Bomb under the Budget
In cartoon fashion, steam will have been coming out of the chancellor's ears last night when he learned of Lord Turnbull's interview in the .
His , which will be his last as chancellor, was supposed to be a biggy.
It was supposed to show that he - not the Tories - understood the competitive threat faced by the UK and is addressing it. And it was supposed to further set out his stall as the probable next prime minister.
However political discourse over the coming days is likely to set by the savage criticisms made of him by the former cabinet secretary and erstwhile permanent secretary at the Treasury.
I can think of no precedent for such an attack being made on a serving, senior cabinet minister - and premier-in-waiting - by someone who till recently was the most powerful civil servant in the country, although there are echoes of the way some of the mandarinate rounded on Margaret Thatcher in 1979.
The problem for Gordon Brown is that Andrew Turnbull, who served with the chancellor at the Treasury for four years, is neither prone to intemperate outbursts nor has he had a conspicuous falling out with the chancellor.
In fact the reverse is true: Gordon Brown had a difficult relationship with his first Treasury Permanent Secretary, Terry Burns, stemming from a lack of mutual trust; but stability was restored after Turnbull succeeded Burns.
Turnbull has more recently, since leaving government, raised the odd concern about Treasury policies. For example, in a speech last year in the House of Lords he was waspish about Treasury hostility to Adair Turner's pension-reform proposals. But his reservations have been expressed in a rather delphic way.
There is nothing delphic in his latest critique, that the chancellor's style of working is insulting to his cabinet colleagues, that it undermines government cohesion and that it tends to militate against proper assessment of strategy.
There are however two ways of looking at Turnbull's indictment of Brown as embodying Stalinist ruthlessness.
One - which will be the interpretation seized on by the Tories and by Brown's many enemies within the Labour Party - is to see it as evidence that he is unsuited to be prime minister.
They will argue that the UK is crying out for a return to proper Cabinet government, with responsibilities for policymaking and policy execution properly shared between a team of ministers and then delegated further down the line.
And they'll say that little about Brown's history shows that he is capable of that.
By contrast, the view of Brown and his close colleagues would be that Turnbull is manifesting - in a rather delayed way - the pain of the traditional civil service against the chancellor's determination on taking office to drive through change in the face of what he perceived as an inflexible bureaucracy.
The chancellor also believed he had a mandate from Tony Blair to control the government's domestic agenda, stemming from their pact in 1994 when Brown made way for Blair in Labour's leadership contest.
To put it another way, most of what Turnbull says about the way that the Treasury has dominated policymaking since 1997 - and the way that Gordon Brown has acquired enormous power at the expense of his cabinet colleages - is true. Apart from anything else, the Treasury has been deeply resistant to sharing its plans even with 10 Downing Street and the prime minister.
However, there are some - including many civil servants - who will argue that's been a good thing, in that it has allowed Brown to push through significant reform to the stewardship of the economy, to welfare and to competition policy with an efficiency that might not otherwise have been possible.
That said, there appears to be a consensus now - within Labour and the civil service - that a command and control style of government is no longer appropriate. Even Brown himself talks about the imperative of delegating power and governing on the basis of bringing the widest range of talents into his tent.
Turnbull has made it more urgent for Gordon Brown to prove that he can govern as prime minister in a different way from his modus operandi as chancellor, irrespective of whether that modus operandi was right for the times.
I'm 
°ä´Ç³¾³¾±ð²Ô³Ù²õÌýÌý Post your comment
Gordon Brown would be a total disaster for this country.A complete failure as chancellor and a nightmare in waiting.It would spell the end of Labour as a political force.
I for one would relocate abroad immediately this arrogant clown takes charge.
At last someone influential has spoken out against the Chancellor who has managed to build a powerful personal fiefdom at the expense of good governance; where have been the tax reforms? Where is the redistribution of income? Why is the income gap between the richest and poorest greater than ever? It would have been amusing to see him take the rap for the abysmal control of taxation over the last 10 years when he takes over as PM but, unfortunately, I still live and work in the UK and, like most of the below average earners, will be made to suffer. Labour, you are a disgrace.
The words 'chickens' 'home' and 'roost spring to mind - and if what Lord Turnbull perceives as Gordon Brown's style (and boy, does he come across in that way) then you can understand the 'Anyone but Gordon' camp within NuLabour..
You only have to recall the satire on tv of Tony Blair pleading with Gordon Brown before a previous Budget as to the content ('Oh, go on - give us a clue..') - to realise that this is, indeed his style. Heaven help us...
Great news! The 'Sir Humphries' who've diverted the political agenda to their insider's interests for decades have been out-manoeuvred! And Ministers are being told what they must achieve from the actions, spending and the policies they propose. And gripped if they fail. Could there be any better news than that!
Yes there can! We're assured that Government has often commissioned expert and independent advice on its strategic policies - such as money supply, housing and more. Wonderful news! Why wasn't this done before?
Surely the answer to Andrew Dundass's question is...Because we live in a Democracy and not an Elective Dictatorship.
So many issues have been imposed that were not properly thought through because they weren't available to be challenged/discussed at the design stage.
The problem with Brown is that he talks the talk but doesn't walk the walk.
For example - despite his green credentials, green taxes etc the UK lags badly behind in the development of clean technologies. Can I suggest readers take a look at this website (if that's OK Robert) which shows where all the hydrogen refuelling stations are around the world. You should note that there are two "extinct" ones in London but that other countries are steaming ahead deploying these things.
For me this just shows up how fraudulent Brown's policies have been.
For me, it the results that matter. And Gordon Brown's time as Chancellor has been a success. The Civil Service is a disgrace. You only have to look at the Home Office to see what happens if they are not given firm leadership.
I'm not Mystic Meg, so I don't know if Gordon Brown will make a good Prime Minister, but his record as Chancellor indicates that he may well be.
A few years of Gordon Brown will be the greatest thing that could happen to ensure the Tories get in at the next election.
Joe Halton and others may not know this: the independent reports commissioned by Gordon Brown's Treasury have been published for comments by anyone who wishes too, and in advance of decisions. Unlike the private, secret and self-seeking advice governments received before from insiders in the civil service. That couldn't be a more democratic approach. Moreover, the objectives set for ministers to achieve are also published for all to see. Which is why folk complain if they're not met! If that's tough on the culture of secrecy and manipulation we have endured for decades, it is also much more democratic.
Evan Davis certainly damned Brown with faint praise in his Sun 18th March comments on the forthcoming budget. And one can certainly see similarities in oratorical style between Brown and all those burly soviet functionaries who droned for the motherland in their "fact" rich speeches about tractor and heavy goods production:targets always being hit, everything continuing to be wonderful under communism. The key things are: has Brown got anything approaching a normal human personality? And what will be the national reckoning of his dreadful strategy on introducing PFI across the whole of the public accounts.
As a fellow scot i should be proud of Gordon Brown becoming the next Prime minister of the UK, but I think he will be a dissaster,he comes accross as cold and calculating, David Cameron will destroy him at question time, and middle England will be turned off.
This could lead to years of concervative rule and ultamately the break up of the UK
surely david steel means that labour (Gordon Brown) will lead to the break up of the union? It is, after all, labour who have taken us down the road of devolution and so introduced the 'scottish question' that can only result with the complete fracturing of the nation?
As for Brown - thanks, but absolutely NO thanks - i never thought it possible that there could be a more untrustworthy, power hungry 'maniac' than TB, but GB is just that. his election would result with more sychphantic gerrymandering than we have ever seen under the current inhabitants of #10.
OMG a leader in the government, what a quaint idea!
Someone who sets targets and expects, nay, insists they are met. Like a rudder on a tanker Mr. Brown has steered the economy, tweaked our finances and when all else fails, tax to target our little island through the storms of international business, finance and crises.
I will never forget the daily worries associated with a wayward economy under the consecutive Conservative governments. Have you all forgotten 15% interest rates so quickly? I have never voted labour in my life but with a workaholic person of impeccable motives and motivation in charge I could be Browning it next time.
Or should I go for the new hairstyle, follow that cause, untried, untested, inexperienced person who has a party that doesn’t really doesn’t have any policies (or none they would admin in public) and isn’t prepared to nail there colours to a (not the) flag ! Oh, but they do have some ethnic people allowed in there party now...just.
Autism is described in the OED as " A condition in which a person is morbidly self-absorbed and out of contact with reality. "
Gordon Brown is guilty of the worst kind of Political Autism and will be even worse as a PM
One can hardly blame Gordon Brown for paying little attention to his political colleagues. As far as intellect is concerned he is a giant among pigmies. Yes, this does show an arrogance, and this is why the least impressive of his colleagues are those who dislike him the most. There has been a dearth of ministerial talent since the beginning of this Labour government - fewer and fewer able people go into politics as the contempt for politicians grows. Brown's ability to deliver a successful economy is in stark contrast to the records of those who have held other senior posts. Lord Turnbull has probably done Gordon Brown a favour by illuminating this fact.
The Labour Party are constantly heralding Gordon Brown governance at the treasury, however, the last ten years have been absolutely appalling for the British people, his cruel vicious onslaught of taxation by stealth on homeowners in particular through council tax is unforgivable, the freezing of tax allowances for two years has harmed many Pensioners, this cruel and insensitive man is an absolute disgrace to socialist principals and he expects people to vote for him in a general election, he will discover the hard way just wait for the May election results.
How can one explain how Gordon Brown was able to destroy the Pension funds of so many people (in one fell swoop) if he is a man who listens to advice?
He continues to rob Pension Funds every year and yet asks us to "Save for our Old age".
He is nothing but a control freak, dictating to all concerned and as such, he should not be in a position of CEO, Chairman, or, Prime Minister of the UK.
If / when New Labour vote him in as PM, he will exercise dictatorial control of both number 10 and number 11 - May the Lord Have Mercy on us all.
The man who sold gold low, and bought euros on a high, who has presided over the most grevious transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich, the biggest property bubble in history, and the highest levels of personal debt and most punitive tax regime in europe. The man who now seems set for coronation, by the man responsible for the greatest foreign policy disaster since the Dardanelles.
What a democracy we live in.
Agree with the anti-Browns for the following reasons
1. UK prodcutivity lags US France and Germany
2. Fiscal imprudence - smoke and mirrors re the public finances with all the PFI deals which are not recorded on the balance sheet which means that creative accounting is undertstating the liability for current and future taxpayers. Has failed to realise that Govt can borrow at the lowest cost not the private sector so why do it?
3. As a consequence of 2 we are paying for it ie through the declines in the quality of our public services as the public purse is being drained to meet very expensive PFI deals (see the STEPS deal as a great example)
4. Agree on inequality - rich getting richer poor getting poorer - middle getting squeezed into the poorer category.
Overall Brown's misguided use of free market economics that has a restricted view of human behaviour is his main weakness.
Oh yeah lets not forget about his writing of the cheques for the misadventuire that is Iraq the cost of which would have more than covered the NHS needs for cash
5. Hikes in national Insurance to help NHS that was mismanaged - double whammy - Labour's promise we will not raise tax rates but what is NI if not a tax but with a different name - typical of the break promise in substance but keep it in form type of creativity we get from this and most Govts.
With Brown we will get more pyrrhic victories while our infrastructure and society continues to crumble (lets not forget the potential financial mess that will be the Olympics.
We need a political force that can deliver quality for society but we don't have that option
The middle classes under labour have been robbed, beaten, cheated and lied to. Brown may have got what he wanted to meet his own ideal of social equality but at what cost. Where are we going under labour? The operation was successful but the patient died. Motivated leadership is what is required. Passion, vision and a lot less of self-interest based decision making.
I am one of the thousands of criminal defence duty solicitors who are to be mac-jobbed due to the treasury removing our duty status (I took 2 years of exams and portfolios to qualify) and handing it to our employers (not dis-similar to hospitals being given consultant status and then handing out the consultant work to unqualified staff).
Remember Sally Clarke. Evidence of innocence being withheld from the defence is a weekly occurance. Do we really believe a 20 year old unqualified clerk will be able to stand up to police officers and CPS lawyers bent on meeting targets. Will he have a sufficient understanding of the rules of evidence, disclosure and procedure to be able to draft the application necessay to persuade a judge to order the CPS to disclose evidence supporting the defence. Barristers used to do this but now they aren't paid for drafting these applications only the solicitors are. So it's down to the unqualified clerk that is set to replace me.
Being a criminal defence duty solicitor many of my clients are dirt poor. There isn't room here to describe the impact treasury led targets have on the life of a recently disabled woman with 2 children living in privately rented accomodation. But just consider what it is like to have £100 per month to feed, heat and clothe 2 children and yourself after the rent is paid. Thats why they meet me now. They never did before.
Consider one thing. Children of 16 and less are stabbing eachother. They are the age group who have been through labours education system and who live the family life created by labours economy and benefits system. 10 years ago children of 16 and under who did this were loopy. Not now. There is something very wrong with this treasury targets driven country we have. And Gordon Brown's personality disordered world view is at the centre of this malaise.
In reply to Andrew Dundas the fact that independent reports are open to the public for comment does not necessarily mean that the government are acting in a democratic manner.
To do that they would have to take account of the submissions (and this government does not have a very good record on hearing). Further they would have to abide by a majority decision. As we do not have access to the results of any submissions we will never know if it is yet another cynical exercise in trying to convince the masses that they have a say in the running of their own country.
What about the fact that in 1997 national debt was 350bn and now it's 500bn. 30bn a year since 2002 kind of adds up you know. 30bn here, 30bn there, pretty soon you're talking real money. And this borrowing and squandering at the same rate is projected to continue until 2011/2012 by no less than the chancellor himself.
Worse, he borrows 30bn 'over there'- for investment you understand - but 40% of that comes back to him 'over here' as tax revenues in one form or another. He borrows 'for investment' to flatter his tax revenues. Without 30bn a year in borrowing he'd actually be 42bn (30bn + 40%*30bn) a year short on balancing the books.
And on top of that the tax-take has gone up from 33% to 40% of GDP on his watch.
He has borrowed, taxed and squandered away the legacy of the healthy economy he inherited in1997. And he stands to be rewarded with the job of PM?
I sure hope not. Not that Cameron is any better you understand.
Agree with Lossaversion (comment no 19)about Gordon Brown.
However he missed out one of the most disgracful and destructive acts of Gordons chancellery - the destruction of this nations final salary pensions schemes and the subsequent condemning of hundreds of thousands of old people to an uncomfortable end to their lives.
A disgrace.
Gordon Brown should definitely NOT be allowed to run the country.
I certainly will always vote against him.
inhumen
Agree with Lossaversion (comment no 19)about Gordon Brown.
However he missed out one of the most disgracful and destructive acts of Gordons chancellery - the destruction of this nations final salary pensions schemes and the subsequent condemning of hundreds of thousands of old people to an uncomfortable end to their lives.
A disgrace.
Gordon Brown should definitely NOT be allowed to run the country.
I certainly will always vote against him.
inhumen
Good article. But then as the author of one of the better Brown biogs I wouldn't expect less.
You mentioned the lack of trust between Brown and Terry Burns. Well in fact it was all one way. Burns clearly thought that he could get on with the new regime after May '97 and thought, perhaps naively, that his previous close association with the Thatcher government wouldn't cause any difficulties.
Turnbull's complaints do look a little mealy mouthed considering that when he was at the Treasury he said that people should stop moaning about special advisers and get on with it.
As for the two ways of looking at the comments, anyone who thinks that this is a further example of the civil service digging its heals in is wrong. Talk to current and ex-ministers and you will find that they are rather more pained about Brown's style than officials.