A YEAR is a long time in politics. British prime minister Gordon Brown seems to have exhausted the goodwill and expectations which accompanied his succession to Tony Blair last summer. He is now fighting for his political life following the huge swing to the Conservatives in last week's Crewe and Nantwich byelection. He cannot survive many other weekends of media and public speculation on his future like this one, relentlessly exposing his weakness and vulnerability.
This was no ordinary mid-term setback, but a crucial turning point for the Conservatives under David Cameron's leadership. It was not just a Labour Party defeat, but a Tory victory, something that has eluded the opposition party since Labour won power in 1997. It now looks eminently possible the Conservatives could win the next general election - so much so that Labour must decide very soon whether to replace Mr Brown or maintain his leadership in the hope their party can recover its confidence and appeal by 2010. Either way their room for manoeuvre is much diminished. There is precious little time for an alternative leader to make an impression. Whoever might covet the job will be aware that it would be a humiliatingly short period in power if the political trend has indeed turned against Labour.
Much of Mr Brown's damage is self-inflicted. He is now indelibly associated with political indecision and incompetence after several major miscalculations, including his failure to call a snap election last October and last month's humiliating budgetary U-turn over a 10p tax proposal that would have made five million of Britain's poorest people worse off. Political retribution was delivered in the local government and London elections. This byelection is important because a relatively high turnout and 17.6 per cent swing to the Conservatives showed core Labour voters deserting the party. Mr Cameron is correct to say nothing is guaranteed by this result, and that public attention will be intensified on Conservative policies. But there is now a willingness to respond to his party's ideas just when Labour's stock of them appears so bare and unconvincing.
Last summer's hope that under Mr Brown steady progress towards attainable goals for a fairer society could maintain unity between Labour's different factions has been dissipated. Certainly falling house prices, rising food and fuel costs and recessionary fears have taken their toll on the party's fortunes; but the political damage to Labour cannot be explained other than as a protest against Mr Brown's style of leadership and political credibility. His determination to stay in office needs to be matched by a far more convincing vision and capability if his original message of incremental, egalitarian reform is to be retrieved. It is not an ignoble vision, but he has proved unable to articulate and deliver on it.
It looks as if his potential rivals probably have little stomach for a confrontation against him. They all realise that a panic decision to replace him would look opportunistic without a deeper political renewal. Mr Brown will hope economic recovery can make that more possible but he has yet to show he could turn it to his advantage.