A closer look at Tony Blair’s tarnished reputation

Once regarded as something of a sun king and one of ‘us’, he’s portrayed as now being part of that rich globalist elite that he once seemed to want to at least restrain, writes Sean O’Grady

Every time he’s tried to intervene in a debate with some thoughtful constructive ideas on some great current issue, two words always crop up: Iraq and hypocrite (Getty)

It’s obviously embarrassing for Tony Blair that one of the more interesting stories that emerged from the Pandora Papers is how he and his wife, Cherie Booth, were beneficiaries of a property purchase arrangement – perfectly legal – that meant they avoided paying £300,000 in stamp duty on a property in London. In their defence they say that they did not break any laws, the property was acquired “in a normal way through reputable estate agents” and that they had “never used offshore schemes either to hide transactions or avoid tax”.

For the record, then: the four-storey building purchased by the Blairs was previously owned by an offshore company based in the British Virgin Islands. At the time of the deal the firm, named Romanstone International Limited, was partially owned by Zayed Rashid Al Zayani, Bahrain's minister for industry, commerce and tourism. The Blairs bought the building by establishing a British company named Harcourt Ventures to acquire the shares in Romanstone, the leaked documents claim. They each held a 50 per cent individual stake in the firm which was also registered for VAT. There is no suggestion the Blairs actively tried to avoid paying the tax and they say they “will of course be liable for capital gains tax on resale”.

Make of that, then, want you will – and people certainly have, and there have been some withering allegations of hypocrisy (an extremely serious crime when committed by a Labour politician and placed before the court of public opinion by the British press). One politician who knows Blair well commented: “We must tackle abuse of the tax system. For those who can employ the right accountants, the tax system is a haven of scams, perks, City deals and profits.”

That politician was of course Tony Blair, the 1994 version who was seeking to win the Labour leadership, and had no compunction about using the demagogue idea that there is one rule for “us” and one rule for “them”. Now, though, it does rather seem as though Blair has moved from “us” to “them” in quite a dramatic way. Once on the side of (and one of) the many, or self-portrayed as such, the Blairs, with a combined family fortune approaching the £200m mark, are some of the very few who can indeed afford the right accountants, etc.

It’s only fair to point out that their businessman son Euan accounts for some £160m from the recent sale of his training business, that all ex-premiers are in demand for consultancy, speech-making and memoirs (wait until Boris Johnson gets motoring!), and Cherie Booth QC is a successful lawyer and wealthy person in her own right.

One should also add that Blair did get New Labour into power, and, with a wide range of economic and social reforms, made Britain a more open and equal society, and did deliver for the poorest. Why shouldn’t the Blairs take the same opportunities open to anyone to make a career for themselves? They worked hard, had talent, took risks… they didn’t benefit from any great inherited wealth of social position. Isn’t that what an opportunity society is all about?

It still sticks in the craw of some, most obviously in Labour circles, and turns the voters off, and that’s the real political problem with the tarnishing of Tony Blair. Since he left office his reputation, once that of a sun king, has sunk. Every time he’s tried to intervene in a debate with some thoughtful constructive ideas on some great current issue – Brexit, the state of his party, the vaccine programme, Afghanistan – two words always crop up: Iraq and hypocrite. He’s portrayed as now being part of that rich globalist elite that he once seemed to want to at least restrain. His sensible suggestions, such as giving everyone a first Covid jab to get herd immunity under way quickly, are devalued as coming from someone who no longer understands the lives of the masses (if he ever did). The governments he led are discredited for (supposedly) doing nothing to support “left behind” communities. In the world of his critics – and it has a sizeable population – his enthusiastic embrace of globalisation meant the closure of industries and loss of jobs. His passion for the EU meant immigration and wages pushed lower for those able to find alternative work when the factories shut down. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan weren’t obvious successes either.

Whether it’s fair or not, it has all left Blair virtually friendless, politically and in the media. He is uniquely reviled by the left and by the right, and even by parts of what’s left of the centre. On the very day the BBC is due to air an excellent documentary series on the making of New Labour – a monumental achievement that changed the face of Britain – this tawdry story about stamp duty emerges. Blair certainly managed to rebuild his party and rehabilitate it in the eyes of the electorate; he seems to have much more trouble protecting his own good name. Still, as he sometimes says, “that’s politics”.