This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/17/gordon-brown-found-his-voice-union-scottish-referendum-vote

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Awkward no more: how Gordon Brown found his voice Awkward no more: how Gordon Brown found his voice
(about 17 hours later)
Twitter erupted with excitement. “Everyone with a vote needs to watch this.” “Gordon Brown’s speech is as good as everyone says it is.” These were tweets from right-of-centre columnists after Brown had delivered a mesmerising speech on the final day of campaigning in Scotland. Across the political spectrum there was noisy praise for the inspirational address.Twitter erupted with excitement. “Everyone with a vote needs to watch this.” “Gordon Brown’s speech is as good as everyone says it is.” These were tweets from right-of-centre columnists after Brown had delivered a mesmerising speech on the final day of campaigning in Scotland. Across the political spectrum there was noisy praise for the inspirational address.
The compliments were not a freakish one-off. Earlier this year the election expert John Curtice told me that Brown alone in the pro-union campaign was framing messages that would appeal to the “don’t knows”. Last week Brown was the one urgently negotiating with party leaders at Westminster in order to unveil measures that would stop the dramatic swing towards the yes campaign. The return of Brown as a political force has been a marked and unexpected feature of the campaign.The compliments were not a freakish one-off. Earlier this year the election expert John Curtice told me that Brown alone in the pro-union campaign was framing messages that would appeal to the “don’t knows”. Last week Brown was the one urgently negotiating with party leaders at Westminster in order to unveil measures that would stop the dramatic swing towards the yes campaign. The return of Brown as a political force has been a marked and unexpected feature of the campaign.
So marked has been his contribution that an immediate striking question arises. Why was Brown not like this when he was one of the dominant figures in British politics and of course ultimately prime minister? How to explain the muffled, awkward, sometimes irritable voice that contrasts so vividly with the passionate one that has made a distinctive impact in the campaign?So marked has been his contribution that an immediate striking question arises. Why was Brown not like this when he was one of the dominant figures in British politics and of course ultimately prime minister? How to explain the muffled, awkward, sometimes irritable voice that contrasts so vividly with the passionate one that has made a distinctive impact in the campaign?
Part of the answer is that the skills on display in the campaign were always part of Brown’s repertoire. After Labour had been slaughtered in the 1992 election for the fourth time in a row it was Brown who reframed the economic arguments so that his party was in a position to win and it was Brown who in the late 1980s used to light up conferences and the Commons with occasional bursts of scintillating oratory.Part of the answer is that the skills on display in the campaign were always part of Brown’s repertoire. After Labour had been slaughtered in the 1992 election for the fourth time in a row it was Brown who reframed the economic arguments so that his party was in a position to win and it was Brown who in the late 1980s used to light up conferences and the Commons with occasional bursts of scintillating oratory.
But the 1992 election also partly explains the muffled voice, the tonal straitjacket and sheer tedium of his wooden public performances. Soon after the election Brown became shadow chancellor when polls showed that so-called middle England did not trust Labour to spend or tax. Brown knew that one word out of place from him could be electorally fatal. For the next 15 years he was responsible for economic policy, assuming middle England and its media could only cope with the muffled voice. Much of his public narrative was on the theme of prudence, not a subject to rouse the passions. Behind the scenes he was always focused on the purpose behind the prudence, including higher public spending and redistribution. He assumed that key parts of England would only accept these objectives if they were implemented quietly and hailed retrospectively.But the 1992 election also partly explains the muffled voice, the tonal straitjacket and sheer tedium of his wooden public performances. Soon after the election Brown became shadow chancellor when polls showed that so-called middle England did not trust Labour to spend or tax. Brown knew that one word out of place from him could be electorally fatal. For the next 15 years he was responsible for economic policy, assuming middle England and its media could only cope with the muffled voice. Much of his public narrative was on the theme of prudence, not a subject to rouse the passions. Behind the scenes he was always focused on the purpose behind the prudence, including higher public spending and redistribution. He assumed that key parts of England would only accept these objectives if they were implemented quietly and hailed retrospectively.
His public voice became even more awkwardly contrived as he sought to replace Tony Blair as leader, every word weighed in order to keep rightwing newspapers on his side as much as they were on Blair’s. By the time he became prime minister he was determined to be a father of the nation, above politics, until he had won an election. His decision not to call an early election in 2007 exposed him as highly partisan and he was never quite sure what his public voice in England should be from that point on. After his defeat in 2010 he opted for near silence. His public voice became even more awkwardly contrived as he sought to replace Tony Blair as leader, every word weighed in order to keep rightwing newspapers on his side as much as they were on Blair’s. By the time he became prime minister he was determined to be a father of the nation, above politics, until he had won an election. His decision not to call an early election in 2007 exposed him as highly partisan and he was never quite sure what his public voice in England should be from that point on. After his defeat in 2010 he opted for near silence.
The shame is that if he had shown his authentic passion, as he has now done in the referendum, he might have appealed more to England than he did (though it is easy to forget that as chancellor he was sometimes more popular than Blair). But even in the straitjacket he had moments that hinted at the force currently on show in Scotland. The most vivid was the 2002 budget when he put the case for a tax rise to pay for spending on the NHS. Ed Miliband, his adviser at the time, said to me afterwards: “At last Gordon was able to be himself.” Polls suggested it was by far the most popular budget of the New Labour era.The shame is that if he had shown his authentic passion, as he has now done in the referendum, he might have appealed more to England than he did (though it is easy to forget that as chancellor he was sometimes more popular than Blair). But even in the straitjacket he had moments that hinted at the force currently on show in Scotland. The most vivid was the 2002 budget when he put the case for a tax rise to pay for spending on the NHS. Ed Miliband, his adviser at the time, said to me afterwards: “At last Gordon was able to be himself.” Polls suggested it was by far the most popular budget of the New Labour era.
So the Brown of the referendum campaign is not an aberration or some weird metamorphosis. Some of those in the Better Together campaign point out that Brown’s famous flaws have also played a problematic part over recent months. But those endlessly discussed flaws have obscured Brown’s strengths. Indeed, perceptions of the recent past have become a nightmare for him. Before the referendum he was widely known, in parts of England at least, for throwing printers, disloyalty and for apparently wrecking the entire global economy. It must be hoped that his rise from the political dead in the referendum will lead to a reassessment. Already there has been a change. Before the current campaign Miliband did not dare to hint at any association with Brown, regarding him as too toxic. In the campaign the two shared a platform and now rightwing columnists tweet sincere praise for him.So the Brown of the referendum campaign is not an aberration or some weird metamorphosis. Some of those in the Better Together campaign point out that Brown’s famous flaws have also played a problematic part over recent months. But those endlessly discussed flaws have obscured Brown’s strengths. Indeed, perceptions of the recent past have become a nightmare for him. Before the referendum he was widely known, in parts of England at least, for throwing printers, disloyalty and for apparently wrecking the entire global economy. It must be hoped that his rise from the political dead in the referendum will lead to a reassessment. Already there has been a change. Before the current campaign Miliband did not dare to hint at any association with Brown, regarding him as too toxic. In the campaign the two shared a platform and now rightwing columnists tweet sincere praise for him.
Yes, Brown is famously flawed, but too many assessments of politics since 1992 have failed to appreciate the multi-layered, nerve-shredding constraints on him as he made his moves. With his opposition to the euro, vote-winning economic policies that gave the space for investment in public services, his understanding of the complexities of public service reform, and his prime ministerial response to the global crash in 2008, he is one of the most significant and misunderstood figures in postwar British politics. There are far more important issues at stake in the referendum vote but perhaps afterwards he will be understood a little more. Yes, Brown is famously flawed, but too many assessments of politics since 1992 have failed to appreciate the multi-layered, nerve-shredding constraints on him as he made his moves. With his opposition to the euro, vote-winning economic policies that gave the space for investment in public services, his understanding of the complexities of public service reform, and his prime ministerial response to the global crash in 2008, he is one of the most significant and misunderstood figures in postwar British politics. There are far more important issues at stake in the referendum vote but perhaps afterwards he will be understood a little more.