| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
luke
Joined: 11 Feb 2007
Location: by the sea
|
 Posted: Mon Oct 15, 2007 10:03 pm Post subject: Why the Sun might dump Brown |
 |
|
|
|
| Quote: | 
Why the Sun might dump Brown
Irwin Stelzer, one of Rupert Murdoch's top advisers, reveals what he thinks of the PM and the election fiasco - and why Cameron is now 'worth a look'.
James Silver
Monday October 15, 2007
The Guardian
As the brouhaha over Gordon Brown's electoral dance-of-the-seven-veils fades and the Tories' improbable recovery gathers pace, one question lingers amid all the finger-pointing and name-calling. Why was the snap poll - which seemed all but certain to be called - really cancelled? Well, we know the official version. The prime minister summoned the BBC's Andrew Marr on October 6 to tell him that he would not be going to the country this autumn because he had "a vision for change in Britain" and was overcome by the sudden urge "to show people how in government we're implementing it". Brown also flatly denied that his abrupt change of heart had anything to do with opinion polls, including one in particular which was to be published in the following day's News of the World, which showed a swing to David Cameron's Conservatives in key marginal seats.
However, there is another intriguing theory doing the rounds and it has everything to do with a significant (and largely ignored) morsel reported by this newspaper's political commentator Jackie Ashley - who also happens to be married to Marr - that a certain Rupert Murdoch visited Chequers on the very weekend the PM took his decision. All of which raises the question: were Murdoch's upscale mini-break and Brown's apparently catastrophic loss of nerve linked?
Sinister figure
Well, given that Murdoch is disinclined to answer such questions, MediaGuardian turned to the next best thing - Irwin M. Stelzer. The 75-year-old American economist, Sunday Times and Daily Telegraph commentator - and consultant to News International and News Corporation - is variously described as Murdoch's "enforcer", "emissary" and "representative on earth".
If you believe some of the things written about Stelzer you half expect there to be a whiff of sulphur and a pitchfork propped up against the wall in his central London office. Invariably cast as a sinister figure who flits through the shadows, tweaking prime ministerial noses and issuing stark warnings at his master's behest, Stelzer - according to one US website - "has long been regarded in the UK as Murdoch's messenger to elite British policy-makers, including Tony Blair and Gordon Brown".
In person, he is silver-haired and softly-spoken, with a fierce intelligence and a wry sense of humour. So what does he make of Ashley's revelation and speculation that - with the EU treaty issue simmering - "the Sun's threat to use Europe against Brown during an autumn campaign was a factor in his decision not to call [a snap poll]"?
Stelzer insists that "no particular significance" should be read into Murdoch's Chequers visit that weekend. "Brown is too strong a character and Murdoch too smart to say 'you do this or else'." Yes, but surely it was rather more subtle than that? "Well, here are the facts, which aren't as good as what Ashley wrote and I know you wish I'd say a lot more, but we're stuck with facts. Murdoch and everyone on the Sun have very strong views on the [EU] constitution, as does, I suspect, most of Britain, as do I.
"The Sun's campaign [for a referendum], which I think is fun and ingenious, is no secret, nor are [Sun associate editor] Trevor Kavanagh's heartfelt feelings about surrendering more sovereignty. So Brown has to know that one of the factors, maybe the factor, that the Sun will consider [when it comes to an endorsement] is his position on the referendum. But from what I understand Gordon is not going to change his position - he's going to go ahead and not have a referendum - and Murdoch and the Sun will have to decide what they do in a general election."
But surely Murdoch's presence at Chequers on such a pivotal weekend must have had some influence on Brown's decision? Stelzer's reply is lawyerly. "I don't think so. If you mean did the weekend at Chequers influence the decision, then the answer is no. But if you mean does Gordon in his political calculations want to have the Sun on his side, then sure he does. He'd be a madman not to. But he's not going to pander, I don't think." Significantly, Stelzer's assessment of Brown's poll volte-face is damning. "It was an appalling blunder," he says, "followed by a disingenuous disavowal which only made it worse. There's no doubt [Brown] would have gone to the country if the polls were going his way. His guys were running around the conference - I was there - talking about how they were going to put the final nail in the Tories' coffin. There was no indication that there was any feeling that the national interest was playing into this decision. Remember, Gordon had been very careful to say that he didn't need any electoral validation. Then [shadow chancellor] George Osborne came out with his startling tax proposal and Cameron did his quite brilliant speech, both from a presentational point of view and I thought from a content point of view, after Gordon's extraordinarily dreary conference speech, thereby juxtaposing the two. So Gordon called the election off."
In the last days of Blair's premiership, a senior source familiar with the workings at the top of News International told MediaGuardian that the Sun and the Times would be likely to favour Brown over Cameron, on the grounds that [the source] did not "know anyone in News Corp - and indeed Murdoch himself - who is particularly impressed with Cameron. They see him as arrogant, trite and not necessarily up to speed". What does Stelzer make of this view?
"Your source may be high up but he's misinformed," he shoots back. "Murdoch would never presume to tell the editor of the Times who to support. I mean, I've been there and I know he doesn't do it. So the Times is off the table.
"We're down now to the News of the World and the Sun. I think what's happened is - and I know this from discussions at the highest levels at News International," he says pointedly, "that the initial feeling you describe - that Cameron was kind of a lightweight toff, not as agreeable to Murdoch as Brown, the hardworking Presbyterian Scot whose father had a similar background to Rupert's grandfather - that's certainly true. But I think that changed and it changed very recently, around Cameron's speech, to where it is my impression that the Sun and the News of the World - to the extent they take direction from Murdoch - feel that Cameron is worth a look, whereas before he was not worth a look. And I know that to be a fact."
Just to be clear, is he saying the Sun could back Cameron, after more than a decade of backing New Labour and Blair in particular? In what will doubtless be viewed as further evidence of a dramatic turnaround in Tory fortunes, Stelzer replies: "You'd have to think that Murdoch is a closed minded dunce not to think that he recognises that something is happening here in Britain, that the political landscape has been shaken up and he has to look at it."
So how credible a figure is Stelzer, who is also senior fellow of the Washington-based, right-leaning Hudson Institute, when it comes to the views of the world's most powerful media magnate? "Well, I'm not Murdoch's 'enforcer'," he laughs. "That's absurd. I'm really not Murdoch's representative on earth either. He doesn't need a representative. Murdoch can pretty much handle his own affairs." How would he define their relationship? "The concise and accurate description is that he is a client and a friend. That does it all. We talk about issues all the time. He didn't hire me to do a specific thing, but to talk over everything from interest rates to media and regulatory issues." How often do they speak? "It would be strange if we didn't talk once a week, sometimes more. You have to understand that Murdoch is the hub of a massive information system of which I am a spoke."
A spoke perhaps, but there is no doubt that Stelzer, who shuttles between London and Washington, has Murdoch's ear and shares the News Corp chief's opinions on any number of issues, ranging from EU integration and tax cuts to small government and strong defence. That is partly why Stelzer has been a regular visitor to Downing Street and the Treasury over the years and when he talks, prime ministers and their entourages pay attention.
But when I suggest - possibly rather clumsily - the only reason PMs receive him and consult him, as Brown regularly has, he is a little offended. "I like to think [the access] has something to do with my intellect too," he points out. "Look, Brown knows I talk to Murdoch, I don't kid myself. But there's more to it than that. I'm one of the only people who tells him he's wrong. Remember he's surrounded by people who got their jobs by telling him he's right all the time. But I will say to him 'If you raise taxes, I think this bad thing is going to happen'. I like to think he finds some value in our discussions even if only to sharpen his own arguments." He may not be Murdoch's "emissary", but Stelzer has delivered a message to the Brownites nonetheless. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Mandy
Joined: 07 Feb 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 7:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Shows how the power game is played. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Couchtripper - 2005-2015
|
