Brown hints at Blair's resignation in interview

[Emillereid]

GORDON BROWN has hinted that Tony Blair may soon quit as the Prime Minister faces his most dangerous week since he entered 10 Downing Street.

With the key vote on variable top-up tuition fees and the Hutton inquiry into the death of Iraqi weapons expert Dr David Kelly due in the next three days, the Chancellor raised the possibility of his boss quitting in a TV interview.

Asked whether Mr Blair would be in charge at the next General Election, he replied: "Should he be? Yes. Will Tony Blair be? That’s a matter for him.

<snip>


Mr Blair admitted at the weekend that his job was "at risk" this week.

<snip>


Not looking good for the poodle. Are we about to see the great unraveling of Tony. I wonder if he'll write a tell all book and let us in on what the Bushits have on him that made him go along with their cock-a-manie scheme to take over the world.

[Loren645]

1. Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeze.

Please please please please please...

[SquireJons]

29. Careful what you ask for,

Remember Margarete Thatcher?

[Democat]

2. He needs to be punished - let's hope he loses his job

Bush should be the next to lose his job after Blair.

[Skip Intro]

3. Man, if Blair goes things could really get rough for the moron

and Howard down under too

wow, Blair resigning would send shockwaves out in all directions

I'm with Loren645 - please please please please

[Lori Price CLG]

4. Hi, is there a link?

I realize it's from a TV interview, but you had segments snipped, so I thought there might be a link, thanks much! :)

Lori Price
CLG

[pinniped]

5. The world's #1 war criminal needs to go too...

They have a nice cozy cell for the AHOLE all made up.



Does this mean we could call them "French Fries" again?

[Democat]

10. Here is a link

http://www.theadvertiser.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,8502392%255E912,00.html

Replied to the wrong person, but the link is still good. :)

[tkmorris]

6. If he DOES lose his job.....

The American press will have no choice but to tell it like it is. Blair will have lost his job over Iraq.

This is tremendously important I think because there are a lot of people here in the US who are still reluctant to be critical of the war. If Blair loses his job over it the anti-war sentiment gains a big jolt of authenticity. People who support Bush now primarily because they don't want to seem unpatriotic will gain confidence in speaking what they really feel.

The only down side I see is the potential impact on politics in Great Britain, though there are people here profoundly more qualified to speak on that than I.

[Room101]

7. Please Please...............

If he loses his job over Iraq that shock wave will cross the Atlantic and wash up on our shores. Getting people wet with the harsh reality of the lies to let us to Iraq.

[sweetheart]

12. no it won't

That is a fantasy. The conservatives will hold a party, just like they did when clinton's term ended. They will push mega-hard to make the conservative party back in power in britain to rape and pilliage the goodwill on this side of the atlantic as well.

You've got you tea leaves upside down.

[PaDUer]

9. You can bet that * told him

to keep his mouth SHUT or else!

[AP]

13. Keep dreaming. Bush wants Blair to fall. This was the plan.

The BBC and the media is participating in the plan. It would be a success for Bush if Blair fell.

[tkmorris]

21. ok ok

I accept the chastizing regarding what this means in Britain.

Here's the problem then. WHAT THE HELL WAS BLAIR DOING SUPPORTING BUSH IN THE FIRST PLACE?? Furthermore if Blair hangs on he is sure to lose when he comes up for re-election is he not? That's what I hear from friends over there. If however he leaves early it allows the Labour party to distance itself from the war and perhaps maintain it's hold on power.

That's what my Brit friends tell me. Why is it wrong?

[sweetheart]

22. If he survives this test, he will win a third term

You overestimate his unpopularity. Rt.Hon.Mr.Blair is a formidable politician even with all this hoopla... and if the report exhonerates him, as i expect it will, then he'll go on to push for further modernization. Labour will keep its hold on power, i believe, only if blair stays... as indeed, a general election standing with brown is a dangerous proposition.

Why? Brown is a rank and file labour guy... unions and all that... and this is a labour party that opposed capitalism and was totally unelectable until blair, mandelson, kinnoch and this third way talk emerged... all a veil for centrism. Then labour stole the tory thunder and banished them to the wasteland. Brown would, by his entrenched history, be much less likely to rise above and embrace the very wide array of interests that tony blair has been able to unite. The results would be a general election defection of interests, with more centrists going towards torys, liberal democrats and in the end, labour's leadership coalition in serious concern.

Tony is not done, and i wholly expect him to stay standing... in the tradition of knights jousting at a tournament. No british politician would stand up against tony blair, even though he is dismounted. That says something for the man, like him or not.

The anti-war hobnob, he has already dismissed as rabble... and his backbench rebellion is all part of this... they smell that he is wounded and are trying to weaken him because they are old labour people with a grudge and this is an opportune time to extract blood for favours.... just watch. My money is riding on Tony. He'll win both battles and come out stronger. Even though his armour is dented, it is still stronger than anyone in the arena. The politicians who oppose him now are going to eat humble pie.

[sweetheart]

8. Blairs resignation worries me

The entire "new labour" project is very much like "Clintonism"... a charismatic leader ruling a party that is more stoic than the leader, one who is in office by playing the centre against his own partys core leftism.

WIth him gone, this leaves Mr. Brown a scottish labour man... He has proven primitive in the past. He showed up once in glasgow to oppose cannabis liberalization, in classic old labour form... hes draconian and stands to beat up the liberal element of his supporters as much as the conservative.

The real thing that worries me is that the new labour project will fall apart, and that brown's old labour guys will lead on towards losing the next general election... and then we'll have the british version of bush, howard... a real nutter. This guy is famous for his "prison works" theory on cannabis smoking. His home secretary dimwit thinks gun crime is caused by cannabis also.

The result for a cannabis smoker, is that blair tolerates dissent and has downgraded the weed (2 days) as a peace offering in the drugs war where he is not politically empowered to take things further because of entrenched interests. Brown will be worse as he does not tolerate such dissent and is driven by hard core ideologues who have proven dense and unimpressive (think "lieberman"). The result stands to be the breakup of liberal leadership in britain to the benefit of the ugly hate authoritarian torys who want cannabis smokers in prison, so we can't speak out against their crimes (though half of them are potheads themselves, including howard).. soorta like bush is an ex-coke addict who wants to imprison anyone that did what he did. (read: a hipocrate)

If blair had strong leadership in the wings that could take the progressive centrism he has championed forward, i'd feel better and safer... but as it stands, y'all are chanting for brutus to put the dagger in to caesar, whilst the outcome will be a sad sad state of affairs that, like the end of the clinton era, we will soon regret. As bad as clinton was, i'd have him back in a heartbeat. I surely hope i'm not saying that about blair in the coming years after hes stepped down.

Kill the neoliberal for a barbarian... great move. Dammit, where are the liberals in british leadership? I guess its all the result of the personality cult power of blair driving them all away. Oh dear, it leaves me concerned.

[AP]

14. Brown is actually much more corporate-friendly than Blair too.

He'll give big business more of what the want, and then they'll get their tory PM at the next election.

Blair should hold out until November. If Kerry, Edwards, or Clark wins, Blair's troubles are over. They'll do the right thing in Iraq and Blair will have a year to rehabilitate his image without being sabotaged by the US.

[sweetheart]

18. Big business boys

Indeed. There was a recent event to inspire british entrepreneurs.. and bill gates was held up as a hero... i think he may even have spoken... ? He is no entrepreneur... he is a destructive oligarch, just a new one. The british call for business cozyness is simply crony capitalism thinly veiled.

His position as chancellor of the exchequer has left him very cozy indeed with the city of london. (american-read: wall street) They want to get cozier with the government to shut out all innovation, change and competition as usual.

In all honestly, i hope blair manages to win his tuition fees battle, as he is fighting for the right thing... to get universities more money, and for the people who benefit to pay. By american standards, british university is practially free, even with blairs ideas.

Its really too bad that blair trusted GWB about wars. The mistake was to presume that american government was as non-partisan as british government is. It does indeed make him a fool and a war criminal, responsible for every british soldier's death in an illegal war... he is not forgiven. Just dammit blair, whadya have to go doing such a stupid thing for when you've otherwise been a pretty just champion of justice. You, blair, have more damaged liberalism in this world by that choice than any single human being in 2003, IMO. That makes you a fucking ass... yet i still like you... people make mistakes... but dammit!!

[Spentastic]

19. I'll take issue with one thing

"In all honestly, i hope blair manages to win his tuition fees battle, as he is fighting for the right thing... to get universities more money, and for the people who benefit to pay. By american standards, british university is practially free, even with blairs ideas."

No, he is not proposing the right thing at all.

Firstly lets dismisss the "people who benefit" canard.

1) If Tony is correct and that as a graduate you stand to earn more money as as result of your studies, it follows that you will pay more in tax than those that do not attend University. Furthermore, with the NHS do we benefit from training our doctors? The same argument can be made for many professions. Society deserves to educate as many as possible, with society bearing the cost.

2)The need for extra money is in part fueled by the policy of sending 50% of the population to University. Lets say the population of the U.K is 100 people, currently 30 people attend University when they leave there are a number of employers with Y cash to invest in them
simply put it's Y/30 that determines graduate salary. In you change that to Y/50 what will happen to salaries?

3) The reason that the British University system is practically free is to maximise opportunity. I fully support abolition of tuition fees. However the suggested solution is to drive a generation of students into debt. This will not encourage more students from poor backgrounds to attend. This legislation is ultimately the first step down a slippery slope to USA style charging. There are arguments to be made in favour however I'm yet to see any evidence that U.S graduates are better trained intellectually than their British peers.

Actually another thing. I don't like Blair. He's a third way Trojanm horse. As with Clinton they picked the guy with the nicest smile to wield the sycthe. If Blair goes, the Labour party will resemble the democrats. A divided party with no soul.

[sweetheart]

20. british universities suffer

Myself, i think that high earners should pay more tax to support universities, as they are both the beneficiaries and the ones capable of that support... but that aside.

I found british universities that i've attended and visited to be grossly underfunded. The lecturers are underpaid and the morale is unimpressive. I think part of this is that the students are not forking out their contribution... and i believe that education is a priviledge... one that if you believe in it, you should be willing to pay for. It makes british university more on a par with american community colleges... great for "taught" schooling, but in research and advanced learning, defecit. This leaves them open to being bought by corporations... and i've observed this with oxbridge computer science being so underwritten by microsoft, that their frikking research belongs to microsoft. The current system sells out to corporates as the funding gap is still there... because students have no loyalty to their universities, as they dont' see it as a priviledge, they don't have big alumnis funding like american ones do. I've listened to the people chat about this on radio 4, and understand your POV... and were i to call in, i would say that the priviledge is worth paying for... and that an education you have to work for is worth twice as much, as then you don't just do it because its there, but because you WANT it.

For an american audience... consider that british university is basically free... and that the proposal is that you get guaranteed loans that you pay back when you graduate, not on a fixed rate, but actually based on your real salary... how incredibly reasonable, having known americans saddled with 70K of loans on graduation with completely unrealistic payment plans.

I missed the last part of your comment, however. Then who DO you want as leader. Like i said, i equate blair to clinton, and while he was in office, i thought clinton was an ass. Just dammit, i wish bush was a bad dream, and that clinton was still in office today... not cuz i suddenly like him, just lesser evils. Myself i support Kucinich and the british greens and scottish socialists who are the only parties not waging criminalization wars on cannabis smokers.

SO if you want blair out, who then? You're gonna be happy with brown(lieberman)? I actually think that he'll lose a general election if he's in charge and THEN where will you be?

[Matilda]

23. The plan for student loans is based on the Australian model,

which was brought in by the Hawke/Keating Labor Government. Blair
has long used their government style as a model for his. The
danger is that fees can be increased at any time, necessitating
bigger and bigger loans, and that's what's happened in Australia
under Howard. Remembering what Thatcher did to university funding,
I doubt the Conservatives would have anything better to offer.

Even if he gets rolled on fees, I doubt that he would lose his
position, because there is nobody else who could win for British
Labour for a third term.

The other danger comes from the Hutton enquiry, and I doubt if
Hutton will name Blair as the person who order David Kelly to be
outed as the source for the Gilligan interview. There's supposition
and speculation, and we might all have a strong hunch that it came
from his office, but I haven't read anything that looks remotely
like proof, and a Law Lord isn't going to be in the business of
slandering the nation's leader.

So I think Bliar is safe, for now.

[sweetheart]

27. perhaps they should roll the polytechnics back

I think there is some confusion as to what makes a university. (not you, matilda, you inspire this line of thinking) The british people are on about funding universities, and in the same sentence say that all kids need that education to get jobs and a fair chance in todays economy. These are 2 different things.

Getting job training, is more like a polytechnic, a school of taught learning like open university (sans research). Then the school is like an advanced high school, or what they call in the US, a community college. These can have fixed fees, as they do not have to compete for research and such, no Ph.D. programmes... but they are great for training folks to get jobs... very high tech jobs in most of the economy.

Then there are Universities where you go to go beyond taught classes towards research and cutting the envelope of knowledge. These need extra special funding, as this stuff is very expensive. These special needs are certainly taxpayer concerns, but as well, they benefit students, alumnis and businesses who cooperate in research. America's stanford or MIT are good examples of this... britain oxbridge, university of edinburgh... however sheffield hallum is a college... britain has a lotta colleges that are wrongly called universities... and create part of this fuss.

It makes sense that if you take job training that increases your salary, fixed cost job training, that the government should support you, but that you should pay for it, as it is in your interest. There, the topup fees make quite a good deal of sense.

Universities are a whole different matter... geez, its a tough one... i still think taxing the rich who benefit the most from an educated workforce, is the way to cover this.... hmmm...

just having an open brainstorm....

[Oggy]

24. Three things

1) Major problem with the fees is not the fees themselves, it is the fact that they are variable. This then brings a free market economy into academia, so intellectual worth is no longer the driver in Top universities, rather how much money you have is!

2) Labour will still do well with Brown, but yes he is a corporate whore, just slightly less so than Blair. Robin Cook would do a good job. It seems however that you are a Blair apologist, the British Public is not quite ready for a return to a Tory state.

3) the Lib Dems are not "waging criminalization wars on cannabis smokers."

[sweetheart]

25. Blair apologist or concerned realist

Intellectual worth is not the driver in british universities today, rather how well you buy in to the systems that they call "knowledge" and whether you play the game. The cost of running a university is variable.. fact. The question that brings is then "who?" should pay given that the taxpayer, you and me, already pay the vast majority of those fees. The free market is already in universities, as you would surely notice have you looked at research funding today.

I think the best british university is open university. In general, i "agree" that universities need more funding, and really do not see this position as a horror show, rather a very positive move towards improving education and the social framework for next-generation britain. I'm glad you're hooked in to it and making your voice heard. I've remained silent until this thread, as it is not really my business, and i figure the people who are on to this, can figure it out... its not rocket science.

On you second point, i take slight objection. I am not blair's apologist... to be frank, i think the man has really fucked the people of britain by what he's done with bush, and should pay for it in blood, if not a war crimes trial. Robin Cook resigned and hasn't a prayer in hell of leading any party... though i like the man, i have to ask what alternative you see in the REAL world.

Lib dems were pro-legallization until they decided 2 years ago to drop the policy thinking it would help them make further inroads in to tory territory towards formal opposition. They fucked over those who supported them for that, and i don't trust them anymore. THe area where i live has a libdem MP. and i could give a toss. They are wankers who change their platform after voters support them.

THe scottish socialists, however militant do not sell out, nor do the greens. I can't support wishy washy wankers. The current libdem leadership (Charles kennedy - skye) has supported without oppposition the labour policies on criminalization and many scottish people from his part of the world are doing time in prison in inverness for personal smoking of cannabis.... thanks a lot libdems for having the spinal column of a boneless chicken.

[Oggy]

28. Sorry about the apologist comment

That was a bit out of order.

And thank you for your well written response. I will post about Polys to the post above. I agree with you about the best Uni being the British Open University. It is truely the one open to everyone. I personally think 50% in university is too many to fund, especially as Businesses have said they need more skills and less degrees. I am also not against self funding per say, just for a level playing field regardless of background.

Lib Dems - well out of the three main parties I still think they have more to offer, but yes they don't really have the policies that matter, and yes they change at will, but don't all of the main parties do that? For all the other parties you mention they are still not likely to make enough inroads to have serious clout. We need changed policies from the main three. The trouble with power is it corrupts, so who ever has it will be two faced. The question is who out of the three main parties will be radical enough to be able to deal with Global Climate change and Peak Oil? ( sorry going off on one now.).

[sweetheart]

30. skills and degrees

I've come upon this myself considering at age 41 now of re-tooling towards a career where i can better find work from my previous career in software engineering. I discover, despite the "talk" and "big conversations" about lifetime learning, that apprenticeships and such are only for 20 year olds... and that the concept of midlife learning does not exist in the system... sadly, as in midlife i'm more a realist and think perhaps a trade-career, though more difficult work, is less likely to being shifted offshore to india. That said, certainly, learning joinery or plumbing is not requiring university time... yet i discover that britain suffers for a lack in these professions. In short, I agree that 50% university is too high, and that all professions are equal in my eyes. Some schooling simply does not have to be so fancy.

I like the libdems between the major 3, but am unimpressed that they consider me a criminal for smoking weed. As i'm a yank, i can't vote for the buggers anyways, and end up discussing local politics with the folks round these parts. This is mostly "highlanders" against the scottish-executive/london, "we know more about governing your lives than you do, even though we have never been where you live, thinking". I think the scottish executive has screwed the highlanders by putting economic stimulus cash in to dumb things like salmon farming that destroys the environment (and makes unedible polluted fish... the farms have biohazard signs around them... spooky indeed) conifer plantations that destroy the wetlands of the highlands (again executive inspired) and windfarms to also impose on the highlands, because the people who want to put them up want them far away from their own homeees... better to buy off some poor farmers in north scotland instead. Since the scottish executive has proportional representation, and enforcement of drugs laws is devolved to a certain degree, putting focus on the pro-legallization cannabis parties in scotland is the best hope... and i chat that up with folks round these parts... as certainly they've never heard of dennis kucinich.

I think the greens, socialists and libdems are best for climate change and such... heres a link to a thread on this (without the political parties mentioned): http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=1050052#1050063

[Oggy]

31. Energy efficency

I'll post this on the other link too, as it fits with your post there.

The Higlanders have always been screwed by Edinburgh/London. I should know my family was relocated as part of the highland clearances in the late 18 centuary.

http://www.est.co.uk/

As for smoking, well all I say is this is another non level playing field. If you get caught where I live in London you would always get a warning. Back at home where my folks live you'll be banged up. Mind you it is cheaper back at home so worth the increased risk ;-)

[Spentastic]

26. How the Third way wins

"Myself, i think that high earners should pay more tax to support universities, as they are both the beneficiaries and the ones capable of that support... but that aside."

Well that's what the Liberal Democrats have suggested. However Blair can't upset his rich friends can he? Why not? He's a Labour Prime Minister for fucks sake. The fact that Blair faces every challenge from the Parliamentary party with a "My way or the highway" attitude is why I fucking hate him. He's wrong on this, His Mp's think he is wrong yet he'll bully the spineless tossers into supporting him because they know if Tony goes, Labour may struggle.

As for Blair / Clinton comparison its all to valid. Do you honestly believe that the mire the democrats now find themselves in has nothing to do with Clinton? The current lack of unity withing the Democratic establishment is in part due to DLC style policy making. It alienates everybody except the middle. Blair has done the same to the Labour party. True values have been sold out at the expense of "electability". Winning "at all costs" isn't always winning. That's part of the problem there is no viable alternative to Blair. Why? Because he has purged all the characters and surrounded himself with Blairite clones.

Finally for the American audience. Consider that University education in recent history was virtually free. This legislation will only make it more expensive. The fees will raise approx £1bn invading Iraq cost £8bn. Tony Blair obviously is pandering to someone here. I tel you something for free, it's not the left.

[LiberalBushFan]

11. Once they get him to resign

can we borrow the British media for just a little while?

[oasis]

15. Blair and Bush, joined at the hip, sink together.

[annagull]

16. Die, Monster, Die

As soon as the world sees that our man Tony is just a Tory combination, an abberation, Britian will come into the fold. But, until the lie is acknowledged and talked about, Britian and America is lost..

[Emillereid]

17. Sorry -- here's the link

http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=926&id=98342004

I had copied the darn thing, but forgot to paste it. It was still on my clipboard!

[KansDem]

32. Will he be quitting in 45 minutes? (eom)

[goforit]

33. Long due!!....Mr. Brown should watch his step as well!!!

But what would be better is to have Blair step forward
with what happenned behind closed doors.

Now that Cheney is publically critizing Blair....
It would behoove Blair to let the truth ring loud and clear!!!
He was a loyal servant to Bush/Cheney.....and now he is being slammed
by them.

Time has come for Blair

He may just be redeemed if he chooses to come clean.

[T_i_B]

34. Brown is essentially the same as Blair

It's just that he is the only plausable alternative for most people and REALLY wants the top job.

Much as I do wish otherwise, I think Blair will most likely ride out this storm.