There will be much gnashing of teeth this morning in the Leader of the Opposition's office following the Sunday Times article on emails to David Cameron from his PPS Desmond Swayne. The Sunday Times does its best to jazz them up but from my reading of them they're relatively harmless. The truth is, whatever the write-up, that they demonstrate that 'Dessie' is doing his job as a PPS - keeping his leader very well informed about what's going on in the Parliamentary Party. They also show what enormous diary pressures a Leader of the Opposition is subjected to. Yes, the emails are a tad embarrassing in the cold light of day, but so what? The more interesting question is: who leaked them? I trust the Chief Whip will be getting the Whips Office torture chamber ready...UPDATE: The Sunday Telegraph says that the emails had been printed off and went missing. Via a circuitous route they ended up with the Labour Party, who presumably gave them to the Sunday Times in a vain attempt to take the heat of Prescott. Didn't really work did it?
15 comments:
I suspect the only negative from these e-mails will be that Blair has something to bash Cameron with at PMQs again (first Ken Clarke and his blue on blue, now this).
Two obvious candidates - Desmond Swayne and David Cameron.
I agree with sparked, their is nothing to damaging (the nuclear stuff perhaps) unless MP's take offence.
Tone in emails is easy to get wrong and that's when the right people are reading them. As long as MP's keep a sense of perspective it will be fine.
Whoever leaked them should be dealt with very harshly. In my job (i work for a law firm) i'd get the sack. I can't see whit it should be any different in this case.
You would have thought by now the Tories had had enough time in opposition. Such behaviour is crass in the extreme, and damaging to the Party.
It sickens me that the Toty Party still tried to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. If I were DC, it wouldnt be the thumbscres I'd be looking for , it would be the 12 bore.
This is a bit of a non-story. There is a tone of "Can you believe it!" about it which, given that emails and chatter like this goes on in any organisation all the time, and in a political party more than anywhere else, it is a bit ridiculous.
That the EPP thing is still rumbling on is irritating - irritating that the least relevant issue is also the one with the greatest potential for causing damage. Howe was on GMTV this morning. Clarke is, incredibly, still knocking around and seen as potentially useful. Hestletine pops up from time to time. Heath, mercifully, is gone, but there is still enough knee-jerk Europhilia among the pensioners to cause real problems on this front.
Dennis Healey was on the Andrew Neil slot on News 24 last night and, lamentably, one has to report that he made a lot more sense on the EU and on the special relationship than a lot of our people.
In one email, quoting from the ST article, "The e-mails also talk intriguingly of looming “colleague sackings” and “something dreadful” which happened to Swayne in Manchester, adding: “I cannot put it on paper”.
Perhaps we should get up a public reward to hear what it was? Anyone got more info?
If as suggested by the Sunday Telegraph that the mails were routed to The Sunday Times via Labour could it be that its a diversion attempt from the Prescott stories?
Except for a couple of silly comments ie "boring colleagues" looks like a true reflection of the party's views with necessary critisism/warnings.
Isn't this just what a PPS does - keep the leader infomred of backbench feelings. My only feeling is surprise that there is less bile and vitriol in them! There really isn't anything too surprising in them! David Cameron is a bit like Blair, in that most Tory MPs tolerate him because they know he can win for them at the election, but aren't really signed up to his reforms. The question is - who leaked - and why?
But are they really e-mails? 'Subject' line in some, but not in all of them, and no dates/times at all, which seems v.strange. And no 'From'. And the recipient's name and subject (where given) seem much more indented than in e-mails.
Could they be informal typed notes? (But even then, why undated by DS?)
Or could they be 'edited' re-writes of actual e-mails?
And perhaps leaked not by NL, but by a Con HQ insider, (a wet or a Europhobe)?
The reference to council electioneering makes them ca. two or three months old.
Can't imagine NL (if it's them) think this harmless tat is going to divert attention from their seismic scandals!
I thought the description of Theresa May was somewhat generous
Seems a pathetic story to me.
Desmond Swayne has done nothing wrong here - except for being a good PPS
I was also in Manchester and with Mr Swayne at times and nothing bad happened there from I could tell with him...
Surely if Labour are as straight as they claim to be the e-mails should have been handed back to the tory party,
to forward them on to the press shows that they are willing to use any measures to protect their hides.
A woman scorned?
Yes, Anonymous, but were you with him 24/7? In his room? Did you see who came and went?
Perhaps John Reid took a dislike to a question raised by Mr Swayne. See here for details.
Post a Comment