- guardian.co.uk, Sunday January 5 2003 00.45 GMT
Look at other potential candidates for Prime Minister.
There is general agreement that Iain Duncan Smith lacks not only sufficient charisma but is also leading a party set on self-destruction. For his part, Charles Kennedy has exhibited a complete lack of party leadership. He has failed to take the left-wing ground deserted by Labour and has made a weak defence of such natural liberal issues as the Government's moves to end automatic jury trial and the rules on double jeopardy.
There are also other possible leaders apart from Gordon Brown in the Labour Party, and there is plenty of time for them to emerge.
Finally, there is Gordon himself. Potentially, he is a very competent leader but he has behaved in such a self-serving way in this and the last government that I have difficulty thinking of him as a leader of the whole party, let alone the nation.
Look at his behaviour over the funding of foundation hospitals in the health service and, particularly, his actions over the euro. Take just one example: Tony Blair made the suggestion that there would be a referendum in 2003 on the euro and Gordon Brown immediately intervened to announce that there would be an additional economic criterion for entry. Is this the action of a loyal Chancellor or just someone who is desperate for power?
In his new year message, the Prime Minister said there were eight major issues - or 'flashpoints' - facing Britain this year. The most significant are foreign, although they all have an obvious domestic impact.
A war in Iraq, a terrorist attack on Britain, the environment and a new EU constitution are all significant, not to mention a possible referendum on British entry to the euro. But, interestingly, the Prime Minister seems to have avoided the significant 'flashpoints' that could occur at home.
What about public-sector pay? Then there is the firefighters' dispute, which remains unresolved. They are not the only difficulties. Problems in agreeing a new NHS pay structure are becoming increasingly intractable. Then there is the growing public sector deficit.
And what about health, transport, education and pensions? These are hugely significant issues for almost everyone in Britain and have far greater day-to-day effects than Tony's fourth 'flashpoint', the systemic crisis in Africa, significant as this is.
What is clear is that the Prime Minister has still got an enormous number of big domestic issues that need to be resolved. To do this, he is going to have to change the nature and style of his government, which has been characterised by over-centralisation, an obsession with foreign affairs and the concentration of too much power in the hands of the Chancellor .
Three major problems are facing the Government. First is the growing budget deficit, which is not yet large in itself but looks like it could grow rapidly. This could well result in more tax hikes, electorally damaging, particularly if combined with a failure to deliver on public services - the second major problem. The third is the need for Britain to enter the euro, and the ongoing sullen opposition to this from the Treasury.
Two of these problems can be addressed in the short term. The Prime Minister can devolve some power back to Ministers. He can also move Gordon from the Treasury.
But in reality the over-attention to foreign affairs, with a war in Iraq imminent, looks as though it will continue. This act of folly will take up a great deal of the PM's time, even if the war goes according to plan.
It is becoming clear that the ambitious spending plans that Gordon Brown announced last year for the public sector are not going to be sustainable. It is also clear that even if the spending were to be affordable, more of that extra money is going to be absorbed in pay settlements and increased bureaucracy than was originally intended. This policy needs to be reversed.
Unfortunately, a U-turn of such proportions would be extremely difficult for Gordon to effect. To change policy one needs a new Chancellor.
On the issue of the euro, we need to grow up. Whether or not we should join the euro is not an economic issue but a political one. If the Government believes in Europe, it should make the case to the people. We need a Chancellor who can make this clear, and who stops hiding behind economic tests.
Because of these two key issues, the public finances and the euro, Gordon Brown must be moved.
This brings me on to the second urgent change: devolution of power. More power needs to be given to the spending arm of government, to allow it improve standards and achieve better value for money for the taxpayer.
To do this, I would suggest that Gordon Brown be given a new job in charge of the Government's domestic agenda. He could serve as a second deputy Prime Minister alongside John Prescott, with spending Ministers reporting to him to grapple with the need to have a transport system that works, improved services in health and education, and to provide a dynamic solution to the problems of the agrarian economy.
Finally, the present Cabinet system is unwieldy. Too many people report directly to the Prime Minister, which has led to over-centralisation in Number 10 as well as too much Treasury interference.
Most Cabinet Ministers spend their lives being torn in three directions: the demands of their departments, the demands of the Treasury, and the demands of Number 10.
It is clear that it is not working.
Andrew Rawnsley is away
Mowlam on Blair: Email debate@observer.co.uk or discuss it online at www.observer.co.uk/blair
