Suddenly , Tony Blair is on the back foot. Fabled Middle England is in revolt, and the Conservatives scent opportunity, writes Frank Millar
OK, OK. Having captured your attention, back to reality. There has been no seismic shift in the British political landscape. In fact, there is no evidence of any shift at all. Iain Duncan Smith is still flat-lining. Tony Blair has yet to lose a by-election, while the Tory leader probably lives in dread of one arising in a Labour marginal.
Such is the Prime Minister's dominance, most commentators and politicians think the next election already in the bag. Indeed - invoking memories of Margaret Thatcher's vow to go on and on - some fancy the Chancellor, Gordon Brown, kept awake at night, tormented by the thought that Mr Blair might not wish to vacate Number 10 before claiming a fourth term. And yet - there is the feeling of something happening "out there", or, at any rate, of something beginning to stir.
We cannot tell how the firefighters' strike will play out, or how government or the Fire Brigade Union will ultimately fare in their battle for public support. However, the opening hours of the first of three planned eight-day strikes certainly saw the Deputy Prime Minister, John Prescott, on the defensive, seemingly accused by employers and firemen alike of intervening to block a last-minute pay deal.
This may be unfair, since there is also the impression that the employers made an offer without knowing how they might fund it, choosing to disregard government warnings that there was no new money available, while allowing the union to claw back on the previous insistence that any substantial settlement must be tied to reform of working practices.
That said, the public may be less concerned with arguments about modernisation and rather more taken with Mr Prescott's apparent defence that he couldn't be expected to gather his officials and study the proposed new terms in the middle of the night.
Mr Prescott, like Mr Blair, has appeared less than sure-footed in the build-up to a dispute which has the potential to trigger more widespread industrial unrest, and thus provide Labour's sternest test. Failing to resolve their problem with the firemen, ministers equally failed to use time available to train soldiers in the use of modern red fire engines.
Having signalled that troops would be ordered to cross picket lines if this strike went ahead, they relented this week under pressure from the Chief of the Defence Staff, who issued the starkest warning that the morale and effectiveness of the armed forces were endangered by the need to have 19,000 of them on standby to provide emergency fire cover.
If that fuelled more medium-term worries over the prospect of war with Iraq, public condfidence will have dipped again at the sight of ancient Green Goddesses trundling into action against the backdrop of real and urgent government alerts about the likelihood of an al-Qaeda terrorist attack.
The general level of public nervousness will have been further raised by Mr Prescott's confirmation that the firemen have not concluded an agreement about how they would respond to a major incident or emergency. Nor is that nervousness generated only by the prevailing threats to life and property.
Even if they didn't quite believe his proud boast to have abolished the economic cycle, everybody knows that Mr Brown's love affair with Prudence has been integral to Labour's economic success thus far. But will he remain faithful now as dark clouds gather?
The possibility of a Gulf war is one such, bringing with it the risk of a sharp rise in the oil price and, if protracted, a negative impact on the British economy and the country's finances. Property prices might still be booming in Brown's Britain but little else is. Slower growth than forecast spells falling tax revenues, suggesting increased taxes or higher borrowing to fund Labour's ambitious spending plans for the public services. But then national insurance contributions are already set for a massive hike next April, and the middle classes are beginning to notice the effects of Labour's stealth taxing and redistribution.
They are also in a state of mounting alarm at the prospect of worse to come in the form of sky-high tuition fees, or a graduate tax, to meet the growing crisis in university funding, compounded by the government's determination to encourage something like half of all young people into higher education.
Imperial College has suggested top-up fees as high as £15,000, raising fears of elite Ivy League-type universities for the children of only the very rich.
A student at what Downing Street might consider a "bog standard" university doing a four-year course is currently looking at overall costs in the region of £30,000 plus. There is already clear evidence that the prospect of amassing large debts is a disincentive to working-class students.
The middle classes, meanwhile, paper rich but often cash poor, incline to wonder why - if they are to live in an American-style society where they are increasingly expected to pay for vital services - they shouldn't also benefit from a US-style low tax regime.
This issue, moreover, has the capacity seriously to divide the Labour Party and unite the readers of the Daily Mail and the left. Certainly for many Labour MPs it is a matter of principle, rooted in their experience as the first of their families to go to university courtesy of the post-war settlement which guaranteed them grants and a free education.
To them, as to middle-class parents, there is something grotesque about the spectacle of well-heeled Labour ministers closing the door of opportunity behind them.
All of which suggests potentially rich pickings for the main opposition party. The reassurance for Mr Blair, however, is that the Tories will remain unable to exploit the real and inevitable opportunities of a second Labour term until and unless they resolve their own leadership dilemna.