Sir Paul Stephenson, in his statement to the London Assembly, has made clear that it was the Serjeant at Arms who gave permission for Damian Green's office to be searched. His message: Don't blame me, I was only doing my job. She in turn may well deflect responsibility onto the Clerk to the House of Commons, Dr Malcolm Jack. The big question, which will hopefully be answered this afternoon, is whether the Speaker was merely informed, or gave his active consent.
Sir Paul carefully avoided the question of whether he or his colleagues told the Serjeant at Arms if the CPS or DPP had endorsed the need for Green's office to be searched. The DPP denies this. Sir Ken MacDonald, the outgoing DPP told Newsnight last night that he would certainly have been expected to be consulted directly.
Sir Paul Stephenson also said that there "could have been national security implications" in this case, but failed to outline what they were. A good deflecting tactic if ever there was one. There are clearly no national security aspects behind the leaks at all.
12 comments:
Iain, off topic, but did you mean 'three Audi household'? Conservatives should reserve the word 'family' for its proper useage.
Oh, is that right. I'll use the terminology I like, thank you very much.
'could' ? On the basis of a 'could' an MPs office is raided and he is arrested.
'Could' ? Then why was the Official Secrets Act not used?
'COULD' !
I am certain that if they really believed these items of data were concerned with national security, these gentlemen would still be in custody. Can you imagine the joy this would have brought the Labour Party if it were true?
We the public have you sussed Ms Smith and Mr Brown.
You know the subject of you and your governments mismanagement of immigration is a sore subject with us.
We don´t believe your ID/phone tapping/email spying schemes will catch terrorists.
We don´t believe your cataloguing of our children like cattle will prevent child abuse cases.
We also know that this was an attempt to discredit the Conservatives and it has backfired on you.
We resent being told what we can and can´t do under this dictatorial regime.
Infact, we don´t believe anything you say anymore!
This is OUR country and YOU serve US! You seem to have forgotten that.
Now do the decent thing and step down.
A Female Voter
And now the police are going to be given to stop anyone they like without reason and ask them to idenify themselves. If you refuse as I will you can be sent to gaol.
We are now in a Labour led Police State
Can you believe the police arrest an MP and search his home and office and hold him for 11 hours and the Home Secretary was not consulted or the CPS.
Its scary that the Police are going round doing this. They will loose all support if it contnues.
I am not afraid of terrorists but I am of this Labour government
Re the Home Secretary's denial of foreknowledge of Damien Green's arrest, did anyone see Davis Grossman's report on Newsnight yesterday, saying something like:
'putting gently aside one's dumbstruck incredulity'?
(now let's see if the google account stuff works....)
It is also interesting that he denies a very tightly defined charge ( an old Tony Blair tactic ) or "improper influence" from ministers. Now that's not the same as no influence from ministers, and it is also not a denial that ministers did not know before hand.
The point so far as the Home Office is concerned is likely to be this: if you have someone in the Ministerial office who is systematically leaking documents to embarrass the government and aid the opposition party, do you want to leave it to their interpretation of what constitutes national security?
The national interest is not defined by what a 26-year-old Tory thinks helps the Tory Party.
PS Note on the Times politics blog that the Parliamentary privilege aspect of the whole thing is demolished. There is no restriction on police searching Parliamentary offices.
His message: Don't blame me, I was only doing my job.
The Nuremberg defence.
@ David Boothroyd
"The national interest is not defined by what a 26-year-old Tory thinks helps the Tory Party."
OK so tell us, who does define what the national interest is? You?
Frankly you haven't a clue as to his motivations or rationale. As usual, you're choosing to present your views as provable statements of fact. I suppose you'll be telling us next that this man is a secret Tory Agent whose minder is Green.
Next up, the Tory Party is a front for Al Qaeda.
Pathetic.
Iain,
Having watched the Acting Commissioner's speech to the GLA this morning and was struck by the following comment:
"It has already been widely reported that the Metropolitan Police Service was called in by the Cabinet Office at the beginning of October to investigate suspected criminal offences in relation to a substantial series of leaks from the Home Office potentially involving national security and the impeding of the efficient and effective conduct of government"
I can't help wondering if the Cabinet Office deliberately 'over-played' the seriousness of the alleged offences and so therefore inflamed the initial actions of the Police?
This seems to fit with the earlier comments of both Jacqui Smith and Brown; each of whom sought to play up the line that the leaks where from a Dept that 'handles the most sensitive Government information'.
I think this is an important aspect of the case that has been overlooked in the subsequent sensational developments.
Post a Comment