Alistair Darling: a dangerous dead man walking?

Another of the key headlines in the last week centred around Alistair Darling's allegation that the Prime Minister and his spin doctors had "unleashed the hounds of hell" upon him.  What does this mean for his future and, more importantly, Gordon Brown?


Writing for the Telegraph, Jeff Randall provides a useful and succinct summary of the Chancellor's usual style:

"The Chancellor is an Aberdeen-educated lawyer. He has no track record of indulging in flamboyant or exaggerated language. Indeed, until this week, critics had mocked his ability to make Budget speeches sound only marginally more compelling than an Ikea instruction list."

So with these uncharacteristic remarks, Darling has made two things very clear:

1. His position within the Cabinet has been made untenable.
2. He has no intention of going quietly, rather more of bringing down those around him; much like Jimmy Cagney in the 1949 film White Heat.

Given the timing of these remarks, Darling has put himself in a unique position.  He is unsackable before a General Election (to fire him now would be pure madness on Brown's part), yet he is unemployable in a new Labour government; supported by Gordon Brown's refusal, this morning, to confirm or deny whether Darling will continue as Chancellor should Labour win the upcoming election.

So given the consequences for the Chancellor, what will this now mean for the Prime Minister?

It is my belief that with these comments the Prime Minister has lost a member of the Cabinet who will willingly do his bidding.  It is highly likely now, that Darling will grind out his last few months in the job doing not what Gordon tells him, rather doing what he believes is best for the country.

If this is the case, then the Prime Minister has a very big dilemma on his hands, which can be summed up in two words: The Budget.

Being somewhat of a loose cannon on deck, can Darling now be relied upon to deliver the kind of budget that Brown wants?  That is; a budget in line with Brown's much peddled mantra that we must "spend our way out of the recession".  If Brown decides to take this risk, he may find himself confronted with a much more honest, hard-hitting budget, which will do nothing to restore voter confidence in an already wounded Labour party; let alone give the voters any incentives to vote Labour.

Brown's decision is simple.  Does he call a March election, thus avoiding having to make a budget?  Or does he bide his time, hoping beyond hope that Darling doesn't decide to twist the knife that he has already thrust deep into the PM's back?