So it’s off. My home Virgin media broadband connection crashed yesterday afternoon, then while trying desperately to work out whether or not it was my PC or Virgin at fault (it was of course Virgin), I got a text from a normally “very reliable source” saying “there will be no general election”. I switched on BBC 24 and it was confirmed that Gordon had told Andrew Marr that there will be no immediate election.
I had simultaneously a profound sense of relief and disappointment.
I think that since the Labour Party is in Government and can constitutionally remain in power until at least 2010, then the prospect that we volunteered to go door knocking and delivering leaflets before we had to, during cold dark damp winter evenings, was somewhat discouraging. Especially since opinion polls can be wrong and the predicted margin of victory was pretty narrow (or indeed off beam if today’s polls about the Tories being ahead in marginals are correct).
On the otherhand, any election is energising to any real activist. I admit that I have political scores to settle (mention no names). The opinion polls may have been a little flaky but it is almost unprecedented for a fourth term British government to be ahead in polls. I don’t know for certain but I imagine that Gordon would have instinctively wanted to hold an election as soon as he became PM to establish his authority. The awkward squad on our own side will no doubt make problems over policies they want to grandstand over in the near future.
There again, they would probably do this anyway if they were re-elected on a Brown manifesto.
Anyway, Prudence has spoken. Remember this instinctive caution and intellectual analysis is one of the reasons why this son of the manse was re-elected unopposed. Yes, Gordon probably wanted to hold a snap election soon after he took over to give him a clearer mandate; yes, there appeared to be an opportunity too good to dismiss after Tory disarray during the summer and deft handling by Gordon of critical events.
Yes, I did think that he was going to hold an election and it is clear that he was seriously considering it. However, upon reflection he decided against it.
Is there anything really wrong with that? Isn’t this something we should encourage politicians of all Parties to do a little more thinking and being susceptible to arguments before making a final decision? It’s a good thing in my book.
Remember with Gordon, WYSIWYG and if Gordon decided after shifting through all the evidence, this was not the best time to hold an election then we can expect nothing less than for him to say "No".
