Gordon Brown: Who I am, What I believe
Gordon Browns speech is already being binned by some opinion writers, but it’s worth a look to try (again) to get to grips with Browns vision and values. This wasn’t Gordon Brown, measuring everything in sterling, but seemed like a determined attempt to spell out a moral vision. The headlines are from Coldplay, in case you wondered.
See What I’m All About
Browns opening line was : “I want to talk with you today about who I am, what I believe“, so lets take him at his word. What does make him tick?
- the mantra of the speech was ‘fairness’, which clocked nearly 40 mentions in one form or another.
- ‘duty’ - which Brown applied both to himself and to others
- service: the role of the government is to serve the people: “our duty, what gives us moral purpose is serving the people who need us most… people on middle and modest incomes who need to know that they are not on their own amidst this change – we are on their sideâ€
There was a lot of talk about values, enduring beliefs, the DNA of Labour etc., which all seemed to come back to fairness. But what does Brown mean by fairness? A few quotes which flesh it out
“treating others how we would be treated ourselves.”
“And doesn’t each of us want to say of ourselves:
That I helped someone in need.
That I come to the aid of a neighbour in distress.
That I will not pass by on the other side.
That I will give of myself for something bigger than myself” (in spite of Theos, this was the only Biblical or faith allusion in the whole speech)
and part of this fairness is advocacy: defending the weak at home and abroad. “the poor will not go unheard tomorrow at the United Nations, because we the British people will speak up for them and for justice.â€
You’ve Got to Soldier On
…and fairness means not only that the government will support you if you’re vulnerable, but if you’re not vulnerable you should do your bit. “everyone who can work, must work†. Brown talked repeatedly of a new ’settlement’ - we work hard, make the effort, be enterprising, and in return the government will ’serve’ us by insuring us against the uncertainties of globalism, and protecting us when we’re vulnerable.
Part of the ’settlement’ was a raft of proposals for the vulnerable: free prescriptions for folk with long-term illness, more support for the elderly, a better safety net for educational failure, and free nursery places for 2 year olds.
Whoah horsey! Free nursery places for 2 year olds? Is that really about protecting the vulnerable, or is it adding a rider to that ‘everyone who can work, must work’ phrase - ‘even if you’ve got children’. Despite the rhetoric about supporting families, it is working families who are valued, parenting families didn’t get a look in. Parents featured as a) workers and earners and b) people with children in the education system but never as parents full stop. This continues to bother me.
Sometimes Even the Right is Wrong
There was the obligatory Tory-bashing, and no mention of the Libdems at all. Brown took issue, again, with the ‘Broken Society’. His alternative is ‘the Fair Society’, and noted that “we should never forget one thing - that every single blow we have struck for fairness and for the future has been opposed by the Conservatives.â€
Dreaming of When the Morning Comes
So what’s the vision? What does he get out of bed for in the morning? What is the pulsating heart of Gordon Brown?
“Providing free nursery care for more children is a cause worth fighting for. Providing better social care for older people who need it is a cause worth fighting for. Delivering excellence in every single school is a cause worth fighting for. Universal check-ups and new help to fight cancer - these are all causes worth fighting for.”
‘fairness is in our DNA, it’s who we are – and what we’re for. It’s why labour exist… we stand up, we fight hard, for fairness….treating others how we would be treated ourselves.”
This is an ethic of a different age. We’re so used to being motivated by the ‘feel-good factor’ that ideas of duty, hard work, and plain boring old right and wrong don’t really give us a buzz any more. But Jerusalem isn’t built with a magic wand, it’s a slow, labourious and back-breaking process.
Browns vision is not one of a great philosophy or dream, but of practical morality. If you don’t have a serious moral purpose at the core of your being, you have no place in politics. I have some serious questions about where he goes with it, but I remember one recent election where what swung my vote was Browns clear commitment as Chancellor to dealing with global poverty. There wasn’t much in it on the domestic front, so my vote went with the party likely to be most effective and energetic on behalf of the developing world.
Maybe we’d rather have an intuitive, touchy-feely leader like Blair or Cameron. They are certainly more in tune with society. But the practical morality of Brown - duty, service, fairness, integrity, advocacy for the weak - it may not get your pulse racing, but can we do without it?
Labels: Coldplay, modern morals, politics








It was refreshing to listen to Gordon Brown not real off a whole list of statistics for a change - it seems finally someone has told him that it makes him sound like some sort of robotic accountant.
He even made a point of it:
“When we talk about three million more people in work since 1997 - that’s not just a number, that’s a life that’s been changed - three million times over.” And so on.
He is making the statistics human. And he makes a powerful point. The Tories did oppose things like the minimum wage that we now take for granted.
But as for duty, service, fairness, integrity, advocacy for the weak and whether we can do without it, I am not so sure that is even a question most people will be asking at the moment. The big issue is the economy, other issues, rightly or wrongly, will have to take a back seat for a while. On top of that, I am not sure Brown is associated enough with these issues as a PM as far as the electorate is concerned. He is associated with a more negative image.
Do you think that Brown as more “practical morality” than Cameron? I think the jury is still out on Cameron, but I do think he will struggle to lead some of his party on the types of issues you highlight.
Garbo - yes, I’d noticed that about the stats, the trouble is he’s got such a reputation as a number cruncher it will need more than 1 speech to change that impression. But it’s a start.
Practical morality wise, if you compared Brown with the Broken Britain/Breakthrough Britain reports then you’d probably come out on the side of the Tories, but that’s principally IDS’s work. Once all 3 have done their speeches I might do a ‘moral compass’ rating across the board.
Cameron is more of an ‘image’ politician than Brown, it’ll be interesting to see how much ethos/values/morality language he uses in his conference speech (and whether anybody notices!!)
david-keen’s last blog post..It’s the Economy, Stupid, not Rowan Williams