Guido rather misses the point with his reporting of Derek Simpson's £400 a night stays at the Waldorf Astoria. Yes, it's great evidence of union leaders with their snouts in the trough - and Simpson has got a bigger snout than most. When I was doing the BBC paper review last night, my colleague Linda Kennedy chose this as one of her stories. She treated it all as a bit of a joke and poked fun at Simpson for his expensive tastes. Neither she nor Guido have questioned why this story has appeared on the Mail on Sunday's front page today.
The reason is that Simpson is up for re-election as the leader of the Unite union, and has two people running against him. The story in the Mail is a classic smear campaign, designed to damage his chances of re-election. And no one should be naive enough to believe that the Mail discovered Simpson's overnight stays without a little "help". I will leave it to you to decide who might have helped them. It's a classic example of spin and dirty tricks. Some things in union politics never change.
UPDATE: Having just returned from West Ham's superb victory I have been reading through the comments on this thread. Some of them seem to think I was excusing Simpson. Far from it. The story is entirely legitimate. All I was doing was pointing out that there was an agenda behind it, something neither the Mail on Sunday or Guido thought worth pointing out.
Just for the record, I too stay in a hotel in London sometimes, if I have an evening event or a breakfast event to attend. Do I charge my hotel bill to Total Politics? Do I hell. It would not occur to me to do so.
41 comments:
Conversly, how come he seems to have found his voice only recently? Just askin'.
Are you suggesting that he didnt use union funds to stay at the hotel?
Those who live by sleaze die by it, and hopefully the same will be meted out to this government in the shortest possible time when they stand for re-election.
It is clear that there is a power struggle at the top of Unite, which is wny we saw them represented at the Lindsey Refinery, and why Woodley has made his presence felt over various problems in the car industry.
If one of them has chosen to be profligate with union funds so they deserve to be smeared.
How exactly is publishing the truth about someone's expenses a "smear"? If it's true, it's fair game surely?
Congratulations Iain - please accept your 'stating the bleedin' obvious award' for the day.
"How exactly is publishing the truth about someone's expenses a "smear"? If it's true, it's fair game surely?"
This.
When it comes to choosing between outrage at the smearing of a Union leader, most likely by one of his back-stabbing colleagues, and the delight in the seedy confirmation that such people are truly charicatures from Animal Farm. I go for the latter.
Surely it's not a 'smear campaign' if he's actually done what the Mail alleges he has done?
Yes, there may be someone who stands to gain by this being exposed, but does that automatically mean that this is a 'smear campaign'?
If he has used union funds in an inappropriate manner, why should he not be exposed?
The story in the Mail is a classic smear campaign, designed to damage his chances of re-election.
Good.
Remember who pays for Labourlist, Iain
Whoever the source and whatever the reason for the leak, surely this story is firmly in the public interest.
Union members have a right to know when their leaders misuse union funds and Simpson more than most needs to be exposed for his luxurious lifestyle.
Smear or not, if the story is true I'd be happy to see him lose his job for having his snout in the trough like this - I know there's a risk of a replacement being worse in other ways, perhaps a hardline militant who would do more to impede public sector reform, so I'd like to know more about the two alternatives, but I'd be happy to see this guy get the boot.
Labour=Hypocrisy
If he did stay there, then he is bang to rights and no trickery is involved. I wonder if he is trying to get something on the others!
I do hope he's not re-elected. Who's against him? A monkey would be just fine and not require the jacuzzi so the hotel bills would be reduced.
Unions are past their sell-by date and when that happens people lose interest. That's why these poseurs think they can get away with this behaviour.
I loved the spokesweasels' statement trying to justify the choice of accommodation.
The Penguin
"It's a classic example of spin and dirty tricks."
Yes, but does that make it any less true?
To quote a Labour front bencher, 'So what?'.
Snouts in the trough are snouts in the trough, full stop.
all hotels are equal but some are more equal than others
Exposing a scumbag leftwing union leader for having his snout in his members wallets is about as far from a definition of smearing as you can get. If anything the ferrets should be encouraged to gnaw each other to death in the sack.
You're welcome to analyse the sub-plots etc. wherever they may be Iain.
Am getting to the end of my tether with this lot and I don't expect much else from the other lot, post election, either. I look around and don't like what I see or hear from them either.
All options open for my vote.
"Union Leader Victim of Smear Campaign"
And your point is?
I don't agree with Iain. What do you call it if someone revealed information that was in the interest of the public and especially union members? What this union guy is doing is wrong at least by the standards of the union movement. Why shouldn't he be exposed for ripping off union members? It's no different if it's MPs, ministers, councillors, CEOs etc.
So any story we read here about Broon and the Labour Party in the week or so before the next General Election should be ignored because it is just a "smear"?
Well done Iain. This is the sort of blogging that justifies why I read your blog but never read Guido. You report the story and look behind the obvious, Guido misses the point.
Bloody hell, you don't say, well I never. The Orwell Prize is in the bag Iain.
There was no need to mention the election as the animating resaon for the story surfacing now since it is clearly referenced in the original article itself. Doh!
When is a smear not a smear? When it is the truth.
I'll bet you any money Norfolk Blogger is lying... oh look a site search reveals 103 references to Guido on his site. Amazing for someone who doesn't even read the blog.
Norfolk Blogger - you are not a very good liar.
"Union members have a right to know when their leaders misuse union funds..."
That'll be 'whenever they think they stand a good chance of getting away with it' then...
Looks like these little piggies want a slice of Derek's action next week:
Kevin Coyne
Jerry Hicks
Paul Reuter
IUnknown
Hardly confined to Trade Union politics Iain. Mr Simpson has opened himself up to much of this onslaught by his own tactics.
Times newspapers also gave him a good going over a couple of weeks back.
I couldn't vote for him, whatever his politics, and whatever the risk of what could replace him.
He has used the Union's good offices to send out targeted letters to members just ahead of the election period.
He has dominated the unions' United magazine as Cover Star and throughout the run of paper.
His Exec have issued a rebuttal - with the election materials - over some of the statements by his competitors.
He did oppose similar tricks from Sir Ken Jackson in getting elected in the first place.
I couldn't vote for him myself given all this.
He's been a very dirty scrapper himself, he is very highly paid and well taken care of, he's made his own Waldorf Hotel bed, and he'll have to lie in it.
Is it beyond these people's wit to stop, think, and stay in a mid-range hotel if they are required to entertain or negotiate into the wee small hours?
PS Guido hasn't missed the point at all.
I've got to agree with Guido on this one. It is totally legitimate politics to accuse a candidate for re-election of abuses of power and hypocracy, especially if you belive them to be true.
If an election campaign is not the right time to mention this, when is?
PS Woodley is set to remain for one year after Simpson goes. That was the deal they did at merger. If he had two years as top dog without the Simpson balm to keep him calm this might not be such a bad thing.
Simpson insists that his working to 66 and his pay etc were all voted through. But there was a single vote on what used to be called a composite. All or nothing.
Wsan't Simpson once asked what would he do if he saw Woodley staggering down the street, answering, 'Shoot him again'.
Might have been the other way around.
Brotherly love. You can't beat it
I like your articles commenting on who's leaking to journalists - there's not enough of that (would spoil the charmed circle, eh?). Keep it up!!
As far as this story is concerned:
Guido = right. Iain = wrong.
wv: trobin. Who the hell makes these things?
Lord Dale of Saffron Walden said: "Just for the record, I too stay in a hotel in London sometimes... Do I charge my hotel bill to Total Politics? Do I hell."
I wonder if the fees that Sky News pay for newspaper reviews mean that you can also stay at the Waldorf? ;-)
For God's sake, do you people not actually bother reading what I have writtenDid this sentence pass you all by? "Yes, it's great evidence of union leaders with their snouts in the trough - and Simpson has got a bigger snout than most."
It's a great story and well done to the MoS for getting it and to Guido for highlighting it. My only point was to point out something that they hadn't - that there was an agenda here by one of Simpson's opponents.
That adds even more to the story and will hopefully result in Simpson throwing a bit of muck back.
I am sure that kevin Maguire will rush to Simpson's defence and say that nothing's too good for the workers...
"For God's sake, do you people...."
Brilliant.
Signed
Us people
After all is said and done.
Nobody can deny that Simpson is one creepy twat..
great article Iain. Rumour has it that D. Simpson once turned up in a helicopter to give a speech at Glastonbury festival!
The thing about Simpson that rankles most is that he is a sanctimonious old fart. He seriously needs a good spanking - metaphorically speaking - that is, taking down a peg or 150,000 (ish). He really is the most partisan and ignorant of men and uses his undoubted vocal gifts to present his 'argument' in tones reminscent of Phil Drabble commentating on sheep dog trials. Come to think of it that is probably where he could do something vaguely useful for a change.
See how fat he has become since being elected as Leader?
I have been in his sumptuous office with a drinks cabinet groaning with every tipple going.
This rat is a traitor to the working class and just like all other Union Leaders is milking the system to his advantage.
Still we know he is clogging his arteries dining at the Waldorf so some justice will soon prevail
"Just for the record, I too stay in a hotel in London sometimes, if I have an evening event or a breakfast event to attend. Do I charge my hotel bill to Total Politics? Do I hell. It would not occur to me to do so."
But, frankly, who should care whether you do or not? You don't hold an elected post for an organisation which is apparently for the benefit of "the working class" (per prev commentor "lushlaroo"). Hardly a description of the readership of TP, eh?!
I was so angry about this story that I left the union. Here's my story in full: http://blog.matthewcain.co.uk/ive-left-unite-the-union/
Post a Comment