Two years of Gordon Brown, prime minister

Two years ago last Saturday, Gordon Brown kissed hands and assumed the office of prime minister. After a long wait, he finally occupied the intersection of executive power, parliamentary command and democratic validity. Successful prime ministers master or balance these three facets of power. Two years on, it is appropriate to examine his performance in each of these faces.

Executive power

The Office of the Prime Minister dominates the British executive and Cabinet. Its power is unrivalled and affords the prime minister dominance over his executive colleagues. This is especially true of Brown, who dominates the senior hierarchy of government and the Labour party. With his rivals either vanquished (Tony Blair) or converted (Peter Mandelson), there remains no challenge to Brown within Cabinet. Even a volley of senior resignations could not shake his power within government; the brilliant promotion of Mandelson ensured he remained secure in his job. However, the most recent plot limited Brown’s power to move Alistair Darling or David Miliband—opponents are beginning to check Brown’s power. Nevertheless, Brown remains a formidable plotter and tactician behind closed doors, skills honed over a decade-long battle with Blair. This power reflects his continued occupation as prime minister at a time when his power in parliament and support across the country continues to ebb.

Despite the dominant power of Brown, events quickly overtook his initial agenda. Events—a global recession and parliamentary scandal—superseded his promises of an end to corruption, constitutional reform, eco-towns and health reforms. His initial promises remain unfulfilled. Despite his power within Cabinet, he was unable to enact the changes he wanted. He never articulated an overall direction for his government, leaving the whole ship rudderless. In contrast, his has skilfully wielded executive power to tackle problems he did not want. The British response to global recession has been widely lauded and Brown can claim some credit for Britain’s inevitable recovery. He decisively used government power to prevent a more severe recession. He can also claim credit for a remarkable G20 deal and global response. However, his government has since returned to bungling as it again lacks direction.

Command of parliament

Brown’s dominance of his party does not extend to the parliamentary party (PLP). Initially, the PLP welcomed Brown warmly. He was not Blair and appeared to offer MPs a better chance of re-election. However, as Brown’s poll ratings descended to new lows, the self-interest of the PLP meant they began to plot against him as they had against Blair. Brown alienated his MPs with controversial policies, such as the abolition of the 10p tax band. MPs openly questioned his leadership and openly plotted his overthrow twice in 2008 and once so far this year. Each time only the lack of an alternative leader scuppered plotters intentions. Government whips—the expression on executive power in parliament—appeared weak. Brown struggled to reassert his authority. Most recently, this dissent meant Brown conceding an inquiry into the Iraq war of increasing openness and a climb-down on the part-privatisation of Royal Mail.

Democratic validity

Brown’s relationship with the electorate was always troubled. Initially, he was a popular change from Blair and a strong leader decisively tackling terrorists and floods. However, his dithering over an early election eroded his lead. Soon he was an unpopular as Blair. Then he was less popular.

Brown has struggled to achieve democratic validity. Opponents accuse him of being ‘un-elected’ (a status shared by half the post-war prime ministers). He lost key by-elections and led his party to a historic defeat in this year’s local and European elections. He shows deafness to popular opinion, evidenced by his government’s unpopular position on Gurkhas. In addition, the expenses scandal has challenged the validity of the entire parliamentary system.

This lack of democratic validity enhances his weakness with the PLP, who fear for their seats. It is the core of his troubles. Though his dominance of Cabinet ensures he remains secure in Downing Street, the continued collapse of Labour support across the country weakens his power outside Whitehall. This is a stark contrast to Blair, who could rely on democratic validity to challenge the PLP and enhance his power.

Lacking balance

With his focus on executive power, Brown’s rule is unbalanced. During his prime ministership, Brown devoted considerable resources to protecting his executive power. He neglected the PLP and the public. This, alongside unfortunate events, led to his weakness outside government. It also explains his continued survival despite an apparent lack of popularity; his power lies in the executive to the neglect of parliament and the ballot box. He can use that power—especially patronage and whipping—to defend himself and keep the PLP quiet, even if it means he cannot enact much change. However, in June 2010 his power to call an election expires. Then, his lack of democratic validity is all that matter and it appears it will condemn him.