GARETH FULLER / PA-EMPICS WAR SPOILS By opposing the Iraq invasion, Charles Kennedy has helped the Lib Dems

Posted Sunday, May 1, 2005; 12.03 GMT
Kennedy, the Lib Dem leader, has tried instead to sing a song of sweet reason. Affable and calm, refusing to "go negative" on Blair or Howard, he attracts voters impatient with political mud wrestling while his manifesto zeroes in on Labour's sore points: advocating more control of the Health Service by front-line doctors, repealing tuition fees, free nursing-home care for the elderly, all financed (maybe) by an explicit tax hike on the rich. As Iraq continues to bubble, Kennedy's ace is having opposed the war from the start, unlike Blair and Howard.

In the back of the prime Minister's motorcade going from Swansea to Cardiff, Alastair Campbell is talking fast. Blair's longtime champion and message guru is dictating ideas to an aide in London for a press release denouncing Howard, who earlier that day had said Britain's handgun laws were too tough. "It should say 'rank opportunism … and irresponsibility!'" he shouts into the cranky mobile phone. In the back seat, Philip Gould, Blair's veteran pollster, is phoning to arrange the final touches on a presentation to Blair about the state of public opinion. Campbell and Gould are the dynamic duo of Blair's previous victories, back with their well-known moves: rapid rebuttal, daily polls and focus groups, rigorous attention to keeping Blair positioned in the center.

Except, this time, the apathy of Labour voters seems impervious to their charms. One long-serving Blair aide likens them to generals fighting the last war. In 1997 and 2001, winning swing voters was key. But "the evidence has been saying for a while that Labour's battle this time wasn't going to be swing voters but turning out the disaffected working-class vote, who aren't alienated so much from Labour but from politics generally," he says — as well as Muslim voters who have little incentive not to defect. "This adds up to a different kind of battleground that they haven't seemed to grasp."

Labour has chosen two key issues on which to fight: a pledge of continued economic growth and further improvements to public services. "The answer to the trust question is to show Blair has done his job and Labour has delivered," says a campaign strategist. And the party has shoveled an avalanche of attractive policies onto the airwaves — increased maternity leave, help to a million home buyers, refurbishing all secondary schools. Labour has telegenic young ministers to sell its substantial accomplishments — a minimum wage for the first time (now $9.20 an hour), a million more homeowners since 1997, two million more people at work, 28,000 new teachers, 13,000 more police, a doubling of foreign aid. But as one minister ruefully admits, "We often speak in the language of targets and delivery, which is an important discipline within government, but it doesn't always engage and inspire disaffected electors."

This campaign has tried to tug at apathetic Labour heartstrings with a threat — Howard — and a two-word walking promise: Gordon Brown. He is widely expected to tack left after replacing Blair sometime during the next term, and already polls higher than Blair for "most capable Prime Minister" (41% to 33%). Their interminable rivalry has been patched up and the two now are campaigning together, straining to get a big majority. A London Labour voter who told a party canvasser he was disappointed with Blair says the canvasser "immediately brought up Brown and mentioned his name three more times in about 30 seconds."

So where does that leave Blair, as he faces voters for the last time? He has certainly weathered on the job, but despite the drain of Iraq he remains "upbeat," according to an old friend. A civil servant in his orbit calls him "the best politician we have, very impressive." His self-confidence is striking. He waves away briefings with "I can handle it," and he usually can, though his instinct for handling people isn't always matched by attention to the grubby details of policy. That confidence is a bulwark of his political power, at home and internationally. A Time/cnn poll shows that 60% of Britons consider Blair a "strong leader," even though 51% consider him dishonest. Half of French people consider him strong, too, and despite Germans' deep aversion to Blair's Iraq policy, they trust him as much as they do their own Chancellor, Gerhard Schröder.

But Blair is growing less patient, even as voters grow impatient with him. "He's more self-absorbed, as they all become," says a long-time adviser; and more alone. Many of his original band of aides have departed Downing Street. "The demands are intense and he gets frustrated about not being able to get things done," says the adviser. Another veteran aide thinks Blair is looking to become a kind of chief executive unconstrained by politics, able to drive through reforms more radical than he was willing to venture when re-election loomed. But the aide also wonders "if Blair's quite worked out what are his wellsprings of new energy. He spends too much time dealing with professionals in suits and ties, who aren't the ones who renew him. He already seems a bit detached. He's quite an intuitive politician; he needs a different kind of connection to pick up on the next stage of the story." What, like living on a sink housing estate for a few weeks? "That's not a bad idea."

Re-election, if it comes, will not restore the affection Blair felt from his countrymen before Iraq; more like the modus vivendi of an errant spouse returning home for the sake of the children. At campaign headquarters, even Blair's stalwarts admit that the pummeling on Iraq has hurt, that victory on Thursday will not clean the slate — and that the day when Brown will take charge is advancing. Paradoxically, the man leading Labour to a likely third and unprecedented victory may have little time to add to his achievements. So we may see Blair hurrying to make a mark on aid to Africa at the July G-8 summit in Scotland, or in peace negotiations in the Middle East or Northern Ireland. Of course, Blair will not want to be seen as being forced out, but he's not addicted to Downing Street. One veteran aide says "he still has another big job in him," and another has said for years that Blair never wanted to stay beyond 10 years in office.

Besides his undoubted political triumph of remaking Labour and leading it to three terms, what will his legacy be? Of the scores of worthy plans in Labour's manifesto, from raising the school-leaving age to funding more R&D, none is particularly visionary; there are no calls to greatness that might engage the country on a new level.

But perhaps that's the point. If Labour wins this week and the government's improvements in public services pay off, Blair will have given his more affluent, less deferential, more demanding citizens what they seem to want. Instead of schools with outdoor toilets — there were more than 600 of them in 1997 — they want modern ones with enough teachers, health care on a par with the rest of Europe's, trains that run on time, and the right successor: Gordon Brown. To deliver that will be no mean achievement. The question is, will Blair be remembered kindly for it?

Previous | 1 | 2 | 3

Reality Check [Nov. 09, 2004] Europe longed for a Bush defeat. Will his victory deepen the transatlantic divide? A look ahead The Heart Of Labour [Oct. 05, 2004] Blair's encounter with the doctors is like the other good news he's been getting lately: mixed at best. The War at Home [Sep. 28, 2004] From a hostage crisis to the Labour Party conference, Blair sees Iraq everywhere he looks Town vs. Country [Sep. 21, 2004] A move to end hunting with dogs in Britain sparks unexpected outrage Doctor's Orders [Aug. 16, 2004] Europe's health-care systems need strong medicine. Germany and Britain show signs of life, but in France, doctors are defecting What the Butler Saw [Aug. 02, 2004] An investigation finds that Blair took Britain to war on a false premise — yet shouldn't be held to blame Final Rounds [Jun. 07, 2001] An electoral rout threatens the Conservatives' unity and Hague's leadership on the last day of the campaign Right Side Down [Jun. 18, 2001] Europe's conservatives need a radical remedy to reverse their chronic decline Tony Blair's Next War [May 12, 2003] It's a battle for the soul of Europe. Can the British leader — celebrating his 50th birthday — stop the alliance from splitting apart? Seven Days In Hell [Mar. 24, 2003] Blair's character under question Can This Man Beat Blair? [Jun. 16, 2004] Blair takes a hit as Michael Howard leads Britain's Conservatives to a sweep in local elections Passion and Politics [Dec. 05, 2004] Official London is awash in sex scandal — again. But the latest one amounts to more than just titillation Whistling In the Dark? [Apr. 07, 2005] Despite self-inflicted wounds, Britain's Conservative Party is motivating its base. Is that enough to win? The Blair Legacy: Not Exactly Piffle [May 02, 2005] Tony Blair's campaign is an odd combination of success and unpopularity Search all issues of TIME Magazine Indicates premium content