Magazine article New Statesman (1996)

Tactical Briefing

Magazine article New Statesman (1996)

Tactical Briefing

Article excerpt

From: The Unit

To: GB

Subject: Khmer Rouge v Pot Noodle

So, pretty good week. Great that you're keeping your head down. Very much feels almost spooky how absent you are from the national debate concerning your future. Think this is a good choice. It is a choice, isn't it?


Also great that you're spending so much time sweating over the "Speech of your life". Think we need obviously to prepare a fallback line in case it doesn't turn out to be the speech of your life -although, having looked at the initial draft, I think it definitely will be! The "growth correlatives across the different production sectors" was very compelling. If we understood it right--which I'm pretty sure we definitely didn't.

Anyway, should it not go over (which it most certainly will), think the line is: "Why should GB give the speech of his life, actually? It's just another regular conference for another regular PM, just like Thatcher in '84, and we don't need to give the speech of our life, actually, dickheads."

So, after soundings, it's clear that there are now two well-defined factions in the party. Those who think you should go and that this will lead to a reversal in our fortunes. And the opposite faction, our supporters--who think that you should go, but that this will not lead to a reversal in our fortunes and therefore doubt whether it is worth the upheaval. (There is a rump who don't want you to go at all, but these people are not considered serious players by any serious players. …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed


An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.