On borrowed time?

Another thing that must have sent jitters down the spines of the Labour leadership just before the conference began was the result of the Brent East by-election, which saw a relatively unknown Liberal Democrats candidate defeat the Labour candidate by a comfortable margin. The outcome of this by-election is all the more significant because Brent East was considered to be one of the safest electoral areas for the Labour Party and this was the first time in fifteen years that the Party had to face a crisis of this type. Political analysts are viewing this incident as a reflection of the British public's discontent about Mr Blair's stand on Iraq and a sign of the growing disillusionment of the electorate about his government's overall performance. It is also worth noting that Ms Oona King, Labour MP for East London's Tower Hamlets -- a predominantly Asian (Bangalee) area population-wise -- has fallen badly out of favour with the locals for supporting the war against Iraq, so it would perhaps not come as a really big surprise if she and her party had to bear the brunt of the voters' discontent in a future election.

In an exclusive interview given to a Sunday broadsheet shortly before the crucial Party Conference at Bournemouth, Mr Blair did manage to put forward a semblance of confidence although -- for the first time -- he acknowledged that he was finding it tough going to combat the events of the past few months. He indicated that although reforms such as topping up university tuition fees or establishing foundation hospitals proposed by the government had generated a lot of controversy, turning away from them at this point would be a grave mistake. "The worst thing we could do at the moment is back off and back away," he said: "Whatever the battering you get, I actually feel more confident of our forward agenda. If we give up on that, it would be just a catastrophic mistake." Brushing aside the whispers circulating in Whitehall and elsewhere, he said that the Government was going to "hold its nerve" in the face of all adverse criticism and that he would stand for a full third term at the next general election.

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source

Meanwhile, a poll conducted on behalf of the same Sunday broadsheet that carried his interview found that more than 40 per cent of Labour Party members considered Mr Blair an unacceptable liability and wanted him to resign before the general election, while nearly 60 per cent believed that he was wrong to join the US President in going to war against Iraq. The same poll also revealed that Mr Gordon Brown enjoyed strong support among Labour sympathisers, with 88 per cent of them declaring to be satisfied with the way he was doing his job as Chancellor of the Exchequer. The real challenge, however, facing the Prime Minister is that much of his own party now looks upon him with wary suspicion. This was reflected in the words of someone close to the Chancellor who told BBC1's Politics Show programme: "There is a feeling now of disquiet, a sense that we have lost our way and in particular that we are losing the trust of the people that ought to be on our side. We need to find a way to regain that trust."

It is true that when Mr Blair addressed the Conference, he was enthusiastically applauded by members of his cabinet as well as others present among the audience. His 50-minute speech was also greeted with repeated standing ovations. But the next morning all the national dailies carried pictures of Gordon Brown sitting in the front row looking grim and with his hands folded in his lap while others around him were clapping their hands off. Mr Blair declared once more that he was certainly not going to "back off" from the government's "forward agenda", adding: "I have no reverse gear" which earned him another round of applause. But at the next day's session, the government's much vaunted scheme for foundation hospitals was summarily rejected by the unions, thus forcing the Government to suffer a humiliating defeat and causing panic among loyal Blairites. At the moment everybody is keeping quiet, probably watching each other's back surreptitiously, trying their best to interpret body language if one may use that expression.

Like the Awami League and the BNP in Bangladesh, the Conservative Party and the Labour Party in Britain have held power in turns ever since Labour's Clement Atlee replaced Winston Churchill. The present Labour Government under Mr Blair has already been in power for a record period and is beginning to show the tell-tale signs of dissolution -- complacency, arrogance and losing its edge. But the main opposition -- the Conservative Party -- is in disarray, their leadership lacking the strength and the determination and the strategy to turn the Labour Party's weaknesses to their advantage. So while there is a strong chance of a change of leadership in the Labour Party, there is no real chance of a change of government in the foreseeable future -- at least that is how I read the scenario.

A Reprieved Reformation

If my memory serves me right, that's the name of a short story penned by the American writer O Henry that I read many years ago (do forgive me, if I have got the title wrong). It is the story of a notorious safe-cracker who, trying to avoid being apprehended by a tenacious policeman, arrives at a small, sleepy town and sets himself up there under a pseudonym. Soon he discovers that the old-fashioned vault of the town's only bank was fitted with locks that would be ludicrously easy for him to pick and so begins to devise a plan to help himself to its contents. But one day as he is reconnoitering the premises, he comes upon a beautiful young lady and all thoughts of robbery goes out of his mind in a flash as he is smitten head over heels with love at first sight. He discovers that she is actually the daughter of the owner of the bank and manages to ingratiate himself with her father with the purpose of asking for her hand in marriage at a suitable time. He has already decided to turn a new leaf, to give up his safe-cracking career and severe all ties with his criminal past. He has a suitcase full of the tools of his trade which he wants to dispose of.

One afternoon, suitcase in hand, he is on his way to the railway station when he notices a crowd and a commotion in front of the bank. Noticing his lady love among them he approaches near and learns that the banker's youngest son -- the young lady's kid brother -- has somehow locked himself inside the vault which is totally airtight and will certainly suffocate to death unless he can be brought out within a few minutes. The banker, who has the only keys that will open the vault, is away and no one knows what to do. Well, our safe-cracker, who has become a totally reformed character since he met his lady love, knows what he must do in order to prove to himself that he is really worthy of her. So he opens his suitcase, takes out his tools and begins to tinker with the locks and in a few minutes succeeds in opening the door and bringing the nearly unconscious child out into the open air. Everybody is jubilant, jostling with one another to shake his hand, clap him on the back etc, when he notices a pair of keen, shrewd eyes watching him over the heads of the crowd around him. Yes, it is the policeman who has been after him all these months. Realising that his time is up he approaches the officer and says: "Well, you've found me, so take me away." But the policeman looks at him for a few seconds feigning puzzlement and says: "You must be mistaken, Sir, I don't know you at all." Saying that he raises his hat in a salute, turns and goes away. Our hero has won a reprieve.

Now, why did I have to narrate this story at length? Because the circumstances surrounding this year's Man Booker award, viewed as literature's most prestigious for the best fiction writing, reminded me of it. This year's Man Booker winner is -- no, not Monica Ali, the author of 'Brick Lane' which topped the Granta magazine short-list of first books earlier this year, received lots of pre-publication accolades, managed to generate quite a furore among a section of the Bangladeshi (mainly Sylheti) community in London who took umbrage at some of the remarks made by the principal characters of the book and was also a hot favourite with the bookies as a sure winner. But finally the £

50,000 Booker award -- which made the careers of Salman Rushdie, JM Coetzee and Margaret Atwood, among others -- went to someone virtually unknown, the Mexican-Australian author DBC Pierre, for his first work 'Vernon God Little'. It was definitely what is known as an 'upset' in betting circles.

But what has DBC Peirre's book got in common with O Henry's story? Nothing, as a matter of fact, but its author has, in my opinion, something intriguingly in common with O Henry's safe-cracker. To elaborate, the safe-cracker took a pseudonym in order to escape the law, and the name of the author of 'Vernon God Little' is also a nom de plume -- his real name is Peter Finlay -- and although he is not known to have assumed this name to hide from the law, he is no stranger to unlawful pursuits. In fact, DBC is an acronym for 'Dirty But Clean' which is the description of an Australian cartoon character that spends his life living on his wits, cheating people and stealing from those who befriend him. Like this character, Peter Finlay also has a lurid past, chequered with many unsavoury activities like working up debts of hundreds of thousands of dollars, indulging in drug and gambling addictions, smuggling contraband, leaving behind a trail of wronged women etc. He has also tried his hand, albeit unsuccessfully, at film making and treasure hunting.

But what brings Peter Finlay's character parallel to that of O Henry's safe-cracker is that while love made the safe-cracker a reformed man, it is the inner creative urge, what Peter Finlay himself calls the "art beast" struggling within him, that finally enabled him to metamorphose into what he has become today -- a creative writer, and an undoubtedly good one at that measured by Booker prize standards. And Peter Finlay -- or DBC Pierre, if you prefer -- himself feels that he is at least reforming, if not quite reformed yet. He has said that he is going to use the £

50,000 cheque he has won to pay off some of his debts and, as he may well be able to make a fortune from future writings like other Booker prize winners, he will certainly try to compensate all the people he has wronged over the years. Well repentance -- if that's what it is -- is strong medicine and it may indeed win Peter Finlay a reprieve next.