NOTHING became Gordon Brown so well as his dignified departure. His words of farewell were graceful and measured, and it was hard not to feel for his predicament, whatever your inclinations towards the man might have been.

Brown is unlikely to feature in any future list of Britain’s Best Prime Ministers, and there is a grain of tragedy in this situation.

A man who could have been great was undone by his own character failings in relentlessly campaigning for the job, and then fluffing his big chance after Tony Blair gave in and waltzed off on a new career as a multi-millionaire globe-trotting Christian with a questionable war record.

The departing Prime Minister said when stepping down on Tuesday night that he left the country “fairer, more tolerant, more green, more democratic, more prosperous and more just”, and I think he had a point.

These matters may be imperceptible and open to interpretation, but that sounds like a fair impression of how Britain has become, although others will no doubt disagree.

As for the man who now occupies Number 10, David Cameron isn’t all that popular in this vicinity, as may have been evident in recent weeks. So a leaden queasiness descended on your columnist as Call-Me-Dave finally got to run the country, thanks to a hasty and perfectly cynical marriage of electoral convenience with Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg.

A poor Tory election campaign had produced an okay result, but not a good one. Failing to win an overall majority denied Cameron his triumphant Tony Blair moment. He once cheekily declared himself to be the heir to Blair, but he failed to pull off Blair’s trick of winning a rock-solid majority.

Not only that, but he flunked the task against a dog-tired Govern-ment led by an unpopular Prime Minister; he stumbled even with the backing of nearly all the newspapers, and the strident support of the right-wing press, which dutifully savaged Brown, and then turned on Clegg when his popularity rose; and he tripped even when buoyed by Lord Ashcroft’s misspent millions.

To be fair, Cameron did a good job in reviving his party’s fortunes – but not good enough. The escalator of public popularity took him so far, then stalled.

But the interesting outcome of the consequent electoral stalemate is that the Conservative Party now has to govern with the help of the Lib Dems. Their hands will be tied to some extent and that is no bad thing.

Collaboration and cooperation are now required, instead of arrogantly charging ahead, which can happen with big majorities. And would almost certainly have occurred if Cameron had won one.

Heaven knows how this odd arrangement will work. Surely many Lib Dem MPs and supporters must be biting their tongues at the grisly improbability of being in government with the Tories.

And here’s a funny thing. How come the party leader who lost the popular vote now finds himself appointed as deputy Prime Minister – and does that job mean anything at all? Who knows, but we certainly live in interesting times.

• TO LOOK in a different direction, was anyone else infuriated by bankers and the money markets demanding a quick decision and a strong Government?

While we all seem to be at the capricious whim of the markets these days, there is something wrong about the sector that was bailed out with public billions agitating for a strong Government that promises to sack low-paid public sector workers and withdraw the services they provide.

If the banking sector hadn’t been so generously helped out by public money, those who surf the financial waves for a very lucrative living wouldn’t be in a position to demand anything at all.

Also, if decisions about running the country are to be based entirely on what the markets demand, then that devalues some of the power politicians wield. Mind you, it has long been the opinion of this column that good luck rather than skill determines whether or not a Government does well with its finances.

And now it’s wait-and-see time all over again.