That Peter Mandelson Interview In Full - All 7,500 Words Of It

As you know by now, in the current issue of Total Politics (out today) I have an interview with Peter Mandelson, which has caused a bit of a frisson in political circles over the weekend. Ed Balls called it the "twitchings of a political corpse". Nice. He rather made Peter Mandelson's point for him.

Quite a few years ago I published Peter Mandelson’s book THE BLAIR REVOLUTION REVISITED. At that point he was between jobs, having resigned for the second time from the Blair government. He was a fish looking for water. What impressed me about him then was his complete understanding of what was expected of him as an author. I thought he was a class act then, and I still do.

Ever since then I remained in email contact with him, as I had his private email address. From time to time we’d exchange pleasantries, but one thing I noted was that each time I sent him an email he would reply within minutes. Andrew Neil is another one with the same admirable habit. But our paths didn’t cross again in person until the autumn of 2008, shortly after his surprise return to the cabinet for his third incarnation.

I was in the House of Commons walking up the wide staircase to the committee room corridor when I spied Peter Mandelson coming the other way. I didn’t expect him to remember me, so I affected not to notice him. But he immediately stopped and said hello. “How’s the blog doing,” he asked. “All the better when you feature,” I responded. “As it should be, Iain, as it should be...” And he then glided away. It was a typical Mandelsonian performance. Right, I thought. I’m going to get an interview with you if it’s the last thing I do. And two years later, I eventually succeeded.

There’s no doubt about it, as you will shortly read, Peter Mandelson gives good interview. I haven’t quite worked out yet if he realises what he is saying or whether he does it deliberately, but there were more stories to come out of this interview than any other I have ever done. I don’t think Peter Mandelson has ever knowingly given an uncontroversial issue in his life. And long may it remain so.

You can read the full interview on the Total Politics blog HERE, but here are a few snippets.

Ed Miliband knew his electorate. He wasn't playing to the country, he was playing to the people who were voting for him. And he was very successful in doing that.
Well, he has a very strong character and personality, as his brother discovered. He has strong personal qualities and something that people don't realise is that when I came back in 2008, the colleague with whom I spent most time in the Cabinet was Ed Miliband. Partly because he was a neighbour in North London and partly because he went out of his way to befriend me. He really wanted to bury the hatchet and to put all that he did for Gordon against Tony and all that he did amongst the Brownites against the Blairites.

People tend to forget him in that. Everyone thinks it was all Ed Balls.
He played his part, but he also wanted to put it behind him, and by befriending me and by spending so much time with me, I think he succeeded in that. I didn't realise he had such strong leadership ambition. For me, the sort of default candidate and next leader was David. To be honest I didn't really think that seriously about Ed as a would-be leader, and I missed that. And as I said I spent much more time with Ed, and Ed was going out of his way to be more friendly towards me when I came back in 2008 than David did. But that again I think shows some of Ed's cleverness.

Or deviousness. But it's interesting that you didn't identify him as a leader. Do you think he actually has what it takes to be a leader?
Well I think the fact that he came forward and challenged his brother, and conducted such a strong campaign, shows that he does have what is needed in politics to be the number one person. I mean, the one piece of advice I gave at the beginning of the leadership contest, was that he shouldn't say anything to win the vote of the party that might make it subsequently more difficult to win the votes of the country.

But he ignored that advice didn't he?
He ignored that advice but he's made up for it since.

Have you found it difficult in the last six months?
Yes, I have, the truth is... Look, I know I should say to you that I've adjusted, I've moved on, I'm happy, I'm looking to the future with confidence. But the truth is that I feel a sense of bereavement for our government. Personally I feel like a rather displaced individual and I'm not coping perfectly. But my word, I would have been in a much, much worse position if I hadn't written a book and had that to talk about and present and do events about. It is a bit of therapy, but I also thought that it was an interesting story and a historical account that needed to be given. I had not just a ring-side seat but I was in the ring for a lot of the time and if you're going to the sort of book I've published on somebody like me, without being vain about it, I think that politics and how we've seen how we can understand the past and see the future would have been the poorer.

Have you ruled out a fourth comeback in terms of being in the frontline of things in politics.
I tend not to rule out of anything in politics, given my career, given my roller coaster career. Would you predict anything? I don't think so. But I'm not going to sit by the telephone. I'm not going to hang around in expectation or with some sort of entitlement. I will find other things to do in my life. Things that I enjoy, things which I think are stimulating or important but also enable me to earn a living. If you were to ask me though, whether fundamentally I'd rather be in public service or the private sector... I'm a public service man. I was brought up in that way and that set of values and motives will never leave me.

But I don't think anybody understands your relationship with Gordon Brown...
They understand it a darn sight better having read my book.

But when you read in your book, and indeed Alastair's book, the things that went on between ‘94 and your second resignation, you clearly thought the man wasn't fit for the job and you advised Tony Blair to get rid of him at one point.
I didn't advise him to get rid of him. I advised him to reshuffle him.

You know what I mean.
No I don't know what you mean, could you please be a little bit more specific.

In Alastair's book, and I thought in yours, but I might be wrong...
Alastair's is not a book, it's a diary. And what you are reading is night after night, the world according to Alastair's mind and head as it was then. Mine is a more reflective and analytical book. Drawing yes, on my experiences and what happened, but I hope giving a balanced account and that's why I include in the book Gordon's own words on how he saw the situation, why he found it so frustrating, why it was driving him so mad. Just as it was totally aggravating for Tony as well. You see it from both sides.

You do, I accept that. But there are so many instances which you catalogue, and so does Alasdair and you don't really disagree on them.
But they happened.

The interesting thing about both yours books is they're on the same hymnsheet. Often two people can attend the same meeting and they have entirely different recollections. That hasn't happened here.
It was quite clear what had happened. It was also clear what Tony was doing during this time.

Being very weak...
No, not being very weak. Managing a situation which he was unable completely to cure.

He could have cured it by being stronger, surely. Every time he seemed to give in to Gordon Brown.
Look, it's very easy for an outsider to say of a PM that he should have done this or that. He had to trade off or balance the frustrations of having a difficult chancellor, but also a good and effective one in many respects. And on the other hand, the risk of disruption, destabilisation of his government and the party if he had shuffled Gordon out of the Treasury. Now, that is a judgement call that only a PM can make and it's easy for an outsider - and we are all outsiders if we're not the PM - to say that he should have done this or could have done that. True, there were options. But his judgement had to be about what was in the broader interests of the government. How was he going to sustain it. And if you contrast Blair with Thatcher, Thatcher's cabinet fell apart at the end of the 1980s. She drove very senior members to resignation. They walked out and finally got rid of her. That didn't happen in Blair's case.

It did in Brown's.
Well, one person resigned.

Hazel Blears, James Purnell, others.
Fine, but I'm talking about Tony Blair now. You asked me a question about Tony Blair. Was he right or wrong? And I'm saying it's very easy for us to say he should have done this, he should have done that. But if he had shuffled Gordon he might have created the same circumstances which saw Thatcher's cabinet breaking up at the end of the ‘80s.

QUICK FIRE

What book are you reading at the moment?
Niall Ferguson's biography of Siegmund Warburg.
What's your favourite view?
The view from Anacapri towards Naples.
Best friend in politics?
Roger Liddle
What food do you most enjoy? Apart from mushy peas obviously.
Unfattening Italian.
What do you do to relax?
Read, run and cycle, and look at DVDs, but very infrequently.
What makes you cry?
Emotion.
Invite four people to a dinner party, living or dead.
In politics they would be people like Hugh Gaitskell, Harold Macmillan, Jack or Bobby Kennedy. What women would I invite? Difficult. Oh, Barbara Castle.
Which period in history would you most liked to have lived through?
The Second World War and the Labour government that followed.
If the producers of Strictly Come Dancing come knocking at your door, what might you say?
They had their opportunity and now they can get lost.

Well if that has tempted you, read the full interview HERE.

Interviewing Peter Mandelson

On Wednesday I shall be interviewing Lord Mandelson for my next 'In Conversation' interview for Total Politics. As usual, if you've got suggestions for what I might ask him, do feel free to leave a comment.

Mandy: Make Trouble? Moi?

You've got to admire Peter Mandelson's chutzpah. He makes some remarks which are a clear slapdown to Ed Balls' core vote heartlands strategy and then holds his hand up and pretends that his comments were merely a statement of the bleedin'obvious. And of course, he's right it is. But the fact is he didn't need to open his mouth at all. Peter Mandelson says nothing without knowing exactly what the consequences are.

What's his endgame?

The Top 100 Left Wingers in Britain

Today the Daily Telegraph publishes its Top 100 Influential people on the left list, together with a comment piece from Brian Brivati and myself explaining the rankings. It's certainly rather different from last year.

As they meet at their party conference in Brighton , Labour’s members know that an unelected politician, who has twice resigned in disgrace, now holds the government together:

Baron Mandelson, of Foy in the County of Herefordshire and of Hartlepool in the County of Durham, First Secretary of State, Lord President of the Council, Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills and the most powerful man on the Left of British politics.

Never before in The Daily Telegraph’s annual survey of the British political elite has Gordon Brown been off the top spot. But these are extraordinary times. When Brown brought Mandelson back into the Government, it was presented as the return of an experienced minister, In reality, it was the return of a political manager.

In a crisis, Mandelson stays calm, gives instructions, offers advice and issues threats to those who need to hear them. When Brown’s leadership was most heavily challenged, in the wake of the expenses crisis and the meltdown in the European elections, it was Mandelson who kept him in office. If he walked tomorrow, the government would not fall – but the remaining confidence in the future of brand Labour, as currently constituted, would disappear.

There is another reason for Mandelson’s supremacy: he is the only minister offering a coherent narrative of how Labour might win the next election, based on a return to the New Labour project of making policy that sits comfortably with middle England (hence Brown’s recent, and almost certainly doomed, attempt to portray himself as the champion of the middle classes).

Yet he has not had it all his own way. Alistair Darling’s stubborn refusal to be consigned to the dustbin of British politics kept both Mandelson and Ed Balls out of the Treasury, while his insistence that retrenchment would be necessary, given the scale of the fiscal disaster we face, helped puncture the Prime Ministerial fantasy of Labour “investment” vs Tory “cuts”.

Darling climbs 19 places accordingly. Similarly, while David Miliband slips due to his vacillation over the leadership, his refusal to leave the Foreign Office limited Brown’s scope for reconstructing his government and again demonstrated the limits on the Prime Minister’s power.

Yet the dramatic changes on our list since last year do not just reflect convulsions within the leadership – they demonstrate a wider malaise on the Left of British politics.

Of course, our survey, put together with the help of a panel of experts, is not scientific – that is part of the fun. But while the succession of ministerial resignations – including Hazel Blears, once tipped for a top job in government and party; Caroline Flint, a former rising star who thought herself “political window dressing”; and of course Damian McBride, number seven on our list last year – have created openings, there have been few new faces demanding a place at the high table.

The unions have improved their rankings overall, and some old faces have come out fighting: John Prescott, with the help of his son David, has used the internet to rally the troops and extend his political life, as has Alastair Campbell, and Charles Clarke has kept his profile high with a series of biting attacks on Gordon Brown. But who else?

James Purnell, last year’s golden boy and a major player in those bloody days of June, slips back a little. Yes, he was the only Cabinet member to summon the courage to resign on principle – but his resignation was not the knockout blow he expected, indicative of the extent that Brand Blair has declined in relevance, as many within Labour have lost faith in the one virtue that kept the project alive for so long – election-winning.

Purnell is now doing some hard thinking about Labour’s ideological direction at the think-tank Demos, Of his former colleagues, Harriet Harman has been a big winner, keeping the parliamentary ship afloat, holding the party together and positioning herself for life after Brown.

Of the Miliband brothers, it is Ed, Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, who came out of the expenses scandal and the leadership crisis best off.

Generally, the Brownite loyalists have slipped back as the Prime Minister’s authority receded: Ed Balls is down eight places, Douglas Alexander down seven, though Balls’s wife Yvette Cooper continues her slow creep up the rankings. By the same token, the prime minister’s advisers – McBride apart – might have done their jobs well, but those jobs have become increasingly difficult, hence their slide down the rankings.

So a vacuum has certainly opened up, but who is filling it? The old Left has climbed – Dennis Skinner enters our list at 68, for example – but not nearly as much as they should have done. Whenever Labour has lost power before, whether in the 1930s, 1950s or 1980s, there has always been a strong and coherent Left-wing position, critical of the governing wing of the party and ready to make its case after a defeat.

Yet the sheer scale of the party’s plight seems to have shocked them into silence: Jon Cruddas (up 61 places) and co have raised their voices, but have yet to produce a credible alternative to the existing agenda on the really big issues (even though they are well-positioned for the carnage the next election will bring about).

It has been left to lower-profile figures such as Jessica Asato at Progress and Richard Reeves at Demos (whose position on the Left is nominal at best) to make the running on issues like constitutional reform. Indeed, apart from the arguments about public expenditure, this is the only area in which clear Red water has developed.

Admittedly, in the current economic and fiscal environment, it is hard to see what the domestic agenda of a resurgent Left would really look – another stimulus package, paid for with even higher direct taxation on the rich? Yet globally, the state is back, a liberal sits in the White House and the recession is slowly responding to various forms of fiscal stimulus (or emerging from the cycle as it would have done anyway, depending on your economics). It should be a time of dynamic new entries to the list. But the great thinkers of the Left seem strangely muted, while the younger generation seems to be keeping its head down and waiting for the election.

There are very few fresh faces on the scene, very few new ideas surfacing. The Left is treading water as the sharks on the right circle and wait for the kill. By the next year, the corpse will have been picked clean, and not many of the people at the top will remain relevant. The question most of our 100 names are spending rather too much of their time thinking about is who will replace them.

Here are the Top 50, together with their rankings last year...


1 81 Peter Mandelson
2 1 Gordon Brown
3 6 Harriet Harman
4 4 Ed Miliband
5 24 Alistair Darling
6 67 Jon Cruddas
7 11 Charlie Whelan
8 2 David Miliband
9 14 Alan Johnson
10 9 Derek Simpson
11 Sarah Brown
12 3 Alex Salmond
13 5 Ed Balls
14 12 Tony Blair
15 8 James Purnell
16 13 Jack Straw
17 John Prescott & David Prescott
18 Lord Adonis
19 Tessa Jowell
20 29 Alastair Campbell
21 21 Tony Woodley
22 53 John Denham
23 16 Polly Toynbee
24 22 Nick Brown
25 42 Andy Burnham
26 37 Frank Field
27 28 Shriti Vadera
28 50 Caroline Lucas
29 38 Yvette Cooper
30 34 Liam Byrne
31 31 Deborah Mattinson
32 65 Sunder Katwala
33 26 Douglas Alexander
34 64 Richard Reeves
35 45 Neal Lawson
36 25 Andrew Rawnsley
37 39 Shaun Woodward
38 Glenys Kinnock
39 Geoff Mulgan
40 52 Dave Prentis
41 Baroness Royall
42 54 Mark Serwotka
43 Amartya Sen
44 43 Alan Rusbridger
45 23 Jackie Ashley
46 94 Steve Richards
47 47 Jack Dromey
48 30 Brendan Barber
49 57 Jim Murphy
50 88 Phil Collins

Short biogs and analysis of the Top 50 are HERE and 51-100 HERE.

Quote of the Day: Gordon Brown

"People want to know how is the special relationship...
...Well Peter and I are getting on well"

Gordon Brown at the LGA Reception, Labour Conference

That Mandelson/Gadaffi Conversation In Full

I do not begrudge Gordon Brown a holiday. Prime Ministers need them just as much as the rest of us. But six weeks? He went on holiday on 27 July and is due back at work on 7 September. Nice work if you can get it.

Perhaps Mr Mandelson is in the middle of launching A Very British Coup. If rumours are to be believed it was his conversation with Colonel Gadaffi's son which gave the Libyans the impression that the release of Al Megrahi was all about trade. Mandelson may be all powerful, but last time I looked he had no jurisdiction over the Scottish Justice Ministry. But in the diplomatic world a nod is as good as a wink. You can just imagine the charming scene at the Rothschild villa in Corfu, can't you. As Mr Gadaffi and Mandy share an evening cocktail Gadaffi starts talking about the possible release of Megrahi.

Gadaffi: We would of course look very favourably upon increasing trade links with Britain should, er, you know...
Mandy: And we would naturally like to do more business with your country.
Gadaffi: Good, glad we got that sorted out so quickly.
Mandy: Excuse me, I seem to have a bit of a pain in the groin...

Have Peter & Shaun Fallen Out?

The FT's George Parker and Brian Groom have a very revealing interview with Peter Mandelson this morning. This exchange caught me eye, as it reveals that Lord M and Shaun Woodward clearly do not get on at all.

Although Lord Mandelson shares advisory duties in Number 10 with Ed Balls, an old foe, he seems less happy about the growing presence in the inner circle of Shaun Woodward, a Tory defector and now Northern Ireland secretary.

Gordon Brown rates Mr Woodward and turns to him for advice – most noticeably during prime minister’s question time. But Whitehall insiders suggest that Lord Mandelson finds the Northern Ireland secretary a doleful presence and questions his judgment.

Asked about Mr Woodward’s role, he is icily precise. “I have meetings with the prime minister and Ed Balls because Ed plays an informal role as well – as he did at the Treasury,” he says.

“But my main desire is to weld together the team of full-time staff working in central government.”

On whether he endorses the advice being offered by the Northern Ireland secretary, he replies: “I don’t know.

“What is the advice being dispensed by Mr. Woodward?”

Miaow.

Kevin Maguire is Mandy's Parrot

Kevin Maguire's political "commentary" is becoming more of a joke by the day. Earlier on he was on Sky News getting a pasting from the Telegraph's Andrew Pierce. And now I see he has written on his blog the following words of wisdom.

"Each day the Tory indignation at Damian Green's arrest looks like a smokescreen to hide the fact they have colluded in a possible crime."

Earlier on today Peter Mandelson said...

"I also think it's pretty self-serving by Conservative MPs, who want to put up a smoke screen to hide their own party's role in allegedly colluding with a Home Office official in breaking the law."

If Kevin Maguire wants a job as Peter Mandelson's parrot, why doesn't he just ask for one?

News of the World: Mandelson to be Investigated

Jamie Lyons in tomorrow's News of the World has a huge exclusive on Peter Mandelson's activities in Brussels and his relationship with Oleg Deripaska. He alleges that Mandelson was due to meet him again in Moscow this week, but the meeting has been cancelled in the light of recent events. He also reveals that an investigation into his links to Deripaska is about to be launched by a top Brussels watchdog. Here's an extract from the News of the World story...

PETER Mandelson faces an investigation over his links with a super-rich French aristocrat, the News of the World can reveal. A top Brussels watchdog last week made an official complaint to the head of the European Commission that private equity tycoon Ernest-Antoine Seilliere had privileged access to Mandy when he was EU trade chief. It comes as Mandelson is already under pressure over claims he was too close to Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska who may have benefited from his rulings as EU trade czar. The EU watchdog that made the fresh complaint says Seilliere was effectively allowed to write trade laws - benefiting his clients - during a string of meetings with Mandy. Now a top Euro MP is demanding a review of all the decisions made by Mandelson before he quit Brussels this month. In a letter to Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso the Corporate Europe Observatory (CEO) says: “We would like to express our concern over the privileged access and undue influence.” It claims Mandelson broke EU codes on impartiality by getting so close to Seilliere...

CEO has put together a damning 6,700-word dossier - seen by the News of the World - blasting Mandelson’s links with the group. Mandelson was officially rebuked last year after the CEO complained he had refused to reveal details of meetings with industrial lobbyists. CEO now claim Seilliere’s group helped Mandelson write controversial new laws which benefited its members.
And it says Mandelson routinely shared valuable information on trade negotiations with it.
CEO says they were so close Mandelson has let the group use his official Brussels HQ - free of charge - for a conference where they will rub shoulders with some of the most powerful politicians in Europe...

At the same time Swedish Euro MP Jens Holm, a member of the European Parliament's trade committee, has written to Mandelson's replacement, Catherine Ashton, asking her to reverse several decisions Mandy took. He said: "It's well known here in Brussels that BusinessEurope and its top people have had an intimate relationship with Mr Mandelson. “They were always tipped off at an early stage whenever there was a new EU directive being written on competitiveness or trade or other issues.”...

Mandelson has cancelled a meeting with Deripaska next week. The Russia trip was originally planned for his predecessor as Business Secretary, John Hutton, before he changed jobs.
And the delegation was scheduled to meet the Russian oligarch. But it has now been called off.
A spokesman for the department said: “As is usual in the preparation for visits there are changes to the itinerary and meetings are regularly added to or drop off the agenda."

On the face of it there is no direct link between Business Europe and Mr Deripaska. Should one be uncovered, however, that would lead to a whole new ball game. Interesting how the focus has now shifted from George Osborne back to Peter Mandelson, isn't it? Not before time.

Why Conservatives Should Man the Barricades for Osborne

I haven't blogged about the George Osborne situation until now because I didn't feel I had anything to say which either hadn't been said before or which would add to the sum of human knowledge. Maybe I still haven't. Anyway, let's look at the facts, rather than some of the hyperbole and fiction which has been spouted during the course of the day.

This is how I read what has happened...

1. George gossiped to journalists about what Mandy said about Gordon. An understandable thing to do bearing in mind his return to government. Perhaps he should have kept it zipped, but we have all done it. Normally, embarrassment is the only consequence of being found out. Ahem.
2. Mandy was outraged and promised revenge. Nat Rothschild was none too impressed, and goaded by Mandy, decided to take things further.
3. It was a mistake to do the live TV press conference before issuing a detailed rebuttal statement.
4. The media hasn't yet asked itself what crime has been committed. Answer none. No money has been donated so there has been no wrongdoing.
5. If someone asks you, as a politician, or as a party employee about donating you have two choices. You either point them in the direction of someone else or you explain how the system works and what the legalities are. That is not a crime. It is not even a thought crime. Yet.
6. So what we are talking about here is an allegation that a conversation about a donation took place. As Stephen Tall says, this is a bit of a he said-she said-he said situation. Rothschild says he has a witness to the conversation. Why hasn't he produced the witness then?

It's clear that the root of this is that Rothschild is furious that Osborne has broken the unwritten rule that says 'what happens on tour, stays on tour'. And he has exacted his revenge in a particularly spiteful way.

The media is in full herd instinct mode without actually stopping to think: hang on a minute. What's he actually done wrong? What law has he broken? What rule has he transgressed? Perhaps they might like to concentrate a little more on this sentence from Nick Robinson's blog this morning.

Mandelson's first instinct was to refuse to answer questions about what he said was his private life. He knew all too well that the way the media can keep a story running is to publish a list of "unanswered questions". This approach did not, however, kill the story. Nor did the backing of the EU Commission which declared him not guilty of a breach of the rules. So far, no evidence has been produced that he broke any rules but there's little doubt that had he behaved this way as a cabinet minister he would have been in breach of the ministerial code which advises against perceived conflicts of interest.

Isn't that far more serious than anything George Osborne has been accused of? But I didn't comment on Mandelson's situation any more than I had intended to comment on George's. But it has now blown up into such a ridiculously big story that those of us who happen to think a lot of George Osborne need to stand up and say so. His detailed chronology of events is well worth reading in full. It is unprecedented in its detail. Its message to Mandelson is: I've shown you mine, now you show me yours.

ConservativeHome has published a superb piece on why George Osborne is indispensable and it reminds us why the barricades need to be manned in his support.

The lessons here are...

1. Politicians are never 'off duty'.
2. Choose your holiday companions more carefully.
3. What happens on tour rarely stays on tour.

And above all...

4. Peter Mandelson is back and making sure we all know it. And isn't Times Political Editor Phil Webster a happy man! As is Robert Peston.

Peston hasn't liked Osborne's comments about his role in last week's events and this has given him a reason to hit back. Mandy's briefing fingerprints were all over this particularly poisonous blogpost from Peston this afternoon. Quite what this has to do with the BBC's Business Editor is another question. Perhaps Nick Robinson should talk to him about tanks and lawns.

It's been a pretty torrid week for the Shadow Chancellor. But every politician has to go through character building experiences like this. Osborne should take heart from the way his leader performs in these circumstances. Cameron displays courage under fire which we must all hope George Osborne can emulate. He is as vital to the Cameron project as Tord Grip was to Sven. He must also trust his instincts. I do not believe he wanted to do that wretched press conference this afternoon and should not have allowed himself to be talked into it. He's got an instinctive political brain. Now is the time for him to engage it.

Politics has changed in the last few weeks and for once, I don't think Conservative High Command realised it quickly enough. Trench warfare lies ahead. Sod bipartisanship. Brown hasn't got a bipartisan bone in his body. He regards the very notion of it as a sign of weakness. Brown wants a fight. Let's give him one.

What if Mandy Offered to Defect?

Apropos defections, I can't remember how we got onto the subject, but on 18 Doughty Street last night I asked the panel what they would say if they were David Cameron and he was called by Peter Mandelson offering to defect to the Conservatives...

"David, you're the only one who can be trusted to be the heir to my beloved
Tony. Only you will see through his marvellous works. If I can be of any help,
any help whatsoever, you know you can count on me..."

My panel was split on what David Cameron's response should be. Mine consisted of two words, the second one of which was 'off'.

Mandy's a Quitter Not a Fighter

The news that the Prince of Darkness is to leave his £200,000 a year post as Britain's EU Commissioner in 2009 and not seek reappointment will come as a relief to many Tories as well as Gordon Brown. Alan Duncan, the Conservative Shadow Trade & Industry spokesman had unbelievably floated the idea that a Cameron government would consider leaving him in his post. That really could have been a Clause 4 moment. The trouble is it might have caused the resignation of half of David Cameron's front bench.




Mandelson's feud with Gordon Brown is still in full flow and I doubt whether the phonelines between Downing Street and Brussels will be buzzing when (or if) Brown takes over. They could of course email each other to save any verbal disagreement. Mind you, we all know people tend to be rather more aggressive in emails than in conversations. I think Gordon Brown would be most interested in Peter Mandelson's private email address, which contains the word 'demon'. How singularly appropriate.

When he took his Commissioner's Oath he promised to leave party politics behind him. As we all knew, Mandelson has found it almost impossible to do that. Every few months he is pictured at a Labour Party event. Every so often he makes a statement about how awful Gordon Brown is. And today he shares with us his view that it would be far healthier for the Labour Party to have a proper leadership contest. I happen to agree with him, but as an EU Commissioner he really should be keeping it zipped. I do not recall his two immediate predecessors Neil Kinnock and Chris Patten indulging themselves in this manner. I suspect he does it to remind us that he still exists.

The next controversy regarding Peter Mandelson will come in Tony Blair's Resignation Honours List, where he is almost certain to make Mandelson a Life Peer. Let's face it, if Blair doesn't, Brown is hardly likely to.

Attention must now turn to Mandelson's replacement. If there is no election before 2009 it will fall to Gordon Brown to make the appointment. This is a tricky one. In theory he should appoint a Conservative, although there is no convention that says he must do so. Indeed, he is much more of a party political animal than Tony Blair was (oops, past tense already!) so I would not be surprised if he appointed one of his own Cabinet. Of course, he could surprise us all and appoint a Liberal Democrat.

Step forward Charles Peter Kennedy.

This appointment would have many advantages for Brown. Kennedy is popular in the country, Brown would be seen to be non-partisan and if Cameron won power he would be saddled with a pro-European, federalist British EU Commissioner.

Peter Mandelson: What Goes Around, Comes Around

There used to be a time when newspapers prostrated themselves before Peter Mandelson. They believed that by sucking up to the Prince of Darkness they would be rewarded with his favour, that he might grant them access to His Toniness, or feed them a morsel of insider gossip. Those days are long gone, as evidenced HERE in The Guardian today.

The Guardian had published an article in which Mandelson was criticising Tony Blair's conduct of the Northern Ireland peace process. Mandelson, as usual, complained that The Guardian has misrepresented him. This is what he said on the Today Programme this morning...

"You see what the Guardian are doing is taking a snapshot of my views and what I said - with some care and caution, I might say, in a very long interview - and extrapolating from a particular instant and applying it to a policy as a whole. And I don't think they are justified in doing so."

And that, dear reader, was his big mistake. The Guardian were incensed and have now published a recording of his interview with them. They would never have dared do that five years ago. They do it now because they know what we know - that Peter Mandelson is a spent force in British politics.