Fallout from Brown's poll decision

By Laura Kuenssberg
Political correspondent, BBC News

Mr Brown said he wanted to show how he would change the country

Gordon Brown has set out his reasons for deciding against a snap election this autumn.

But after weeks of speculation about the possibility of a ballot, what will be the fallout for the prime minister from the move?

The idea of an autumn election began as a rumour, possibly designed to unnerve the Conservatives.

It seemed pretty unlikely. Surely Gordon Brown, famed for his caution, would not throw it to the wind, and go to the polls more than two years before he had to?

But then, the whispers became louder, cranked up by some ministers and some of Gordon Brown's own advisers.

By last week, some were saying the election juggernaut was revved and rolling.

An advertising agency, not just any, the one that ran Mrs Thatcher's campaigns, was hired and prepared a poster.

And jobs at the Labour Party were being advertised. But now the prime minister has called a halt to it all.

Private polling

The prime minister himself does not deny that he was thinking very seriously about going to the country next month. But he won't now, and probably not next year either.

Private polling after a successful Tory conference in seats where support for Labour and the Conservatives is almost even seems to have demonstrated that Labour might lose them.

Ironically it was the rumour of an election that arguably forced the Conservatives to pull together

Indeed an ICM poll of such constituencies suggests as much, putting the Conservatives 6% ahead in a survey of marginal seats.

But the prime minister insists it was not the melting away of Labour's strong poll lead that led him to decide there would be no ballot.

He told the BBC's Andrew Marr that he thought he would win an election but wanted to show how he would change the country, rather than being judged on how he had dealt with a series of events that have taken place since he moved into Number 10.

'Extraordinary indecision'

Mr Brown has opted not to risk the political damage of a bad election result. Yet he will not escape criticism for allowing the speculation to build.

He made visits that wouldn't have looked out of place in an election campaign, seemingly moved government statements to accommodate a potential announcement and then in the end, did not go for the gamble.

So it's no surprise the Conservatives are claiming they have succeeded in forcing Mr Brown off course. David Cameron, the party leader, says the prime minister has displayed "extraordinary indecision".

Ironically it was the rumour of an election that arguably forced the Conservatives to pull together. And in the months to come they will relish accusing Mr Brown of "bottling it".

The Liberal Democrat leader Sir Menzies Campbell says despite promises that Gordon Brown's administration would be spin free, the Labour leader has put his party before the country.

Sir Ming, who is also an old friend of the prime minister says he has suffered from a "loss of nerve".

'Fiasco' criticism

Even some of Gordon Brown's own side are angered by how this has been handled.

The left wing John McDonnell who attempted to win the Labour leadership says the whole thing's been a "fiasco" and blames the youth and inexperience of some Number 10 advisers.

Ever the strategist, the prime minister has made a decision that few political old hands would dispute.

The worst of all outcomes would have been to call an early election, years before he had to, and then suffer heavy defeats, even be forced out of government.

But his reputation is dented by weeks of speculation about an election that in the end came to nought. Indecision is not a quality any inhabitant of Westminster would desire.