Mr Blair – You Owe Me!

Monday 14th May, 2007

• Home Page
• All Contents of Site – Index
• Brown Stuff
• Tony Blair – VERY Latest
• “I did what I thought was right”
• A Leader’s Deathbed Confession?
  

Preamble to this post -

Since most of you will get bored after a sentence or two of the below, I’d better make it clear! I don’t actually MEAN this post title. The PM owes me NOTHING.

I just thought I’d try to get into the mindset of the dissatisfied or the unsatisfiable, thus this post.

The other night I was tapping merrily away, but in the clear light of a sunny morning, I thought I’d better clarify a few things, Officer. So you can click away now secure in the knowledge that I am NOT after a payback ;0)

Original post follows:

Yes, Sir. You do. A peerage will do. Though really I’d be happy with some of my time back so that I could get back to my own business. Can you fix it for me?

After all I deserve it, don’t I? If you’d like to spend a few minutes chasing around the internet (well, no I don’t expect you would – that involves computers), you might notice that this is one of the few blogs or websites dedicated to upholding your character, and defending your innocence and generally saying you are an all right kind of guy! And your staff, too. And I have never met any of you!

Surely, that’s worth SOMEthing?

Well, no. It’s worth nothing, actually. All I’m doing is what I prefer to do – having a bit of faith in human nature – not jumping to conclusions – not being misled by others’ prejudices or well-put opinions. I’m happier being like this – believing in people, even if I do seem to be in the minority, in the online community, anyway.

Well it’s 1:30am and I should be tucked up like most people, but I’m still determined to put another side to this story, so here goes.

Yates and A Year-Long Inquiry

For almost a year we’ve had the prospect of the prime minister – (the Prime Minister?! I can still hardly beLIEVE it!) – and/or some of Number 10’s staff, being dragged through the courts and possibly clapped inside. The REAL criminals at HMPs must be rubbing their hands with glee, anticipating the day they can “rough up some bigwig” or worse. Got some “solitary” cells available, Mr Reid?

And why this manhunt? Well, it’s to do with some favours they’re supposed to have done in exchange for a bit of prestige. You know – the usual stuff.

To this end we’ve had Scotland Yard, under the rising star, Inspector Yates, working away like a good un – “only following the leads”. And in the wax and wane of his relentless wake we’ve watched the great British press having hairy fits to be first with the breaking news. The Attorney General’s integrity is constantly questioned as he is accused of wearing two ill-fitting hats at the same time. The police seem to have honed their leaking skills as keenly as others. The press struggle to uphold their right to publish regardless of injunctions and of endangering ongoing high-profile inquiries. And all the while the government struggles, man and womanfully to hold firmly to their task of running the country.

Don’t get me wrong – if this was a murder inquiry and the police were digging up the garden at Number 10, I’d understand. I’d shut up. [Even if we'd noticed the chancellor had been missing for a few weeks ;0) ]

Yes, I would STILL shut up. Honest.

Or if the government had set up a slush fund and had set themselves up in international drug trafficking, profiting from Afghanistan’s poppies.

Or if Mr Blair had pocketed a few millions from the party donors to help set up his Blair Academy.

But none of this has happened.

This needless and irrational inquiry is having a corrosive effect on this country and on the Mother of Parliaments upon which many others are based. There must be more than a few at the top of the police service who have been asking themselves, “what’s happened to Yates’ judgement? Has he comPLETEly lost it?”

A Flood of Leaks

There have been leaks galore, from one side or another. And just when we thought we’d all agreed on how to fix them, here it comes again. The public are confused. Don’t know who to believe. The police – the government – the press – none of them? In the end public cynicism becomes the norm and people believe what they want to believe and carelessly bask in their own little pool of selective, superior, insider knowledge.

Inside Out

Only they’re not on the inside, they’re on the outside. Obviously. But they think they are on the inside because the paper press, who also think they are on the inside, and can get quite uppity when it’s clear they’re not, keep feeding them their superior ‘insider knowledge’. People believe what they want to believe and they read the papers to prove it.

Didn’t Yates realise this cynicism could develop if the inquiry stretched on an on? Or is that of no interest to him?

Has he no responsibility for the fact that the court of public opinion is sitting in its semi-ignorance and prejudice and damning as corrupt a prime minister, government, party, their friends and associates and our whole system of government?

Is his judgement so focused on getting his man/men/woman that it never crossed his mind that the fight might not be worth the candle? There are many times where inquiries are not pursued “in the public interest” and of much lower potential political or public fallout.

I have no idea whether charges will be pressed. Certainly it looks like the original inquiry on “cash for honours” was dumped through insufficient proof or a sniff of a fishier odour elsewhere.

YET WHY if the original reasons were so clear-cut has the focus been moved? Surely if the case was so strong and indefensible, Scotland Yard should have found something months ago?

A Nod And A Wink

After all we all know that cash-for-honours arrangements are long-standing. It has ALWAYS been done. It’s the British way. A nod and a wink. Generation after generation. So what?

So, since this government introduced a new law focusing on this as an area to be tackled, they need to be taught the first lesson, eh?! Hoist by their own petard. No, surely that is no motive?

I have always argued that if charges were pressed, then alongside Mr Blair or his staff or colleagues in the dock would be numerous predecessors who did the same thing. Not to mention today’s Conservative party, who, perhaps watching their own backs, have been noticeably quiet throughout this last year. And the Liberal Democrats’ largest donor is serving a prison sentence as I write.

But this crowded dock will never be seen. It’s a pretty exclusive place – invited guests only. Inspector Yates’s inquiry was only ever about THIS government.

Again – WHY?

I wonder if Yates would have considered pursuing this case if Tony Blair was at his earlier heights of public popularity. If he hadn’t got himself in hot water over an unpopular war. If some of his policies hadn’t irritated people (including the police, at least the police some of the time).

Struggling here, admittedly, to find motive. I can’t really believe that an intelligent policeman thinks that the suspected breaking or bending of an electoral law here and there (allegedly) is worth all of THIS! A quiet chat surely would have made sure that Labour’s plans for House of Lords Reform and Party Funding were put at the forefront. Hang on. Haven’t they been? Weren’t they always going to be tackled?

And yet, an ulterior motive for this inquiry is out of the question, I am sure. Well, almost.

And, of course the inquiry has now become allegedly, the pursuit of a cover-up – a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. A MUCH more serious offence. Yet, was protecting one’s own position not inevitable? Given the complexity of the issues, the positions of those under inquiry, the proximity to the top levels of government, WHAT was expected? Somebody in the firing line would have been bound to say – “it would be better if they didn’t see this, or know about that”. Surely? Human nature.

Real Life?

I think we need to step back and get real about this. Put yourself in that situation. Would you and I willingly open all the drawers to a police inquiry if we thought that some of the dirty washing could be rinsed out to our disadvantage?

Then again perhaps we do have to believe that Inspector Yates expects such high standards of behaviour from everyone and anyone and himself, presumably, that bending of the rules, for instance, is a criminal offence and those suspected must be pursued relentlessly.

And yet we know that in real life we are often put into situations where the truth is ever so slightly twisted. Where agreements are made ‘under the table’. Where shortcuts are taken, reciprocal arrangements made.

It’s called ‘life’. And we’re in it.

We look right now like an innocent, naive new little country, which thinks it’s grown up, trying to lock people up for ‘life’ when they have committed no more than a traffic offence.

I’ll probably add to this post, when there’s another leak or rumour which irritates my sense of justice.

Be Sure “Getting Blair” Is Not The Motive

In the meantime, good people of Britain, I suppose I can have faith in your common sense. You’re not meekly going to be led by the nose, swallowing the Yates endeavour for the country’s honour. Or are you? Has Tony Blair let you down so badly that you don’t care why you get him, or how, as long as you get him?

It seems that despite the PM’s problems and unpopularity he is still ahead of any others in his party in the popularity stakes, according to the latest opinion poll.

And by the way, in case you hadn’t guessed – I was only joking with that page title.

Mr Blair – you owe me nothing. You’ve given me and the country enough. Enough already! That reminds me of a Guardian Cif (Comment-is-Free) article I read by Ellie Levenson in September 11th 2006. I found it quite moving. Ill paste it at the bottom.

I’m proud of the stance I ‘m taking, even if I’m the only blogger in the country who thinks we are all innocent until and unless proven guilty, and that includes prime ministers and their staff.

Others may think you still owe them in some area or another, in some issue or policy; I don’t. I’ve been perfectly happy with most of the changes that you and your government have brought to this country over the last ten years. I haven’t had everything I’d have liked, but much more than I had expected in 1997. And I remember the previous government.

I just wonder if Inspector Yates, the printed press and many in the country will feel they owe you something if the whole thing blows over with no charges made. An apology, say? I wonder, but I don’t expect.

==============================================

Written a week after the PM was “encouraged” to say he’d resign within a year.

Why I still love Tony
by Ellie Levenson
September 11th 2006
Guardian Comment-is-Free

“It might not be fashionable at the moment, but we should remember and be thankful for all the good things Blair has done.

It’s not a popular time to declare oneself a Blairite. Even Blair isn’t being so bold these days. In fact I may be the last Blairite standing, which I know will earn rather a lot of opprobrium on these pages, and probably elsewhere.

I wasn’t at the Progress conference this weekend. Well, it was a Saturday. But I was so roused watching it at home on the telly that I actually stood up and clapped, frightening next door’s cat that has taken to sunbathing in my window box in the process. It reminded me exactly why it is I am still a fan of Tony, and just why the conduct of some members of the Labour party this week has been disappointing.

So I expect you might ask why I’m still a Tony fan. I know that many people have worked up their hatred of him to such a level they are unable to recall the great things the government has done under his leadership. The fact that you are probably tutting and spitting and frowning and cussing and already composing your responses as you read this proves it. So here’s why. I’m a Tony fan because of the national minimum wage. Because the debt was dropped for many developing countries. Because of the pledge to end child poverty. Because of the Civil Partnership Act. Oh yes, and because of the free entry to national museums and the restoration of London government.

There’s a song Jews sing at Passover – Dayenu. It means “it would have been enough”. It lists some of the things God has given the Jews and says after each, Dayenu, each of them would have been enough. No, I’m not comparing Tony to God, but to all of the above, compared to the regressive nature of the Tory years, Dayenu.

But it wasn’t enough and Tony knew it. There were other great achievements. Sure Start for example. Or the Disability Rights Commission. Or how about peace in Northern Ireland? Dayenu. Oh, and the Freedom of Information Act, shorter hospital waiting lists, tax credits, paternity leave and better workers’ rights. The Human Rights Act – Dayenu. Oh go on then, one more for good measure, more places in higher education, a policy that has done more to raise people’s aspirations and make the country less elitist than any other.

No wonder I’m disappointed at the conduct of his detractors – he deserves to be remembered for all of the above, not be forced out of office in a wave of cowardly backstabbing and disloyal letters.

I hope the Labour party wins the next election, but I fear the behaviour of the last week may have contributed to making this less likely. If whoever takes over next May does lose the next election, there is likely to be a second leadership contest shortly afterwards. And if there is we could do worse than to bring back the man who made us electable in the first place. Yes, that’s right, we re-elect Tony. Ten more years, that’s what I say!”

==============================================

Ms Levenson – I couldn’t have put it better myself. You’re a star!

---

Tags: Mr Blair - you owe me