Britain: Various newspapers have emblazoned May 31st and May 4th as likely times the prime minister and his deputy, John Prescott, will stand aside from the Labour leadership. Yet as Mr Blair made clear yesterday, no final date has been agreed between himself and the chancellor, Gordon Brown.
The prime minister thought there was a broad understanding that he would stand down next year. But this week's convulsions were provoked because Mr Brown wanted something said in public: a bankable irrevocable wriggle-free promise. And yesterday he got it.
Only 490 days since the general election, well short of Mr Blair's promise to serve a full term, he has set out his end date and there is no turning back. It is a big political defeat for the prime minister.
From the Treasury's viewpoint, one acceptable timetable would be a statement from Mr Blair at the party's spring conference on February 16th that he will stand down after the May elections in Wales and Scotland, three days after he chalks up 10 years as prime minister. A six-week election campaign involving as many as a million party members and levy payers might allow Mr Brown to take over in mid-June.
This would give him six weeks to attack David Cameron at prime minister's questions. This would give him only 42 of his much-fabled first 100 days to have an impact before the political season fizzles out. Mr Brown would like longer but may fear it is too dangerous to agitate for it.
Not so many Welsh and Scottish MPs, assembly members and parliamentarians, are likely to be unhappy with a May 4th resignation. Labour is in coalition with the Liberal Democrats in Scotland, and is trailing in the polls.
There is another calculation for Mr Brown. If he is in charge at the time of the May elections and they go badly, it will be a dreadful launch pad for his leadership.
The feeling in the Brown camp is that they will not push for an earlier departure, but that if the party wants one they will accept that verdict - even if the elections then go badly for Mr Brown.
Both sides insisted yesterday that no private deal had been reached, and that Mr Blair's announcement emerged from the two meetings in No 10 on Wednesday. Deputy prime minister John Prescott also, belatedly, played a role. He decided the crisis was so deep that he needed to come back early from holiday in Portugal. He saw Mr Blair at 8.30am yesterday, and spoke to Mr Brown on the telephone, playing his honest broker role.
The chancellor's supporters still have questions, not just about the date but also the process by which the two camps will continue to co-operate. The chancellor wants signs that the orderly transition is back on track.
The Treasury wants to see greater collaboration on policy, and signs that party machinery is being jointly run by the two men. Allies insist this is not a demand for a dual premiership, and that it would be absurd for Mr Brown to try to muscle in on international negotiations, especially the upcoming Northern Ireland talks.
For the Blairites, the clock is ticking and they appear to have no real strategy for survival.
- Guardian service