Monday, February 22, 2010

Why Won't the Lobby Expose Mandelson's Duplicity?

It has long been a hobbyhorse of Guido Fawkes that the lobby system is bankrupt and corrupt. Today's events would appear to confirm his view.

All day yesterday and today, Peter Mandelson has toured the studios telling us all that Gordon Brown is sweet, innocent and wouldn't recognise the word bully if you spelled it out to him. This is the very same Peter Mandelson who, until he came back to the Cabinet, would ring up many of the parliamentary lobby and feed them multiple anecdotes about.... yes, you've guessed it, Gordon Brown's bullying and tantrums!

Yet lobby etiquette forbids these journalists from exposing Mandelson's rampant hypocrisy to public ridicule. Oh, they will do it at some point in the future after he has long disappeared from the political stage, but what a pity it is that not a single one of them has the bollocks to do it now.

And while we're at it, we already know that Alastair Campbell has excised any mention of Brown's tantrums from his diaries, and yet as soon as Brown leaves office he will dish the dirt. Nice of him to hoodwink the voters in this way.

26 comments:

David Lindsay said...

What sort of Prime Minister would you prefer? And I wonder at anyone who has never had a boss who shouted and swore a bit. Fleet Street is clearly not as one tends to think it is. Then again, perhaps they assume that no one else has had these experiences, since that would make them the same as everyone else?

Deafening silence from the usual critics of fake charities about the National Bullying Helpline, whose income in 2007 was a mere £1,818, with expenditure of £852. The figures for 2008 are 207 days overdue. In 2007, £1000 was raised by CLM Solicitors and Monahans, £200 by BNY Mellon Asset Services, and around £600 pounds from all other donations. Ann Widdecombe is a Patron, though one does have to wonder for how much longer after today's breach of confidentiality. And the helpline refers callers to a human resources consultancy run by Christine Pratt and her husband.

DeeDee99 said...

Because they're frightened of being bullied?

Also - why aren't your blogs feeding into PoliticsHome today. Have they disconnected you - or are they too in on the conspiracy to prop up Brown?

Cath said...

I think many of us believe that Campbell is guilty of far greater sins than pretending that we don't have a psychotic nutjob for a Prime Minister

Prodicus said...

Terribly amusing, the Bunker's faith in the Dark Lord, simply because he still has a grip on some editors's dangly bits. They really do think he still has the power to dazzle real people, out here beyond the village, don't they? But - can't they hear us laughing?

Paul Halsall said...

This one has turned around and bitten the Tories, eh, Iain?

The mistake was to get Mrs. Pratt involved.

Now, you're pretty hooked into Tory gossip. So do you know which Tories tried to get her on the BBC?

DespairingLiberal said...

If true it is a disgrace, but then again, we only have your word for it don't we Iain. Is there someone amongst the H of C Press Corps you might be able to persuade to break ranks? Someone who perhaps would benefit from being in with you Tories after the General?

Mandleson is obviously a many-times proven major league liar and hypocrite but that doesn't mean this time he isn't right about the political basis of the BullyGate assault. Clearly this has been the result of co-ordination at the highest levels in the Coulson machine with the ridiculous and aptly named Pratts as patsies.

God help us all as we get closer to The Date. The smearing ordure that is about to fall on all our heads will take the breath away as clearly neither Coulson nor the spin-cyclists in Mandy-Brown HQ won't hesitate to dredge any conceivable gutter.

I wonder how low the turnout will get given the levels of cynicism this will engender? A new low of 35% is on the cards!

Roger said...

The simple answer is that they all know one anothers' guilty secrets. Anyone who breaks the omerta code will find themselves ostracised by their peers and ridiculed by their political "friends". Those rules apply in any club and to pretend that the Lobby is somehow a disinterested observer of the political scene is laughable. However, Mandelson touring the airwaves with his faux indignation at the vile calumnies heaped upon his friend Gordon takes irony to new levels.

Nick Drew said...

well this humble (non-lobby) blogger has posted his Mandy story

*looks around hopefully for Nick Robinson et al*

DespairingLiberal said...

In the days of the Roman Empires, rulers like Tiberius, Caligula and Nero, noted for their single-minded unpleasantness, sought to appoint as heir and successor someone even more debased and wicked than themselves. That way they could feel confident that after their own death, they would be looked back on with sad longing by the oppressed and suffering plebs.

Mandy attracts such loathing from all quarters that I am inclined to think Brown is thinking along much the same lines. Probably he will announce that Peter is his chosen successor once he goes down to defeat.

trevorsden said...

Pathetic self serving apology for shocking disgraceful behaviour by Brown (et al) from Mr Lindsay, who chooses to shoot the messenger.

The Times has this report
"The head of the union for civil service mandarins today alleged that bullying was rife across Whitehall and that staff had very little power to respond to abuse by politicians and special advisers. " -- another bit of embarrassment for Mr Lindsay to pretend does not exist.

The fact that Mr Lindsay wants to avoid is that people were bullied in No10 and did ring a help line.
But socialist Mr Lindsay does not give a toss about bullying as long as it serves the socialist cause.
'What sort of Prime Minister would you prefer' he asks, implying its all right for bosses to swear and intimidate underlings. An honest one, I reply.
No chance with labour.

Interesting how quickly socialist 'principles' can evaporate when it suits.

DespairingLiberal said...

Trevorsden, I feel a bit less than totally convinced by the recent conversion of Tories such as yourself to the anti-bullying agenda. Aren't you the Party that has often come out with statements such as "harsh discipline never hurt anyone", "flog 'em till they drop", "spare the rod and spoil the worker", etc, etc?

Given that most of you belong well over on the Monday Club blue-washed far-right, I just laugh when I hear you coming out with this stuff.

Roger said...

DespairingLiberal

Flogging, hanging from the yardarm, public hangings, stonings etc are not bullying - they are suitable punishments for transgressions against the (prevailing) ruling class. Throwing a mobile phone or calling someone a c**t is in an altogether different category.

Elby the Beserk said...

David Lindsay

Report them to fakecharities.org - they have a huge list there. Oh - hold on - they are all ones hugely subsidised by the government and the EU. LOTS of them

And as for what sort of prime minister .. one who had a clue what he as doing, that would do, for starters.

Unsworth said...

Despairing Liberal

Another unsupported load of garbage. ""harsh discipline never hurt anyone", "flog 'em till they drop", "spare the rod and spoil the worker", etc, etc?"

Names and dates, please. Otherwise we'll have to conclude that you are, yet again, talking bollox.

Unsworth said...

@ David Lindsay

"What sort of Prime Minister would you prefer?"

Anyone, indeed anything, but the present incompetent clown.

And maybe you could confine yourself to posting your careful constructs on one blog only. It gets so tiresome - even disappointing - having to repeatedly plough through the crap on the off chance that there might be a pearl of wisdom hidden in it somewhere.

You seem to believe that bullying is commonplace, therefore it's perfectly OK. Does Harriet Harman agree with your interesting position? More importantly, has anyone actually addressed the allegations, or are we once again witnessing the usual NuLab assassination (in so many senses) of the Messenger?

Nigel said...

>>What sort of Prime Minister would you prefer?<<

An elected one, for a start.

Preferably without BPD.

And to be really ambitious, one with a rudimentary grasp of reality.

Jimmy said...

"What sort of Prime Minister would you prefer? "

I think the consensus is a posh vacuous empty suit with a background in PR.

Moriarty said...

Jimmy- he's not available. He's busy milking the middle east for millions of pounds a year.

Klaus Westwood said...

Surprised only a few people seem to have picked up on Miliband's now customary lukewarm support for the PM

http://www.ludiplebeii.co.uk/2010/02/miliband-jumps-to-brown-defence-again.html

Martin said...

Here's a question. Why is Tom Bradby (ITV News) the only one of the main news hacks (Toenails, Bolton and Snow) to point out the smear was on Christine Pratt (especially Radio 5) and not as Lord Mandelson said on Brown?

I'm shocked that Sky News has moved so far left over the last few months as well. Could this be them having to pay back to Labour for getting the pointless election debates?

None of the main networks can be trusted (ITV are probably the best of the lot though and the BBC the worst) and Iain there really needs to be something like the internet radio station you worked at for a while but a live TV news station internet based so it can avoid the Ofcom crap.

We are losing the ability to question politicians as the lobby hacks just suck up for fear of being closed out.

Thomas Rossetti said...

Excellent point, Iain. The tide is gradually turning, though. Does anyone serious about politics really pay any attention to lobby journalists these days?

Victor, NW Kent said...

I note that Mrs. Pratt's past and the whole story of her charity were ferreted out and disseminated to Labour adherents by about 6pm last night. The bilious Baroness Bullyem was on Sky News last night, shrieking out the dirt from the folio prepared by Mandy.

As to David Lindsay's question as to what sort of Prime Minister I would prefer it would be one who is patriotic, competent, pragmatic, even-tempered and honest. I do not see any of those qualities in Mr. Brown.

Victor, NW Kent said...

I note that Mrs. Pratt's past and the whole story of her charity were ferreted out and disseminated to Labour adherents by about 6pm last night. The bilious Baroness Bullyem was on Sky News last night, shrieking out the dirt from the folio prepared by Mandy.

As to David Lindsay's question as to what sort of Prime Minister I would prefer it would be one who is patriotic, competent, pragmatic, even-tempered and honest. I do not see any of those qualities in Mr. Brown.

DespairingLiberal said...

Martin, exactly what was the smear on Pratt?

Didn't she say "people at Number 10 have frequently contacted us about the Prime Minister"?

Under intense questioning, she later turned this into "we may have had a few calls some years ago from perhaps Number 10 or perhaps the DPM's office and these were not about the PM".

Hmmm.

She also turns out to be running a "charity" that actually fronts for a dodgy ambulance-chasing litigation firm to which her "national" (not national at all) "helpline" (actually a business referral leads generating tool) sends people. Her outfit is not a member of the organisation for Helplines and has been condemned for breaching their guidelines.

There is evidence that the firm to which she refers people to (run by her husband) is playing both sides of the mediation/litigation game for profit.

All of her patrons have dumped her.

She checked out her approach with Tory MPs before making her allegations.

Now please tell us - which part exactly is the smear?

norman said...

Lindsay, Jimmy, Despairing, Halsall-supporters of the lying and disgraced Labour Leaders' cheer leaders, hell bent in hoisting on us more years of power by Labour imbiciles.

Jimmy said...

"Labour imbiciles."

Oh dear.