SHARED OPINION

Mandelson plays down friendship with Blair

FRANK JOHNSON

Damon Runyon is supposed to have said about some brawl or row: 'There'll be a dame in there somewhere.' Likewise, in any commotion concerning this govern- ment, there'll be Mr Mandelson in there somewhere.

As I write, with the morning papers spread out around me, the Independent seems to have best understood this eternal truth. I have not met its new editor, who came from the Daily Mail. Stephen Glover, writing in The Spectator just after his appointment, warmed to him but, in regret- ting that he would probably not last long, explained that he was 'a rough diamond who likes long lunches'. At which point I suspected that, whatever his eventual fate, this is a man who would see the main point of any big story. Thus the Independent's front-page heading ran: 'Now the heat is on Mandelson.'

The accompanying report pointed out that 'In the lobbying scandal . . . the spot- light fell increasingly on Peter Mandelson, the Minister without Portfolio, who has had close links for several years with both the adviser concerned, Roger Liddle, and Mr Draper.' The paper also had the headline: Mandelson plays down his friendship with former aide.' There followed quotations from one of the television and radio inter- views which Mr Mandelson had given the previous day in which he said of Mr Drap- er: 'He is a bit of a showman. He has a fine intelligence, but sometimes I am afraid he misuses that intelligence. He gets above himself.'

The story, by the paper's political corre- spondent, went on: 'Listeners might have got the impression that Mr Mandelson had barely seen Mr Draper in the past three years, and that his relationship with him had been purely professional even before- hand. In fact, the two are still good friends and although the Minister without Portfolio has been busy since the election he has still .round time to see or speak to Mr Draper at Least once a fortnight.' Perhaps his remarks about Mr Draper do not bear the construction that the Indepen- dent put on them. There is, however, only ne sure way to behave in public life if your Macleod gets into trouble; to say what lam fiMiacleod said when trouble struck Mr Pro- 11.10:. 'He was my friend. He is my friend. no will remain my friend.' Anything less is t Only bad behaviour, but bad politics. In public life, nearly everyone knows who everyone else's friends are. Thus, if you dis- tance yourself from a friend in trouble, everyone knows it.

Likewise there is only one course for the public figure in trouble: to apologise for any trouble caused. This Mr Draper has done. But Mr Mandelson has acquired, however unwittingly or unfairly, a reputa- tion for detaching himself from friends when it suits him. He detached himself from Mr Gordon Brown when Mr Blair looked, from Mr Mandelson's point of view, a better bet for Labour leader. Mr Mandelson could retort that a Blair leader- ship would better suit the national and party interest.

But policies are inseparable from person- alities. Mr Brown and his friends do not see Mr Mandelson's change of heart as so high- minded. Mr Brown's friends have been quick privately to point out that this 'lobby- ing scandal' is the work of the Mandelsoni- ans Mr Liddle and Mr Draper. They dis- miss the importance to the 'scandal' of the one Treasury figure whose name has been mentioned in it.

Mr Mandelson's detaching himself from Mr Brown those four years ago therefore constantly returns to haunt him. So, too, if that is what he is doing, will any detaching of himself from his protégés in this present matter.

It is all, however, an amusing interlude; prompting as it does speculation as to what Mr Mandelson will say when Mr Blair eventually gets into trouble or becomes widely unpopular. Perhaps he will tell inter- viewers: 'Tony's a bit of showman. But sometimes he attaches more importance to show than substance, something which I hope I never do.'

Interviewer: 'But weren't you very close to Mr Blair?'

Mr Mandelson: 'Well, actually, I haven't spoken to him at any great length for a cou- ple of years. Whitehall's a big place. Natu- rally, I see him at parties and at Cabinet meetings. But they are purely social occa- sions. They're nothing to do with the seri- ous business of government.'

Interviewer: 'But we have about 10,000 soundbites in which you seem to be saying that he will make a great prime minister.'

Mr Mandelson: 'Yes, yes. I know there's been a clumsy attempt by the media to link me to a few soundbites, and to Tony. But I'd very much like to see them in context. I challenge all television channels to produce them by 11 a.m. If not, the nation will assume that they do not exist, or do not bear the rather lurid construction which has been placed on them.'

There's no party quite like it,' Profes- sor Kenneth Minogue was overheard to say at The Spectator's summer gathering. But this for me is the difficulty. For that rela- tively small section of the British popula- tion which does not attend, it should be explained that our annual party is held in the spacious, but not vast, Georgian house and garden in Bloomsbury which we are privileged to own. Yet the number of guests probably exceeds Doncaster Rovers' aver- age home gate.

Many of them seem to like the crush; to find it the whole point of the occasion. Mr Robin Wight, the advertising man who is also something of an advertising theorist, observed: 'It's like an orgy without the sex.' I assume that one year someone distin- guished and elderly will choose our party at which to die. There being no space for his or her fall, we will not know until very late or perhaps the following morning.

But I am worried that New Labour fig- ures might eventually be deterred from coming. They are much grander than Tory ministers were, grandeur these days being more a question of manner and spirit than lineage. They do not share the Tories' will- ingness to rub up against other people, so to speak. As an experiment, I am thinking of transferring the occasion next year to a marquee on a large lawn up the road, with a band. Colleagues, who oppose me on the issue, say that this will make it just like any other chunk of corporate entertaining. In that case, Labour ministers would undoubt- edly come then.

When I passed on Mr Wight's orgy remark to a friend, the friend told me what he called a Surrey girl joke. Not wishing to seem out of things, I did not ask what Sur- rey girl jokes were. From the context, how- ever, they seem to hinge on points of good behaviour. Thus: Why do Surrey girls seldom go to orgies? Because one has to write so many thank- you notes.