The Sundays on the “honours gag”
March 4th, 2007
Is Ming right about the implications of the latest developments?
As expected the Sunday papers provide a lot more information about the gag that was placed on BBC news on Friday night following its plans to cover a “new development” in the cash for honours probe that has now been going on for a year.
Reproduced above is the coverage from the News of the World web-site which quotes a Crown Prosecution Service source who is reported to have said: “We believe the leaks are coming from government sources who are trying to disrupt the inquiry.”
The Sunday Telegraph notes that “Detectives were believed to have become alarmed that disclosures from the BBC could have alerted a suspect to a key line of questioning. When the Prime Minister was questioned for a second time in January, a news black-out was put on the interview for similar reasons.”
One major political figure to have commented on the development is the Lib Dem MP and prominent lawyer, Ming Campbell. He is quoted as saying “the inference of Lord Goldsmith’s actions was that he at least contemplates the possibility that a prosecution of some kind will follow.”
My only thought about how this might affect the “Blair leaving date” betting is that it could complicate the transition plan. Clearly Blair would not want to step down in circumstances that could suggest his departure his linked to the inquiry.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Surely charges would more likely bring forward rather than push back the exit date?
Sure, Blair wouldn’t want to leave on that note, but I struggle to see what choice he would be left with. Staying in office under those circumstances would be near impossible.
Observer - Miliband not as firm in denials of running, Clarke may stand to provoke proper election (will decide in May), more likely that there will be a challenge…
Exactly right, Arb Seeker. This isn’t a question of Blair being loath to leave under a cloud however personally and politically inconvenient it may be for him; the matter has gone way beyond “what’s good for Tony”. If two of his senior aides are in fact guilty of what is being alleged, then it is unthinkable that the Prime Minister - in whose gift the conferment of honours reside - was not also aware of it. Under such circumstances, for the integrity of government and the good of the country, he would surely have to go.
Morning! Sawadee Kap. Another sparkling sunny day as we head towards a Blairless, Labour-rein Britain.
It seems unquestionable to me that the leak comes from Number 10. What on earth would the police have to gain, at this stage, at the end of their investigation, by leaking evidence they already have - (an email, it seems, between RT and LL)? All the leak can do is 1. alert suspects to the line of enquiry, and 2. possibly jeopardise a future trial. Given that Yates’ reputation now rests on some sort of proceedings eventuating - as he will be torn apart by unspayed Labour attack dogs, some of them on here, if he fails - he must be very keen to avoid injudicious revelations.
But, ah, Number 10 denies all knowledge of the leak and the injunction, so that’s alright then.
Listen guys, a note to you in the PM’s Office. We Don’t Believe You About Anything Anymore. You brought us the Iraq War, remember? You are a bunch of proven lawyers. You lie, you lie, you lie. You lie before breakfast to your own children. It’s what you do. We’ve learned this, painfully, over the years. So you may as well Shut the F up.
So Number 10 leaked the email to scupper Yates. Question is - doesn’t that itself constitute more perverting of the course of justice?
Murkier and murkier. But what an entertaining weekend.
Sean T are you becoming a self styled creature of the morning?
Oh what a beautiful morning,
Oh what a beautiful day,
I’ve got a wonderful feeling,
Tony is going to pay.
Apologies to Mr Hammerstein
Mike - Well done on the Sunday Programme. I watched with a hangover
Do you think PB.C will get a surge of hits?
btw - I still think you’re wrong about Obama.
BB
Re 7. Thanks BB. The GMTV feature on PBC should be repeated on ITV2 at about 7.40AM and then on ITV2+1 at 8.40AM.
7. I still think he’s wrong about Obama winning but I’m equally sure I should have listened to his tip when Obama was 50/1!
On the question of the timetable, the matter’s now really out of Blair’s hands. Bad results in May’s elections and the charges potentially being laid against two key, close aides on an issue where the PM’s decision is required (nominations for peerages)? If he doesn’t go voluntarily, I’d expect him to be pushed in those circumstances - intense from behind the scenes at first; a Brownite cabinet minister going on the record to say that it’s time he went if Blair becomes intransegent. Blair wouldn’t have the political power to sack him/her - a resignation speech would be fatal.
Of course, if charges aren’t laid before May (and I still don’t think they will be), he might just drag things out and survive until a July handover - which will annoy Brown intensely as he won’t get a shot at Cameron until October that way. That probably depends on whether Labour can hold on to Scotland and Wales.
Blair will hang on to the very last minute i.e. resign in late June, an election in August and ‘goes to the palace’ in September.
The deciding factor will resignation before the Labour Party Conference, that is the only thing the only thing he can not wiggle out of.
[10] Actually, he’s said he’ll be gone before the TUC conference, which IIRC takes place 2-3 weeks before Labour’s.
[9] It may be that, if charges are brought against more than one person (which I think is the assumption we’re all making), they won’t all be brought at once.
“Angry of Bankok”
At last it’s becoming interesting. On Monday the injunction will almost certainly be lifted. In any event the details will be on the net from foreign sources by Monday
If as suggested the reason for the injunction is that the release of the email will prejudice the trial then charges must be brought before the injunction is lifted. In other words today.
If the suggestion that the injunction is to prevent those involved knowing the direction of the inquiry then it doesn’t make sense. The BBC called No 10 to have their story confirmed!
It’s got to be a charge or nothing this week or the inquiry will become a joke.
10 Agree. Assume, for the sake of argument, charges are brought against people close to Blair. After 10 years, do we seriously think he’s going to say;
‘I’m sorry, something bad has [I]possibly[/I] happened on my watch (setting to one side ‘innocent until proven guilty’) and therefore I am going to do the honourable thing and resign.’?
Considering all the other things that have gone wrong on his watch (Iraq, WMD) why would this provoke a resignation?
Much more likely:
‘I congratulate Inspector Yates and his team on the thorough investigation, and while obviously the law must take its course, from a personal point of view I continue to have the highest personal regard for the integrity of those charged’
I wish I was wrong - but I doubt it.
Mike Smithson “One major political figure to have commented on the development is the Lib Dem MP and prominent lawyer, Ming Campbell.”
What? Have they demoted him from leader, without anyone noticing? Typical!
On topic, whilst I woun’t have quite put it the way SeanT does, it really is turning into a chipper weekend; seeing Roger & Tyson and Nick P squirm yesterday is some of the best sport the Tories have had in 15 years or so.
It is just a shame that we have to have our govt mired in corruption & attempts to pervert the course of justice, in order to get this sport.
Mike, just seen your interview on GMTV. Thought you came over very well. Some good publicity for the site too.
Sorry I should have said more of a joke…..and it should have been ‘Bangkok’. Incidentally I was in a conversation yesterday where the people I was talking to thought the reason Lord Levy was being pilloried was because of good old fashioned anti-semitism!
It really is a shame that there is no seats market on the May locals. There must now be a real possibility of a 1995-style meltdown for Labour.
Meanwhile yet more great publicity for UK(R)IP…
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=DBPGWWCXSFHDJQFIQMFCFF4AVCBQYIV0?xml=/news/2007/03/04/nukip04.xml
PS. Portillo thinks Labour under Brown is going to walk the next election according to an article today. I never thought I’d agree with Portillo……
18 - the travails of UKIP go on! When a party has very weak leadership for so long, it can get to a point of implosion. Farage is a capable man but he has come to late to save UKIP from the rocks.
I firmly believe that if CK had stayed leader of the LDs for another couple of years, the party would have become totally rudderless and unravelled just as UKIP has.
Morning all! As Sean T would say, ’sehr interessant!’
I’m not sure about the impact on the Blair Switch market. I can see your point, Mike, but it all depends how it goes from here. If a couple of very close aides are charged, I would think Tony’s position becomes untenable. Don’t forget there’s a fair bit of pressure on him unrelated to CfH. Not everybody in his Party is happy about him leading them to a likely heavy defeat in May. It could even be a meltdown.
Having drifted yesterday, the Q3 price is back into around 1.7. That’s too short. Q2 looks value still at 3.0. Even Q1 is still not entirely out of the question, although odds of 24 are not overly attractive.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/michael_portillo/article1466766.ece
18/20. Do I detect a difference in attitude towards UKIP between the Daily and Sunday Telegraph? The Sunday has been very hostile of late.
16. Yes, that’s it - anti-semitism. Obviously the reason why Turner was arrested as well. Nothing to do with the evidence. At; straws; clutching.
17 - There’s more than 10,000 seats up for grabs in the locals, and Labour really could get a good kicking if they continue the way they are going!
20. Yes, thank goodness the inspirational Ming came along to transform his party’s fortunes.
Benedict! I was your 14,000 visitor this morning. Do I get a prize?
Not satisfied with producing a sparkling, 24 carat gold scoop on Friday, your blog (relax, it’s no longer a secret) provides one of the best all round summaries of the present goings on. It’s all the more helpful in that it is not unduly biased, or gloating. You’re doing a great job, BW.
Respect.
David. I too thought it ridiculous but it just showed me how irrational people can become when tribal loyalties are at stake.
19-22. As always Woger hasnt managed to readthe article. What a gift for analysis he is. Was yesterday’s focus group in his favourite restaurant in the Cote D’Azur? That will be a place where you can get real, authentic anti-semitism. In case Woger doesnt know, Jonathan Powell isnt a Jew either.
27. ‘it just showed me how irrational people can become when tribal loyalties are at stake.’
Indeed. Your posts on the cash for honours affair being a prime example.
27. Yes, it’s easy to become blinkered in support for or opposition to a case beacuse of party affiliation. Thank goodness it doesn’t happen on this site too often!
Blair will have to be dragged out of the place. If charges are laid this week, Blair will NOT resign because he doesnt have to, the Labour Party cannot do anything about it, he may well be forced to give a firm date in return for Browns agreement and he will then have 3 months or so to come up with a plan.
His position has been untenable for 1.5 years, under the traditional criteria of credibility, cabinet support, parliamentary party support and public trust and he hasnt even considered resigning. In fact he was forced to promise he would leave at all, if not for that Brown would still be wondering ‘if’ not ‘when’.
What if the explosive nature of developments allow him to extract concessions from Brown? He stays till next year but doesnt go to the conference!
Well done Pot and Kettle! Yesterday you were spelling ‘Azur’ with an additional ‘e’. I started to fear that my first and only stalker wasn’t too bright!
Roger- 19. Portillo suggests that there will be a hung parliament with Labour the biggest party. Now that is not “walking the election”, as you state, and is probably a fair forecast. I would put the two main parties within 15 seats of each other based on what we know now.
The big unknown is how will Gordon go down? The Labour writer, John Rentoul, is not very complimentary on that score this morning.
http://comment.independent.co.uk/columnists_m_z/john_rentoul/article2326123.ece
My betting position on Blair leaving has been to lay Q2 and nothing that has happened change my view on that strategy.
BTW. IG seem to have settled this week’s BrandIndex market. The buy bet on Cameron has proved to be enormously successful - alas the “sells” on Benn and Hague have been losers.
I was led to believe BBC stood for
Blair’s Broadcasting Corporation
or am I very much mistaken?
Not long before more revelations come into the public domain about how”rotten to the core” NuLabour is
Good piece this morning Mike. Mrs G was very impressed.
Interesting article by Rentoul. Though as a Blair ally probably not that objective.
Who is the Cps person who will make the decision once Yates has finished his investigation.
Wouldn`t want to be taking that one, or the media intrusion that will come with it, as what ever they do the they will be critical comment.
Are we still twittering on about cash for coronets …. IMO one of the soundest policies that both the Conservatives and Labour have been been implementing to ensure that my taxes don’t pay for political parties.
Meanwhile up north it appears that Labour is determined to run a negative campaign in an attempt to put the SNP back in it’s box :
http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/politics.cfm?id=341082007
Thank you 37. Unfortunately Mrs S was less so after I disclosed the scale of my losses on the Lib Dems at the 2005 General Election!
39 dez. The DPP, Sir Ken Macdonald.
BTW he was a co-founder of Matrix Chambers ….. of Cherie Booth fame !!
32 - Well your english spelling can be a little erratic. The fact that you are unable to read a press article without misrepresneting it suggests that you spend too much time in wealthy restaurants herer and in France and too little time engaging your brain. A view of you that is pretty unanimous here.
Interesting article Mike, you missed the Mail on Sunday article which says who the mail was from and too, and it also claims to have an injunction against it.
See
http://aconservatives.blogspot.com/
That said this seems to be a killer story. murkier and murkier indeed!
41. Yes, you did me plus I’m sure a lot of other people a big favour there Mike!
Portillo is not an Oracle. It is the view of an ex-Conservative MP who lost his seat and wants to be liked.
The British people despise Labour.
[33] I think Rentoul, possibly despite himself, is saying more than that, Mike. He is implying that social democracy, as introduced in the 1940s and more or less sustained by every government since (remember Thatcher’s claim that the NHS was safe in her hands?), is past its sell-by date. It was, after all, the child of war and the determination of the people of this country not to be conned again, as they had been after 1918. That generation has largely left us.
And social democracy implies an optimistic view of human nature which to-day’s world does little to confirm. I daresay that you would join me in wishing it were not so, but that’s only what we wish. I still think there’s a huge gap on the “populist” right, which is simply waiting for the charismatic character whom Murdoch et al can take up as a winner. Perhaps we should be grateful that Farage and Griffin are so patently incompetent.
Mike
Kettle’s op-ed in Guardian (Comment is Free)…
It suggests a special Labour conference on 30 June - does he mean one that wd officially make Labour leader, it’s a bit unclear? If he does then that cd, by 1 day, sneak into Q2 (on Betfair anyway), or have I misunderstood the Labour rules…?
Mail on Sunday names names:
http://preview.tinyurl.com/2hntna
39 I understood the DPP has recused himself from involvement in the cash for honours investigation because of his association with Matrix. Has he changed his mind?
A couple of weeks ago it was reported that everyone in the line of responsibility in the CPS who had such associations or was in any way a political appointee had done the same. Except the AG, naturally.
40. Jack, SNP is usually good in acting as the poor victim badly threated by other evil parties. I suppose they’ll start their victim impersonation as soon as Labour start with the negative campaign
43. Pot and Kettle. “A view of you that is pretty unanimous here”.
I hope this isn’t another one of your dodgy self selecting polls!!
43. Pot and Kettle. “A view of you that is pretty unanimous here”.
You’ve every right to attack Roger, or anybody else, for that matter, as we all have. However, by what right do purport to speak for us all?
Re 26, Peter many thanks. I was going to knock up a summary so far, but that is going to take some time, as there is quite a lot of little detail in the cash for peerages issue!
Now I’m really confused. Thought this was from RT to LL. But now JP is mentioned. And the MoS doesn’t know if its injuncted or not. Has anyone spoken to MI5? or the NKVD?
I can also see Blair hanging on, grimly, if there are charges (which I suspect there will be, surely. Otherwise why all the sturm und drang?).
Blair’s argument - and it’s not entirely without merit - would be that: 1. he hasn’t been charged with anything, and there’s no such thing as guilt by assocation, and 2. polls show that he is still a more popular leader of Labour than Brown would be (remarkably), so he isn’t doing the damage that some Labourites claim.
Personally, and speaking very selfishly, I hope this is precisely what happens. i.e. That there are charges, but Blair hangs on to power as long as he can.
Much more entertaining that way. And ultimately much more damaging for the Left.
51 start? It has been going on for weeks up here. Leaving Church this morning in Friockheim the topic of the election came up a few said to me that not many believe Labour anyone. There are now like what the Tories were in the mid 1990’s. They may be right and Labour’s present strategy is becoming to resemble political suicide.
12. Woger, are you now, finally, resiling from your long held opinion that the Moon is made of tartan marzipan, sorry, I mean - that the Yates inquiry is a total waste of time and going nowhere?
For a year you have steadfastly claimed that cash for coronets is a pointless inquiry and its gonna dribble away shortly and no arrests will be made ‘you mark my words’ etc etc etc.
I have found this fatuous stance of yours a source of constant hilarity, and will be said it it is replaced by something more akin to sanity.
BTW I finished watching Pan’s Labyrinth. Cracking movie. The 2nd best of the year, for me, just behind Apocalypto. I’m watching Babel tonight.
50. ‘or was in any way a political appointee ‘
Isn’t it remarkable that such a problem should even exist? Doesn’t it again demonstrate how desperately in need of reform the whole appointments system is?
This sorry saga is a direct result of excessive powers of patronage being vested in the executive, and in the person of the PM in particular. We not only have corruption, but also a serious muddling of the executive and judicial branches of government.
We are missing one set of information related to the Blair switch market: Just how fast could the Labour Party elect a new leader & deputy?
Q1 is out unless something bigger than what we appear to have is laid at Blair’s door. Even if charges were laid tomorrow (extremely unlikely) and Tony actually resigned by the end of the week (extremely unlikely) there’d be little time to get the selection show on the road and get a replacement in. Wasted money to enter the market as a new bet unless you planned to play mathematics and try to lay off lay off for guaranteed profit later.
I am, however beginning to look more carefully at Q2 for a small top up. What I am trying to understand is, if we get a combination of charges being laid AND Labour takes a pasting in May, there might be a strong desire for Tony to announce his resignation very soon after and try to move on at speed. The key question here is how quickly can Labour go through its new leaders’ election process? If Tony resigned within days of a May beating I am guessing they could elect a new leader and deputy to be in place before end of June.
The other factor that has been pointed out by PtP, David Herdson & Arb Seeker is that charges on an aide could well leave Blair in a position thats untenable and trigger a putsch at cabinet level if he doesn’t walk fairly quickly. I’m guessing there is a mix if factors here for the Labour Party. a) take a beating in May, Tony carries the can and play the fresh start card b) if charges were laid soonish, conclude its just getting way too out of hand and look to get Tony out sooner rather than later, especially with a beating in May on the cards.
Can someone set me straight on how long the leadership election procedure could take, especiially if they are looking to get it done and dusted as fast as possible?
The deep cynic in me thinks that if speculation that No.10 is leaking information is correct then they will, somehow, get their way and get the information out that they need to stymie prosecutions or the timetable. On the other hand, if that happens and the CPS decide charges can’t go ahead, I’d expect someone reelated to the inquiry to talk and lay it out on the media table to strong effect. I don’t think the cops detractors realise that these guys are rapidly being pushed into a ‘nothing to lose’ position by the bull being fired their way.
There is an interesting article in the Guardian (aka Obs) today with John Major. Most of it is about journalism but it contains this passage which relates to a topic often raised here about the ‘economic legacy of the Tories’.
The last quote is something that we all might remember when getting too hot under the collar?
“What was the most successful economic period in the last 30 years and which government had the lowest tax proportion in the last 25? …… According to Major’s office it was (so defined by) Peter Sinclair, professor of economics at Birmingham University.
The figures? November 1990: interest rates 14 per cent; inflation 9.7 per cent; growth 0.5 per cent and falling. May 1997: interest rates 6 per cent; inflation 2.6 per cent; growth 3.5 per cent and rising. Says the architect of this success: ‘When you look at things in perspective, you see reality rather than current dramas. It takes a long time. You need to wait for the academics and the historians.’ He says commentators are now beginning to refer to ‘the boom that began in the 80s’ and that Brown is well aware of the debt he owes.”
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/conservatives/story/0,,2026298,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=19
46 Vayker,
“Portillo is not an Oracle. It is the view of an ex-Conservative MP who lost his seat and wants to be liked.”
He resigned his seat, he didn’t lose it.
“The British people despise Labour.”
What evidnce do you have to support this claim ?
Re 55, SeanT, if you read my blog, it is now clear that the email was between RT and JP about LL.
I also agree that Blair will hang on.
Re 58, CJ Fox, It does not seem to have been a problem in the past. Clearly it is just a problem with this executive, and it needs to go.
63. I think you are quite wrong about that. It may be the case that this executive has abused its power more than its recent predecessors, but in a properly structured political system, the scope for such gross abuses should not exist.
It will not be enough merely to change the party in power - the problems we see today would simply recur at a later date. There has to be a thorough process of reform to restore public confidence.
A terrific movie. In my top six for sure but not second.It’s odd how well Mexican films and directors are doing these days. I shot an ad in Mexico City about 5 years ago and we were shooting in a derelict chapel and the crew numbered 105! I was told that people like to bring their families with them to help! I’m always amazed how they ever get a full length feature to-gether!
I would still be very surprised if anyone is charged with selling peerages. If they decide to charge people with deleting emails without charging anyone for selling peerages then that cant make sense. What could the emails have contained if not evidence that could incriminate someone with the substantive offense?
Re 64, CJ Fox, I disagree. The USSR had the best protection for human rights in law under Stalin of any country. If you have a bad executive, they will do what they like. The only way to fix that is to hold them to account in the free press (and internet) and then through them out,
Re 65, Roger, Makes sense to me. If emails were deleted to inpead the inquiry then charges could and should be brought.
59 - Yokel - “We are missing one set of information related to the Blair switch market: Just how fast could the Labour Party elect a new leader & deputy?”
I am puzzled by this and similar comments from other posters. The Betfair definition strikes me as uncharacteristically succinct and clear:
“When will Tony Blair officially cease to be leader of the Labour Party?”
If, say, a couple of top aides are arrested, say, tomorrow, TB might announce shortly thereafter that in the exceptional circumstances he considers he has no option but to stand down, as Party Leader and/or PM, *with immediate effect*. In such cicumstances, he would surely cease to be Leader within the terms specified by Betfair. This seems to me to allow plenty of time for Q1 backers to have their dreams fulfilled. I am not saying I think this is very likely but I have seen worse 20/1 shots [Beef or Salmon to win the Gold Cup, for example
] and would not discount it entirely.
Am I missing something?
I’m having trouble understanding how a supposed strategy by No10 to leak evicence in order to prevent prosecutions (as was surmised by posters on a number of blogs this weekend) would work.
If (for example) the Ipswich prostitue murder suspect sustain the type of coverage seen up until he was charged, and it still be deemed that a fair trial with an impartial jury could take place, then why on earth would a few leaked emails jeopordise the Cash for Peerages/cover up trial?
Just can’t see it - seems a fairly desperate strategy (which if it is the case, demonstrates what a hopeless position they think themselves in). Or have I missed something more significant?
It didn’t make sense to me Robin either. As it happens we seem to be the only people who don’t know the precise contents of this email. I called a friend this morning who knew all about it but said he was sworn to secrecy and told me to ring almost anyone else up and they’d tell me!
65 Roger, if there is evidence of perverting the course of justice or otherwise impeding the police then there may be sufficient evidence for charges of corruption, misfeance or bribery if there is insufficent evidence under the Honours Act. The laws on corruption seems a bit iffy as regards government departments, ministers or the crown but not sure if these exemptions apply to the people mentioned. Because it is hard to prove corruption the evidential factors looked at include:
* was the offer made in the presence of more than one person who can therefore corroborate? (an email might cover this)
* was the offer serious and was it made on more than one occasion?
* was the offer reported as soon as practicable?
* did the defendant have the money readily available to pay the bribe?
* did any money pass hands?
* did the person making the offer receive encouragement to make it?
It depends on the CPS and what case they would consider in view of evidence they have.
62. Benedict, you have a blog?
Sorry, that was just for old time’s sake.
60 Witan
I am gratified to note that you too are a member of that select minority known as The John Major Fan Club (motto: nice PM, shame about the PArty.)
Incidentally, you seemed to be confused about my ’spelling’ comments the other day. I was in a hurry and didn’t have time to explain. Basically, my ‘appointment’ of David Herdson as Spelling Commissar was meant to be ironic - a mild, not very serious dig at those who took issue with me on the little spelling debate recently.
No, my views haven’t changed - I still think nobody should critcise the spelling, or grammar, of others on site - but I was fascinated and amazed to discover how many thought otherwise. Ah well, always good to have one’s views challenged…variety, spice, life, and all that.
67. PtP
Has anyone got a clarity from Betfair or indeed, perhaps more improtantly, from the Labour Party? In effect if Blair resigns as PM tomorrow does he also resign from the leadership of the Labour Party with immediate effect and thus there is no leader until a new one comes in?
Or, is it he resigns as PM & Labour leader but like many resignations it has a notice period thus he is still leader until someone fills the seat?
Or, he resigns as PM but still is leader of the Labour Party until a new laeder is elected?
Or……..you get my point.
Peter you may be right, but I doubt very much the Party as a whole will want Blair resigning to be seen as a panic job thus I would suspect he’ll stay on as leader during the transition period whilst a new leader is elected. At the end of the day this is Labour Party’s call. Perhaps this has been clarified by someone au fait with the party’s mechanisms and I’ve missed it.
72. Make that one more, I quite liked the guy Major.
55 Sean T
I agree entirely but must again point out your incorrect use of the German language. ‘Sturm’ and ‘Drang’ are nouns and therefore require a capital letter. It is a strange and useless linguistic convention but until the Germans see fit to abandon it, we should show some respect.
It may be Sunday, but the Spelling Police remain active. Nor do they confine their activities to English.
This is a second warning. A thrid is likely to result in formal proceedings.
PtP I think JM was much underrated but made some errors. But who doesn’t? His party was Ok overall. It was some of his dumber backbenchers that used his small majority to cause mahyem and to capture the whole party but lost any chance of even avoiding a meltdown in 1997. We are just getting out of that nightmare now.
JM has done a splendid job looking after the interests of the two Princes and in a very modest and self deprecating way, too. That awful harridan ‘History” will judge him well for successfully correcting most of his mistakes and for his common sense in persuading the first Bush to halt the carnage in Iraq. If he had been in office, and not Blair, the younger Bush may have had a more rational guiding hand and more effective (that is constraining) friend?
Are you sure, on the spelling thing, that you have not got me confused with someone else?
Are the government trying to bring down any trial with leaks? If not they are doing a very good job at it. Further, roger, as their mouthpiece, makes it clear that they are attempting to curtail an investigation before its natural finish. Surely that will lead to further investigations? Might this affair go on for months ahead so that the latest leaks can become part of the investigation? Is, in fact, Q3 becoming more and more likely?
(and you charge people with what is easiest to convict, the way the law works it’s easier to go with PCJ, blame the legislators not the police)
73 In all seriousness, Yokel, I think yer best man is Andrea. I think he has opined on this matter before and if I recall correctly…
Sorry…fat finger…
i) the two resignations - PM & Labour Leader - may be some time apart but in practice it isn’t likely
ii) upon resignation, the Labour NEC would meet and decide what to do - probably apoint a Temporary Leader and then announce elections
In short, I think the technical arguments against Q1 are ill founded. There is time - it just ain’t likely (though not impossible.)
79. Fair enough, I’ll take that as correct.
And finally, Yokel…
Yes, I understand and you may be right. I just suspect we may be at a tipping point where the benefits of Blair not appearing to panic are roughly balanced by the benefits of an early departure.
I think the Q2 and Q3 options should both be about evens and have hedged my bets accordingly. Plenty of room for healthy argument though.
If peter the p is to activate the Spelling Police, he ought, in fairness,to issue a spelling list of words likely to be useful for the coming week:
definite
jail or gaol
arrest
resignation
imprisonment
A”(and you charge people with what is easiest to convict”
You’ve watched too much Perry Mason! If you don’t think that after ten policemen have spent a year on this investigatoion they will take the line of least resistance at the final moment then you have less respect for the law than I have. They will bring charges for everything that they have evidence for and for which they believe there is a reasonable chance of conviction.
PS Paul. I’m not even a Labour Party Member let alone a spokesman for them!!
83 - If the people concerned have destroyed the evidence then you have to go with PCJ, surely you can see that.
(Thanks for the line about the government trying to get the police to lay charges before they feel as though they have completed investigations by the way, I had thought that might be a ploy but you articulated it first).
47 - no he’s not.
Rentoul only has one script - and it’s Sebastian’s script from Little Britain.
He loves Tony and wants to have his babies.
And he hates Brown.
And he lasways has done and he always will.
Good piece to read over sunday lunch on George Galloway’s site
It’s open season for “Nulabour bashing”
MPs from Poland and Germany are visiting Britain on behalf of the Council of Europe. In a humiliation for the government, they will be investigating the lack of integrity in Britain’s voting system and the systematic corruption of the voting process. Voting fraud has mushroomed since the government introduced the postal voting on demand system.
In a major speech in the debate called by the Tory opposition in the Commons , George Galloway accused the government of a cynical subversion of the electoral system in order to increase their chances of winning general and local elections. Postal voting on demand has destroyed the secrecy of the ballot introduced in 1872 to stop corruption and allowed the easy theft of voters’ ballot papers.
Galloway indicted Christine Gilbert, the former chief executive of Tower Hamlets council and wife of Labour Minister Tony McNulty, for presiding over the most corrupt elections on the British mainland since the secret ballot was established. For her services as Chief Executive of Tower Hamlets council, Gilbert has been rewarded by being made head of Ofsted. New Labour held on by just one seat to their control of Tower Hamlets council and Galloway will detail specific allegations of fraud which enabled them to do so.
“Postal voting on demand has nothing to do with making it easier for people to participate in our democracy,” said Galloway in his speech lambasting the government, New Labour and senior council officers. “It is all about enabling the major parties to organise and manipulate their vote to give them the best chance of winning. It is but a very small step from this to outright theft, fraud and coercion of the vote.”
George Galloway is demanding an end to postal voting on demand to begin the process of restoring the integrity of our voting system.
I don’t think we have heard the last on this one.
83 The police don’t decide the charges, the CPS do. The CPS has a history of going down the easiest route and charging only where there is a high confidence of conviction in their view.
76 Witan
It is also my belief that he played a crucial role in starting the NI Peace Process, though I type these words in trepidation that I may be taken to task by our resident expert on the matter.
Re spelling…confused? Yes, most probably. It’s me age.
87 I never thought I would agree with Gorgeous George but postal voting, which I use, needs a radical overhaul.
Or rather go back to what it was: a mechanism to use if you had good reason not to go to the polls: service personnel and government employees outside the country, business that took you outside the country at irregular but prolonged periods, chronic debilitating sickness etc.
To make it easier to vote why not have polls open every evening for a week including a weekends?
33.
” how will Gordon go down?”
Ssurely, questions og this nature should be left to the commentators who frequent Guido Fawkes’ blog?
81. Its not a big worry for me as I’m modestly green for both Q2 & Q3 though there isn’t substantial money involved.
Whilst my understanding of the procedurals of Tony’s resignation would appear to be wrong and thus have coloured my views, incorrectly, on a Q1 bet, your clarifications do make Q2 look even more attractive not me than they first looked this morning. I think its overpriced. As you know I’ve had my own theories on the Tony legacy project and Q2 before. Given current circumstances, I just can’t seem to get away from topping up on it especially under current as I have a little scope to do so.
O/T Sad to see War of Attrtion out, he was my one success out of 3 last year and thankfully one of my biggest bets on Cheltenham in a while. Having said that I wouldnt have fancied him this year on the now likely slow going.
If you remember Galloway’s speech after he won BG & B; he spent more time attacking the returning officer for the conduct of the election than he did attacking Blair over Iraq.
92. I think I’ve just kicked Martin Day’s rear for poor spelling & grammar with that post…and I don’t have an excuse for mine….
I hope other PB.commers managed to get on a Q1 departure at 65 the other night, as recommended by yours truly. The lay price has now moved down to 50, so a (small!) guaranteed profit is already available. It seems to me that in the event of charges being laid early next week, the Q1 price is likely to collapse to perhaps 5-6 in short order. A knee-jerk move perhaps, but one that would mean some decent returns for the braver punter.
92 O/T and onto sanity…
Am getting a lot of interesting Festival info through now, some from Ireland where everybody seems to be getting very excited about Arran Concerto. Over here, I hear warm words for State of Play and Our Vic (Ryanair, NOT the GC). On Thursday, I’ll be going to the popular London Racing Club pre-Festival meeting. I always scribble some notes for circulation afterwards. I’ll copy you, but be warned that these days, the best thing about these meetings is the beer.
95 Ramper - I may dislike the name but am happy to confirm you were spot on that exciting evening.
97. Merci, Pierre. My other recommendation from that evening also still holds - in the event of charges and resignation, I cannot see how Brown can avoid being caught in the inevitable political backlash. The desire for a new face to clean up Labour’s image will be huge. He is a lay, even given the recent drift in his price.
OT: what a self deluded, immature, awkward and boring prick Ming Campbell is. That is all.
just seen the write up of Sir Menzies speech at Spring Conference on the BBC website. quite a good attack. If it was dancing on ice I would give him 5.6
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6416621.stm
98 Hmmm..with all due respect, Ramper, can’t go along with that. You know he’s 1/10 with the traditional bookies? Absent a clear link with CfH, I can’t see Brown’s position being threatened.
100. Really? He just seems particularly unpleasant. Oh I forgot, he’s now ‘Mr Angry!’
100 I thought so too, Jimbo, but then what do we know? NS seems to be the leading authority on Ming things.
There are two separate issues here: what will actually happen, and what punters think will happen. I can only really comment on the first, but I do know what I’m talking about when I say that TB will not resign if (and it remains an if) anyone who has been cautioned is charged.
After all, why should he? If you learn that one of your staff or indeed a friend of yours is accused of something, you’ll be concerned and probably sceptical, but would it cross your mind for one second that it should make *you* quit your job? As for pressure from Labour MPs for him to go early, it has almost entirely evaporated - I can’t think of a single one who is still arguing that he should.
The speculation that it’ll move markets back and forth may well be right and I won’t offer an opinion on that. The outcome, though, will IMO be in the range May-July.
104. Thanks Nick..May it is then….!
I take it you can confirm comments above that once Tony announces his resignation he formally ceases to be Labour leader with immediate effect rather than when his successor is chosen?
105: There I don’t know - it depends on the wording (and, for those who bet on it, presumably on how Betfair interprets it).
Meanwgile…
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/03/04/ncam04.xml
33. Hmm, John Rentoul claims in his article that the Chancellor sprung the public sector pay rises on the cabinet. But in fact Brown has been making speeches to the City that there would be a 2% public sector rise since last April. In July 2006, he sent a letter and a paper to the Pay Review Body, which can be found on the Treasury website
http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/674/D1/publicsectorpay_130706.pdf
The whole ten-page paper deals in detail with inflation and how this was picking up, and concludes
“In conclusion, this paper has shown that against a background of high service price inflation, goods price inflation has been increasing and there has been a temporary increase in consumer price inflation due to high oil prices. It will be important to remain vigilent to the risk of higher pay settlements feeding into higher service sector inflation and that public sector pay rises do not contribute to inflationary pressure in the economy going forwards.
….. The Pay Review Bodies should therefore base their pay settlements on the achievement of the inflation target of 2%”.
This remember was July 2006. Since then the economy has accelerated, and the bank of England has reacted. The govt had to do it’s bit to tighten fiscal policy. Anyone who thought otherwise had rocks in their head. It’s disturbing that even after such detailed explanations as in the paper linked to above, some cabinet ministers didn’t get it.
I assume the minister busily texting at the cabinet meeting was Patricia Hewitt, and that it was Blairites who briefed Rentoul.
While it’s true that Hewitt will find it rough selling this to the unions, and would have preferred a higher rise to ease her job, recall that public sector union members are likely to take revenge on Brown for this in the leadership ballot - and that he is fully aware of this, but put Britain’s interests before his own leadership ambitions. Brown is taking the bigger risk.
This episode also illustrates why it’s important that Brown becomes leader - I think he’s the only member of the cabinet who understands economics. If he’s not there, what will happen to the economy? It doesn’t bear thinking about.
re 68, Robin, the strategy mystifies me also.
Re 69 Roger, I’d love to have a word with a few of your friends!
Re 71 Seant,
Re 72 and 74, Me too, Major was a nice chap.
107 If he’s the only one in the Cabinet who understands economics, we have a bit of a problem, Snowy.
What about Alistair Darling? Is he a dunce, too?
101. We will have to agree to differ, mon cher. But I think you may be undestimating what a seismic impact this affair is likely to have on the Labour Party.
Can I be the first to simply thank Yates and the Yard - for a year of splendid entertainment? The way they’ve dragged it out for so long, with cliffhangers, subplots, narrative twists, dramatic interventions and everything else - is worthy of Dickens on mid-season form. No, better than that, Dan Brown.
I particularly like the way the noose has slowly, oh so slowly, tightened around Blair himself. Excellent stuff.
Ok i’ve just had a totally random thought, and want to know whether I am correct. Will the Labour leadership election be the first time that someone who is 15 years of age be able to vote for a primeminister? A good way on emancipation for those under the age of 18!
111 Sure thing, Ramper, and for my part it will be a perfectly respectful agreement.
Anyone read John Hutton’s comments on a competitor to Gordon?
105.”I take it you can confirm comments above that once Tony announces his resignation he formally ceases to be Labour leader with immediate effect rather than when his successor is chosen? ”
when Labour is in government and the leader (who is PM) becomes permanently unavailable, the Cabinet shall, in consultation with the NEC, appoint one of its members to serve as party leader until a ballot under these rules can be carried out.
So I suppose it’s possible that Tony announces his resignation triggering the election process and then the Cabinet and the NEC ask him to carry on until the end of the elction process
116. Many Thanks
Could go either way then, either ceases to be leader right away (eg resigning in disgrace due to scandal) or stays on until new leadership process complete (eg resigning post election stuffing).
I should expand that Hutton says that a competitor to Gordon would be good for democracy within the party. Can be read and as a statement of pretty neutral fact or as something else…
110. I might be being uncharitable, but I think that Gordon Brown, Ed Balls and Vince Cable are the only ones in the commons who understand economics.
There is no chance of Cable ever holding the post of chancellor. So the country is left with Brown and Balls. If Brown is PM, he can ensure that Balls continues to exert a strong influence in the Treasury. If Brown was not PM would another candidate have the sense to keep Balls in place? Probably not.
It’s actually scary that some in the cabinet were in favour of the short-term gain of a good public sector rise, and didn’t understand the long-term threats it posed. This after a year of persuasion and some pretty clear explanations of why it was necessary to hold pay-rises to 2% from the treasury. Shades of what happened in the first term.
I think when Brown and Balls finally exit government, this golden age economically speaking, will end. And then people will wonder why they were so hung up on Brown’s grumpiness, and gave him so little credit for taking some very hard decisions in the teeth of opposition from his own side.
116. “So I suppose it’s possible that Tony announces his resignation triggering the election process and then the Cabinet and the NEC ask him to carry on until the end of the elction process”
Massive scope for betfair confusion if official leader Tony Blair is replaced by interim leader Tony Blair.
119. Like all resignations he may simply ‘carry on’ without an interim leader.
Further scope for fun is revealed by the betfair market rules for next Labour leader.
[…]The market will be settled based on the first official announcement of the next Labour leader as selected in the next Labour leadership contest.[…]
I know it’s unlikely, but what if there’s no contest?
Re 87, Herbert, I don’t like agreeing with Galloway, but here I do.
121. Alrighty thats clear…..where did you get that?
118 Uncharitable was not the word that sprang to mind, Snowflake - arrogant would be more like it. After all, you imply you are in a good position to judge. If you are - and for all I know you may be - then you must be an Economist of some distinction.
Perhaps it’s time to drop the mask and let us know who you really are.
72,74,109 - Count me in too - Major was a decent and honourable Prime Minister (agree PtP?). He was badly let down by the parliamentary party, which by that time was almost ungovernable.
113 - so you’re only 15?!
Still not sure why the leak strategy would work (68). I guess then that the Met forced the AG’s hand because they were more concerned at protecting the ongoing enquiry than any supposed threat to a trial.
That says to me that charges are not far away.
118 Yes that’s right snowflakes, because economics is weally weally hard.
Re 100, Jimbo, The BBC headlines it as Menzies seeks deal with Brown.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6416621.stm
A seriously bad move that will damage the Lib Dems. If people want Labour out next time they are not going to swap to another party who will keep them in!
121/123 Clear?!!! It creates massive uncertainty and complications. Where did it come from, James?
124. It’s my opinion, and I’m entitled to hold it - just as you are entitled to hold the opinion that I’m arrogant.
I don’t get wound up about your opinions - why are you getting so wound up about mine? If you disagree with my thesis, provide an explanation why.
Re 104, Nick, I entirely agree. He will simply not resign. In fact I don’t think he would resign if he was charged!
126. Have you noticed how many Tories have lisps on here?
125 Agreed, Robin.
Re 106, Cameron on the back foot? Now he is just playing down a gaff. Mind you I got some stick over it too, from Lib dems who seem to manage to agree and disagree with us at the same time!
Yokel. Not that I think either outcome is at all likely but… You’ll find the rules on a tab on the right hand side of the market in question.
128. Irony PtP irony….this is looking complicated. I always assumed it was on this basis that the Blair switch would be decided (assuming an orderly handover) until your comments this morning.
Now I’m just confused…which is unfair to my brain.
124 - I’ve got her down as Mrs Brown or Mrs Balls… the blinkered unshakeable bunker approach to everything is almost admirable.
131 Have you noticed how you have become a figure of derision?
Low rates are the sign of bad economies not always good ones. This shows the level of deception these boys are involved in. Waht would growth figures look like if not for massive increases in public spending under NuLab?
It is however the inconsistency of policy that marks Brown as as either clueless or a spinner of yarns.
How can having a minimum wage, massive welfare increases with poverty reduction as a goal tally with unrestricted labour market supply?
The widening of the wealth gap is a direct result of government policy as those deemed to be just above the poverty line are all sucked into the welfare trap because wages cannot rise. The sad fact is thet we are destined for another low turnout election, with no policy alternatives that are worthy of the name. We will see the ‘core’vote become more important with many voters turning away from Labour simply not voting given the alternatives. cameron plucks defeat from jaws of victory……
It is hard to think of anyone who would not get elected in Camerons position. I seem to remember a vacuous, devious, master of spin winning a landslide in circumstances not as advantageous as those facing Cameron
Is it likely that the police will leave it till tomorrow morning to charge someone?
Re 124, Peter I felt the remark by snowflake a little beneath contempt!
127 - why do the BBC use the picture of Ming doing his celebrated impersonation of John le Carre’s Smiley?
Were the LD posters aware that PR was no longer a deal breaker?
127 - Short of an agreement to introduce an acceptable form of PR to be followed by an immediate election, if it is made clear that lib dems will make a pact with labour I will stay at home and not vote. Why should I vote for the continuance in power of the party that is the least liberal?
139. Could be a way to go yet.
A dawn raid and arrest always looks spectacular though….
139 - or they’ve already charged someone and injuncted it? (Is there a verb to injunct? I doubt it…)
I see Snowflake is Boring for Labour again. If the Labour party is the only party with great economists, why did they want to go into the euro? And how come Britain has been growing slower than any other major English-speaking economy? Derr? Snowy?
Economics, as it happens, isn’t hard. You free up the labour market, rein back the unions, cut taxes, deregulate, improve infastructure, abolish capital controls -
Bingo - growth. The question is how much you let politics and the need for social cohesion interfere with this natural process. Labour have gone for an inbetween approach - in between America on the one hand and the eurozone on the other. As a consequence we have agreeably steady but not spectacular growth. Quite good, could do better.
The idea that Brown and Balls are economic titans, as if that matters anyway, as if such a thing exists, is risible.
Snowy, love, put the kettle on. I’ll have a macaroon.
Re 142, Ukpaul you could always vote Conservative!
re 144, Robin I doubt it!
Lib Dems say PR no longer a “deal breaker” for coalition. Interesting the focus is on Labour, but it always was a bigger stumbling block with the Tories. At the same time it opens that possibility, it raises their leverage with Labour by raising that possibility. A new realism by the Lib Dems. Perhaps. I think in the first instance they will try to make sure they nail down some gains perhaps something on the House of Lords than stake everything in obtaining PR for the HoC, risking triggering a quick second election as in 1974 which see one or other of the big two returned with a majority, and the “mom