The further they recede into history, the more simplified a Prime Minister's reputation becomes. Those who can claim a substantial achievement or be blamed for a gross failure are eventually known just for that one thing: the top line in their obit. Others fade completely.Sometimes the summary is obvious. How else would Churchill be remembered except as the victor of WWII? Eden is known only for the failure in Suez, while Callaghan is remembered for a misquote, Heath took us into Europe, and so on.
Thatcher and Blair are too close to have been simplified yet. Neither will be forgotten quickly, though.
Barring some extraordinary reversal in Labour's fortunes, Gordon Brown will rank pretty low down in future lists of this sort, just below John Major, in all probability. He'll fade fast, be largely blamed for the poisoned chalice which is the Labour Party he inherited, and be lucky if even one achievement stands from his Premiership.
Instead, he risks becoming a cautionary tale about the desire for power without purpose. After all, has there ever been a Prime Minister who strived so hard for the top job over so long a time, who took the crown, and who then had absolutely no idea whatsoever what he wanted to do with it?
If Gordon Brown had retired last year instead of becoming PM, he could have held a reputation as the most successful Chancellor in modern times (despite the flaws in the metric such things are judged by). Instead, those ten years will be the set-up for a punchline which is all about a failure of vision. I almost feel sorry for him.
Leave a comment