Hewitt and Hoon: Like the Chuckle Brothers, but less co-ordinated

By David Higgerson on Jan 6, 10 11:13 PM

JANUARY 6, 2009: A date which might go down in political history for one of two reasons. Hindsight in June may tell it is was the day that Gordon Brown's - and Labour's - fragile fightback against David Cameron was scuppered from within.

Or maybe we'll look back at today in years to come and cite it as the date the world's most pathetic and shallow political coup was staged.

One thing is for sure. Today was the day we saw the true colours of Geoff Hoon and Patricia Hewitt. Two failed ministers, smarting at the sidelines of politics, seem by their actions to be telling us that if they can't run Labour, then Labour shouldn't be in Government.

Their credibility couldn't have been more damaged if they'd decided to hold hands and march across the floor to join the opposition parties.

This pair aren't thick. Their actions today - reminding the public of the division in Labour just at the time when Cameron seemed to be cracking and Brown was hitting form - appear to be the actions of stupid people, but they aren't. They knew what they were doing. But they clearly think the rest of us are stupid.

First up, lets look at Hewitt. As we know from her reign at health secretary, she doesn't take anyone's opinion seriously unless it matches her own. She's the minister who angered doctors so much they took to the streets to protest against her, and a survey of NHS workers showed only a third thought she was doing a good job. Oh yes, and she only just survived a vote of no confidence herself.

So, a far from perfect track record. But to hide behind the excuse that she and Hoon were only asking for a secret vote to put the rumours of disquiet to bed once and for all is as patronising to the public as it is untrue.

What she refused to admit on Five Live was by calling for this vote, she was therefore calling on Brown to go. If she wanted the issue put to bed once and for all, why not also agree to rally behind Brown if the vote went ahead?

And if the issue was such a burning one within Labour, why go for a private vote? Why can't she get the 70 signatures needed to force a leadership vote? As the hours beyond 1pm told us, the answer here is a simple one: Because that support for removing Brown simply doesn't exist.

Many Labour MPs realise that, while Brown isn't their top choice, he's not doing a bad job at present - and that any chance of holding on to power would evaporate if the party elected a new leader but didn't call a general election.

Hewitt doesn't need to worry about this. She's standing down at the next general election. So it's one last hurrah for a politician in front of the cameras, still refusing to accept other opinions and, in the process, falling on her sword in a matter of hours.

For a minister who was accused by many in the health sector of being out of touch and a poor leader, it's incredibly ironic she should appear so out-of-touch now while criticising someone else of being a poor leader. Still, that special consultant role at Boots should help soften the blow.

Now for Hoon. He certainly knows how to judge public opinion. After all, how was he to know the public might not like the defence secretary going off on a ski-ing holiday at the time he'd cancelled troops' leave ahead of the war in Iraq?

He also hid behind the 'putting the issue to bed' line but, as one MP said today, he's a serial stabber in the back when it comes to Labour PMs. His other argument was that many Labour MPs were upset that the message about Labour's good work wasn't getting out to the public.

Who's been in charge of that good work? Brown, and his cabinet. If there's a problem with getting the message out, trying to remove the source of the good news isn't the way to do it.

Hoon unravelled on Newsnight when asked if this plot would have happened if he'd landed the European job handed to Baroness do-dah of Upholland. The answer was 'that's neither here nor there.' Wrong. It's very much here and now.

There's no point Hoon and Hewitt saying they are responding to circumstances because that doesn't answer who created the circumstances in the first place. And there's no point saying, as they did, that they just want to do the best thing for Labour.

How can this be the best thing for Labour if it alerts everyone outside the bubble to the fact that Labour is still divided. If they truly believed in what was best for Labour, then they'd believe the best thing for Labour was to be in Government. The sure-fire to ensure that doesn't happen is to try and break the fragile peace that exists in Labour.

Hewitt and Hoon represent the very worst in politicians to me. They so involved inside the bubble that they can't even judge the mood properly there. Wanting Labour in power actually means wanting them to in power for Labour. And they simply hate being stuck on the sidelines.

In their quest to be the centre of attention they've done Cameron a massive favour - but also wrecked any little bit of integrity each held following appalling ministerial careers.