Entering a crowded field, Peter Mandelson has written a surprisingly compelling account of the New Labour years, far more revealing and subtle than the fuss over the serialisation suggests. Nearly every page is illuminating, sometimes in unintentional ways. The book should be read by anyone remotely interested in politics, psychiatry and theatre. There is enough material for specialists in all three areas to last a lifetime.
Of course, there are no new revelations in relation to the famous big picture: that would be impossible. By now everyone knows that the Blair/Brown relationship was dysfunctional, fuelled by jealousy, frustrated ambition and a growing, underestimated ideological chasm. Even so, Mandelson casts fresh light on the dynamics of a duopoly that seized almost total control of a party.
He does so by adopting a familiar device in fiction. Quite quickly the reader discovers that Mandelson is a slightly unreliable narrator. This is not to suggest this account is fictitious; largely it is reliable and accurate, although narrow in its sweep. He plays the role in a particular and gripping way. In several episodes Mandelson seems to be taking the reader down one particular path only to change direction suddenly without any explanation, behaving as if on the same route.
His rapprochement with Brown in summer 2008 is typical. Mandelson appears to be writing supportively of Brown as he discusses prospects for the government with the Cabinet Secretary. Then the Cabinet Secretary mentions a big project that Brown is contemplating. Oh dear. Peter knows what happens to Gordon's big projects. They fall apart. Another knife is inserted in Brown's back during a passage that was fleetingly positive.
The big project Brown had in mind was the return of Mandelson: one of the most extraordinary twists of his leadership. And yet Mandelson's account shows why the move was slightly less astonishing than it seemed. Quite often, the reader is taken into a private conversation with Blair in which he and Mandelson despair of Brown. The Chancellor is mad and bad. Yet, within a few pages, Mandelson is having a long conversation with Brown about what he needs to do to become leader gracefully.
There is no attempt to explain the sequence. Soon the reader asks no questions as the narrator moves from Tony to Gordon and back. We get used to it. Mandelson is not being overtly duplicitous. Largely, he was mediating on behalf of Tony, seeking support for Blairite reforms and a smooth path for Gordon to the leadership (the use of first names throughout conveys an ambiguous bond). But the lack of reflective paragraphs, as the deranged dance between the three becomes increasingly destructive, show how a form of collective madness became normal to the participants.
The omission extends to Mandelson's two enforced resignations from the Cabinet, for which he deserves unqualified sympathy. The second in particular was based on a fleeting media frenzy to which Blair and Alastair Campbell succumbed. Evidently, Mandelson felt betrayed and yet soon he is back with Tony and Alastair planning the government's latest attempt to acquire momentum. Always he is willing to forgive Tony, although not entirely. As he writes of Tony's capacity to lead, he proceeds without a moment's pause to express frustration at Blair's indifference to policy detail and limited attention span. In one discussion with the PM, Mandelson raises vital questions about the war in Iraq. Instead of exploring them, Blair compares him to George Galloway.
When Blair and Mandelson discuss domestic policy, the exchanges are similarly superficial. During the second term Blair and Mandelson briefly analyse Brown's resistance to their reforms of public services and membership of the Euro. Is he old Labour? Is he a different version of New Labour? There is no clarity about what they mean when applying these evasive definitions. Mandelson cannot accept that Brown had genuine concerns about the reform agenda and the consequences of Britain joining the Euro. Either he puts it down to Brown's ambition or that the Chancellor is "old Labour", whatever that is supposed to mean.
In reality, there were important differences about the role of government and markets in the provision of public services. I had many conversations with Brown and his entourage during the second term and, while I have no doubt that insatiable hunger for the leadership played a big part, I am also certain their concerns about Blair's policy agenda were substantial and real.
This should not be surprising. By the third term the Conservatives' new leader, David Cameron, declared his genuine support for Blair's reforms. A Labour leader appeared to have more in common with the Conservatives. Mandelson never explains the difference between Blair's version of New Labour and Cameron's Conservatism. Perhaps that is because there is no difference.
For most of the book, Brown comes over as a monster, especially in his dealings with Blair: shouting, threatening, slamming doors, authorising vicious media briefings. Yet part of the book's multi-layered appeal is that Mandelson provides partial explanation for the anger without intending to do so. Towards the end of Blair's leadership he recounts the outgoing PM's evangelical attempts to launch Ten Year Plans in a range of policy areas.
Mandelson notes that Brown was livid. What did he expect? No prime minister had sought to bind his successor in such unsubtle ways. Similarly, Mandelson confirms that Blair told Brown in the autumn of 2003 that he would leave the following year. It is not altogether surprising that Brown erupted when Blair stayed.
The narrator evokes a picture of a political monster and yet, if the reader probes deeply, the monstrosity becomes partly justified. At the same time the victim of the monstrosity, Labour's longest-serving PM, comes over as weak in the face of strong political personalities. Blair was more than happy to take on the supine Labour Party, but usually succumbed to big individuals in politics and the media. This was not a prime minister who would ever dare to probe President Bush about the wisdom of war.
After the serialisation, Mandelson was criticised on the grounds that, if Brown was such a disaster, he should have removed him as PM. The book provides a definitive justification. Traumatised by a reputation for treachery and his previous evictions from the Cabinet, he opted for loyalty and a final attempt to be a minister who lasts the course. He was never sure an alternative candidate would make much difference or whether his favoured option, David Miliband, would win.
But the slippery narrator even makes this explanation move in and out of focus. During the attempted coup against Brown in January this year, he kept his head down rather than actively come to Brown's rescue as he had before. Nothing is quite what it seems. As such, the book conveys Mandelson's authentic voice, and a work rushed out for maximum publicity is one of enduring significance.
Steve Richards's 'Whatever It Takes', on Gordon Brown and New Labour, appears from Fourth Estate in September
Comments