Right at the wrong time

Cassandras

The unimportance of being right in politics is proved again.

The Cassandras of 2003 on the dangers of the Qinetiq deal were ignored and they are ignored now. The perpetrator or this massive error is waltzing round TV studies as Lord Moonie the pundit.

Researcher David Lowry, MP Llew Smith and 34 other MPs  complained vociferously that it is wrong to encumber taxpayers with liabilities while selling off public assets to the private sector. There were bitter exchanges on procedure with the Speaker as this major financial scandal was smuggled out in a hidden announcement. There was no significant  debate at the time. The media were numb with indifference in spite of the matter having raised repeatedly on the floor of the House.

Lord Moonie now beams with 20/20 hindsight self satisfaction. It would educational for him to read his blind faith in the deal at the time. It would be helpful if just one journalist did the homework and exposed the culpable complacency of Government in 2003.

As always , no credit to David Lowry, Llew Smith et al. We were all right at the wrong time. Before the event. How foolish of us.

Tabloid Induced

Stupid but not wicked, we hope.

David Abrahams wanted to give money while protecting his privacy. He did not want to hunted and hounded by the jackals of the national press.

Labour party supporters are right to be furious that again we are being portrayed as the bad guys. Idiotic administrative failures of this kind do not compare to other  scandals. Buying peerages is a utterly wrong. So is stuffing £50 notes in brown envelopes to ask PQs. Lobbyists treating politicians to buy votes is abominable.This is perceived to be worse than it is  because it comes in the wake of other scandals involving party funding.

It happened before when the Tories went mad over sexual scandals. They were  knocked off their 'back to basics- family values' pedestal by a serious of cases of matrimonial infidelities. Some of these bad news stories were strung out for weeks. Major ordered MPs to resign swiftly if another scandal broke.

It was the hapless  MP Mr Hartley Booth who starred in their scandal free scandal. His researcher published a love poem he had written to her. There was no suggestion of any physical contact whatsoever. At worse, he may have had a naughty thought, But the hysteria won and he resigned never to hold office again. It was dubbed 'Coitus non-startus' or 'Hartley's seedless jam.'

There are worrying latent scandals now that have not stirred a ripple of interest among the tabloids. Are Lords Ashcroft and Laidlaw living abroad after promising to move to the UK as a condition of their peerages? Are they paying UK taxes? MP Gordon Prentice has raised this and has a bill to strip Lords of their peerages.

Why is no-one interested in exposing the truth of these scandal-rich scandals?

Comments

[Praguetory, Czech]

"Stupid ? ...yes. Wicked?...hardly"

Why should we accept stupid leaders? On the other hand, I applaud Brown's decision to return these illegal donations.

[Tony]

Actually I think the situation over the donations shows Labour as a victom of its own success. In the run-up to the 1997 election we did get stories about 'sleaze' and incompentance in government against the Tories and it was a major factor in their defeat in that people did not trust them any longer. However successful that approach was it has changed the rules on the how we view the actions of politicians. In this case it seems that it was no malicious intent to hide the identity of the donor but because of the current situation over Northern Rock and the HRMC data then anything will be seized on as evidence of malpractise / incompetence - if you use the weapon then you can hardly be surprised when the opposition, having been burnt in the past, realise how effective this can be in discrediting the government.

[Paul Flynn]

The legislation brought in transparency. Without the 2000 Act neither cash for questions or this latest donation would be in the public domain.

Unless there are elements in this that we do not know, this is still at the lower end of sleaze scale. Stupid ? ...yes. Wicked?...hardly

[Praguetory, Czech]

"Please try to answer the questions on who or what was harmed."

A victimless crime to rank alongside white collar fraud, shop-lifting, prostitution, drug-taking and other crimes not included in the British Crime Survey?

"Of course it's wrong but where is the harm?"

The proper application of political donation rules are crucial to a level playing field. Anybody can see that breaking of these laws/rules harms democracy.

"A ticking off perhaps, but a resignation?"

Why did your government bring in this legislation if you don't think the laws should be enforced?

"On a scale where 100 is the worst financial scandal, this would rank at minus 2."

Good to see you bring up the subject of financial scandal whilst £25bn of public money is on loan to Northern Rock and another £15bn is on the line and 25 million citizen's bank details are at risk. Care to place them on your makeshift financial Richter scale?

I think the end to your disastrous tenure is finally in sight.

[Paul Flynn]

Please try to answer the questions on who or what was harmed. Of course it's wrong but where is the harm? A ticking off perhaps, but a resignation?

On a scale where 100 is the worst financial scandal, this would rank at minus 2.

The Labour party is punch drunk with repeated bad news and acts irrationally. This was the main item on the BBC News. the world has gone mad.

[Praguetory]

Who has been harmed ? What great principle has been breached? The two named donors are not seeking any advantage from the party . Neither is Mr Abrahams.

Stop jumping to the most convenient conclusions. The rules around donations are there for a reason. That the offical who is responsible for your party's reporting obligations didn't know the rules is atrocious. It remains to be seen why Peter Watt decided to leave so quickly.