The Spectator, 56 Doughty Street, London WC1N 2:4 Telephone: 0171-405
1706; Fax 0171-242 0603
MR BLAIR REACHES 100
Worldly wisemen will say that there is something 'arbitrary' about assessing a new government 100 days after its taking office.
But ever since President Kennedy made a show of his first 100 days, we all do it, and nothing can stop us. It has become another of the signposts — like anniversaries of great or interesting events — to guide us along the twisting way of public affairs.
To where is the signpost at the end of Mr Blair's, and New Labour's, first 100 days pointing us? Certainly, towards more and more of a Prime Minister whose manner and tone most people at present seem to enjoy and appreciate. That manner and tone, and the widespread appreciation of it, are reminiscent of Mr Major in his first year or so in office. It is the manner and tone of the New Man. Mr Blair, like Mr Major before him, understands that we live not so much in the welfare state, as in the therapeutic state. Voters seem to need con- stant reassurance that everything that can be done for them is in fact being done. It is probably one of the reasons why President Clinton survives all scandal, and why M. Jospin won. If Mr Blair has the right tone for our times, then so did Mr Major. What ruined him was the economy going wrong for at least two years after his 1992 victory. In other words, he met the fate of most prime ministers.
Will the economy go wrong for Mr Blair? We do not wish to sound worldly-wise, but surely the answer is, yes, it always does. The economic cycle has not been abolished. Some exceptionally gifted, or lucky, politi- cians, such as President Reagan, managed to prolong the happy part. The unhappy part, however, always comes around in the end. Only communist governments, with their low level of economic activity, were able to give a semblance of having stopped the cycle.
The economic future, then, is unpre- dictable, but probably less happy than the economic present. The political outlook depends on whether, whatever it is that goes wrong with the economy, Mr Blair will be blamed. Whatever it is, he will of course blame it on his legacy from the Tories. He will have allies in this stratagem. Much of the media, especially radio and television, loathe the Conservative party more than ever. Media people are great ones for the therapeutic state. They will erect barriers between the weak, demoralised Tories and the voters. On 22 July, for example, radio news bulletins, prompted by a Treasury statement, obligingly reported the IMF as saying that the government had 'made an excellent start'. What those bulletins did not report was that the IMF also said that `since 1992 the UK has had the strongest recovery of any major EU country. ' There was much other good news from the IMF, such as 'the UK has a higher proportion of the working-age population in employment than any other major EU country.' But this did not reach the airwaves. With help like this, when trouble comes, Mr Blair has a good chance of not being blamed. Spin-doctoring has not ended with the general election. It will probably consti- tute this government's only contribution to medical science. The Tories should have made sure that the country knew what the IMF had really said. The sweetness of these 100 days has been a relief after years of bit- terness, but should not be allowed to become sickening.
Britain is finally to ask Brazil for the return of Ronnie Biggs, the Great Train Robber, when an extradition treaty comes into force this month. Mr Jack Straw, the Home Secretary, will sign the papers requesting Bigg's return 32 years after he climbed over the wall of Wandsworth Prison.
Biggs is now nearly 70 and has spent most of his life on the run, that is when he has not been spending it in the Sun. Home Office sources say there is no question, however, of leaving him in Rio de Janeiro.
Papers prepared for Mr Straw argue that Biggs cannot be left at large because it would set a bad precedent.
Former Detective Chief Superintendent Jack Slipper, the Scotland Yard officer who tried to get Biggs back from Brazil more than 20 years ago, disagrees. Mr Slipper feels that Biggs should now be left where he is. We cannot help but sympathise with Mr Slipper, and to a certain extent with Biggs.
While condemning Biggs's crime, we feel there is something almost heroic about such long and open evasion of the law (for no one could accuse Biggs of a lack of frankness). It bears a resemblance to one of those Gilbert and Sullivan comic operettas in which ineffectual policemen pursue resourceful malefactors with rictus grins. There was once a custom in this country whereby a thief, having outwitted authority for an unusual length of time, would receive an automatic pardon. Having out- distanced authority for over a quarter of a century, perhaps Biggs, while not eligible for a pardon, should be eligible for a blind eye.
Previous page
