The pages of spin
- 14 Aug 07, 06:55 PM
I owe an apology 鈥 of sorts 鈥 to Alastair Campbell. When his diaries came out last month, nobody had much time to read them. On the Monday of publication I managed about 200 pages (out of more than 750), and confined myself to reading about the early years of the Blair government. On Newsnight that night I expressed disappointment. There was nothing very new in the book, I said, and many of the stories sounded quite familiar, I said.
I鈥檝e now read the remaining 550 pages, and done so rather more slowly and carefully than I did the first chunk. I want to modify my verdict. Although it鈥檚 true that there are no great bombshells, the diaries are a valuable addition to the growing history of the Blair years. They paint a fascinating, detailed picture of life at the heart of government 鈥 the tensions, bickering, and the relentless pressure. I was particularly surprised by Blair鈥檚 doubts at so many important moments, and his basic insecurity, so that he would be phoning Campbell every few minutes for reassurance. I can鈥檛 wait for the full versions to be published.
Campbell鈥檚 friendships are interesting, too. He was in regular contact with the former right-wing Conservative and fellow diarist Alan Clark, and also got on well with several other Tories - Nicholas Soames, David Davis and Michael Heseltine. But as a Manchester United fan, and biographer of Alex Ferguson, I was especially interested in Campbell鈥檚 close contacts with the United manager. Ferguson fed Campbell and Blair lots of advice in the run-up to the 1997 election, telling them that Labour was so well ahead in the polls that they should play it safe - as if they were winning a match 2-0 with only a few minutes to go. Let your opponents take all the risks, Ferguson advised, and open themselves up to giving away more goals.
Given the Labour spin doctor鈥檚 close friendship with Ferguson, I鈥檝e always been curious as to why Campbell allowed both men to make essentially the same mistake. Ferguson told the world he would retire as United manager in 2002, but that announcement causing him nothing but grief, and he eventually changed his mind of course with only a few months to go (and is still in power at Old Trafford). Then in the autumn of 2004 Tony Blair famously announced a rough timetable for his departure as Prime Minister. Over the next three years that announcement also caused Blair huge trouble. Like Sir Alex, he deeply regretted it.
The lesson to any man of power: time your departure to come as a complete surprise.
Comments Post your comment
How do we know it isn't all just Jackanory? No Kelly No Brown means no credibility? Which is why a copy with a starting price of 拢1 still has no bids?
Iraq Tony had no choice when to go? TB had to say something or there would have been a leadership challenge? Or rather he chose not to quit for the good of the country but stayed on?
Were they good guardians of society? They used immigration to keep the wages low and house prices high, they mortgaged the revenue on PFI that everyday brings a new horror story and sold our foreign policy to the highest bidder.
I'm sure AC has a story to tell but he ain't ever going to tell it us.
Complain about this post
THE PAGES OF SPIN TURN EASILY
To understand Campbell, you need only to read Zimbardo鈥檚 book 鈥淭he Lucifer Effect鈥. Given free rein, without consequences, few can resist the temptation to wield power 鈥渇or the hell of it鈥. It was evident that Blair 鈥渒ept鈥 Campbell the way some men keep a dangerous dog. When challenged, Blair responded saying: 鈥淥h Alastair鈥檚 Alastair." Clearly he was happy with that truth. The Blair years showed us just how much power has gone to the Prime Minister; small wonder that 鈥淟et the change begin" Brown has publicly dropped a couple of items. I once wrote a fictional piece where Blair declared an emergency and Campbell took over homeland security 鈥 I scared myself quite badly. Brown, though devious, looks less likely to pull a stunt like that, but who will be next? The only common denominator for politicians is they all seem to graduate from weird school. And the Campbell experience was too scary by far to see repeated.
Complain about this post
In An Honourable Deception, by Clare Short, p.69, she talks of the cabinet meeting in 1997 when there was a discussion on the Millennium Dome. Blair left early, before the matter had been fully discussed, and the remainder of the meeting was chaired by John Prescott. She says: 'Tony said he was sorry, that he hadn't expected Cabinet to go on for so long, he had to leave and John Prescott would sum up. He then went out to a pre-arranged press conference and announced that we would continue with the Dome.'
Alastair Campbell's version (p. 213, 19 June 1997) is 'TB had to leave early to go to the church blessing of Parliament, so JP took the chair. I could see TB was thinking he would not win, and seemed resigned to it. ... TB came back from the church, saying he had been worried leaving JP in charge, but the truth is that it was JP, helped by Margaret B above all, who really swung it round.'
Which version is the correct one? Who, in this, is more s(p)inned against than s(p)inning? The facts should be easy enough to check.
Complain about this post
I certainly agree the diaries are fascinating. I find it absolutely amazing how Alastair Campbell can write 700 pages of distorted truths.
Complain about this post
I'm sorry, but Michael Crick's turn-around, sounds like a journo eating humble spider-pie to avoid being shut out from the sources in any bout of New Labour vengeance. However double-treble-bluff sophisticated Crick wants to appear, there is a whiff of kowtowing to those that provide him with inside stories.
I get the impression that most of us non-involved people assume that there is loads of spin, at every juncture, in British national politics. And in both smiley parties (who are the LibDems, anyway?). So Michael Crick's climbdown will have to be eaten with mouth-drying spoonfuls of salt.
Complain about this post
To claim tha AC is writing modern history is simply foolish. His motives now are even stronger then they were in the last days of HIS premiership.
His agenda is as strong as Bill Clinton's is to resume office while his wife makes the dinner.
Only when he is a very old man will he really tell us what he thought honestly about Iraq.
I think he fears the law courts too much to ever tell the truth but perhaps a few of his employees might feel different and that would be some form of compensation if they would be so kind. It would certainly be more tantalsing then Prescott's employee revelations.
Complain about this post
Nice to see Mr Crick apologise for being slapdash in briefing himself before telling the viewers waht ot think. Does this apply to other readings - of reports etc?
Complain about this post