The odds are stacked against Brown
11:57am Wednesday 7th May 2008
Not long before he died, the former Labour Cabinet Minister Roy Jenkins was asked what he thought about Gordon Brown's prospects as the next Prime Minister.
He observed that no one, however talented, in the last century has become first citizen after a long period of rule for his party and achieved greatness.
It started with Arthur Balfour, nephew of Lord (Robert) Salisbury.
Balfour succeeded Salisbury just over a century ago with a notable lack of success.
The electorate sniffed a whiff of nepotism there and came up with the enduring phrase "Bob's Your Uncle", which has lasted better than the reputation of Balfour.
Then there was Sir Alec Douglas-Home, another aristocratic figure, who suffered by comparison with Harold Macmillan whom he succeeded in 1963.
John Major was at first welcomed for not being Margaret Thatcher when her long reign ended in 1990, but later seemed colourless and wavering after her long period of firm and determined rule.
But the most chilling example was Anthony Eden, for long the anointed successor to Winston Churchill. By the time his chance came after almost 20 years' waiting, Eden proved to be a failure.
The irony was that after being a highly successful and respected Foreign Secretary, Eden embarked on the foolish and ill-fated Suez adventure.
In much the same way, Gordon Brown, probably the most successful Chancellor in recent times, looks as if he could struggle as Premier because of economic competence.
Churchill was criticised for hanging on to office when he was ancient and ill but politics was an old man's game in those days. He also had doubts, well founded as it turned out, about Eden's ability.
One story is that a colleague came across Churchill, disconsolate near the end of his tenure, saying to himself: "I don't think Anthony's up to it."
This has just been echoed by Lord Levy who says in his memoirs Tony Blair told him he did not think Gordon Brown could beat David Cameron in an election.
Usually electors are prepared to look favourably on any new Prime Minister in the early stages.
The honeymoon lasted long enough for both Eden and Major for them to win elections and Douglas-Home only just failed to do so.
But a Prime Minister has to be exceptional to keep the momentum going once his party has been in office for many years.
Inevitably, ministers become jaded after working for a long period. They become buffeted by events and run out of ideas.
In the meantime, oppositions, even ones as discredited as the Tories were under William Hague or Labour under Michael Foot, regroup, seeming young and fresh in comparison.
The current Government has not imploded in the same way as John Major's did in the mid-1990s with problems over Europe and continuous tales of corruption.
Although Labour has fallen behind the Tories in the opinion polls in the past six months, until last week it seemed that the party could still win the next general election.
Not any more. The local elections were catastrophic for Labour, particularly in the South East.
There were too few contests in Sussex to paint a complete picture but Worthing and Adur still do not boast a single Labour councillor between them. Only in Hastings, where the once-powerful Liberal Democrats are falling apart, was there any faint hope but the Tories made gains there too.
Labour, which ran Brighton and Hove, admittedly with a minority administration until last year, is now out of power in almost every regional town and county hall.
It does not augur well for Labour in Sussex at the next general election, which has to be held within two years.
When Tony Blair swept to power in 1997, his party won five Sussex seats - Brighton Kemptown, Brighton Pavilion, Hove, Hastings and Crawley. It has only ever held one seat in the county before - Kemptown for six years in the 1960s.
All five were retained in the 2001 election and again in 2005, although there were close contests in Hove and Crawley, producing some of the country's smallest majorities. Although Labour has won general elections, notably the two in 1974, without gaining a single seat in Sussex, I do not believe such a feat is possible today.
So what has Gordon Brown done wrong? He has been criticised for not calling a snap general election last autumn although he would have been accused of opportunism if he had done so and would have had a remarkably brief period of office if he had lost.
This made him appear weak and vacillating, an impression confirmed when he hinted he would attend the Olympics in China for the opening ceremony only to announce later that he will be there only at the end.
When not procrastinating and prevaricating, Brown can appear stubborn, often over the wrong issues. It took him a long time to admit that scrapping the 10p income tax band was an error.
He risks a bruising defeat in the Commons over extending the time in which terrorist suspects can be held without charge, despite advancing some respectable reasons for it.
But most of all he is not Tony Blair, with his predecessor's easy charm. Even those who most disliked the former Premier had to admit that his presentational skills were superb.
Brown appears leaden and humourless at Prime Minister's Question Time, suffering as David Cameron utters his too-well rehearsed put downs. Although he is probably the brightest and best-educated premier since Harold Wilson, he cannot get a message across well, a critical failing in this televisual age.
What will happen now? It is less than a year since Labour chose Brown without even forcing him to face a contest for the post.
Tories, ruthless when it comes to leaders, ejected Iain Duncan Smith before he could fight an election. Even the plodding Lib Dems forced poor old Sir Menzies Campbell out swiftly when he proved to be ineffectual.
But it would be another matter for Labour, always kindly towards its leaders, to remove Gordon Brown. It would be unprecedented for this to happen while he was still in office after less than a year.
Labour also has to be reminded that Michael Howard, successor to Duncan Smith, and the current Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg did not revive the fortunes of their parties when they took over.
Brown has ability - his years as Chancellor proved that. He has, as he constantly reminds us, a long-term vision for Britain. He has a genuine commitment to helping less well off people both here and abroad.
This week he has shown humility in admitting mistakes and has shown that he may be prepared to scrap some unpopular measures such as a forthcoming rise in fuel duty. But it may not be enough.
The electorate may simply have grown tired of Labour as it did in 1979 when the then Prime Minister Jim Callaghan said sagely that Britain was experiencing a sea change in politics.
If things do not improve within the next year, worried MPs and party members in Sussex and the rest of Britain could conclude Brown is not the man for the job.
If that happens, Brown may reflect ruefully that Roy Jenkins was right - as was Enoch Powell when he observed that almost all political lives end in failure.