Cordelier, perhaps I was heavy handed with my argument. Brown will want someone who he can control in relative terms, without losing the support of investors. Would Timms loose investment? Ultimately, Brown would take the position for himself, but perhaps we are past those days. Thatcher had much less parliamentary support when Howe served, and he did not have a great deal of free reign from her, they worked together closely implementing Thatcherism.

I agree that Brown would want a steady hand to hold the treasury when he is PM, but isn't that a reason to promote Timms (personally I doubt such a promotion due to pressure). The others in the cabinet simply do not have the experience. Although I doubt Timms, I think the successor will come out of the Treasury itself: more experience to have a steady hand, and it would give Brown more influence. Do you really think it was Brown who put the economy on a sound footing? He has been prudent and followed Tory economic policy, and privatised the Bank of England, but it was Ken Clarke who secured the economic boom. Brown has presided under a more stable world economic condition.

Why do you say the Royal is 'probably' going to be the next Président de la République? Sarkozy has shown himself to be the most popular politician in French politics: he is undoubtedly very charismatic. Frenchmen are becoming less and less satisfied with the Fifth Republic, and he is seen as a radical. Royal appears to owe her popularity in the polls to Chirac becoming more unpopular, good media coverage, and her ‘good’ looks. She really does not appear to have a great deal of substance. The UMP still has a massive majority in l’Assemblée Nationale compared with usual French results. The French hate cohabitation, and for the same reasons you cited for Labour winning the UK election, the UMP is likely to win the next parliamentary election, some will not vote for a president if they think it will cause cohabitation.

I am not saying Royal will not win, but I think the situation is really neck and neck between her and Sarkozy.

I have once attended a debate in the Commons, and the atmosphere is fantastic (despite the fact that the debate was a rather mundane one on the banning of mobile phones whilst driving).

well, did they?

__________________
Archimedes
Because they can't wait use Rescue 8
self closing flotation rescue device.

I presume you are asking if they banned the use of mobile phones whilst driving, if so, they did. Now we have to use hands free sets when driving, or one should face a £30 penalty and 3 points on the license (I am not sure what the US equivalent of that is). However, the debate was a while before they actually gave the Bill Royal Assent.

Hands free cell phone usage is becoming common in the U.S. as well.

__________________
AMERICA LAND OF THE FREE HOME OF THE BRAVE--BECAUSE OF OUR CONSTITUTION.

DC - I don't think Timms has had enough experience to step into the top job in Treasury just yet, though. I think he needs to do a stint at the top of another ministry before he can be accepted as a credible Chancellor. I think he'll get a promotion under Brown, but I don't think it'll be to No. 12. I think Benn has good foundation as experience in International Development to be a credible Chancellor in an outward-looking, probably pro-European Brown Government. Additionally, his experience as an adviser to Blunkett at Education and as a junior minister in the Home office give him a good basis for domestic affairs. If Brown decides to undertake a vigourous approach to Europe to put the pressure on the Tories, I think Benn would be the best pick for Chancellor.

Well, as far as Clarke vs. Brown at Treasury, as you keep pointing out to me, the battle is won on perception, and regardless of what the reality is, Brown is certainly perceived to have done a great job at Treasury, is he not? I doubt very much whether he'd be the front-runner to succeed Blair if that were not the case.

I don't know that Royal has a lack of substance.... she seems to me to be extremely intelligent and shrewd. I wouldn't sell her short. It just seems to me that popular opinion in France seems to moving in favour of the Socialists. There seems to be a growing nostalgia for the Mitterrand era and a weariness with Chirac and all the UMP skisms. I know Sarkozy isn't exactly a "Chirac clone", but it does seem to me that the Socialists are more united than UMP. Admittedly, I'm no expert on French politics (If Britain is Canada's mother country, France is our absentee father *L*) but I have to figure the edge at this point is with the Socialists.

Well, Timms was only an example, but I do think Brown would prefer somebody with economic experience. I do agree with you however, that Timms will not have a place in number 12. I think he has little experience with the press, and he surely has better abilities than that.

It must be appreciated that French public perception is the important factor, and in France, Royal is not exactly seen as a candidate who carries much weight (at this stage). Many of her socialist counterparts see her as lacking intellectual weight. Although she appears to be popular, she is being criticised for her lack of substance. For example, she has attacked the 35-hour week, yet has also praised Tony Blair’s employment record, but still denounced a “globalised hyper-class.” She is seen to suffer from an ideological incoherence.

I’m surprised that you say French opinion seems to be moving towards the Socialists, I can’t see it. The Socialists in France have still not become more popular (they were more popular before the last presidential election, and Jospin was expected to win with ease), but it is Royal herself who is attracting more support. Royal’s rating rocketed when other prominent members of her party were lampooning and scoffing at her in a rather public and sexist way, this won’t last. Her popularity increased because of the opposition in her party, but the opposition will largely go when she campaigns: the men will want prominent positions in government. They were trying to stop her being selected, it is too late, and thus now she is their only chance of ending their long absence from Elysee. Thus far, she has kept a low profile, which has surrounded her in mystery, which has served to help her cause, but when she begins to campaign she will loose this.

Nevertheless, I find French opinion polls to be inadequate when predicted elections: they consistently fail, and are generally poor. That is why I would say her modest lead over others does not necessarily represent France, and one cannot judge the next election on that (I believe I am right in thinking that no French poll in the Fifth Republic has accurately predicted the outcome of the second round of a presidential election). The English (speaking) press appears to report only the favourable polls about Royal; however, that is not truly representative (perhaps that is because Royal is more interesting to the audience):

http://www.lefigaro.fr/france/200610..._et_royal.html

I would agree that there appears to being growing nostalgia in France for Mitterrand. This is a product of this year, therefore the reason for this is the anniversary of his death; personally, I don’t think such nostalgia will last another six months. Moreover, this is Mitterrand nostalgia and not nostalgia for the Socialists. Thus, I doubt this feeling can actually increase Royal’s vote. Mitterrand fought hard for France, and would never stand down, he was very much a no nonsense president, and it is this that the French seem to miss. I would say that Royal is not seen to share the same qualities. Although the French may miss Mitterrand’s shrewd personality I don’t think when it came to voting that they would vote to return to his high unemployment, financial scandals, lies about his illegitimate daughter, lies about the attack on the Rainbow Warrior in 1985 (in which Royal is distantly implicated), or lies about his Vichy past.

As you have hinted, Chirac is no longer a popular figure in France, thus the differences between Sarkozy’s supporters and Chirac can only be a good thing for him. Other than those differences (bearing in mind that Chirac is leaving), the UMP is no more divided than the PS. Royal lacks support in the senior Socialist party, and her ‘radical’ beliefs on policy differ greatly from the others in the party: she disgusted her party with her comments on delinquency. Claude Allègre believes she is cutting the party in two.

At this stage it is impossible to predict the outcome of a Fifth Republic presidential election, but if either of them have an edge it would have to be Sarkozy. He has a firm base from which to work, he has had long-term popularity in the polls (and not just a sudden bubble, which could go as soon as it came), he is radically different from the dated Fifth Republic, and he has a great deal of experience.

Ok, tight to the vest guys. I guess you choose to be mysterious regarding your profiles. Accepted, your choice.

__________________
Archimedes
Because they can't wait use Rescue 8
self closing flotation rescue device.

Marshall, I cannot say I know what you mean. Are you referring to me?