out of desperately needed services. Free cookbook, anyone?

Which poses the question: how can Labour press on with such a plainly misguided campaign?

It is worth noting that many Labour people are struggling. Alistair Darling and the Chief Secretary Liam Byrne have looked incredibly uncomfortable fronting the whole thing. David Miliband's contribution has been anaemic. And a feeling that he couldn't go on spouting nonsense like this was an important reason why James Purnell resigned. But Gordon Brown and Ed â€œtry my tasty potato saladâ€ Balls feel no such qualms. It is, of course, possible to advance an unflattering theory about this, related to character. I would like to try something else. I want to advance my 1992 theory of Gordon Brown and the Brownites.

Here it is. The central ideas that make up Gordon Brown's policy, political strategy and day-to-day tactics were all developed between 1992 and 1994. He hasn't had an important idea since. Nor has he discarded an important idea since then, remaining doggedly faithful to every last one. And these notions, the bedrock of everything he does, were developed as a response to the two big political events of 1992 - the victory of Bill Clinton and, more centrally, the defeat of Neil Kinnock by John Major. There you have it - my 1992 theory.

snip

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/daniel_finkelstein/article6564980.ece