September 30, 2003, 11:51 a.m.
The Great Houdini
Tony Blair survives.

LONDON — David Blaine, the American illusionist and disciple of the Great Houdini, is currently suspended naked in a glass box above the River Thames where he has no food or drink apart from bottled water. He claims he will stay boxed in for 44 days. But his performance is attracting only slight and derisive public interest.

Much ink and television time has been expended on exactly why the British public is so unimpressed by this feat of survival. But the reason may simply be that the public is transfixed by the survival of a far more authentic disciple of the Great Houdini who is today in his sixth year of acrobatics and conjuring. He claims that he will continue his act for another six years. But his ability to survive even one year is suddenly in doubt.

British Prime Minister Tony Blair was uncomfortably suspended last weekend between two snapping crises — the Hutton enquiry into the suicide of Dr. David Kelly and the annual conference of the governing Labor party — not quite naked but protected only by a steadily shrinking credibility.

Last week saw the final evidence given in the Hutton enquiry that was examining the question: Was Dr. David Kelly driven to suicide by (a) the Labor government, (b) Tony Blair, (c) Defense Secretary Geoff Hoon, (d) former Downing Street communications czar Alastair Campbell, (e) the BBC, (f) reporter Andrew Gilligan, or (g) all of the above.

The correct answer would seem to be (g) all of the above — with particular blame falling on the BBC, Gilligan, Campbell and Hoon in that order.

If Mr. Blair seems likely to escape any blame for the government's share in this tragedy — namely, fingering Kelly as the source of the BBC's false report that they had "sexed-up" the intelligence to justify the Iraq war — that is because others have been set up to take the blame.

For the most sensational evidence last week was an extract from Alastair Campbell's diary about a meeting between himself, Hoon and Blair on whether or not to leak Kelly's name to the media. It was rough stuff:

"GH and I agreed that it would f*** Gilligan if that was his source . . . TB said that he didn't want to push the system too far. But my worry was that I wanted a clear win not a messy draw . . . GH and I both wanted to get the source up but TB was nervous about it."

Now, Hoon and Campbell both worked for Blair. They could hardly override his objections unless he was prepared to let them do so. And the picture of Blair as a decent but passive observer failing to restrain two thugs is not very convincing. Besides, the PM had already accepted formal responsibility for the government's actions in the case — though today accepting responsibility is just another way of avoiding the blame. In theory he might be held to account for the leak.

Yet it looks as if the extract from Campbell's diary, with its portrayal of a decently hesitant Blair is the loincloth that will in fact protect him against exposure. Hoon will have to resign, of course, and Campbell has already left Downing Street. But unless Lord Hutton is less respectful of government ministers than most High Court judges were in the past, he will conclude that the prime minister was "not really to blame." And Blair's first crisis will have been surmounted.

His second crisis is an almost annual event. Labor's annual conference, composed disproportionately of activist left-wingers, is always on the verge of attacking the Prime Minister because it believes him to be a Tory in disguise. But Labor MPs have continued to support him because they think that he is respected by the British electorate as the only man standing between them and a socialist Labor government. (It's the same argument judged from different standpoints, really.)

What has changed in the last year is that the polls suggest that Mr. Blair is now regarded as untrustworthy by the voters. His personal rating has slumped to the middle twenties in several polls. And, significantly, a Daily Telegraph poll showed yesterday that 71 per cent of respondents thought that there was "a culture of deceit and spin at the heart of the government."

Labor left-wingers would like to use the prime minister's loss of standing to oust him in favor of the finance minister, Gordon Brown, who yesterday brought the conference to its feet with a stirring but vague evocation of left wing Old Labor "values" that included no reference to Blair's moderate reforms of health and education, is their candidate. And there were dark hints from the Left that Blair's speech this morning would be greeted with general hostility.

Blair is a brilliant platform speaker so that, even if he meets some opposition, he will probably survive this test and even win respectful applause. (He was speaking early this morning, so you can check the accuracy of this prediction.) Even if he has a very rough passage today, however, he is in a strong long-term position.

To begin with, even in this slough of Labor's midterm despond, Blair's new Labor government is still virtually level-pegging with the two opposition parties — at 30 per cent support to the opposition Tories' 33 percent and the third-party Liberal Democrats' 30 per cent. Since governments usually recover from the midterm blues, this is a good point to recover from. On past form, Blair should be able to win his coveted third term — and no one follows these indicators more closely than backbench MPs.

Second, a poll in the London Times shows that Blair's reform policies are much more popular with Labor voters than with Labor activists. Despite real and widespread complaints about "deceit" and "spin," most voters think that New Labor is an improvement on Old Labor. Again, MPs take trouble to know what their voters think.

And, third, Blair's biggest weakness is that, unlike Gordon Brown, he seems not to like the Labor Party. But that weakness is easily remedied. Leaks have been pouring our of Downing Street this weekend to the effect that Blair's speech today will stress that New Labor is the best modern expression of the traditional socialist values of caring and community. His speech today almost certainly contained assurances on these lines. And the conference is likely to greet him with the forgiveness traditionally granted the Prodigal Son — even though the prime minister will almost certainly refuse to admit any actual wrongdoing.

In short Mr. Blair has shown the steely toughness necessary to survive in both his current crises. His opponents both in his own party and in the opposition have shown no such ruthlessness. The Tories are virtually invisible. And Brown has been as hesitant in reality as Blair was in the Campbell diary extract, willing to wound in his conference speech but yet afraid to fight.

Indeed it was Blair's ruthless determination to seize the Labor leadership in 1994 that effectively overawed Brown (who had the better claim to it) into withdrawing and supporting him. Brown broods still about the unfairness of this, Until he is prepared to attack Blair openly in pursuit of his job, Blair will continue to dominate his party and British politics. You can't beat someone, however discredited, with no one.

*   *   *

YOU’RE NOT A SUBSCRIBER TO NATIONAL REVIEW? Sign up right now! It’s easy: Subscribe to National Review here, or to the digital version of the magazine here. You can even order a subscription as a gift: print or digital!