BRITAIN: The Labour conference will be about Gordon Brown, but not in the way he might have expected, writes Frank Millar
You might be forgiven for thinking this really should be Tony Blair's party.
It's not, of course, in the commanding, all-conquering spirit of the age that saw the bright young hope pull Labour from the wilderness of opposition to an unprecedented three terms in power. The glory days are over.
The great showman himself has called time - now almost certainly to his regret - and his audience moves on, thrilling perhaps to the thought of a grand finale but with seats already reserved for the next production.
Yet, and not least for these reasons, the Labour Conference 2006 should be Tony's gig. And if the comrades converging on Manchester this weekend have any sense, they would resolve to enjoy it. So too, some wise Labour experts suggest, should Gordon Brown.
Since the attempted coup, barely a fortnight ago, evidence has accrued that the general public is finally in on the secret of the chancellor's desire to force Mr Blair from Downing Street with immediate effect - and that they do not like it. Mr Brown's protestations of innocence have not convinced, as evidenced by yesterday's ICM poll finding. Mr Brown is considered by voters less honest than Conservative leader David Cameron and the more likely of the two "to stab a colleague in the back".
That conclusion alone should chill Mr Brown and his advisers and cause them to pause. Add the findings that Cameron is currently considered to have most potential as prime minister, the more likely to take Britain in the right direction, the more honest, less arrogant and (by a long way) the more pleasant personality and it isn't hard to understand the suddenly widespread sense that Brown the presumed shoo-in now has a serious problem.
Even without the growing perception of arrogant, brooding ambition and personal disloyalty, the front-runner was always going to have difficulty as precisely that - the man with it all to lose. Hence the conclusion of many commentators that Blair has the easy part next week, while Brown, the would-be-successor, must give the speech of his life.
Yet those wise heads disagree, and suggest this is not the occasion for Mr Brown to set out his leadership stall but rather a time for celebration of what has gone before.
Ironically, some think Brown is set to succeed just as his "luck" as chancellor begins to run out. The first strike in the health service for 20 years over privatisation of services may be the harbinger of more to come. To public amazement doctors and nurses are losing their jobs while the NHS is awash with taxpayers cash. Ministers are accused of gerrymandering hospital closures, and of slipping out the bad news of poor primary school results on the same day as yet more "record" exam-result performances.
Despite millions thrown at the problem, truancy is up, as is knife crime. Interest rates are set to rise again soon. While acknowledging the benefits to the British economy, Liberal Democrat Vince Cable this week charged that large scale immigration from eastern Europe had also brutally exposed the failures in Britain's education, health and welfare systems. Mr Brown stands accused of ignoring the problem of rising personal debt. The so-called 'Ipod generation' despairs of ever getting on the property ladder, while more and more older people face selling their homes to provide care in later life. Just as the spending boom draws to a close prime minister Brown and whoever he appoints his chancellor will face increasingly tough questions from a British public now well aware that years of stealth-taxing and "investment" have not delivered New Labour's promised "world class" public services.
Yet Labour also has much to celebrate, as Blair and Brown will remind delegates next week.
Economic stability, Bank of England independence, low inflation and low unemployment, the minimum wage, millions of pensioners and children lifted out of poverty, genuine improvements in health and education as in provisions for single and working mothers, devolution, and - despite the fresh challenges of the new terrorism - a more liberal and tolerant society than they inherited from the Conservatives nine years ago. "Much done, more to do", as Mr Blair said in an earlier soundbite.
Add to the list one other thing seemingly lost sight-of in the tumult of recent weeks - the very real possibility that Blair's final bequest may yet be a fourth Labour term in power.
That is not the headline message now from the polls.
However we should be cautious about Cameron/Brown choices before Brown (assuming he does in fact succeed) is actually installed in Number 10. Beyond Manchester this week lies Bournemouth and a first conference as leader at which Mr Cameron will have to show he is not a policy free zone, too inclined to Blairite spin over substance.
Moreover, when parliament resumes, as Blair finally leaves the stage and Labour's new regime begins the business of re-inventing itself, Mr Cameron will have to see his poll ratings rise and stay well above current levels if the Conservatives are even to have a hope of being the largest party in a hung-parliament.
In other words, Labour still has the next general election (in 2009 or 2010) to lose. However, it can begin the process of losing it next week, should the competing factions decide to emulate some of the brothers at the TUC Congress and behave badly.
Peter Hain - the Northern Ireland and Welsh Secretary who is a serious contender for the deputy leadership - believes that won't happen.
Confirming the party's horror at "the carnage" of two weeks ago, he insists both sides looked over the brink, saw the black hole beckoning them and decided to pull back. Others, too, believe Brown should be content to let Blair shine while showing himself "incredibly benign and inclusive." Some Blairite ultras, on the other hand, would find that in itself incredible and consider it "too big an ask".
They believe the chancellor "won't be able to stop himself" and that, even if he does not seek to present himself as leader-in-waiting, the hurt caused by the attempted coup makes it almost certain that the "outriders" for both camps will inevitably collide.
Dismissing the benign scenario offered above, one insider told The Irish Times: "The conference will be about Gordon, but not in the way he would have expected. The question is whether the doubts about him are bigger at the end of the week than at the beginning."
If that is the case, it will be instructive to see who picks the fight.