- Home Page
- Blair’s Retirement Announcement – “I did what I thought was right”
- Tony Blair – VERY Latest
- All Contents of Site – Index
- The Guardian Cif-ers and Other Such …
- Go to the start of Original Post, as at site’s launch
- Go to Blair Videos Page – to fill that Blair-shaped hole in politics
- Watch my videos on Tony Blair at YouTube
- Brown Stuff
Click here to add your comment
Thursday 10th May, 2007
This page was originally called “Tony Blair – Latest” . I’ve tidied it a bit and re-named it. The font is smaller than the original to make loading faster, but the content is exactly the same.
Click here For “Tony Blair – Very Latest”, from 30th March to today
Caption Contest – Forever Friends
Any suggestions about who is saying what here? Here are a few of mine. Add yours to the comment box at the bottom:
GB: [”Keep still, Tony, while I retrieve this sharp object I misplaced last summer. I’ll make it as painful, er, painless as possible”]
GB: [”Sorry, Tony … but this hurts you more than it hurts me.”]
GB: [”Don’t struggle, Tony … just keep looking ahead. You won’t feel a thing.”]
TB: [It isn’t dandruff, just a few grey hairs, Gordon.”]
So now you know what I think of our soon-to-be Prime Minister. I wonder what exactly became of Brutus after Caesar’s demise? Must dig out my Shakespeare. Hope it was tragic.
29th March, 2007
Update
HOSTAGES TO FORTUNE?
Now the Iranians are re-thinking whether to release the female marine if “Britain creates a fuss”!
A FUSS?! There are increasing numbers in the UK who think the fuss is not big enough.
If there was ever any doubt that this capture was anything other than political surely we now understand. Even if our service boats HAD been in Iranian waters, it is not legal to capture those on board at gunpoint. Our service people should have been asked to leave the area. They would doubtless have done so immediately in order to defuse the situation and to verify whether or not they were in Iraqi waters. Holding hostage, which is more or less what is happening, service personnel of a nation there under UN mandate, is illegal and wrong.
The Iranians have said that British officials will be allowed to meet with the British Navy personnel once they admit that their sailors and marines were in Iranian waters by mistake. They will not get this admission, as it is not true, so will have to come up with another reason to climb down. This has come as a result of Tony Blair’s ratcheting up of the pressure, and President Bush’s support of the British stance yesterday. The British government has frozen ties with Tehran.
28th March, 2007
IRAN CRISIS
British Navy Personnel – Female Captive Speaks – Video
“Unacceptable, wrong and illegal” said Tony Blair in parliament today (view today’s Prime minister’s questions).
On release of the video, which is seen as propaganda, Iran has said that Faye Turney, the only female in the fifteen, will be released ‘today or tomorrow’. The UK government and people want them ALL back, and SOON. BBC report here.
The letter seen on the video, and said to be written by Seaman Turney, is widely seen to have been written under duress. Des Browne, Defence Minister, said it is “completely unacceptable” to parade our people in this way.
Newsnight reports tonight showed pictures of the seized naval personnel seemingly still with their weapons. These pictures have been dismissed by Menzies Campbell, Lib Dem leader as “confection”.
NORTHERN IRELAND – The End of The Beginning? Paisley & Adams agree on devolution setup. READ IT HERE
If you’re known as Mandy, there’s a song about you below – click here to view video
He “ain’t bothered” – click here to view video
The Latest opinion polls shows that Blair’s MORE POPULAR than Brown
HISTORIC DAY FOR NORTHERN IRELAND
They’ve agreed! Ian Paisley of the DUP and Gerry Adams, Sinn Fein, met for the first time (can you believe it?) this morning and agreed to restore Northern Ireland ’s devolution from the 8th May.
Bertie Ahern, the Irish prime minister, Peter Hain, Northern Ireland Secretary, and Tony Blair all noted the momentous nature of today’s agreement.
Video of statement byPaisley and Adams
Video reaction of Tony Blair to the agreement
Prime Minister Tony Blair, who has devoted years and much effort into securing a settled devolved assembly, said it was, “… a very important day for the people of Northern Ireland, but also for the people and the history of these islands”.
“Everything we have done over the last ten years has been a preparation for this moment.”
Now that the PM has succeeded in this task, with others of course, of settling this centuries-old conflict, perhaps he can retire from office a happier man than otherwise. He deserves it.
Of course now Mr Blair’s date of resignation is being mulled over again. After the work he has put into the Northern Ireland peace process over the last ten years you can put a bet on it being after 8th May!
MANDELSON’S LEADERSHIP CALL TO MILIBAND
Update to leadership controversy:
Hazel Blears, the party chairman, ever mindful of the harm splits do to political parties, has urged Labour members to pull together for the May elections. In the light of the controversy over the leadership, she is probably right. But the cat’s out of the bag – and Macavity’s no longer the favoured moggie.
Has it backfired? Peter Mandelson’s attempt to encourage a tide of support behind David Miliband in an effort to get him to rethink his leadership position may have backfired. It may not yet be working, but that does not mean it won’t work. At the very least it will keep up the pressure on those who fear a Brown premiership is likely to be unpopular and lead to defeat at the polls.
[Pic: David Miliband - The Young Pretender? Is he Blair Mark 2?]
SO? KEEP TONY BLAIR
Why don’t they keep the election winner they already have? Blair is leading Brown in the polls DESPITE Iraq and other issues surrounding him. And that’s with Labour supporters too, 52% of whom prefer him as leader compared to Brown.This poll result taken a few days ago is worth repeating here:
“Even across parties, 35% of people would now prefer to have Tony Blair as Prime Minister, with 30% preferring Brown. This isn’t just Labour’s opponents playing silly buggers – Blair is now preferred across the board. Amongst Labour supporters 52% would prefer to see Blair as Prime Minister.”
Is it all too late to turn back the tide for Tony Blair’s continuing leadership? Could events yet transpire … ?
Sunday 25th March, 2007
BLAIR SAYS MARINES’ CAPTURE “UNJUSTIFIED AND WRONG”
Update: Iran says the marines may be granted “consular access” but only after an investigation has been carried out, following calls from Tony Blair and Condoleeza Rice.
The 15 Royal Navy personnel are based on HMS Cornwall, which patrols Iraqi territorial waters. Speaking for the first time since they were captured at gunpoint by Iran, the Prime Minister said today, “It simply is not true that they went into Iranian territorial waters and I hope the Iranian government understands how fundamental an issue this is for us.”
He continued, “We have certainly sent the message back to them very clearly indeed. They should not be under any doubt at all about how seriously we regard this act, which is unjustified and wrong.”
The prime minister, in Berlin for the EU’s 50th anniversary celebrations, said he had not commented up to now because he wanted the incident to be resolved in “as easy and diplomatic a way as possible”. He added, stressing that he wants this settled diplomatically, that he holds the Iranian government responsible, “It is the welfare of the people that have been taken by the Iranian government that is most important.”
PM “WOULD HAVE RESIGNED” IF TREATED AS A SUSPECT
The Telegraph today says that Police investigating the cash-for-honours inquiry were told that Tony Blair “would be forced to resign” if he had been questioned under caution in the second interview on January 26th. I have seen the suggestion that Lord Levy was the one who warned the police of this. Well, I’m sure HE would have made them sit up and take notice!
Well, my theory is that all of these whosaidwhattowhomandwhens might well be part of the plan. Let the whole thing collapse under its own weight.
On the other hand, I could be wrong. Perhaps Mr Blair is being set up for further police action once he leaves office. Then we could see our former prime minister in the dock for the biggest contrived nonsense of a crime since cash for honours became the norm. I sincerely hope not, as it will be to our shame and disgrace as well as his, if this happens.
Will Miliband Win?
Mr Blair is said to have expressed the opinion that David Miliband “will win” if he stood against Gordon Brown for the leadership. A Downing Street spokesman says that the PM “did not use the word ‘will.’ ” Maybe he said – ‘could’ or ‘might’ or even ’should’.
MANDELSON BACKS MILIBAND / STRAW BACKS BROWN
Just as Jack Straw announces that he will be running Gordon Brown’s leadership campaign, Peter Mandelson has said that Brown should face a challenge for the leadership. He has said that younger Labour MPs should be given the chance of electing the leader THEY’D prefer. I suppose he’s done the sums; but wasn’t it some of the younger, or at least recent intakes of MPs who stuck the knife in Blair last summer? And wasn’t the invisible chancellor, Macavity, directing their every move from the sidelines? Or am I just being TOO, too suspicious?
DOUBLE RUBBISH from the Church
And since two senior churchmen have been knocking Blair today, he must be doing SOMETHING right. The Archbishop of Canterbury more or less blames Blair for the state of the country’s morals today. What about the Church, your Eminence? I thought the Church looked after our morals, and the politicians our politics. Oops, sorry, misunderstood.
And the Archbishop of York says that Blair should ‘apologise openly’ for the slavery of centuries ago. Come on! He didn’t do THAT too, did he?
Saturday 24th March, 2007
DILEMMA FOR BLAIR
After their meeting today members of the DUP want a six week extension to the British government’s deadline of Monday 26th March.Government sources told the BBC Northern Ireland Secretary Peter Hain has yet to be informed of the DUP executive’s resolution.
The sources said the government would not produce the emergency legislation the DUP wanted and there had been no agreement to defer water charges.
If there is no deal by Monday’s devolution deadline, the government’s view is that the assembly will be dissolved and it will be up to the parties to agree a position amongst themselves.
DUP leader Ian Paisley said the details of the resolution would be released after negotiations with the government are concluded.
The DUP members are resentful because they believe that Tony Blair’s deadline is set to suit HIS exit timetable rather than their negotiating needs. Now Mr Blair has to decide if he wants to risk seeing years of work going down the drain in this the last few weeks of his premiership by calling a halt now, or if he could stomach swallowing his pride and allowing the DUP until May, when he should in reality still be in place as Prime Minister.
A hard choice as the parties in Northern Ireland may still want more time after that, and Mr Blair does not want to risk passing the glory for settling Northern Ireland over to his successor. And why should he since he’s done most of the work from the government side?
On the other hand to call a halt now may be the worse option as the parties WILL return and they WILL settle some time soon, of that there is little doubt.
But Mr Blair might well be asking them – what exactly would six more weeks do? It could even bring to the surface further reasons not to progress.
I imagine a long night with much midnight oil burnt, and the PM at the EU birthday bash too!
Bluff? Or double bluff? Who will prove to be the biggest bluffer?
BAD NEWS FOR BROWN – PEOPLE PREFER BLAIR AS PM
Opinion polls after Wednesday’s budget have produced some intriguing figures. According to the UK Polling Report website Tony Blair is preferred to Gordon Brown as PM!! WHAT? You mean there’s more than just one of me out there?
[Quote from the site]:
Looking at direct comparisons with Tony Blair, 30% think Brown is doing a better job as Chancellor than Blair is as PM, 24% think the opposite. Compare this to two years ago, when 52% thought Brown was doing the better job. 35% of people would now prefer to have Tony Blair as Prime Minister, with 30% preferring Brown. This isn’t just Labour’s opponents playing silly buggers – Blair is now preferred across the board, amongst Labour supporters 52% would prefer to see Blair as Prime Minister.
From the Telegraph
The Budget has done nothing to improve voters’ view of Mr Brown as Prime Minister. He is seen as less of an asset to Labour than a year ago while Mr Blair – who has said he will stand down this summer – has recovered from his post-Iraq low-point.
Two years ago, Mr Brown had a 35 per cent lead over Mr Blair when voters were asked who was doing the better job – it is now down to six per cent. Two years ago more people wanted Mr Brown than Mr Blair as Prime Minister – now more people want Mr Blair (36 to 25).
DUP – DECISION DAY ON SHARING POWER WITH SINN FEIN
Important weekend for Tony Blair, Ian Paisley and Northern Ireland. By Monday, the decision to work in their shared devolved assembly needs to be made in the positive or the power sharing options will be withdrawn and power taken back by London. This time Paisley is minded to share power, though he has doubters in his won party. If DUP members try to call Blair’s bluff on this, they might be the ones who suffer most in the end, given that the voters clearly want devolution to move forward NOW.
Gordon Brown’s poll ratings as would-be prime minister is falling following this week’s budget.
EU CELEBRATES 50TH BIRTHDAY
Friday 23rd March, 2007
PAISLEY WANTS MORE FROM BROWN
Ian Paisley spent several hours at Downing Street today talking over the chances of a settlement to the Northern Ireland devolution issue. Afterwards he said that the money offered by Gordon Brown was insufficient to deal with the likely problems. Over to you, Chancellor.
Update to Mandelson’s “Brown can’t sack me” jibe
Former Cabinet minister Peter Mandelson has said Gordon Brown should face a contest for the Labour leadership. Mr Mandelson, the European trade commissioner, said a “coronation” would be “off-putting to the public”.
Speaking on Al Jazeera TV, he failed to refute recent comments by an ex-Cabinet secretary that Mr Brown had shown “Stalinist ruthlessness” as chancellor.
PM says, “I WISH I’D STUDIED HISTORY”
He said to Simon Schama that he thought that no two democracies had ever gone to war with each other. This rather threw Mr Schama, who said he’d have to look into that. This page might cast some light on the question. It’s a well-researched and scholarly site, which seems to doubt the oft-cited claim about war between democracies, though it does say such wars are few and far between. It points out that an economic basis for war in often poor non-democratic countries might be more indicative of the likelihood of war than the existence or not of democracy. Excerpt follows.
Of the 39 international wars between WW2 and Y2K, 6 might have been between democracies.
Why does it matter?
Although there is no undisputed case of two democracies at war, the evidence certainly casts doubt on the thesis. In fact, the thesis is not nearly as strong as the statement that no two countries with a McDonald’s Restaurant have ever gone to war with one another, so why do you never hear distinguished international diplomats expound on the need to sell more beef patties in the world?
At first, this McDonald’s factoid seems enormously trivial; however, when you stop and think about it, the McDonald’s Peace Formula can be quite interesting. It seems to indicate that as countries are incorporated into the global economy by trans-national corporations, they stop waging war on one another (although it might be vice versa). Unfortunately, no one wants to go around saying that the best way to assure peace is to surrender your national economy to large heartless corporations. It makes a much better campaign slogan to say that democracy is the best path to peace. This is why we see so many people claiming that democracies never fight each other, and relatively few people outside of McDonald’s Corporate Headquarters claiming the geopolitical virtues of burger bars.
More to the point, it should remind us that McDonald’s (like democracy) is most common among rich countries, while war is most common among poor countries, so the apparent peace between democracies may stem independently from economic causes, rather than as direct cause and effect.
The Universal Democracy Peace Formula has been around a long time — since the days of Immanuel Kant and his 1795 essay Perpetual Peace, in fact. It dates back to an era when democracies were more often hypothetical rather than real, and political philosophers were trying to sell democracy as a path to peace by prophesying that no one really likes war, so if we granted our cannon fodder the chance to decide their fates for themselves, they’d say no, thank you. In fact, it almost sounds like that old adage spouted by monarchs, fascists and dictators for centuries — Democracies don’t have the stomach for war — and it seems to forget that it doesn’t take much to whip a mob into an angry frenzy.
PM talks to historian Simon Schama – listen to MP3
Thursday 22nd March, 2007
TERRORISM
Three arrested in the investigation of the 7/7 (2005) bombings in London, where 52 were killed on trains and a bus. Lord Carlile says that the investigation is thorough and ongoing. Those arrested “are not a pack of lone wolves”, he said. Meanwhile the trial of the men charged over the 21st July plot, which was claimed to have been intended to be “bigger and better” than 7/7 goes on.
WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO WHEN YOU STOP BEING PM?
[Pic: A gift from his young visitors.]
In a Schools Day project the PM is questioned by children in Downing Street. Watch the video here.
Pardeep, who is 13 years old, described the prime minister as being “very approachable and talkative”.
“He is a really, really nice gentleman. He asked everybody loads of questions.”
She asked Mr Blair about global warming, and whether he thought children were being forced to grow up too quickly.
She said he answered the questions very honestly.
Asked by one of the youngsters what he’d do when he stopped being prime minister, he was a little more reticent, explaining that the presence of the press meant they’d all have to wait to find out.
Gordon Can’t Sack Me!Peter Mandelson says that Gordon Brown, if he becomes Prime Minister will not be able to sack him from his post as European Commissioner.
Asked whether he would keep his job under Mr Brown, Mr Mandelson told BBC Radio 4’s The World At One: “I don’t know whether this is going to come as a disappointment to him, but he can’t actually fire me. So like it or not, I’m afraid he will have to accept me as Commissioner until November 2009.”
Wednesday 21st March, 2007
Yes, he has been a good chancellor. So good, we can’t risk losing him! Gordon Brown’s delivered a surprise by cutting 2p off income tax and abolishing the 10% rate. But the jury is still out as to whether or not it was a giving or taking budget. “Fiscally neutral” seems to be the going term. He joked in his speech about a previous chancellor having merged the posts of PM and chancellor, saying no PM should ever do that again. Well, hopefully. Read more about thebudget here.
Point bypoint details of budget
Tuesday 20th March, 2007
STALIN – OUR NEXT?
Update – Brown will not have to face a leadership vote if there is no-one standing against him, the NEC has decided today.Mr Blair is expected to announce his retirement within days of the Scottish and Welsh elections on 3 May. It could mean Britain has a new prime minister as early as 22 June.
A bit of interesting stuff, not about the present PM, but the expected next one. A former leading civil servant, Lord Turnbull says in a Financial Times report, which he thought was ‘off the record’, that Gordon Brown has a “Stalinist ruthlessness” approach to colleagues. Lord Turnbull also told the Financial Times that Mr Brown had a “very cynical view of mankind and his colleagues”. He added that Brown would not allow “serious discussion” with colleagues, and was Macavity-like.
PM TOLD PRESCOTT: “I’m used to Gordon looking down on me”.
This chimes for me with a remark John Prescott made in the recent three-part TV story about Blair. Brown and Blair were having dinner at Prescott’s, and the chairs were rather low. Brown asked for another chair, and when Prescott asked Blair if he’d like to change his, the PM said, “no thanks. I’m used to Gordon looking down on me”.
Hhmm…mmm
BLAIR PRAISES CHANCELLOR “AS CHANCELLOR”
In response, Number 10 has criticised the former head of the civil service’s remarks. Tony Blair’s spokesman praised Mr Brown’s record and said it was “in the interests of good government that civil servants should not become the story”.
He added: “The prime minister made very clear yesterday his admiration for the chancellor’s record as chancellor.”
“As chancellor“? Yes. We understand.
Macavity’s not there …
Brown’s ‘Macavity’ propensity, (never there when he’s needed) is another side of his character criticised by this eminent Whitehall mandarin. I and others have referred to that in recent times. I call him – the Invisible Chancellor.
For instance – despite the continuing pummeling that the PM takes over Iraq and other government policies – where is the chancellor, the joint-architect of New Labour, when Mr Blair needs him? Nowhere. Never.
Equally he was nowhere to be seen when his little band of merry men set out to cut Blair down to size last September. Maybe behind the curtain, his dagger dripping blood; but nowhere to be seen. Calling him ‘Brutus’, as I usually do, is to be too magnanimous.
Click to view short BBC video report
Monday 19th March, 2007
PM,& BROWN LAUNCH PERSONALISED SERVICES POLICY REVIEW
(Happy all you Labour revolters? Your man is on board the same ship as Mr Blair).
The review is the first in a series setting out policy for the next decade. They are intended to see what has worked “after 10 years in power… what should be intensified; and on what new directions should be pursued”.
WOW! A TORY POLICY!
The Tories are promising to reduce corporation tax – Labour says they could only be paid for through massive cuts in public services.
CAMERON SPINS IT
David Cameron to save the NHS! A quick review of the media’s response to Cameron’s REAL stance on the NHS from 4th January, 2007.
Reform Media Summary – 5 Jan 2006
Several papers cover the Reform response to David Cameron’s speech to the King’s Fund yesterday in which he announced his plans for a health policy commission. You can fool some of the people SOME of the time, Mr Cameron. But on the NHS? I don’t think so.
Saturday 17th March, 2007
PM SAYS, “DOES MY FACE LOOK BOTHERED?” 
Watch the full video of the PM with Lauren (Catherine Tate).
Play in Windows Media – Is he bovvered?
Play in Real Player – “I ain’t bothered”
Short clip here. Did you notice that even though he’s supposed to be such a good actor, he just couldn’t bring himself to mispronounce the word “bothered”.
Ms Tate told the BBC that she admired the PM’s comic timing. “He is one of the finest comic actors of his generation,” she joked.
Describing her visit to Number 10 to record the sketch as “surreal”, she added: “It is a bit like a Tardis… it goes back and back. I wasn’t nervous because I don’t particularly get nervous. I’m too busy thinking about what I’ve got to say – but there was a sense of occasion about it. We were all thinking: ‘This is history’.”
Friday 16th March, 2007
Labour Party Leadership “Election” (and Prime Minister) Timetable
Next Tuesday Labour’s NEC meets to discuss the timetable for Tony Blair’s exit. Expected to last seven weeks, in which the candidate(s), one or more, will need to perform at hustings for party members. Expensive? Only two million or so? Hardly affordable I’d have thought at this time. Worthwhile? Not if there is only one candidate, imho. The party already knows all about Mr Brown. Now, if they were asking THE REST of us – it might be worth it.
Thursday 15th March, 2007
PM’s Sky interview with Adam Boulton – on Iraq – Click here to view videos of Tony Blair interview
Cash For Honours
Inspector Yates has “no end date” to his inquiry. Is he getting paid by the hour? And can those under the spotlight expect to hobble in their zimmer frames or be wheeled into the court any time in the next decade or two? Are the Police stretching a point here? Waiting for someone to crack under the strain? It all seems a bit ridiculous to me! See “Police -The State We’re In”
P.S. Tony Blair has been “told” not to include his “cronies” in his resignation honours! Hopefully, he’ll continue to ignore the backbiters, I mean backbenchers. The Independent says he has a certain Levy, Turner and Mandelson on his list.
Party Funding Review
Update 16th March
PM responds to Phillips review
1. Sir Hayden Phillips says £50,000 should be the capped ceiling for individual donations.
2. Spending on general elections should be lowered.
3. There should be public contribution. Say 50p per person each year based on the number of votes. At present 80% of Labour’s income comes from the Trades Unions.
Wednesday 14th March, 2007
Two main news items today, one not yet complete. Check back later for the news on the Nuclear Debate in Parliament. Back again? OK – the government won! Go here to see my comments on this.
The other important, even historic political happening is the government’s draft Climate Change bill, published yesterday and open to public contributions – so please click here to submit your own suggestions. It has received much acclaim as well it might. It has also received the usual debunking from Debunkers Unlimited.
But meanwhile serious politics. The PM said yesterday that this “revolutionary” step puts the UK at the forefront of the worldwide fight against climate change and sets an example to others. Click here to read more about the proposals.
Someone’s singing “Mandy” just for you. But don’t take it all TOO literally, please!
[Oh Mandy … but I sent you away, oh Mandy … and I need you today …]
[Pic: Peter Mandelson with the PM on the day Mandelson resigned in January 2001. Who is hurting more?]
[Pics: Peter Mandelson & Tony Blair, in more innocent days.]
Tuesday 13th March, 2007
Peter Mandelson criticises Tony Blair!
Yes, you read right. In today’s Guardian the former Northern Ireland minister, long-time ally and close friend of the PM is said to be sticking the knife where it hurts – into the PM’s Northern Ireland devolution settlement, deadlined March 26th.
You might ask – has Mandelson lost the plot? Is he upset because HIS part in Labour’s decade-long N.I. story has been ignored? Surely not. Fulsome thanks and recognition will surely come to all from the PM when the job is done and the time is right.
Or, in the way of Mr Blair’s many erstwhile friends and allies, has Mandelson given up on the PM’s ability to hand out jobs and favours and is instead rekindling his Brown credentials from years back, with an eye to his own future? If so, how very, very sad.
It couldn’t be a touch of pique because of Mr Blair’s wooing of Ian Paisley could it?
Remember that none of you, including Mandelson and Brown, would be ANYWHERE without Tony Blair. How much they all owe him. Does friendship mean so little to Peter Mandelson? If Mr Blair were a friend of mine, I’d cherish him, now of all times, just as HE is on the verge of ending this historic and awful conflict.
Mr Blair will still get his Northern Ireland deal, I have little doubt, even if Mandelson thinks he gave too much to Sinn Fein throughout some of the “process” of negotiations. We are past that argument now. The voters have spoken and they want a devolved assembly now. They are not interested in point-scoring over who-said-what-to-whom-and-why over the last ten years.
Oh dear Mr Blair – with friends like this, you’ll be well out of it.
Update: Peter Mandelson says that The Guardian has “ripped out of context” what he said about Tony Blair’s handling of the whole issue. He praises the PM and explains that there are always conflicts to be balanced. He might have been better advised to say, “I didn’t agree with everything the PM did in his conflict resolution tactics, BUT he has been proved right!” Although even saying there was ANY disagreement is a red rag to a bull in today’s hyped-up climate.
Saying nothing would have been better still. Take your example from Tony Blair. When have we ever heard him criticising anyone? No, I can’t think of any time either.
Blair Quote: “My project will be complete when the Labour Party learns to love Peter Mandelson.”
Way to go then, Mr Blair.
Listen to The Guardian’s audio tape of the interview.
I’ve now listened to this interview, and despite Mr Mandelson’s praise of the PM, saying that there were numerous issues to balance in the negotiations, his words can’t be considered exactly helpful at this delicate time.
There is only one thing that matters in the end – peace and final settlement of democratic devolved political rule in Northern Ireland. Mr Blair possesses the diplomatic balancing skills required to allow “the blanket” to be pulled this way and that to secure a deal.
The “process” may well have been the policy in the PM’s mind, as Mandelson says.
In that case, the process, and the policy, are all but complete. In a couple of weeks we should know who was right and who was wrong. Any bets against Mr Blair?
Listen to Mandelson’s interview today on “Today”with Jim Naughtie.
P.S. At least the Home Secretary is still onside. The Guardian:
“John Reid, Mr Mandelson’s successor in Northern Ireland, is more supportive of Downing Street’s efforts, saying:
“If Tony Blair’s Labour government never did anything else but bring to an end the longest-running political dispute in European history and the longest running war probably in world history, on and off, it would be worth having the Labour government just for that.”
Amen to that.
GOING or rather STAYING NUCLEAR
So the Deputy Leader of the House of Commons, and A.N. Other have resigned. So what? With Conservative support the PM will win the Wednesday vote on Trident easily. The PM would prefer the full backing of his OWN party, but he’s used to coping without that these days. Good to know there are still some who will not allow party or political differences to get in the way of our country’s long-term defence. OF COURSE we need to retain Trident.
NOW THE BEEB CAN TALK!
WOW! The BBC is AT LAST able to talk about the Police request for Friday 2nd March’s injunction on their broadcast on the cash-for-honours inquiry. Great! But pretty useless now, since other media outlets have spilled the beans from the day after the injunction! No news there, then. But one question – if the Police were so concerned about this, and if none of the other media outlets had the full story, why haven’t they interviewed Turner, Powell and Tierney yet? Or is it, as I suggested last Friday, bluff and double bluff, to encourage the case to collapse?
And in the ongoing leadership – I mean – 2020 Vision Labour policy debate, Charles Clarke (2020 Vision site) backs Miliband in today’s Independent. He also answers public questions on a wide range of issues.
Excerpts from Q&A:
Q: Should Tony Blair’s successor adopt a more balanced foreign policy without slavishly supporting the US?
A:There’s never been anything slavish and all foreign policy should be balanced.
Q: Has George Bush ruined Tony Blair’s legacy?
A: No. Tony Blair bears responsibility for Tony Blair’s acts.
Q: Did you feel betrayed by Tony Blair when sacked as Home Secretary?
A: Betrayed is the wrong word. I felt disappointed and let down, and I think that Tony Blair made a serious political mistake.
Q: How do you think history will judge Tony Blair?
A: As a great prime minister who changed this country for the better, but failed to make the most of his opportunities.
Q: Do you want Gordon Brown to succeed Tony Blair?
A: I’ll take that decision when we have a leadership election.
Q: Is the Chancellor “psychologically flawed”?
A: No, at least no more than most people. And by the way that wasn’t my phrase.
Q: Will you stand for the Labour leadership?
A: Unlikely but not impossible.
Q: Would you like to see David Miliband step forward as a challenger for the Labour leadership?
A: Yes, I think that he’d be a good candidate and a good prime minister. Unlike David Cameron, he’s got good ministerial experience in a tough spending department.
Sunday 11th March, 2007
Try saying these words -
“TONY BLAIR IS INNOCENT – AS ARE HIS COLLEAGUES”
There – wasn’t that hard was it?
Of course the Prime Minister is innocent. As I write, and the press and half the public are expecting ‘deserved’ police charges, the PM and his staff are all as innocent as the rest of us. We should not forget that.
Neither he nor anyone else under police, press and public scrutiny have been found guilty of ANYTHING, much less charged. Innocent until and unless proven guilty.
But, because of the ongoing inquiry they are (all) presumed guilty. The end results could be that Scotland goes independent, because voters don’t support Labour in May, for all the wrong reasons. And that we the people get the (wrong) idea that we are being run by a crowd of crooks. We risk playing into the hands of anarchists here, to whose agenda we are inadvertently subscribing. And whichever way it works out in the end, I think questions SHOULD be asked about the interference with democracy that this long and over-egged inquiry has caused.
Anyway, it’s Sunday – so lots of thought and opinion – some of it, seemingly, “leaked”! Well, fancy that.
“Detectives have submitted a confidential new file on the cash-for-honours case to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), it can be revealed. The file was delivered on Wednesday by Scotland Yard to the CPS, which will soon decide if charges should be brought after a year-long investigation.
It is understood to deal with the dramatic events of recent days, which detectives privately fear could harm their chances of successful prosecutions.”Meanwhile John Yates is writing a detailed update on the investigation for the House of Commons. Wonder when they’ll get that. Before or after the CPS presses charges (or doesn’t). The Scotsman, amongst others, runs with the story that “Labour officials face charges over secret loans”.
The paper says, “Scotland Yard detectives are considering bringing “specimen charges” against the officials over allegations that they broke funding laws over their management of some of the loans accepted from 12 wealthy backers.”
Such charges would be in addition to the other possible charges already hanging over Labour. Papers are expected to be with the CPS within the next few weeks (though haven’t we heard THAT one before?) Obviously, they’re determined to get SOMEBODY for SOMETHING to justify the validity of the whole inquiry. Disgraceful behaviour by the Met, if this is the case. The alternative is that the police themselves might have to ‘hang Yates out to dry’. Better that our whole system of government should be wrecked than THAT!
“Detectives have submitted a confidential new file on the cash-for-honours case to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), it can be revealed. The file was delivered on Wednesday by Scotland Yard to the CPS, which will soon decide if charges should be brought after a year-long investigation.”
Yates’ Report to HoC Public Administration Committee
“It can also be revealed that Assistant Commissioner John Yates, who is leading the inquiry, is writing a detailed update on the investigation for the House of Commons public administration committee. His decision to provide MPs with more information follows criticism from a committee member last week over the length of time the inquiry has taken.”
Friday 9th March, 2007
Sir Alan Sugar on “Today”, Radio 4 defends, and bemoans, Levy’s … ‘blind loyalty’ to Tony Blair.
Excerpt from BBC report:Businessman Sir Alan Sugar has defended Labour fundraiser Lord Levy as the police inquiry into claims honours were exchanged for party loans continues. He described Lord Levy as having “blind loyalty” to Tony Blair and a man who put his “life and soul” into raising funds for the Labour Party. But Sir Alan said it “is looking like [Lord Levy] is a scapegoat”. Sir Alan raises similar points to myself and many others. Having taken so long to conclude this farcical inquiry, is there bound to be a sacrificial lamb? Or is there yet a chance that another leak will spring, thus encouraging the police/CPS to cease their pursuits and draw an inconclusive, if unsatisfactory line under this nonsense? MPs too are questioning the length of time the police inquiry is taking and may call for an explanation from Inspector Yates. MPs are becoming restive and “increasingly irritated” (Paul Flynn MP) at the length of time it is all taking – almost one year. Labour MP Paul Flynn, a member of the Commons Public Administration committee, which suspended its own inquiry at the request of police last May, hinted that MPs might call for assistant commissioner John Yates, who has been leading the Metropolitan Police investigation, to be called before the committee.Meanwhile, the PM gets on with his job.Blair and other EU Leaders Agree Targets for Cutting EmissionsMr Blair has been foremost amongst EU leaders in pushing for carbon dioxide emission limits. Today they have agreed on an ambitious target to cut emissions, and thus greenhouse gases by at least 20% by 2020. A binding target for the use of renewable energy has also been agreed. Throw out your old-style light bulbs within the next three years! “Europe at its best”, a British member said. The Foreign Secretary said, “it puts the EU streets ahead” in the fight against global warming.Stormont vote – “An Opportunity of Historic Importance”, says Mr BlairAnd in the Northern Ireland Assembly elections Ian Paisley’s Democratic Unionists Party has won the highest number of seats with Sinn Fein not far behind. Bertie Ahern and Tony Blair have made a joint statement saying that the people have shown leadership and want a return to devolved power. By 24th March they need to agree so that their devolved assembly can be set up. Otherwise, Mr Blair says, it is back to British government control.Joint written statement by the Prime Minister and Taoiseach in response to the Northern Ireland election results.Video of Prime Minister Tony Blair and Taoiseach Bertie Ahern at press call after the vote. Read their joint statement:“The people have spoken and the St Andrews Agreement has been democratically validated.
We can now move to the next step outlined at St Andrews – the restoration of the Assembly and Executive.The message of the electorate is clear. After so many years of frustration and disappointment, they want Northern Ireland to move on to build a better future together through the restored institutions. Many of the practical issues which have been raised in this election campaign can and should be resolved locally. Elected representatives now have the chance to do so.Restoration of the devolved institutions represents an opportunity of historic proportions. It must not be missed. We urge the parties to take on this challenge and to set Northern Ireland on a steady course for the future.We will work closely with the parties in the coming period as the final steps are taken for restoration on 26 March. Much good work has already been done in preparation for restored government. We look forward to this work continuing.Thursday 8th March, 2007
WHAT THE (free) PAPERS SAY – updated
I say – THE LAW’S AN ASS
Why? Well, it often HAS been as we all know. In this case it could be so for this reason:
LEVY ACTIONS NOT ILLEGAL
Since the original inquiry has shifted, we understand, from loans/cash for honours to “perverting the course of justice” there is a whole new focus. A suspicion of perverting the course of justice is a charge used to indicate the covering up of an illegal act. Yet, the “illegal act” in question at this moment regarding the position of Lord Levy, is actually NOT illegal. Recommending or discussing recommending a peerage is perhaps frowned upon in regard to party donors, or considered unacceptable, but it is not illegal to recommend someone for a peerage.
By their various efforts, allegedly, to cover up all aspects of honours to donors, a long-standing arrangement anyway in this country, some close to government might pay with their freedom.
If people were ever charged and convicted over this (perverting the course of justice or/and conspiracy so to do) I would fully expect an appeal to succeed. But by then the damage to reputations, the government and the lives of many individuals would already have been done.
ENTRAPMENT?
And what right would the police have had ‘contrive’ such a situation, anyway, if that were the case? Where people are convicted on distorted charges because of police manipulation of the line of attack, and/or because of police instilling fear and confusion? The word “entrapment” comes to mind.
An ASS? At times the law’s a stable fool of them.
Still, today’s Daily Mail dwells on Lord Levy’s presence at meetings which discussed nominations for peerages and other honours. It says he lobbied for people he thought should get peerages.
IF NO BARGAIN WAS STRUCK, THERE IS NO ILLEGALITY
As I mentioned above, as far as I can discover, lobbying in itself is not actually a breech of the 1925 Honours, Prevention of Abuses Act (scroll to bottom of this page to read the Act). And neither is it a breech to give peerages because people have donated money to a political party. NOT in itself illegal. It would, it seems, be illegal if a bargain had been struck, but this has not thus far been claimed. Indeed it was partly, as we understand it, because the police could not find evidence of such a bargain that their inquiry shifted focus to the divide-and-rule tactic of searching for the perversion of the course of justice.
If people questioned by the police had not been full and frank in their answers, and indeed tried to hide the involvement of Lord Levy there may be a case to answer. However, it is NOT a requirement that anyone under questioning NEEDS to answer questions that are not asked.
The Daily Telegraph says it “can disclose that some of the documents seized by police also referred to Labour Party donors. Others related to conversations between Jonathan Powell, the Downing Street chief of staff, and Lord Levy, the Prime Minister’s personal fund-raiser”.
I didn’t think this was “new” news! Haven’t we heard this before? Shows how much scrabbling around there is by our free, competitive press for something to say.
Meanwhile a Downing Street spokesman underlined anger at the continuing leaking of sensitive details of the investigation.
“The Met Police have a job to do and we believe that they should be allowed to get on with the job without leaks, without speculation.
We don’t know where the leaks have come from, but whatever the source, they are unhelpful.”
Wednesday 7th March, 2007 The paper world has turned upside down such is their delight at the turn of events of the last few days. This is typified by The Daily Mail’s praise of The Guardian. Don’t any of them yet understand what’s going on, (in my humble opinion)? Or perhaps The Guardian now does. Today, in a Special Report, perhaps with an eye on its future commenters in their visceral anti-Blair Comment-is-Free pages, it has decided to better balance up its criticism. Click to read The Guardian’s full “special” articleExcerpt:“But the police’s hardline approach in the cash-for-honours inquiry has led to them being accused of heavy-handedness. Officers have also been accused of selectively leaking information.“A theory among government supporters is that it is a technique to shake suspects and ratchet up the pressure. Lord Levy insistedthat there was no reason for the police decision to arrest him last July, because he was fully cooperating with the inquiry. There was also concern within Downing Street about the dawn arrest at her London home of Ruth Turner.Though police have denied leaking stories to the press, Scotland Yard has been irritated by the allegations. This might explain why it moved so quickly to prevent the BBC from broadcasting its story last Friday.”The Guardian, praised today for its pursuit of “freedom of the press” might have a few questions to answer if the end result of their dogged determination to nab the villains is a dropped investigation by the police, due to this “evidence” having been leaked.And today’s Times says:“Speculation over the source of the leaks has reached fever pitch. Downing Street insiders said that the obvious inaccuracies in the original leak showed that it could not have come from there. Other Whitehall sources said that the police and the CPS gained nothing from leaking documents that might form part of the evidence and pointed the finger at No 10.Some insiders hinted that the police had leaked the information to give themselves an excuse if the case collapses.”I’m not one of those insiders, but I drew the same conclusion yesterday (see below). Otherwise it’s hard to see in which way Downing Street benefits from this, given that Lord Levy was obviously distressed by it all, so was not forewarned. Nor was Lord Goldsmith in on any “Number 10 leak”. Still, I’ll never convince the conspiracy theorists or those whose endgame is to find a culprit in this ridiculous cat-and-mouse chase.I become more and more convinced with each development that there’s a game of bluff and double-bluff going on here.Noteworthy in the Daily Mail’s article is this on Inspector Yates:“He has faced endless, anonymous attacks from Westminster and Downing Street supporters as the investigation moved inexorably towards Tony Blair himself.
Colleagues say Mr Yates is determined to follow the evidence wherever it takes him and so far it has led his team to the very heart of government.
But the stakes are high for the Liverpool fan.
No prosecutions and it may be the man tipped by some to be the next Commissioner of the Met whose head will roll. “
So, no pressure then?
Tuesday 6th March, 2007
CASE COLLAPSING? – LEAKERS? – 3 OPTIONS?
So now that it is possible that the whole case is LIKELY TO COLLAPSE, who benefits? Well, for a start Number 10, but perhaps also the police or even the Crown Prosecution Service. Why these two? Because it is a way out without losing face.
But what do I mean “likely to collapse”?
Well, it’s obvious, isn’t it? The Guardian, in its wisdom, (but if it wasn’t them it would have been some other paper), might well have managed to foil the hopes and plans of much of its readership. In our society this kind of leaking will continue; nothing can be kept secret for long. So, if there is more to leak, we’ll notice the drips again soon. If there is no more to leak, defences are already being prepared. In the end any trial could well be lost by the CPS. Would they and the Met want that? No. But can they afford NOT to charge someone?
No. So, is blaming the dissemination of evidence (on an unknown leaker) a useful way out?
Even Angus McNeil, the ScotNats MP who started the criminal trail, is worried that the police’s case might now fall. Somebody, he says, should answer for this leak. Panicking eh? Ho hum.
IS LEVY Being Set Up? – “I’m the victim of a smear campaign”
WHOSE LEAK? Number 10’s? The Met’s? The CPS’s?
Lord Levy has said that he is the victim of a smear campaign. If so, by whom? Somehow, it seems unlikely that if a sacrifice were to be offered by Number 10 in order to protect others this man would be the one. But Mr Blair and the Labour party owe him much. And this would not be in character for Tony Blair. Apart from that, isn’t the prospect of an angry Lord Levy a deep concern if Levy chooses to drop others in it? That he would, if he takes all the flak.
Who knows, knows who. But since the information on Lord Levy, it seems, has been with Scotland Yard for some time, the CPS will have had sight of it. Why haven’t they charged him yet, then? He denies any wrongdoing. A sprat to catch a mackerel?
If it were Number 10’s leak, they would be in order to claim that now the evidence is in the public domain a fair trial could not be had by anyone. Not sure if that would stand up, but it could be pretty off-putting I’d have thought for the CPS. In the meantime Number 10’s people and Lord Levy can work on their defence.
So, is this the police and/or the CPS’s last gasp to try to split Lord Levy and Number 10? After all, didn’t Lord Levy say, according to this report of five weeks ago, that he would not “swing” for Mr Blair? Or is someone at Number 10 taking that chance rather than see Mr Blair’s aides in the dock?
You have to ask – even if we ever to uncover the leaker, the defence for that ‘minor sin’ in today’s overheated climate, would be that leaking was the currency used by all sides, even by the prosecuting body. Perhaps in the unlikely event that someone is charged with leaking, (if that’s a chargeable offence), it would even be considered worth it on all sides if it avoided a long drawn-out case culminating with a conviction or at least a trial for Tony Blair himself. And since the reputations and credibility of all in this inquiry have already been trashed by the unbalanced press, there is little recovery for any of them in the judgemental eyes of much of the written media and much of the public. Damned if they do, damned if they don’t.
Meanwhile Inspector Yates might well walk away without a prime ministerial scalp, but with a reputation for fearless investigation. Wins all round then?
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL’S Position
In the end it is the Attorney General who will advise the CPS on whether charges should be brought. Some believe that it would be simply impossible, no matter the integrity of Lord Goldsmith, for him to make an impartial decision in this case, given his closeness to government.
Although Lord Goldsmith, at police behest, went to court for an injunction against the BBC in order to “protect the police evidence”, some still do not believe he is sufficiently distanced from those in the firing line. But then some won’t believe anything that government, or particularly this government does or says.
THE GUARDIAN Breaks Ranks
So The Guardian’s flown with it! I knew SOMEBODY would! Couldn’t keep them ALL quiet for long. Now it’s open forum for the press again. So just in case you haven’t heard, here’s the story of Levy, Turner, a document, a changed story, the Met, the CPS and Number 10 – from The Guardian
Excerpts here:
** Cash for honours: key document names Levy – Memo from Blair aide says peer tried to influence her evidenceDetectives are investigating whether Lord Levy, Labour’s chief fundraiser, urged one of Tony Blair’s most senior aides to shape the evidence she gave to Scotland Yard, the Guardian has learned.
Police have been investigating whether Ruth Turner, the prime minister’s director of external relations, was being asked by Lord Levy to modify information that might have been of interest to the inquiry. Officers have been trying to piece together details of a meeting they had last year. Ms Turner gave an account of it to her lawyers and this has been passed to police.
It is this legal document and the exchange between Ms Turner and Lord Levy that has been at the heart of the inquiry in recent months, and which prompted the focus to shift from whether there was an effort to sell peerages to whether there has been a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. **
And Lord Levy insists that he has nothing to answer for.
5th March, 2007
CARRY ON CONSTABLE
Update on THAT e-mail (Monday 5th March, 10:00pm)
WHAT A FARCE!
Number 10 is disputing some of the factors concerning the “e-mail”. Whether or not it was an e-mail seems to be the issue. That might sound a bit hair-splitting, but the format of the “document” may indeed be of vital significance when we recall that Scotland Yard in one of their earlier leaks said they thought a secret e-mail system had been hidden from them. This assertion was denied by No 10.
Also, tonight it seems, No. 10 and the CPS (why them, and not Scotland Yard?) have both denied that they are the source of the leaking of the e-mail to the BBC.
It ‘wasn’t me, it was you’ time.
Childish behaviour it may seem and IS in many ways. But of course reputations, livelihoods, future prospects and criminal records and even imprisonment could lie ahead of those involved in this fiasco.
If anyone does end up with a criminal record or worse, imprisonment over this nonsense I sincerely hope they will have the strength of character, and the friends around them to appeal – [and not decide to just top themselves].
This police pursuit of a government for this reason is, in my humble opinion, the biggest farce since Carry On Constable!
Monday 5th March, 5:00pm
The BBC is now able to release SOME information about the e-mail whose contents were at the centre of the injunction on Friday. It seems that the e-mail was sent from Ruth Turner, the PM’s Director of Public Relations to Jonathan Powell, his Chief of Staff and referred to Lord Levy, Mr Blair’s Chief Fundraiser. They are unable to release any further information regarding content.Number 10 has since refuted that version of events, although they have not clarified in which way(s) it is “inaccurate”.
Sunday 4th March, 2007Cash For Honours Injunction, Gags, BBC , Charges & LeaksThe injunction, which is still ongoing and was sought at the request of the police, is arousing much speculation, as it would. The Independent says that they have been told that Tony Blair expects the year-long investigation to come to an end this week. It seems that a long-awaited independent report on party funding, delayed until the conclusion of the police probe, is pencilled in for next week. Detectives are thought to have uncovered the email last year. It was one of the “major developments” alluded to by John Yates, the police chief in charge of the investigation, in a letter to MPs on 16 November. Since that letter, the Prime Minister’s chief fundraiser, Lord Levy, has been arrested and questioned on suspicion of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. Ruth Turner, No 10’s director of government relations, has also been arrested. Ms Turner has been questioned on suspicion of perverting the course of justice, not, as in Lord Levy’s case, of conspiracy to do so.And Scotland’s Sunday Herald says that the injunction is expected to be lifted this week when a team of detectives led by the assistant commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, John Yates, has completed a new focus of its inquiry. They also say that the BBC is understood to have intended to broadcast the identity of a person interviewed by the inquiry team who was subsequently ordered by police to respect a week-long news blackout, similar to the one relating to the PM’s second police interview. The paper says that “BBC lawyers are understood to be preparing an urgent appeal against the injunction ruling and will present their case to the High Court tomorrow.”So, tempus fugit, eh? How much longer can those who know keep mum?I’ll bet some can hardly contain their excitement, anticipating a manacled Tony Blair being bundled into the back of a police car. According to The News of The World, the police are saying that “detectives in the cash-for-honours inquiry believe that Downing Street is trying to wreck their investigation by leaking top secret evidence.”REALLY?So who leaked this bit of juicy information about ‘Downing Street leaking’ then? Not to mention the information about another blackout? Or police expectations of charges within the week?And there we were, thinking all the leakers had dried up! Fat chance!The News of the World continues:“They [the police] hit out after being forced to get Attorney General Lord Goldsmith to issue an injunction on Friday night — stopping the BBC from running new allegations about the probe.We can reveal police acted after the Beeb obtained an email understood to contain damning evidence about an alleged cover-up by No 10 officials over giving peerages to prominent Labour Party donors.The row puts the spotlight on Labour fundraiser Lord Levy and Downing Street aide Ruth Turner.”And The News of the World says that it has learned that detectives believe they have uncovered clear evidence to bring charges alleging a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. Charges are expected, according to sources, this week.If this knowledge about the type of charge, against whom and when does not point to leaking by the police I don’t know what does. So far I have found no leaking in the public domain (which could be traced back to No 10) which would benefit those in the eye of the storm.I continue to return to the whole rigmarole of pursuing the government for this ‘capital crime’ as wrong and unnecessary. Since cash-for-honours has ALWAYS been this country’s way, see here for Lloyd George’s open selling, WHY on earth is THIS government taking all the flak and shame of the system.We should all remember – innocent unless and until proven guilty.
Also today – Sunday 4th March
PM: “I didn’t want to be belted and chucked out by my
party”
He regrets ” … uncertainty was created.”
Tony Blair said today, perhaps rather pointedly, ‘It wasn’t really my desire last year to have a situation where all this uncertainty was created.’
Despite some latching on to this as HIS apology, even for instance on the ITV News, it was a ‘I’m sorry on behalf of my party’ sort of apology. He’s well-practised at this; had to do it in August too after THEIR coup effort. Do THEY ever think of this and feel any responsibility?
You don’t have to read too hard between the lines to see that Mr Blair believes the actions of others created the uncertainty.
For anyone who thinks that it is all his doing, I refer you to his statement before the 2005 election when he made it clear he would serve “a full third term”.
He did not say half a term and he made it clear that there would be sufficient time for his successor to take over. With the continuing uncertainty about his actual leaving date – an announcement is expected in early May, for the end of July 2007, he will have been proved right all along. A long transitional period was never necessary. And since we do not yet know if there will be an opponent for Gordon Brown, and so no leadership campaign has yet started, it will only be a matter of weeks from Mr Blair’s announcement, perhaps 4 – 6, before the new prime minister is in place.
He has admitted for the first time that he regrets the way his lengthy departure has created ‘uncertainty’ for the government now racked by a divisive battle over who will succeed him. In a wide-ranging interview in today’s Observer, the Prime Minister spoke frankly of his doubts over whether he had done the right thing by pre-announcing that he would not fight a fourth election. But he suggested the upheaval could have been worse if he had not been open about his intentions, and said he hoped his departure would finally draw the sting over the war in Iraq.
In the end although not quite “belted and chucked out”, the PM HAS been chucked out, slowly and painfully, there is little doubt. Last August, Mr Blair was forced to select an acceptable time limit by some in his party in order to stay on at ALL! That has been clear from the beginning, and might explain his lack of endorsement for Gordon Brown as his successor. I think they got him at a low moment. Easy to say with 20/20 vision, of course. But would the rebels REALLY have wanted to show Mr Blair the door a few weeks before the party conference? I don’t think so. And after his moving party conference speech – well, all bets for his leaving date were off.
Go here to see what the PM said and when, about leaving his post.
Listen to the interview with Tony Blair on his regrets
Mr Blair says,
“Politicians are in the listening business because they end up standing for election, but when they are in government they are also in the deciding business, and that is when life gets more difficult. And I think that we do politics a power of good in a way if you are able to have a far more profound dialogue and conversation with people where at least if they still disagreed with the decision-maker, the politician, at the end of it they at least understood why they were doing it and didn’t end up thinking they were doing it for reasons of sort of whimsy or just sheer bloody-mindedness.”
Citizens Policy Review – read the BBC interview with the PM, recorded 3rd March 2007
Saturday 3rd March, 2007
BREAKING NEWS AGAIN – 10:00pm, 3rd March
1 It seems the reason for the injunction, requested by the police NOT No. 10, was that they are investigating an e-mail between two members of Mr Blair’s inner circle. Any reporting, they said, could have interfered with their inquiries.
2 Mr Blair has admitted that his naming his departure timetable has caused unrest in the party. He says that not to have done so would have caused even greater difficulties.
Friday 2nd March, 2007
Hold The Front Page AGAIN …. Breaking News!
At the request of the metropolitan police the Attorney General has tonight secured an injunction against the BBC
preventing them broadcasting an item on BBC television’s Ten O’Clock News on the Cash For Honours inquiry.
This is the first time an injunction has been applied in the year-long progress of this inquiry. Quite why this has not been applied earlier with all the media feeding frenzy (especially in the written press) is hard to fathom.
There will be much speculation as to whether the implication behind this injunction is that the Attorney General expects that charges are likely to follow and so broadcasting could be prejudicial to a fair trial. Sir Menzies Campbell says that we must be careful in jumping to conclusions because “the Attorney General acts in the public interest and must ensure that no prosecution or defence case is prejudiced.” It is likely to be interpreted in a certain way since the request was not made by Number 10 but by the Police. The thinking will be that they wish to “protect their evidence”. And if there is concern that there would be prejudice to the case NOW, I’d have thought this is a little late! Due to the press’s self-indulgences of recent weeks, the Court of Public Opinion has already sat and decided. If it turns out there is no case to answer, no case brought or acquittals in the end, the wary, cynical public will still feel that there is no smoke without fire.
Reputations will have been dashed on the rock of selling newspapers.
FAIR TRIAL?
I can’t see how anyone can get a fair trial. Perhaps the police feared that that would be the position the Attorney General might take if tonight’s news had been released. Too late, Mr Plod. The case is already prejudiced in my non-legal humble opinion.
Of course the news might have been minimal – such as – the PPC are not expected to make charges for several weeks . It may even have been a shot across the bows of the press, to keep the lid on leakers and the media who used leaks to such bad effect recently.
I wonder if we can depend on all at the BBC newsroom to contain themselves? If the “news” is in tomorrow’s papers, we’ll know who to blame! And here’s a thought – does this injunction cover ALL media outlets? I don’t imagine that’s possible, without individual injunctions.
Here we go again … if they’ve missed tomorrow’s deadline, the Sunday papers will have a field day!
Wednesday 28th February, 2007News report – interview- Clarke & Milburn – 2020 Vision siteTHE 2020 VISIONAlan Milburn and Charles Clarke have launched a website called ‘The 2020 Vision’, a play on words if ever I saw one, to look at Labour’s future direction, so it seems. It’s rattled some cages, of course, as the expected shoo-in to No 10 of Gordon Brown is evidently being challenged. Since there is no “big hitter” willing to put their name into the hat, it should be clear even to Labour. Brown is not universally acceptable, but such as David Miliband are unwilling to drink from the poisoned chalice. No wonder! There is NO-ONE but no-one who will replace Blair with his ease, vision and general appeal. Forget the problems over Iraq – forget the honours nonsense – repercussions from both will fade before the next general election. The answer’s clear. KEEP TONY BLAIR FOR PM – he’s your winner! And as Gerauld Kaufmann said in September the party should be down on its knees to thank Blair. They should also be down on their knees to beg him to stay, not because they will lose without him, though they will, but because he is arguably THE consummate politician of the last 50 years.Interesting links in the tale of Blair v Brown v Who?Blair v Brown TimescaleBlair at PMQs 28 Feb – Meacher put-downBrownites v Blairites – the Full StoryHow Would Brown Change Things?
Monday 26th February, 2007
HOLD THE FRONT PAGE!
The Sun, another horse in the Murdoch stable has a different pitch on yesterday’s News of the World story. In fact VERY different. The opposite even.
And now that we understand that Blair and Brown (in partnership) are “fighting EU constitutional take-over” what are we to make of yesterday’s scaremongering that the PM was about to go it alone with the constitution?
I’ll bet one thing we don’t do is to hold that newspaper group to account. And yet it is arguably the all-pervasive media empire of Murdoch that decides which governing party we get. THEY are never held accountable. In fact the great British public keeps on buying their papers – and that is something today’s politicians understand.
Way to go with “education, education, education” Mr Blair!
Sunday 25th February, 2007
The Independent Prime Minister
STANDING DOWN, AND UP FOR EU CONSTITUTION?
If anything shows the growing independence of Tony Blair, even more than his withdrawal of troops from Iraq, it’s the two stories below. One, that he will stand down as an MP in the autumn, and two, that he means to sign the UK up to the EU Constitution within a month from now.
I have never been able to see Blair on the backbenches after all these years dominating the House. It would not work. MPs would be studying his face for reaction on every issue and at every PMQs with Brown in the spotlight. So an early departure does not surprise me one bit.
But what of this EU Constitution story? The history is that Blair was thwarted time and time again in the early years of the B & B partnership by Gordon Brown’s dislike of most things European. And if this story is true, Blair seems perfectly willing as he departs from office, to lose the “Sun wot done it” and Murdoch’s support? Why? Not because he wishes Labour to lose – I don’t believe that for one moment. Perhaps he has been told by Murdoch that his papers are about to switch sides. Murdoch’s support depended on Blair being PM. Has Blair been told that the Murdoch stable will not be forthcoming for Brown, anyway? And with Murdoch on the Tories’ side – well, it’ll be a short and bitter reign for King Gordon. So what does Blair have to lose if he finally gets his way on Europe?
Is this the revenge of Blair?
And above all else, does he know that until the local elections his recalcitrant party, still floundering in the polls, WOULD NOT DARE get rid of him?
[Scroll down after Blair Quits story to read more]
News of The World says – BLAIR WILL QUIT AS MP – EXCLUSIVE – By Ian Kirby
TONY Blair aims to quit as an MP after walking out of Downing Street. He will stand down as MP for Sedgefield in the autumn, triggering a by-election. He has told members of his local Labour Party in the north-east he does not want to “get in the way on the back benches”.
Mr Blair, 53, has been in the Commons for 24 years. He had privately agreed to stay out of domestic politics for five years to give Gordon Brown a clear run as Prime Minister.
But now he has decided to make a clean break. He broke the news to his agent John Burton last month. A Labour Party source in the north east said: “Once he has left Downing Street he will be out of the country for most of the time. Labour might have a 60-plus majority but there are votes coming up in the Commons where every one will count. Gordon Brown will not want Tony to be sitting on the backbenches, and Tony won’t want to pretend he’s busy with constituency business.”
“Tony has earned the chance to choose his departure time and is now ready to give someone else a chance. He’ll go in the autumn. With an 18,457 majority, his seat should be safe from a Tory or Lib Dem challenge.”
Mr Blair is expected to stand down as an MP after the Labour Party conference in September.
Well, even if the denials from Downing street are true, it wouldn’t surprise me one bit. Blair on the back benches is just too, too incongruous.
But perhaps more serious, if true, is this:
TONY BLAIR is about to secretly sign Britain over to a federal Europe… FOREVER
As in the News of The World
“The News of the World can reveal the Prime Minister intends to rubber-stamp the European Constitution without consulting his likely successor Chancellor Gordon Brown — not to mention British voters.
Mr Blair has PERSONALLY pushed forward plans for a permanent EU President and Foreign Minister as one of his last acts before he stands down as premier.
He will travel to Berlin on March 25 to sign the 50-page agreement, Declaration on the Future of Europe. Far from a simple “declaration”, this is a binding treaty which embodies “basic laws” for 490 million people in 27 countries. Its proposals were set out in the despised constitution, already crushingly rejected by voters across Europe. It will set up:
# A PERMANENT, unelected, president of the European Union who will speak as a sole voice for the whole of Europe and serve a five-year term.
# FULL-TIME foreign and defence ministers to represent Europe — which means powers like China and America will by-pass Britain and speak directly to them.
# A REFORMED European parliament, empowered to draw up more of its own laws. Britain would lose the ability to veto its decisions — and each member state’s own government will lose the right to “opt out” of EU laws and treaties.
That will mean that Mr Blair’s successor will be unable to renegotiate ANY of the European treaties.
The document is being finalised by the German government, which holds the EU presidency. But we can reveal it will state:
If a change of government in a country calls into question what has been agreed, not only is society split in that nation, but our continent is increasingly incapacitated.
We must commit to our European legal principles: pacta sunt servanda — “treaties are to be honoured.”
Officials in Brussels have been working on the new agreement since June 2005, when the Dutch followed the French in rejecting the 300-page constitution which laid out exactly what powers the EU needed when it expanded from 12 to 27 member states.
In all, nine countries with a population of over 150 million turned it down or, like the UK, decided not to put it to the vote.
Downing Street played a major role in the latest negotiations but their plans have infuriated the Treasury, which fears Gordon Brown will be landed with a series of deeply unpopular moves when he takes over.
One Brown aide told us: “Why are Downing Street doing this? We don’t need more European integration, we need the integration we have to work properly.”
Under the new plans, the European parliament will be able to come up with trade union laws, green regulations on carbon emissions and metres of red tape that could cripple business.
It can set its own budgets, meaning the EU will tell Britain how much we must fork out to fund its massive bureaucracy.
That move alone will cost Britain hundreds of millions a year, since the EU will be able to reduce our rebate from Brussels negotiated by Baroness Thatcher in the 1980s.
THE European Constitution was thrown out by voters of France and the Netherlands and would have been thrown out here if the British people had been given the chance.
The constitution is finished and should stay finished — that’s democracy. The days when a political elite in Brussels could take more and more power for the EU are over.
People are quite clear that the EU has too much power, not too little. So it’s astonishing our government is giving the time of day to plans to bring back the constitution.
It shows how paralysed ministers are while they wait for a new Prime Minister. Now is the time when Europe would welcome British leadership, yet the government is silent. Britain’s message can and should be clear and simple: NO to the constitution, once and for all.
And there should be no cunning plans to bring bits and pieces of the constitution through the back door.
Every political party should sign up to our pledge that there can be no new EU treaties that hand over more power from Britain to the EU without the British people having the final say in a referendum.
The tragedy is that the EU could be spending its time so much better. If the EU reformed it could do so much for our economy, for our environment and for global poverty. That is what Europe’s leaders ought to focus on when they make their grand declaration next month.
What is Tony Blair trying to accomplish by failing to take a stand? Is he hoping that this will help him to some top Eurocrat job after he leaves Number 10? Unlikely. His European colleagues have seen too much of his slippery behaviour to want him in Brussels.
Is this his way of mucking up Gordon Brown’s first months as premier, leaving him to deliver an EU treaty our people do not want?
Perhaps. But then Gordon Brown will only have himself to blame for failing to take a stand earlier.”
My thoughts on this story, if true:
Interesting. Machiavellian even. But, again if true, Blair has learned this trick from the Chancellor. Quite apart from the “coup” of last summer, obviously with Brown’s concurrence, in the early years of their “joint-rule” Brown put a stop to several pro-European moves which Blair was keen on, including the euro. Blair knows that Brown is not nearly so keen on the EU as he is. The fact that the British people are still not on board on the EU is no brake to Blair today.
My advice to you, Mr Blair, after having watched the David Kelly Conspiracy programme tonight – don’t take a walk in the woods alone before 25th March whatever you do.
Saturday 24th February, 2007 Have you noticed how our PM still seems to dominate the political agenda despite being “walking dead”? From the USA, EU, Australia to the Middle East, what Blair says and does counts.In America there is some consternation and much admiration for his talk first stance on Iran.
Friday 23rd February, 2007
At the Welsh Labour Party’s Conference in Llandudno, Mr Blair raised a laugh at the start of his speech when he thanked delegates for their welcome and said: “It’s amazing how nice people are about you when they know you’re going.”The PM told the party in Wales at the end of his 35-minute speech that they could be “really proud” of what they had done. He said, “A coalition government would seriously damage the economy. If you don’t turn out to vote Labour on May 3rd, you will let in a Tory administration. Contrast our record with 18 years of Tory rule and you’ll see why we must turn out to support Rhodri (Morgan – First Minister of Welsh Assembly)”. Also today, there is talk about a British “Son of StarWars” system in alliance with the USA, for counteracting ballistic missiles. Hmm..mm – that’ll go down well with old Labour. And, having just promised to withdraw 1600 troops from Iraq by May, we are sending 1000 more to Afghanistan, largely due to the lack of support of our EU “allies”. Ah, well, some out, some in – at least it’s an overall 600 or so less in the war theatres. It really is time that other NATO members pulled their fingers out, though. Or are the nights still too dark out there for the poor lads? Thursday 22nd February, 2007The PM’s rushing around like the proverbial. In London and Manchester discussing gun crime. Possible policies on identifying potential “problem kids” at six, and now he’s at the Welsh Labour Party conference tonight. So little time, so much to do!And Prince Harry is off to Iraq with his Blues and Royals regiment, just as 1600 troops are coming home. Proud and keen to go, it is hoped his presence won’t put his regiment in even greater danger. Hope he comes back safely, Mr Blair. Otherwise it’s the Tower for you!Following his announcement on troops withdrawal from Iraq, listen to the Prime Minister’s interview with John Humphrys on “Today”, Radio 4.
Wednesday 21st February, 2007Blair: “1,600 Troops Out”, and More To FollowTony Blair announcing Troops Withdrawal,
[Pic: Behind on left, John Prescott, Deputy PM, right Gordon Brown, Chancellor]
View PM’s Commons Speech on Withdrawing 1600 Troops (BBC)
So there we have it. The PM has said that we will be withdrawing 1,600 troops in the VERY near future, with, according to Des Browne, the Defence Secretary, possibly more withdrawals to come later in the year. Asked why the Defence Secretary himself did not make the announcement Mr Browne said, “The PM said that when Operation Sinbad is complete, he would come to the House to make an announcement.” And Operation Sinbad is now considered complete.
And so, by Christmas we could have 3,000 troops home. Presently we have 7,100, down from over 9,000, and so it will soon be roughly 5,500. And perhaps 500 more withdrawn by late summer. Tony Blair’s announcement was expected and was hardly a surprise.
The opposition parties supported and welcomed the announcement, though with the usual remarks added just for completeness.
David Cameron, the Conservative leader, called for the Prime Minister to support the principle of the need for an inquiry into the conduct of the Iraq war.
Sir Menzies Campbell, the leader of the Liberal Democrats, who has called for a withdrawal date of the end of October and specific numbers for withdrawals, said it was a long way short but “a step towards their end”.
Alex Salmond, the Scottish National leader, remarked that it was a “day of judgement speech”. He also asked the PM, in Salmond’s time-honoured fashion, to apologise for the “misleading information on weapons of mass destruction”. As usual, he was dwelling on the past rather than dealing with the future.
And in America, the US Secretary of State, Condoleeza Rice said that the coalition remains intact and the British still have thousands of soldiers in the south. She said it has always been the plan to withdraw all troops as responsibility is transferred to the Iraqi authorities.
In Iraq, of course, some will portray it as chasing the British out of the city and the country.
So, have we done the job we went to do?
There is certainly some improvement compared to a year ago, with the murder rate down considerably. Since 2003 economic activity has vastly improved and businesses are operating compared to the days just after Saddam fell.
Tuesday 20th February, 2007Blair To Announce Troops Withdrawal From Iraq
[Pic: Blair in visit to British troops in Basra]
After Prime Minister’s Questions tomorrow, Wednesday 21st, 12.30pm, Tony Blair is expected to announce a timetable for the withdrawal of troops from Iraq. He is expected to say hundreds of troops will return from Basra within weeks with more to follow. Some 7,000 UK troops are currently serving in Iraq and about 1,500 expected to return home within weeks.
Repercussions for this will likely be resounding in the USA where President Bush is sending thousands more troops to Iraq, despite opposition from the Democrats, many Republicans and the majority of the American voters. And now his closest ally, Tony Blair, is seemingly deserting him and taking the opposite route. Of course Basra cannot be compared to Baghdad for insurgency killings and the local security forces are now in good operational mode in Basra thanks to help from the British. But with Iran looming on the horizon, and no end to the present insurgencies realistically in sight, it may be that Blair (and Bush) are sending a message to Iraqi security forces that “enough is enough”.
Stick to your guns, Prime Minister (no pun intended!) The British media and some voters will be expecting you to buckle under pressure from Mr Bush. But you, and we have already kept our side of the bargain. And who knows where a future Prime Minister will take us unless the ground is laid clearly. You know you will be accused by some of deserting Iraq to prepare for Iran. In the end you owe no-one more than you owe the British electorate, our troops, your Government and yourself. Do the right thing, Prime Minister, for the right reasons.
View BBC news-clip here or read story here.
Downing Street Petition – Road Pricing
The Downing Street website’s road pricing petition is causing the Government some headaches. It seems 1.7 million people have signed the petition , which closes at midnight tonight. And a BBC survey today shows that 74% oppose the idea of charging by the mile.
The Government, it would seem, has some explaining to do. Some benefits to be gained for public transport services as well as environmental protection, and the cutting of taxes would make the policy more acceptable. Soon the petitioners will receive an e-mail from the PM explaining the “facts” which he says have not been explained properly by the original petitioner. The Government also makes the point that such road pricing will not be introduced until after two general elections hence, although the question of road pricing was actually part of their 2005 manifesto. So, although we all say we want to cut down carbon emissions and protect the environment, the transport equivalent of NIMBY seems to be raising its ugly head here.
Just as well we don’t have policy by petition. I dread to think what we’d be looking at next if we did!
Monday 19th February, 2007No 10 Petition – ID Cards In reply to the Downing Street petition against ID cards the PM has e-mailed the petitioners. He wrote: “I believe that the National Identity Register will help police bring those guilty of serious crimes to justice. They will be able, for example, to compare the fingerprints found at the scene of some 900,000 unsolved crimes against the information held on the register.”The Home Office said the police would not be allowed to search the register, saying its Identity and Passport Agency would do any database searching.The PM’s official spokesman said that it was always the government’s intention that the police could get access to fingerprint data contained on the planned register.Under the Identity Card Bill, first published in April 2004, approved authorities would be allowed access to “limited parts” of people’s details on the register, with the person’s consent, so they could check somebody’s identity.Opposition parties have voiced concern and say that this idea was not included in the original paper. The Government denies this and says this option for use was always included. And the Government is being criticised for changing the reasons for introducing ID cards. In fact, there are numerous reasons for introducing them. Since my travels around the world show me that other countries use them easily and many can’t imagine life without them in this digital age, I am reasonably happy with the idea – as long as it is not the thin end of the wedge. For example, don’t let’s sneak on everyone’s bank and health details unless and until they request it.
Sunday 18th February, 2007PM on London Shootings of Three TeenagersAfter the shootings in London last week of youngsters, the Prime Minister discussed new gun law extensions in an interview with Andrew Marr today. He pointed out that gun crime has actually fallen, by 16% this year, and the number of those killed has fallen to the lowest this century. However, it is clear to most that this teenage gun problem has to be tackled by society as a whole. See full Andrew Marr interview with PM. See BBC report
Friday 16th February, 2007BNP Tells A Tale!As a PS to the previous entry below on the BNP (or former BNP candidate) case, can I refer you reluctantly, to text from a site which more than any other I have come across (and I have come across quite a few) betrays the breadth of unbelievable idiocy we have to deal with in this country at the moment. This BNP member tells in fictional story form the conspiracy theory for 7/7 with the PM personally as its mastermind! The very idea that a British Prime Minister or any leader of any open western democratic government could be responsible for the murder of his own people belies all common sense. Tony Blair may be considered stubborn, determined, recalcitrant or brave, but he is not stupid, despotic or mad! He would need to have so many state organisations, press and individuals in his pocket for life and forever, even beyond the grave, to avoid discovery in this kind of scenario. Are such people “in the know” really so gullible and/or easily controlled? And in voting for Tony Blair three times have we the public been so frequently fooled? And above all, is Mr Blair really so evil?As the law stands in this country of free speech, we are all entitled to spew out such filth if that is our wont. But surely it won’t be long before internet freedoms like this are curtailed? At the very least there must surely be some element of libel in this kind of condemnation of our democratically-elected leader. The Unite Against Fascism website is well worth a visit, especially if you have a vote this Spring.
Tuesday 13th February, 2007“My husband wanted to shoot Tony Blair” As if it’s not enough for Mr Blair to avoid the slings and arrows of his political opponents, some disillusioned voters and the press, it now seems he was, allegedly, a desired gun target for a BNP member. This man wrote in his diary, allegedly, “The easiest way to save the country is to assassinate Tony Blair. When Prescott takes over, we’ll shoot that ******* as well!”In his trial at a Manchester court today the former British National Party candidate, who frequented anti-immigration websites and held explosive chemicals in anticipation of a civil war, boasted of “wanting to shoot Tony Blair”, according to the defendant’s wife. Interesting that he also wanted to shoot Lord Greaves of the Liberal Democrats! Lord Greaves, whose title is to those who know, a bit of an oxymoron, is a long-time sandalled old liberal. Strange that someone saw both he and the PM as worthy of the same fate, allegedly. It must be one of two things they have in common – the other being the name of “Tony”. It also shows how disturbed and unbalanced some of us are – allegedly! Perhaps now, the Lib Dems will find in their hearts a bit more empathy for the PM.
Monday 12th February, 2007PollsNow that there are no leaks springing, the opinion polls are the latest topic of interest. And of course, they are dissected by the bloodthirsty press to see just how bad they are for the PM.Some 56% – including 27% of Labour supporters – said they believe the Prime Minister has handed out peerages in return for party donations and loans, against only 13% disagreeing. But 53% said they also believed honours were routinely sold by earlier Conservative administrations. As John Reid said the other day about David Cameron’s mis-spent youth, “so what?” You can hardly expect people to think differently, when almost the same percentage believe it has always been done! The whole premise of the inquiry stinks and I, for one can’t wait until Sir Iain Blair gets his teeth into the question of such an inquiry’s impact into a government in power.And as for those thinking that Mr Blair should resign if charges are brought against his chief fundraiser Lord Levy or members of his staff, well, 53% to 35% doesn’t seem completely overwhelming to me! And there are 12% who obviously don’t know. And some of the 53%, persuaded perhaps by press speculation, could well change their minds when they are better informed from ALL sides. One day the PM and the Police will be free to tell us what they know, and what they believed to be true. Until then, it’s all conjecture.
Friday 9th February, 2007PM Chats to Stephen Fry
Listen to Stephen Fry’s podcast with the Prime Minister.Read the transcript of the interview. His political philosophy on society“I think if you were looking for a sort of more mature consensus about issues to do with liberty and freedom today, I mean I think there is a particular type of political philosophy, and this is where I am as it were, which is I would be very liberal on say gay rights, you know the equality agenda, ending discrimination against people for whatever reason, but probably less liberal than a previous Labour generation would have been on law and order issues, or antisocial behaviour, you know people who commit violent crime and so on. What is quite interesting is that in the ’60s you would have had a consensus which was a sort of gathering liberal consensus in both spheres, both in terms of personal lifestyle, you know the sexual revolution and all the rest of it, and in relation to you know traditional civil liberties arguments in the criminal justice system. I think what is interesting today is that it is what I sometimes call for shorthand a sort of pro-gay rights, tough on law and order position, which I think is something different from what you would have had a generation ago. “Wednesday 7th February, 2007PMQs today and a visit from Big Brother’s Shilpa Shetty with the PM. PMQs didn’t rattle Mr Blair at all today, despite David Cameron taunting him about the Chancellor’s absence whenever the PM was “in trouble”. His usual call for Mr Blair to step down fell on deaf ears. Menzies Campbell’s call for Mr Blair to call an election when he stands down and referred to his promise to serve a full third term. The PM neatly turned this round against the Lib Dem leader, saying:“There was I thinking he wanted me to go but obviously he wants me to stay.“Well I thank him for that ringing endorsement and I’m only sorry to have to disappoint him”.You have to be up early to beat THIS PM! Video of Big Brother winner in the House of “Big Brother” (BBC interview).Big Brother winner Shilpa thanked Tony Blair for his support during a meeting at the Houses of Parliament.The Bollywood actress watched prime minister’s questions in the Commons before meeting Mr Blair afterwards and declaring: “He was very sweet.”I expect he thought the same about her. She is a great ambassador for tolerance and fairness as well as the determination of all thinking people to root out racism wherever we find it.* And at the Downing Street press conference, the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman said regarding “complaints” over co-operation with the Police from No 10: Asked how the police would let us know of any such complaint, the PMOS replied that making their views known did not seem to have been a problem in the past. Ouch!
Tuesday 6th February, 2007 NEWS: Des Smith, the headteacher who was the first to be questioned in this saga, has been told by the CPS that there is “insufficient evidence” to press charges. So, at least HE can catch up on his sleep. One down, some way to go. And today Cabinet Secretary Gus O’Donnell has said that all the press coverage is “deeply worrying”. From the BBC news website:Cabinet Secretary Sir Gus O’Donnell has told MPs Downing Street has fully complied with police investigating cash-for-honours allegations. Sir Gus, head of the civil service, also rejected a suggestion the probe was a distraction for the government. Meanwhile the PM met with the Commons Liaison Committee
this morning where he was questioned across many areas of future policy direction and aspects of present domestic and international policy. Say what they like, but this guy comes out even under present circumstances, as completely in command of his job. His mind seemed to be focused clearly on every area on which he was questioned and the answers were unambiguous. Why do some say that he doesn’t answer questions? He did this morning, though I expect to see some determined hack telling us what he omitted to tell us as the day’s analysis rolls on. Monday 5th February, 2007Please check back in an hour or two – the way things are leaking there will probably be something to report! Update – peace broke out. No-one charged, questioned, arrested. No more leaks – perhaps the plumber’s been.
Sunday 4th February, 2007Ministers Rally To PM’s DefenceIt’s Sunday, so the usual “insider stuff” is in the papers. From “three suspects” lined up by the Police, to “John McTernan is the mole in No 10″, to “John Yates’s phone calls are being bugged by Downing Street”, to … who knows?I’d still like to know where the Police leaks are coming from.Are these just false trails being laid by the Police hoping for someone to crack? Are all suspects pacing their back gardens today wondering if they can avoid being charged if they shop the boss?WHATEVER. I am still highly suspicious of the root of all these leaks. What a leaky bath they are all sitting in. Hope they all come out of it cleaner than cleaner, to paraphrase something or other.
From Today’s Newspaper Reports & Opinion
According to the News of the World they have identified John McTernan, the Prime Minister’s director of political operations and one of his closest aides, as the “grass” and they hint that Mr Blair could face a third interview, possibly, they say, under caution.
That would be serious, but how accurate is the report? It seems that “CPS sources” say the police are unhappy with the incomplete answers they were given. The Crown Prosecution Service have now spent 11 months working with detectives investigating the affair.
The paper says that the CPS believe they have enough evidence to make charges stick.
It seems it was the McTernan breakthrough that led to Miss Turner and then Lord Levy being arrested in the past two weeks. In between those arrests Mr Blair was secretly quizzed at No 10.
The new developments came after the News of the World revealed that a mole at the heart of Downing Street told of secretly deleted emails and memos that proved at least two people had been lying to police — that mole, according to the paper, was John McTernan.
The paper reports that he also told police about meetings concerning Labour donors who had been offered peerages. Miss Turner and Lord Levy had previously denied the existence of this sensational evidence. But McTernan, it is understood, said the emails were between him and Turner. Detectives have also examined the diaries of McTernan and other Downing Street aides which “prove secret meetings took place”. McTernan’s diary is understood to have revealed at least one meeting about rewarding “high value” donors.
Two aides and one donor are the alleged suspects. And if McTernan has turned “Queen’s Counsel” he will, presumably be absolved. Hmm..mm
From Gaby Hinsliff -The Observer, Sunday 4th Feb 2007
“Privately Blair is busying himself with plans to clear his name after the police have finished their investigation and the CPS has decided whether to lay charges. Once the inquiry is complete, Blair plans to answer questions fully not only about the police but the history of the honours system and crucially the way he believes the 24-hour news media has driven public perceptions of his integrity.
“He has thought a lot about this,‘ says one senior minister. ‘Dealing with the media, in the early days we used to think that was doing the job. No longer. You do the job and you handle the media as best you can.”
Another confidant who spoke to Blair last week describes him as ‘remarkably frustrated’, convinced that if only he could openly discuss the peerages affair he would be absolved: ‘The irony is he desperately wants to explain to people his role because he’s not doing anything inappropriate, but he can’t.’
By the middle of this month, that gag should be lifted and then Labour can judge whether voters will grant him the few weeks’ grace he craves.
Maybe it will only be once he’s left, once he starts the lucrative lecture circuit and is free from the often compromising needs of power, that they will have to once again bring out the crash barriers to keep back the crowds.
The PM decoded …
Ned Temko’s guide to the Prime Minister’s address to Labour’s National Policy Forum:
Blair said: ‘In politics at the top you get used to the periodic storms and I don’t for a moment incidentally underestimate the volume of this one while you, and perhaps more accurately me, are in the eye of it.’
Translation: I know some of you will have thought I was just a little too laid-back when being grilled by John Humphrys on Friday’s Today programme. I do realise this is serious stuff, for me and for the party.
Blair said: ‘The fourth election will not be decided by current events. It will be about whether we have the dynamism, the energy, the vision and clear, well-thought-out policies for the future of our country.’
Translation: I know it looks as if every passing day of’ ‘cash-for-honours’ headlines makes it more likely Labour will lose the next election. But when I’m gone, let’s hope the voters have short memories.
Blair said: ‘I won’t be leading you in the next election but I believe passionately the direction in which I have led New Labour is the only direction. The centre ground is the only ground.’
Translation: ‘Don’t let David Cameron and his New Tories steal your political clothes, and we must not revisit Old Labour’s ways.
Blair said: ‘In the coming weeks, issues like welfare reform, the development of our universities, offender management and reform of the Home Office, climate change – to name a few, and not to mention issues like Trident – will be driven forward.’
Translation: Yes, I am going, which is one reason for tempering your angst about cash for honours. But I’m not going yet. And there’s more than enough for you – and me – to get on with.
Report by Ian Kirby, 4th Feb 2007
“SHOCK admissions by one of Tony Blair’s closest aides are set to lead to three people being charged in the Cash For Honours scandal.
The News of the World can reveal that the Prime Minister’s political secretary John McTernan “started the dominoes falling” when quizzed by cops.
These dominoes are expected to come crashing down around Blair, who yesterday pleaded with the Labour Party to be allowed to stay on in Downing Street. We can reveal:
THE new evidence led to two arrests and Mr Blair being questioned by detectives.
NOW three people, including two of the PM’s closest aides, the Prime Minister’s fundraiser Lord Levy and his head of government relations Ruth Turner, are set to be charged.”
But a defiant Mr Blair yesterday warned Labour will self-destruct if he is forced out. Speaking at Labour’s national policy forum in London, he said: “In politics at the top you get used to the periodic storms — and I don’t remotely underestimate the volume of this one. It can be hard to stay calm as it rages. But however buffeted it should not change our course.”
Deputy PM John Prescott yesterday openly acknowledged the cracks in Cabinet support for the PM. He urged ministers to bide their time and not tear the Party apart. Mr Prescott said: “In our leadership election — which will come in the next few months — it is vital that we strike a balance between constructively reflecting on our past and acknowledging where we made mistakes.”
Ulster Secretary Peter Hain hinted Mr Blair could go sooner than expected.
… read rest of News of World article here
Saturday 3rd February, 2007As the rumblings rumble on in the press – blissfully ignoring calls to ease up on the incessant noise – the Prime Minister has spoken to party loyalists and asked them to hold their nerve while he is in the eye of the storm. We can only hope that they can tough it out as well as he is doing – for the sake of the Labour Party, and, co-incidentally for the sake of governing the country.
Friday 2nd February, 2007
“I’m not going to beg for my character (short video/audio report) … pleading for my integrity” – PM
The Prime Minister spoke to John Humphrys (full interview) on the Today programme this morning. He denied that he was being distracted from his work by the honours inquiry but admitted there were issues raised by the ongoing police inquiry and the media handling of it.
Asked why he did not just hand over to Gordon Brown, Mr Blair said it would be “particularly wrong” for him to step down before the cash-for-honours inquiry had run its course, despite fears it was damaging his government. He pointed out that standing down under this pressure and letting Gordon Brown take over would be “not a very democratic way to decide who should be prime minister”.
When reminded of his “pretty straight sort of guy” claim, ten years ago, the prime minister brushed off claims that voters now saw him as fundamentally dishonest. But he insisted, “I’m not going to beg for my character in front of anyone. I am not going to get into the situation where I am pleading for my integrity, not even in front of the British people.”
Click here to listen to the interview
Thursday 1st February, 2007
Downing Street statement – please scroll to end to read or click here
Tony Blair Interviewed for Second Time, last Friday 26th January
“IT stinks!”, they yell.
But the stench, this time, is emanating from the press. Some of our news outlets are stinkingly incandescent about the fact that they weren’t in the frame. And their anger is probably heightened by the fact that they can’t blame Mr Blair this time.
They’ll try … just watch. But all fair-minded people might finally see through the campaign by some of the press to discredit the PM and encourage his trial by public opinion.
Downing Street has said that they were “not deliberately misleading the public” in complying with the Police request for secrecy until today. The Police have said that they were “completely satisfied” with the help given to them by Mr Blair.
It is understood that the reasons for the police temporary blackout request was because they did not want Lord Levy to know that they had re-interviewed Mr Blair.
SPLITS BETWEEN BLAIR & LEVY? IF SO – WHY?
So, if Mr Blair complied with the police request for that discretion and did not inform Lord Levy himself, just what does that mean?
*Does it mean that Lord Levy now feels let down by the PM?
*Does it mean that Mr Blair has raised his trustworthiness within the police investigation?
*Does it mean that the police have caused a split between the two, hoping that, if Levy is charged, he will not feel a compunction to “protect” the PM?
No doubt there will be much debate as to whether any information provided by Mr Blair led to Lord Levy’s arrest. Splits between them will be sought. Plans to pin the blame on Lord Levy (and others) in the latest investigation of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice will be aired loudly.
We should remember that Mr Blair’s interview did not lead to Lord Levy’s second arrest; that was on the cards anyway.
Indeed it was the reason for the police blackout. And the information the PM provided four days before the second Levy interview may NOT have incriminated Lord Levy further.
In other words – we have NO IDEA!
“TODAY” INTERVIEW – TOMORROW, 2nd FEBRUARY
Tomorrow morning Mr Blair will be interviewed by John Humphrys in his Today 8.10am hot-spot. If you’re a late night blogger or Cif commenter, set your alarm! The rest of the press will be listening in with bated breath! What will Mr Blair say?
- Will he continue to insist that he can say nothing because of the ongoing inquiry?
- Will he discuss the police’s reasons for the secrecy embargo?
- Does the PM think anything he told the police led to his friend’s second arrest?
- What does he think about the police investigation being shifted to the cover-up question?
- What does he think of David Cameron’s call for him to resign?
- How will he deal with this if it is continually repeated in the weekly Prime Minister’s Questions?
- Does he think other parties have anything to answer for?
- Is there likely to be any payback day for the police, if it all comes to nothing in the hands of the CPS?
- What about his weakening authority?
- How does his “purer than pure” assertion in 1997 fit now?
The PM will try to shift the emphasis to the Reform of the House of Lords being worked out right now. He will attempt to draw attention to the recent historic Northern Ireland developments. He might mention the Davos Economic Forum (at which he spoke to universal acclaim hours after his second interview). He will draw attention to the plans to encourage sport amongst the young in preparation for the Olympics.
Mr Humphrys will have none of this.
TONY BLAIR’S AUTHORITY – no Quick Fix
The question of Mr Blair’s authority will be high on the agenda of John Humphrys and others. It is already being sounded at Westminster and even within his own party. Unfortunately for all of them, there is no quick fix. If Mr Blair announced on Today – “I am resigning today” – it would take weeks, even months for a new PM to take over. And his resignation would be taken as an admission of guilt.
Yet the police investigation would not cease. He could still end up in court, as could others. And his resignation would not magically transform Labour’s chances in the Scottish and Welsh elections, partly because of the fallout from Gordon Brown’s present difficulties over charity status of the Smith Institute.
And, if the voters wish to punish Labour today for whatever reason, their mood will not have changed in the next couple of months, regardless of their leader. They will still want their dissatisfaction recorded. As a lightning rod, Mr Blair’s presence protects the backs of his colleagues.
That’s just one of the reasons this most resilient of politicians will likely hang on until the date of his choice.
I can think of many others – but many of us seem to have forgotten those in our rush to judgement in the midst of what I still consider a misguided police inquiry.
And if he were to stand down this very act might have the effect of removing the pressure from the Police to complete their inquiry. The consequences then would be that Labour and its (new) leadership would still have this hanging over them for months to come.
Labour needs to close ranks around its leader.
If there are calls for the PM to stand down now, their party, even when “renewed” by a different leader, will have the air of a split party contaminating it for perhaps many years. An end to Labour’s old problem of appearing split, and therefore losing, was one of Tony Blair’s positive effects on his party. They should never forget that.
COMMENTS ON THE PM’S SECOND INTERVIEW
HARRIET HARMAN
On Question Time tonight Harriet Harman has said that the Cash for Honours scandal has eroded trust. But she said that if party funding changes are made and all financing is transparent, people will be satisfied. Meanwhile the government is working on reform of the House of Lords. Presumably Mr Blair, if he is still around for a few more months, will get to work asap on election funding.
On the same programme another contributor said that Mr Blair still has important business to complete, in particular, the Northern Ireland question which he has overseen for all of his time in office, and is just about to come to completion. He also wondered about the Police handling of the inquiry, pointing to the Police inquiry of the Litvinenko “poisoned spy” case. Mr Litvinenko was murdered in London just a few short months ago. The other day the Police handed their case to the CPS. No hanging about in THIS case, then, although trips to Russia and possibly other countries were involved here. The Police have taken ten months to get to this stage in the cash for honours case. I ask again –
WHY so long?
HAZEL BLEARS
Hazel Blears says that there has been a corrosive effect by this inquiry.
NEIL KINNOCK
The first leader of New Labour says that the inquiry has caused damage to trust.
FRANK FIELD
Scotland Yard’s inquiry was dismissed by former Labour minister Frank Field as a “farcical waste of time and shows a real lack of judgement”.“A relationship between the giving of honours and the financing of political parties has been established over the centuries in this country and it would be surprising if it had stopped under this government,” said Mr Field. He said the original complaint by an SNP MP had just been a “wonderful wheeze” on which to peg a press release.
Liberal Democrat chief of staff Norman Lamb said: “Clearly this is a very serious matter, and it is important that the police are allowed to continue and conclude their investigations.
“Whatever the final outcome of the investigation, this sorry episode underlines the vital importance of reforming both the House of Lords and rules relating to party funding.”
The Conservative Party has not issued a comment.
Wednesday 31st January, 2007
Downing Street and government ministers have called, probably vainly, for restraint in comment regarding the ongoing honours inquiry. The call was partly in response to No 10’s anger at the police tactics in this matter. But also to the detailed poring over detail and projection of possible future events being indulged in by the media. The reporting seems peculiarly unbalanced, especially in the print media.
And meanwhile the government has to govern.
This is the point I have been making for weeks. If the PM resigned tomorrow (in utter disgrace presumably) it would be months before a new PM was in place. In the meantime we would have Mr Prescott in charge and in the end, Mr Blair might be proved completely innocent of all charges. His head on a plate for nothing.
Despite our typically British, fair-play, no-one’s above the law determination to be seen to make everyone visibly accountable including the prime minister, he and the government ARE in a different position from the rest of us. If you or I were being investigated no-one outside of our close families and the neighbours possibly, would know about it.
In this matter of government police inquiry EVERYONE knows about it IMMEDIATELY. This is not good for democracy. The papers grab on every item to try to prove their point. Bloggers, with their own agendas, have a field day. And calls are made that the PM should stand down straight away, by his opponents. Yet, this would be an admission of guilt. Who has been charged and found guilty? No-one.
Is the whiter than white news media and through them the public, able to get away with this projection of guilt by saying that we expect higher standards from the politicians than we would expect from ourselves or others? And if we do, why? Or are they pursuing other agendas – e.g. getting rid of Blair/Labour at any cost? With that “worthy” pursuit are they happy to skew their moral standards to fit?
What is British law, the all-pervasive media and the people they serve coming to, when we stupidly swallow all of this?
Tuesday, 30th January, 2007
Lord Levy has been re-arrested and questioned on suspicion of 
“conspiracy to pervert the course of justice”. He was released after questioning and has denied any wrongdoing . Neither he, nor anyone as yet, has been charged. Mr Blair was said by friends to be apoplectic at this development, but No 10 have not commented.
Meanwhile, the British and Irish prime ministers met at Downing Street. The Northern Ireland assembly election is to be held on Wednesday, 7 March as planned, Prime Minister Tony Blair has confirmed.Mr Blair said there was “a tremendous yearning now for this process to reach its proper completion”.
30th January, 2007The noises off around the second arrest of Lord Levy took attention away from the PM’s meeting with Bertie Aherne, where they agreed on the election date in Northern Ireland. It’s not surprising Tony Blair looks somewhat distracted. But the Police inquiry, hugging the headlines as it does, is oh so much more important than peace in Northern Ireland!Sinn Fein have accepted Gerry Adams’ call for their acceptance of policing in Northern
Ireland. An historic day for Northern Ireland and the rest of the country. Thanks are due in large part to Blair’s ability to bring all sides together over many years. Just one legacy of which Mr Blair can be very proud. A spokesman for Tony Blair said the prime minister welcomed the “historic decision and recognised the leadership it has taken to get to this point”.Update, Sunday 28th JanuaryJon Sopel has been interviewing the PM on BBC’s “The Politics Show”. In a bullish interview, in which he was asked about the honours inquiry, Iraq and the Economic Forum amongst other policy issues, you would never guess the personal stress and political pressure he must be under at this time. Asked if he knew when he would be leaving office Mr Blair refused to say but said that he had plenty of work still to complete, and “I’ll finish what I started”.Sunday 28th January, 2007Sunday papers time! So now we have two “breaking stories” about the Police inquiry. Firstly, the Police are saying (to whom – don’t ask me – the leak receiver, I suppose) that they might secure a Search Order to search No 10.Secondly, it seems they say that they have a signed note from the PM. Incriminating, no doubt?It seems the Sunday Telegraph has been informed that, “Mr Blair had made his comments in ink on internal government papers and initialled them”.But the Telegraph’s sources tell them, “Detectives do not necessarily think there is sufficient evidence to bring charges against the Prime Minister. But he is increasingly likely to be called as a witness if charges are brought against senior aides.”If the PM then felt the need to resign, might that lead to a constitutional crisis – or a shoo-in for John Prescott, the Deputy PM? Hhmmm…mmm. The plot thickens.Last night, No 10 denied the existence of an incriminating document written by the Prime Minister. No 10’s response was, “This is completely wrong. There isn’t any such document.”Mr Blair’s “comments” were among a batch of Downing Street papers obtained by detectives, the newspaper claims, adding it is the first time the investigation’s “paper trail” has led back to the prime minister.Saturday 27th January
The Prime Minister closed the World Economics Forum at Davos, Switzerland with his usual aplomb. Click here to hear the full speech. At this gathering of the rich and powerful he received a standing ovation from fellow world leaders. He focused on his belief that a major breakthrough on long-term climate change goals could be close, due to the “quantum shift” in the attitude of the US. Three quarters of the richest companies in the world were in attendance. So, if British and world politics do not have a place for our international statesman, you can be sure he will have had several job offers here. 
View a clip of his speech here.Click here to read the BBC report.As he sat listening to speakers at Davos, Mr Blair knew what the rest of us didn’t; that he had provided a second interview in this investigation. And now 2% of the world’s population owns 50% of the world’s wealth! Sounds bad? But in fact, it is a GREAT improvement, in fact double the distribution a few years ago. So, to the anti-globalists – things are getting better for ALL of us, not just the rich.Max Hastings’ article here where he recognises the value of Tony Blair, shows that the British public still has much to learn about this, and many little envies to leave behind.And as for Mr Blair’s political future (what! you didn’t think he was finished, did you?) he may well be thinking in terms which I mentioned here several weeks ago.Friday 26th January
Home Secretary’s LetterI can’t keep up with this “lame duck” of a PM ;0) to whom “no-one is listening”. Now Mr Blair has said the judges were “wrong” to assume that they had to let people off, because of John Reid’s letter. Is that another enemy he now has – the legal establishment? If so, I wonder who’ll win this particular battle. Keep watching the Blair Project, folks!
Friday 26th January Secret E-mail NetworkThe suspected existence of a second e-mail network was apparently revealed to police by a witness.
It seems that this level of technical awareness would surprise those who know a thing or two about Downing Street.ITV is quoting an anonymous source this morning saying it is unlikely anyone will face charges over the affair.“Missing” No 10 e-mail networkSo what’s this leak all about then? The ITV news item about a hidden computer network inside No 10 smacks of Police desperation! No wonder Downing Street denied it all.If Scotland Yard detectives have uncovered such a hidden computer network operating inside No 10 from which crucial e-mails appeared to have been deleted in the cash-for-honours affair, WHY are they telling us? Evidence not strong enough to stand up in court? Fishing around for another mole?And what about all this leaking to ITV News? Isn’t this the same Police Force who bemoaned the government’s complaints after the Ruth Kelly arrest last week? And if the existence of a second IT system in the building was revealed to police by a witness over recent weeks, haven’t they managed to weasel something out of Ms Turner in this regard yet? ITV News added that some e-mails on the second computer network appeared to have been deleted after the police inquiry was launched. A Downing Street spokesman rebuffed the claims. And Angus MacNeil, the small-minded politically-motivated SNP MP who started the whole sorry inquiry is still anticipating “handcuffs at dawn” for Mr Blair. Bet he can hardly contain his excitement, poor love. Last night, asked about the ITV News report, a Met spokesman said: “We’re not discussing the investigation.” A bit late now, Mr Plod, isn’t it, to keep shtoom.
Thursday 25th January The Catholic Church’s requested opt-out from anti-Gay adoption laws It seems that Mr Blair will be upsetting the Church (and the Church of England too – so that’s nothing new) by the latest twists and turns in this issue. The government’s “rejection” of any opt-out is being painted as a defeat for the PM who has had concerns about the Church’s position forsome time, it would seem. It’s probably more a case of the PM agreeing that no-one is or should be above the law. Their argument that their moral position cannot be subordinated to the law of the land is reminiscent of this regarding some Islamic mosques. The Church’s arguments have no greater validity, and fall into the same category, though obviously not with the same dangers.
- Downing Street Statement 1st February 2007
Downing Street has issued a statement about the PM being interviewed by police as a witness.The Prime Minister’s Official Spokesperson told reporters: “Last Friday the Prime Minister was briefly interviewed by the police as a witness. At the request of the police this was kept utterly confidential and, as a result, the press and communications team in Downing Street were not informed.
As far as they were concerned nothing had changed.”During the course of yesterday afternoon the police contacted Downing Street to inform us that the requirement for confidentiality had been lifted. We are therefore informing you at the first appropriate moment. “The Metropolitan Police Service is issuing a short statement in parallel.”
Listen to Today Interview with John Humphrys, on 22nd February, 2007
Humphrys persistent efforts to extract an apology from Mr Blair are beaten back by the PM’s arguments on the Iraqi people’s satisfaction with the coalition’s efforts.
Listen to the earlier “Today” interview with John Humphrys, 2nd February, 2007
“I’m not going to get into a position where I am pleading for my integrity.”
Listen to The Condensed History of Tony Blair
As it should be told – by those who appreciate true leadership – Americans. Clever, funny – 15 minutes only.
The Honours (Prevention of Abuses) Act 1925 (C.72) Royal Assent: [7th August 1925]
1.—Punishment of abuses in connection with the grant of honours. (1) If any person accepts or obtains or agrees to accept or attempts to obtain from any person, for himself or for any other person, or for any purpose, any gift, money or valuable consideration as an inducement or reward for procuring or assisting or endeavouring to procure the grant of a dignity or title of honour to any person, or otherwise in connection with such a grant, he shall be guilty of a misdemeanour. (2) If any person gives, or agrees or proposes to give, or offers to any person any gift, money or valuable consideration as an inducement or reward for procuring or assisting or endeavouring to procure the grant of a dignity or title of honour to any person, or otherwise in connection with such a grant, he shall be guilty of a misdemeanour. (3) Any person guilty of a misdemeanour under this Act shall be liable on conviction on indictment to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or to a fine not exceeding five hundred pounds, or to both such imprisonment and such fine, or on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months or to a fine not exceeding fifty pounds, or to both such imprisonment and such fine, and where the person convicted (whether on indictment or summarily) received any such gift, money, or consideration as aforesaid which is capable of forfeiture, he shall in addition to any other punishment be liable to forfeit the same to His Majesty. 2. Short title. This Act may be cited as the Honours (Prevention of Abuses) Act 1925.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
3 Responses to “Tony Blair – Latest”
Tags: Tony Blair News
S Selas Says: 
January 29th, 2007 at 12:03 amTB deserves much praise for his part in achieving the Sinn Fein vote to accept police in N Ireland.It is likely to be ground breaking. Only problem is we shall have to listen to Paisley Snr for a bit.I think TB’s character and temperament have suited this issue better than any other PM I can think of.
March 8th, 2007 at 12:45 pmTony Blair contested the last general election with a promise to serve the country full term. I do not think it ismorally right to make a promise of a certain commitment and then breach it.He is an outstanding leader and at this difficult time when some national and international problems remain unsolved his talents andstrategic vision is needed to contribute to their solution.Cash for honours farce is a non-starter. We do not pay for democracy and this system for political parties to fund elections has beengoing on for the last more than hundred years. So why kick up the dirt now? And against the PM? He has not pocketed a penny so why are wedo a characte assassination? Tories and Liberals have done the same ? Are they going to be prosecuted? Not as far as I know.Anthony Nixon
March 9th, 2007 at 5:16 pmHello Mr Nixon,Yes, agreed, although I don’t think Tony Blair is the one who is letting us down “morally”, as it were. The fools who didnot stand up to the disloyalty and full frontal attack of the few last summer are as much to blame as others.Still, you’d think at least SOME of those close to the top would be thinking of the “unmentionable option” of keepinghim. Well, I expect some of them ARE, but I can imagine it must be difficult to stir things, unless they were sure of a majority in agreement.Obviously not.I have the same concerns as you as regards ongoing issues, international in particular. How is Brown, or whoever, going to cope withongoing problems in the Middle East, for instance, if the renewed party tries to push a non-interventionist change of policy? We never hear fromhim. I suppose he can’t be criticised too much for this as if he did pronounce too much, we’d say he was taking things for grantedand trying to upstage the PM. I suppose we’ve never been in this ’slow death of a premiership’ before, so it isn’teasy. Sickening, actually.As far as I am concerned there is no other British politician with Blair’s talents and abilities to bring others on board. We’re going to miss him.As for cash-for-honours I have made the same points as you. It’s worse than disgraceful how the PM and those around him have been treated over the last year. To think that the blodthirsty press say he and his staff should not be “above the law”. I wonder if this treatment, I call it BENEATH the law, suits their sense of indignant propriety?“Law” – hah!