Wednesday, February 03, 2010

Brown Calls Peter Watt a Liar

I've been in meetings all morning so I missed PMQs, but Dizzy is reporting that Gordon Brown effectively just called Peter Watt a liar. Still I suppose that's not as bad as branding him a criminal, which he did two years ago. Dizzy writes...

Gordon Brown has been asked in Parliament about the now infamous "fund with no name" that Peter Watt referenced in his book "Inside Out". Asked by David Evenett why it was not declared on the Register of Members' Interest. Brown's response was,

I know nothing of what he is talking about
Apart from the roars of laughter in the Commons, presumably he's either claiming that he hasn't read the newspapers, or noticed a complaint about him to the Parliamentary Standard Commissioner, or, he's calling Peter Watt a liar - having already branded him a criminal and screwing him over as detailed in the book.

Nice man, our PM.

20 comments:

D. Bum said...

If he is found to have known then it is cast iron misleading the house and a resigning matter.

Moriarty said...

As the inimitable George Costanza, a role model for us all, once said: "It's not a lie if YOU believe it".

Desperate Dan said...

The worst thing was that the BBC have decided to destroy the Daily Politics by engaging the half-witted Richard Madeley as a regular commentator.

Moriarty said...

Dan, sorry but the Daily Politics blew it for me a week or so ago with Neil's truculent treatment of Eric Pickles. I had some time for Andrew Neil up until this point but on that occasion he just came off like the school bully who picked on the wrong victim.

I can confirm that as a result of that interview the BBC is now £142 per year worse off. Can pay won't pay.

Dave H said...

You don't need to doubt Gordon's word, just understand he speaks a different language.

Go to the Babel Fish translatation page and put "I know nothing of what he is talking about" into the text box, select 'Gordon Brown into English" and click on 'translate'.

It comes out as:

'I know only too well what he is talking about'

OldSlaughter said...

I wonder if there was a bound collection of paper detailing with via writing the events in question.

If only someone would sell such a collection.

Of course if they did it would probably have to be relentlessly plugged somewhere.

moorlandhunter said...

I agree desperate Dan. Madeley seems to be trying to recast himself as a political hack of some description and fails miserably. I think he had the orangey brown skin tone similar to that of Kilroy?

Michael J said...

Well done David Evenett

Direct hit - I believe

Victor, NW Kent said...

Brown's aides released a statement saying that the Dodgy Donor had sent, through a proxy, a cheque for £50,000 for his leadership campaign. They claimed they had torn it up. The law required it to be handed over to the Electoral Commission where it would be forfeit to the Treasury. On their own admission an offence was committed.

Not very long afterwards - I have lost the date - Brown donated £50,000 to the Labour Party.

Julian said...

Well, as the old saying goes "you don't have to be a liar to work for New Labour, but it helps!"

And why didn't anyone ask Brown if he had ever grabbed or yanked a secretary out of her chair, causing an assault, and presumably a crime? Tough on crime, tough on the causes, Gordon - what would Harperson say!

Oliver Drew said...

Interesting. As D. Bum says, surely if it is found that this fund exists then it's a resigning matter anyway, but having also potentially mislead the house...he has two issues on which he should resign... apart from being the man who destroyed the British economy....:)

Michael J said...

Well done David Evenett

Direct hit - I believe

George said...

Nice to see if Wattsie can come up with the goods on Gordo and the alleged fund.
As then its curtains for Gordo and perhaps a second and more searching inquiry into the S(m)ith Institute shenanigans.

Matthew Hewitt said...

Resign? didn't you know that's an old-fashioned, out of date notion which has no place in a New Labour Government. Much like honour, integrity and competence...

The Yorkshire Terrorist said...

First rule of PR - tell the truth, because if you're found to be lying, the consequences will be much worse.

First rule of writing an autobiography - include interesting revelations (true or otherwise) that will get picked up by the papers.

No-one has any reason to trust Watt more than Brown. Let's just wait for the evidence.

Moriarty said...

Not for the first time the Yorkshire Terrorist misses the point.

There absolutely IS more reason to trust Watt over Brown as the latter is a demonstrable liar. That is his history. In contrast when Watt's revelations were first disclosed those who should know (Douglas Alexander et al)were very coded in their "denials".

You have to be a very special sort of gullible to believe Brown's statement in the House. So it was bad PR? So what? Since when did Brown do GOOD PR?

Moriarty said...

A Columbo moment:

And another thing: if this was an allegation made about John Major in 1997 it would not be out of the headlines. And quite right too. The fact that the media have left it alone is a disgrace. The fact that the blogosphere is not therefore making the running is equally a disgrace.

Just how corrupt does this government need to be before the Warks and the Robinsons get stuck in?

trevorsden said...

Brown always lies and misleads. Its endemic with him.

DespairingLiberal said...

I thought it was more of a gasp than a roar of laughter - it was so patently obvious that Brown was telling a blatant lie that most were flabbergasted.

I presume from now on he will be asked this at every PMs QT?

Rightwinggit said...

WV= squaddi.

That is all.