Likely successor’s ‘vision’ a mystery to most Britons

LONDON — Prime Minister Tony Blair’s resignation triggers a succession process in which the outcome was decided over a dinner 13 years ago.

But that does not mean Gordon Brown’s all but certain move into No. 10 Downing Street will be without drama and suspense. His somber personality is a stark contrast with Blair’s and raises questions of whether he can inspire a skeptical British public in the manner of his famously eloquent predecessor.

In 1994, Blair and Brown – partners in the reinvention and resuscitation of Britain’s Labor Party and then rivals for its leadership – shared a now-famous meal at the Granita, a fashionable North London restaurant, where they agreed that Blair would take the first shot at leading the party in the next election, but would eventually pass the baton to Brown.

In his resignation speech Thursday in which he said he will step down June 27, Blair made no direct mention of Brown, but is expected to offer a strong endorsement today. Last week Blair told reporters that he thought Brown would make a “great prime minister.”

It may seem strange to outsiders, as it does to many Britons, that Brown can be handed the leadership of a democracy like Britain without having faced voters other than those in his tiny district of Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath. That, however, is how it works in a parliamentary system where voters essentially choose a party, not an individual candidate.

Although Brown’s name, face and strong Scottish accent are well-known in Britain, and no one doubts his intellectual energy, his “vision” is a mystery to many people. The Sunday Times, in an editorial, called him a “blank sheet of paper.”

Brown’s stewardship of Britain’s economy over the past decade is generally regarded as a great success, but a former Cabinet secretary once characterized Brown’s management style as “Stalinist.” Another described him as a “control freak.”