Whom The Gods Would Destroy
Jonathan Powell - chief of staff at No. 10 while Tony Blair was Prime Minister - is the latest to spill the beans on the inner workings of the last Labour government.
As civil servant rather than a politican, Powell built up a formidable reputation for his fierce intellect and ability to solve intractable problems - he played a pivotal role in the peace negotiations in Northern Ireland, for example.
His memoirs are being serialised in the Guardian, their theme is: "The New Machiavelli: How to Wield Power in the Modern World."
Here are a few extracts:
"The enemy within: how Machiavelli would have dealt with Gordon Brown
Tony Blair and Gordon Brown came into the Commons together in 1983. Tony told me that their relationship during the 1980s was extraordinarily intense. They shared an office, and Gordon used to call him first thing in the morning and last thing at night as part of an endless circular conversation. It sounded more like a romance than a traditional political partnership.
When Gordon moved to a new office in the early 1990s, Tony declined to move with him. He said that Gordon divided the world into those who were for him and those who were against him, and drove everyone around him mad in the process. Tony felt he had to break out as he too was becoming increasingly paranoid.
They had already begun to drift apart by 1994, but Tony's decision to run for the leadership that year tipped Gordon into an outright hostility from which he never emerged. I did not think Gordon would ever accept his former junior partner as his boss. Machiavelli's warning about what happens in these circumstances is clear: you have to deal with those who do not accept the new status quo severely and straight away.
If only Gordon had been content to co-operate with Tony on his reform programme and wait patiently for his turn, he would have been able to succeed to the job of leader peacefully and the New Labour government would have enjoyed much greater political success. It wasn't that he prevented Tony getting his way on policy; it just slowed him down. And it was not a matter of weakness on Tony's part, just an unwillingness to deal harshly with an old friend.
After a brief attempt by Gordon to woo me when I first came to work for Tony, I got my first taste of his modus operandi in 1995 when Paul Hamlyn, the publisher and philanthropist, donated money to set up Tony's office as leader of the opposition. Gordon got to hear of it, summoned me to his office in Millbank and sat me down in front of his desk. He told me in stern terms that he had Tony's agreement that all income was to be shared half and half with his office. I knew there was no such understanding and could not stop myself bursting out laughing. It must have been very irritating, and Gordon never forgave me.
A good deal of the angst between Tony and Gordon revolved around Peter Mandelson, the third corner of the triangle that had existed since the early 1980s. Tony told me that before 1994 Gordon used to speak to Peter at least twice every day before 9am, and Tony lamented that now he didn't speak to him at all. The friendship had been turned into intense hatred, but Gordon remained obsessed by him. He saved a particular intonation of voice for ringing Tony to complain about what "Mendelssohn", as he called him, had been briefing the papers.
Although Andrew Turnbull, who was his permanent secretary at the Treasury, may have been unkind to describe Gordon as "Macavity", it is true that in No 10 we used to joke that we could always tell when a crisis was over because Gordon would reappear.
Robin Cook took me out to lunch in February 2000. As he plied me with wine, it became clear he was trying to find out how Gordon was seen in No 10. I hadn't realised he had known Gordon since he was a teenager. He told me Gordon had wanted to stand in the Hamilton byelection in 1978 but had been told by his father, a local minister, that he couldn't because he and his wife were Tories and his mother had a weak heart. He didn't want to kill his mother, did he?
Instead, he had to spend the campaign travelling around with Robin campaigning for George Robertson. An awful lot of wasted effort has been put into cod psychology concerning Gordon's personality, but Robin's analysis seemed convincing to me. Gordon's parents were very strict, and Gordon simply could not admit to doing anything wrong or making mistakes. That meant he had to eschew any responsibility. If he was accused of anything, he would simply deny it was him and point the finger at someone else. It made it difficult for him to make decisions."
Which just goes to prove the old agage - Those whom the Gods would destroy, they first make mad!
As civil servant rather than a politican, Powell built up a formidable reputation for his fierce intellect and ability to solve intractable problems - he played a pivotal role in the peace negotiations in Northern Ireland, for example.
His memoirs are being serialised in the Guardian, their theme is: "The New Machiavelli: How to Wield Power in the Modern World."
Here are a few extracts:
"The enemy within: how Machiavelli would have dealt with Gordon Brown
Tony Blair and Gordon Brown came into the Commons together in 1983. Tony told me that their relationship during the 1980s was extraordinarily intense. They shared an office, and Gordon used to call him first thing in the morning and last thing at night as part of an endless circular conversation. It sounded more like a romance than a traditional political partnership.
When Gordon moved to a new office in the early 1990s, Tony declined to move with him. He said that Gordon divided the world into those who were for him and those who were against him, and drove everyone around him mad in the process. Tony felt he had to break out as he too was becoming increasingly paranoid.
They had already begun to drift apart by 1994, but Tony's decision to run for the leadership that year tipped Gordon into an outright hostility from which he never emerged. I did not think Gordon would ever accept his former junior partner as his boss. Machiavelli's warning about what happens in these circumstances is clear: you have to deal with those who do not accept the new status quo severely and straight away.
If only Gordon had been content to co-operate with Tony on his reform programme and wait patiently for his turn, he would have been able to succeed to the job of leader peacefully and the New Labour government would have enjoyed much greater political success. It wasn't that he prevented Tony getting his way on policy; it just slowed him down. And it was not a matter of weakness on Tony's part, just an unwillingness to deal harshly with an old friend.
After a brief attempt by Gordon to woo me when I first came to work for Tony, I got my first taste of his modus operandi in 1995 when Paul Hamlyn, the publisher and philanthropist, donated money to set up Tony's office as leader of the opposition. Gordon got to hear of it, summoned me to his office in Millbank and sat me down in front of his desk. He told me in stern terms that he had Tony's agreement that all income was to be shared half and half with his office. I knew there was no such understanding and could not stop myself bursting out laughing. It must have been very irritating, and Gordon never forgave me.
A good deal of the angst between Tony and Gordon revolved around Peter Mandelson, the third corner of the triangle that had existed since the early 1980s. Tony told me that before 1994 Gordon used to speak to Peter at least twice every day before 9am, and Tony lamented that now he didn't speak to him at all. The friendship had been turned into intense hatred, but Gordon remained obsessed by him. He saved a particular intonation of voice for ringing Tony to complain about what "Mendelssohn", as he called him, had been briefing the papers.
Although Andrew Turnbull, who was his permanent secretary at the Treasury, may have been unkind to describe Gordon as "Macavity", it is true that in No 10 we used to joke that we could always tell when a crisis was over because Gordon would reappear.
Robin Cook took me out to lunch in February 2000. As he plied me with wine, it became clear he was trying to find out how Gordon was seen in No 10. I hadn't realised he had known Gordon since he was a teenager. He told me Gordon had wanted to stand in the Hamilton byelection in 1978 but had been told by his father, a local minister, that he couldn't because he and his wife were Tories and his mother had a weak heart. He didn't want to kill his mother, did he?
Instead, he had to spend the campaign travelling around with Robin campaigning for George Robertson. An awful lot of wasted effort has been put into cod psychology concerning Gordon's personality, but Robin's analysis seemed convincing to me. Gordon's parents were very strict, and Gordon simply could not admit to doing anything wrong or making mistakes. That meant he had to eschew any responsibility. If he was accused of anything, he would simply deny it was him and point the finger at someone else. It made it difficult for him to make decisions."
Which just goes to prove the old agage - Those whom the Gods would destroy, they first make mad!
