Brown reprieved, but gallows still being built

THE night train from Manchester back to London, packed with conference-weathered delegates and press, was delayed thanks to a gunman taking shots at the passing carriages.

"If it had happened on the way up you may even have seen some of them throwing themselves in front of the bullets," one contact remarked darkly.

Gallows humour has never had so much resonance.

Some members still believe the Labour Party has a death wish with Gordon Brown in charge. "Beware the conference bounce" is their instinctive feeling.

It would be easy to get swept away with the latest post-conference poll. A YouGov poll showed that Labour had supposedly halved the Tories' lead after Mr Brown's make-or-break conference speech.

Labour's support was up to 31 per cent – a rise of seven points – after what was widely credited as a strong performance by the Prime Minister.

David Cameron's party had slipped back to 41 per cent. But according to one polling expert, the survey cannot be extrapolated as a meaningful sign of good things to come for Labour.

Andrew Hawkins, chief executive of ComRes, said: "The history of recent party conferences is littered with momentary blips that set the betting markets and fringe events alight with speculation, only to fizzle out again within days."

The poll also showed that 49 per cent of people thought Labour should replace Mr Brown as leader.

Perhaps even more worrying for the Prime Minister, 60 per cent said he did not understand the credit woes destabilising the markets and capitalism across the world. For a former chancellor who has staked his reputation on his record over the past decade in managing the country's finances – and his future on being able to sidestep a serious recession – this is potentially explosive.

But the survey was conducted before the resignation of Ruth Kelly, the Transport Secretary, who said she was leaving the Cabinet to spend more time with her family.

The Scotsman had previously named her as one of the ministers likely to quit over concerns about Mr Brown's leadership.

Her resignation did not come as a total shock, although the timing of it – 3am in a Manchester hotel bar during party conference – caught many by surprise. She was reportedly overheard by a Tory observer saying she thought the Prime Minister's speech was "terrible".

However, publicly she remained loyal, insisting that she was standing down because "as well as a front-line politician, I am also proud to be a wife and mother".

The departure of Ms Kelly, a relatively obscure minister for most "civilians" outside Westminster, will not immediately damage Mr Brown. It is more the fall-out and the potential for others to quit in her wake that could destabilise him.

Undoubtedly some of the would-be rebels' plot was knocked off course by Mr Brown's speech.

One of them, whose spirits were dampened by the Prime Minister's emboldened performance, told The Scotsman that they would instead "slip away quietly".

Self-assured but without the Cameronesque pizzazz, Mr Brown managed to balance a human touch with staying true to his serious self.

The presence of Sarah Brown was a masterstroke. It had the Nelson Mandela effect he desperately needed, transferring a touch of the warm-fuzzy feelings on to an unlikely figure: the PM.

He had also tried to make a virtue of his sterner side, emphasising that he was a "man for details" and peaking with the killer line that "this is no time for a novice". This remark was designed to make both David Cameron and David Miliband wince.

It also did Mr Brown no harm that one of his strongest challengers at present, the Foreign Secretary, was left damaged by a conference in which he allowed himself to be branded as gaffe-prone.

His speech called for more leadership but was not a direct challenge to Mr Brown.

While it was an improvement on the previous year, in which he had described the world as a "scary place", the photographs accompanying it were less than edifying, showing him awkwardly grimacing.

One insider told The Scotsman: "I really like David and when I talk to him in person he is charming. But he just can't pull off some off these big, set-piece events."

Then he became entangled in a spin row of his own, after it was claimed – and disputed – that he had said he could have gone further but did not want to trigger comparisons with Michael Heseltine.

In the end, Mr Miliband's supporters were clearly slightly disappointed by the end of conference.

And one of Labour's largest funders, Tony Woodley, joint boss of the Unite union, was openly dismissive of the would-be leader, saying: "I've got no problem with Mr Miliband, but the most important thing for our party is to be united."

In contrast, Alistair Darling, the Chancellor, was left strengthened by his performance.

Observers point out that his confidence seems to be the direct inverse of that in the markets: when they're down, he's up. There was support from the grassroots for his tough words on cleaning up City bonuses, although there are few details on how this can be regulated.

When he walked into the room for Mr Brown's speech, there was a small cheer that went up at the front of the conference hall. And it was too much noise to have come from only his advisers and popular wife Maggie alone.

Then there was Alan Johnson, tipped as a co-conspirator with Mr Miliband.

He acted as the MC for what was probably the most poignant but underplayed part of the conference: the 60th anniversary of the NHS. Several strong female speakers, including 81-year-old Elizabeth Farelly, the first woman boss of a hospital, managed to steal the show. But Mr Johnson is a man comfortable enough with himself to allow that, and his effortless introductions of such "real people" stars boosted rather than diminished him.

The tone at the start of the conference week was much more nervous. This was exemplified at a fringe event led by Charlie Whelan, Mr Brown's former spin doctor, who admitted the party was trailing in Glenrothes. Struck out on the back of his speech note was a sentence saying that Labour "won't give up on Glenrothes" or the next general election.

This "admission" of potential failure is exactly what the Labour Party wants to get out: it wants to manage expectations.

Anything less than a wipe-out will be dressed up as a coup for Mr Brown.

Another trouble spot came when Charles Clarke, the former home secretary, warned: "If Gordon Brown is to remain Prime Minister and prove wrong those who doubt his capacity to change, he must establish his authority and offer clear leadership."

He then clashed with John Prescott, the former deputy prime minister, in a TV interview in which Mr Prescott called Mr Clarke "bitter".

The week ended on a sour note with speculation rife about whether Mr Brown would have a thorough purge of the dissenters from the Cabinet.

But it takes weeks for the true impact of events outside the bubble of the conference centre to be felt. And regardless of this week's casualties, the survival of Labour and Mr Brown still hangs in the balance.

Labour's popularity blip will fizzle out

"BROWN has halved the Tory lead" was how one Labour grassroots blog described this week's poll showing an apparent seven-point surge in Labour support during the party's conference. But what does this tell us about Labour's longer-term fortunes?

Almost nothing, I am afraid. The history of recent party conferences is littered with momentary blips that set the betting markets and fringe events alight with speculation, only to fizzle out within days.

The reason for these temporary popularity boosts is simple – during a conference the media reminds people the party is there.

The problem for poll watchers is that conference bounces are not consistent. The only discernible rule is that Liberal Democrat support tends to be the softest so it bounces higher but falls harder.

For the two largest parties there is seldom a prolonged impact, with one exception – the Tories in 2007. The highest Labour lead in September 2007 was 13 points, but by the end of the next month the highest Conservative lead was eight points.

The smart money must be on the Tory lead widening again next week, probably to pre-conference levels. Some will doubtless say the botched Ruth Kelly announcement explains it, but the real reason is a consistent decline in Labour's popularity since 1997. A single conference – perhaps even replacing Gordon Brown – will not change that.

Andrew Hawkins chief executive of polling consultancy ComRes

Gordon Brown is the leader to follow

THIS week saw Gordon Brown play to his towering strengths – the only chancellor to avoid a recession in 2001 is now the Prime Minister world leaders are following in New York.

At Labour's conference, he showed the passion that drives him – tackling inequality and ending poverty. He also showed his honesty by apologising for mistakes.

He silenced his critics by reminding them that without Labour there would be no minimum wage, no equalities legislation and no substantial investment in our public services, and reminded us that the Conservatives, the Lib Dems and the SNP had all opposed this investment.

He pledged to increase help for our children, our old folk and those who are sick.

Our Prime Minister did not claim he could fix the price of oil or food or the world credit crunch created by incompetent speculators. But he is the one figure with the knowledge and experience to persuade other countries to co-operate in tackling these global problems.

This week, people listened to Gordon Brown rather than the media. He has emerged in a far stronger position as a result.

Let's get to the heart of the matter – what do the Tories stand for? They think they are slick but nobody knows what they are selling.

What are the options? Not Norman Lamont's apprentice. Now is not the time for a novice.

It is time to acknowledge Gordon Brown, a strong Scot with a proven track record.

Nigel Griffiths Labour MP for Edinburgh South