President Barack Obama had barely settled into in the White House before he was happy to admit he had “screwed up” over one of his choices for a cabinet job after Tom Daschle withdraw his nomination as health secretary over an income tax controversy.

Even Britain’s leading bankers were moved to apologise to parliament last month over the sector’s indiscretions in the boom years.

But sorry is clearly not a word in Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s political lexicon, even though he was Chancellor for 10 years and arguably his “light touch” approach to the economy created the environment for  the current economic mess we are in.

Brown is happy to talk of the need for humility, but that’s as far as he will go. He reminds you of a cyclist caught doping, endlessly pleading their innocence, despite all the evidence to the contrary.

Whether Brown believes an act of contrition is simply unnecessary as he has done nothing wrong or that to say the word “sorry” would provide the opposition Conservatives with a stick to beat him mercilessly ahead of a general election is unclear.

Commentator Jonathan Freedland in Wednesday’s Guardian makes the case that until Brown admits some degree of culpability for Britain’s economic woes the Labour Party will not get a hearing at the next election.

Why are politicians so loath to say sorry? And could Brown revive his electoral hopes if he does accept fault for Britain’s economic crisis?

Is the Labour Party going to regret not hosting a Spring Party Conference this year?

Yes, it is going to save them a lot of cash, and Prime Minister Gordon Brown has enough to worry about ahead of the G20 financial crisis summit in Britain in April.

But as Britain braces for a nightmare year for the economy, public support for Brown and his Labour Party is starting to slip.

Polls are indicating once again that the Conservatives are looking like red hot favourites to win the next election due by May 2010.

A weekend get together at the start of the year would have given Brown the chance to rally the Labour troops and reassure them about the tough road — and inevitable difficult election — ahead.

Instead, the party will have to wait until September for that morale-boosting pep talk.

Will it be too late for Labour by then?

Newspapers were in no doubt of the significance of the pre-budget report – this was a defining moment in British politics.

New Labour is no more, they announced, and prudence has been blown away by a massive gamble for the hearts and minds of the electorate before the next election.

“The landmark mini-Budget was a pivotal moment which will shape British politics for years ahead,” wrote The Independent. “It presents voters with a stark choice between two very different futures: a European-style social democracy under Labour, in which the better-off pay higher taxes to maintain public services, or a nation of lower taxes and state spending under the Tories.”

The Guardian, in an editorial entitled “Everything Changes,” said Chancellor Alistair Darling had read the last rites for New Labour. “He abandoned, through necessity, the deal Tony Blair and Gordon Brown struck with the electorate a decade ago, that progressive politics could be paid for without overt economic pain.”

“The government,” it said “has found a purpose, which is to tax the rich to help the poor, something it has never dared admit openly before. Old political certainties now lie like timber, uprooted in the storm. An extraordinary history-changing contest has been got underway.”

The Times called it a “Robin Hood style budget” and echoed the theme of Labour returning to its left-wing roots. “When faced with difficult choices in a serious crisis, it has abandoned its new dogmas for old certainties,” the paper wrote. “Opposing the ‘fiscal stimulus’ is perhaps David Cameron’s biggest gamble, given that Britain’s action will be followed by other countries over the next days and weeks.”

Both parties have now hitched their fortunes to the length and depth of the recession, it noted.

The Sun was among the many papers proclaiming the death of New Labour. “In one emergency splurge, a beaming Mr Brown reverted to Old Labour’s natural big government tendency to tax spend and borrow,” it said.

If the gamble fails, Brown will have mortgaged Britain’s future in “an unforgivably reckless budget.”

The Daily Mail called the pre-budget report the most dramatic about-turn in government policy since the 1970s. “Even if the incentives work  -  and there have to be doubts about whether the cut in VAT will trigger spending in our ailing High Streets  -  the truth is that it represents the most monumental gamble by the Chancellor. For it is based on a positively rose-tinted prediction that the economy will start bouncing back by 2010  -  something many experts hugely doubt.”

The Daily Mirror portrayed Brown on its front page as a poker player, holding his cards under the headline “The Gambler.”

“Mr Darling is taking a big chance but the Tories’ do-nothing approach is a non-starter,” it said. “Yesterday was a big moment in post-war politics and the government rose to the challenge.”

Whether the 20 billion pound package of tax cuts and spending stimuli will be enough to see Britain through the next few painful years was a topic of wide debate in the papers but most felt the VAT reduction to 15 from 17.5 percent — a cornerstone of the report — would have little effect.

“The tragedy is that the fiscal stumulus package, led by a small reduction in value added tax, will still fall far short of the desired effect,” wrote the Financial Times. “The UK consumer is now too stunned by the housing crash, stagnant wages and fears of unemployment to be coaxed into resuming the insane credit-fuelled binge of yesteryear.”

David Cameron’s decision to ditch a major Conservative pledge to match Labour spending plans pound for pound was hailed by commentators as an important step in the politics of the recession, opening up a clear gulf between the two main parties’ economic policies but exposing the Tories to considerable risk.

Labour is expected to cut taxes, accelerate public spending and announce more borrowing in Monday’s pre-budget report. Now their supporters can revive the spectre of “Tory cuts” to funding for schools and hospitals which helped the Conservatives lose the last two elections.

For many of the newspapers, this is all part of a game being forced on the Tories by Gordon Brown’s rapid resurgence in the polls thanks to the economic crisis. A Mori poll this week found the once-mighty 26-point Conservative lead has slumped to just three points — equivalent to a Commons majority of four seats.

“In the extraordinary game of chess that is being played out against the backdrop of the recession, Cameron had no choice,” wrote The Independent. “But there are big risks for the Tories. Most non-partisan economists recognise the case for higher borrowing to pay for a fiscal stimulus. The Conservatives are virtually on their own in claiming spending cuts are an immediate answer.

“Spending cuts are also easier to announce than they are to implement, not least when the Conservatives have some ambitious spending programmes of their own. If Cameron comes up with any pain-free cuts, Brown will implement them first, as he did in the run-up to the last election.”

The Guardian said a curiously quiet period in British politics has come to a close with the announcement.

“Over the past few months the economy has been in wartime, beset by a banking crisis and a global recession, while politicians have been unsure how to react. Sure, Gordon Brown got his fill of summit-hopping. But most MPs have been little more than restive spectators of a crisis which will define economic policy for years to come and set the terms of the next election. That all ended yesterday.

“The political battle lines have now been drawn around one key question: who can best manage the recession?”

The Financial Times was in no doubt of the importance of Cameron’s policy tack. “He has taken one of the biggest gambles of his near three-year tenure … bucking the corporate and economic consensus to bet on a fundamental shift in voters’ attitudes in the next election,” it wrote.

“He believes he will be proved right in the long term as the recession deepens and voters increasingly blame Mr Brown for the state of the public finances rather than turn to him as the best hope for economic recovery.”

That may be a good move, the paper added, if the election comes in 2010 but could backfire if, as some commentators are suggesting, Brown decides to go to the country before things get too bad.

Several papers applauded Cameron for opening up a clear choice for voters in how deal with the coming hard times.

“On the big issue of the day, the route out of recession, there is now a genuine choice,” The Times said, while the Daily Mail declared: “With one bold decision, Mr cameron set himself free to offer a meaningful alternative of real substance.”

The Daily Mirror spoke of thick red lines now having been trawn between the two parties and warned the Conservatives  were missing the public mood.

“Every nurse, care worker, soldier and their families now has a vested interest in voting Labour,” it wrote.

But The Sun applauded Cameron’s move. “Labour seems ready to gamble the entire economy on a “cut now, pay tomorrow” burst of tax reductions financed by ever-higher borrowing,” it said. “That is the economics of the madhouse.”

“At last the Tories seem to be finding their voice. They have decided to put hard-working taxpayers first — and dump their daft promise to match Labour’s bloated spending.”

Only a few weeks ago the cartoons were showing Gordon Brown paddling up the proverbial creek without a paddle as his poll ratings slumped under an endless succession of bad news. The Tories were practically measuring up the curtains at No. 10.

Now — after a crisis that was surely the ultimate answer to a maiden’s prayer — it’s caped crusader “SuperGord” saving the world, lauded by grateful governments across the globe for slaying the fearsome credit crunch monster. Kapow, splat.

Rumours abound that he might even seize the moment and call a snap election rather than wait for the coming economic slump to sour the electorate’s mood again.

Do you think the Prime Minister has managed to make himself electable again with his triumphant rescue package for the banks? Should he go to the country now?     

Labour was destined for defeat at the next election and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown said he wasn’t going to step down.

The Labour Party conference in Manchester had been predictably subdued.

The only story in town had been who was going to have the guts to turn Judas.

And to cap it all off, there was to be a speech from a man renowned for repeating anodyne phrases like “long-term decisions” and “sustainable future” ad infinitum.

But then something changed. In walked New Brown.

New Brown somehow convinced the party faithful in the hall — at least for today — that they can win the next election under his leadership.

And then there was the “human touch” of New Brown.

We’ve all heard how awkward and dour Old Brown used to be, how out of touch with normal people he was, how unlike that charming Tony Blair…

But today New Brown skipped on to the stage, cracked funny gags and had not one, but two kisses on the lips for his wife Sarah as the lengthy standing ovation reverberated around the hall.

The audience had obviously got wind of New Brown, because they were sold long before he strolled in.

Groups of ladies disco-danced to M People and T-Rex in their chairs as the hall filled up. There were whistles and whoops when New Brown strolled in.

They all clapped along dutifully to a short film of Labour’s achievements in power as Jackie Wilson’s Higher And Higher blared out.

It was all a little bit Baptist church, a little bit Butlins — maybe even a little bit Blair.

There will be much celebration and self-congratulating in the trendy bars of Manchester as Labourites raise their glasses to New Brown tonight.

But when the hangovers ease and the Labour Party spaceship relocates to London, will the plotters really stop plotting? And will the opinion polls turn around?

The Labour faithful believes in New Brown today. Do you?

If the message on the streets up here in northern England is anything to go by, Labour will be sent packing at the next election.

Yes, it was just a by-election. Yes, Labour is suffering from severe mid-term blues. But the swing was a massive 17.6 percent and it wasn’t the Liberal Democrats who gained from Labour’s troubles, as is traditional in by-elections.

From speaking to people on the ground, the Labour vote has collapsed and the Tories are out in force. When pensioners who’ve voted Labour all their lives switch to the Conservatives, it’s time for Labour to worry.

Rising living costs and the perception that Labour has encouraged a benefits culture that is bleeding taxpayers dry were high on voters’ grudge list. Then there was the 10 pence tax ”fiasco” as one called it, or Labour’s “cynical, condescending” campaign against Tory toffs, as another said. 

Overwhelmingly, though, there was a sense that people had just had enough. That Labour had had 11 years and what had they done with it?

On top of that, there was a whiff of victory that pervaded the Conservatives’ campaign and got many apathetic Tories or people who had never voted before out in support for Edward Timpson.

David Cameron just needs to maintain the sense that the Conservatives are on track to win and he could see thousands more floating voters jumping on his bandwagon.

Margarete Cernigliaro, 55, said it was the impression that her vote actually counted that prompted her to go to the polling station on Thursday. She is a self-confessed ”lazy voter” who supports the Conservatives but didn’t think it was worth bothering in the last general election.

She told how her six-year-old grandson had met his six-year-old friend on Thursday on route to the polling station with his family. “Let’s vote for the winners,” said one six-year-old to another, referring to Timpson & co.

Even diehard Labour voters think their party has lost the next election. Jeremy Vernon, a 45-year-old teacher, voted Labour as always on Thursday, but rather reluctantly.

“I think it is a national problem. It’s the Gordon Brown problem,” he said and went on to accuse the government of “cooking the books” over inflation, given the huge rises in petrol and basic food items. Asked if Labour could win the next election, he said: ”I think they’ll lose it, definitely.” 

David Cameron may find that looking like a winner between now and the next election will be enough to turn him into one. 

The Times says Gordon Brown is facing the first electoral test of his premiership. It also features London mayoral candidates Ken Livingstone and Boris Johnson. Story here

The Daily Mail leads with how motorists are being fleeced by speed cameras or traffic wardens to the annual sum of £800m. Story here

The Daily Mirror leads with an artists impression of what Elisabeth Fritzl might look like now at the age of 42. Story here

The Daily Telegraph says 150 hostels, intended to house offenders, have been built in residential areas across the UK with little or no consultation with locals. Story here

The search is on for the last Nazis accused of terrible war crimes, according to The Independent. Story here

The Daily Express says the cost of living for the average family has gone up by 11.5% in the past year (story here) and also features a picture on its front page of Josef Fritzl on a beach holiday while his children were locked in his cellar in Austria.

The Guardian says police will reject toughter action on cannabis possession when the drug is upgraded to class B. Story here

** For full coverage of the mayoral election go to our special report **

Safer streets, better housing, more reliable transport….that’s what Ken Livingstone, Boris Johnson and Brian Paddick all want for London and it’s probably what most Londoners want for their city. But what’s the big difference then between “Red Ken”, “Crazy Boris” and …”Policeman turned Politician” Brian Paddick?

That’s still hard to fathom two weeks ahead of the May 1 London mayor election. But there was an air of tetchiness and getting personal during a Reuters Newsmaker debate at Reuters headquarters in London in front of an invited audience of around 250 people.

Liberal Democrat candidate Paddick told Livingstone he had “lost the plot” during his second term.

Ken “vote for me, I’m worth it” Livingstone hit out at Conservative candidate Johnson saying among the hardest decisions he ever had to take was to decide where to go for lunch with his former staff at “The Spectator” while he was editor of the right-wing magazine.

Johnson himself lashed out at the mayor for being inconsistent in his policies (”he wants millions of Chinese to come to London as tourists but is against a third runway at Heathrow” he said of Ken) and for “overpaying” his officials at City Hall. Ken himself was candid about what type of tourist he wants - the ones who spend the most money….not the Belgians…who according to him spend the least.

Under pressure from a lack of experience in managing large teams and projects, Johnson broke new ground (for himself) by finally announcing one person to join his ranks - Bob Diamond, the U.S.-born president of Barclays will join his team of advisors.

“I’m for taxpayer value” the Conservative candidate extolled, having collected the largest number of laughs for his customary one-liners…such as a commitment to keep funding the European Space Agency so he could send the (incumbent) mayor into orbit.

A business-like Livingstone weighed in with his eight-year track record as mayor, the safest pair of hands to run the capital’s 11.3 billion pound budget. Conscious of his audience of business professionals he stressed how he injected new life into the City of London, which apparently had been in decline when he took office.

“Slightly less regulation than our competitors” was his blueprint for future success of London as a financial centre.

Another one of Ken’s big themes for the next term, apart from the 2012 London Olympics, is the Crossrail, the much-delayed high-speed train linking east and west London, most importantly giving City workers quick access to Heathrow airport. There were a few gasps in the audience though when he prided himself on having improved London’s transport system…better than ever in his eyes but a source of frequent frustrations for most Londoners.

There was even a rare flicker of passion from earnest Paddick, when he was tackled by a member of the audience about his light-touch approach to drugs in south London when he was police chief - a policy, he said, he had pioneered in Brixton because that was what the “community” wanted and which had led to more arrests for drug dealing.

But as so often Paddick, struggling way off in third place in opinion polls, spent most of his time extolling his virtues as the man who will “listen and understand” and be “capable and competent”.

A straw poll on voting intentions among the audience saw Johnson, who is neck and neck with Livingston in real opinion polls, leading by a small margin. But, perhaps unsurprisingly, the majority didn’t raise their hands at all - still unsure on who should be leading London in the future?

Just in case you’re not sure….here’s a five-word primer for what they stand for …in the candidates’ own words at today’s Newsmaker:

- Paddick: listen, understand, act, capable and competent
- Johnson: change, democracy, safety, taxpayer value
- Livingstone (in 7 words): vote for me I’m worth it

** For full coverage of the mayoral election go to our special report **

Sitting at the Evening Standard’s London Mayor debate last night, it occurred to me how cosy this election is. Whoever wins the contest on May 1 will lead one of the world’s most high-profile cities with an 11.3 billion pound budget to run public transport, police and fire services and promote the economy of this global financial centre. Yet at times the candidates seem to think they are engaging in some kind of school debating contest.

First there was breathless Boris, who bounded up to the podium like a precocious teenager and raced through his speech to cram in as much as possible during his allotted eight minutes. Then a more nervous, and far less exuberant delivery from the class swot — Brian Paddick — the former policeman turned Lib Dem mayoral candidate, who delivered a serious and earnest “Why I should be head boy” speech.

Throughout Paddick’s speech, Boris and Ken whispered to each other on the podium as if they thought they were at the back at the class and couldn’t be seen. Boris could barely contain his glee when Paddick slipped up in his bid to assert his desirability over a candidate (Johnson) who spends his time at the “Henry” regatta. His conflation of Henley with the Hooray Henries associated with Johnson’s consituency prompted a barely disguised giggle from Boris and his supporters.

Then came Ken, who looked a little beyond the city’s borders to place London in its global context: “The things we do in the city set the agenda for the world,” he told the audience of “influentials” in west London’s Cadogan Hall.

But still, it was difficult to shake the sense that this election contest is more village hall than City Hall. Questions and answers centred around the congestion charge, beat police officers, free travel passes for the under-16s and preserving gardens. It was only at the end that we got a real sense of the scope of this newly created role when columnist Simon Jenkins asked what vision the candidates had for the city. The answer seems to be not too many skyscrapers but well-designed ones are OK. The future of London as a world financial centre seemed less clear.