CONDUCT OF LABOUR HON. MEMBERS AT MAY 2006 FUNDRAISER
22.05.2006 Early Day Motion 2224
That this House notes that senior members of the Labour Party including hon. Members and Government Ministers attended a party fundraising event last week at the Arts Club in Mayfair; further notes that a copy of the official report by Lord Hutton into the death of Government scientist Dr David Kelly, signed by Ms Cherie Booth QC, was auctioned for party funds raising £400; believes this conduct to be in appalling bad taste, arrogant and crassly insensitive in seeking to make money, albeit indirectly, through hawking, as a novelty item, an official Government report into the death of a public servant; regrets the distress caused to the family and friends of the late Dr Kelly; calls on the Labour Party to apologise for such tasteless and offensive conduct and to donate the money raised to an appropriate charity; and deprecates such conduct by hon. Members.
UPDATE: Ceefax are now covering the story too.
Pleased to hear this story is esculating. I hope Cameron raises it in PMQs tomorrow.
It would be something Blair would not be able to defend well and would give the issue serious media coverage.
Whatever Blair said would look weak. Is he going to say his wife is wrong? No. He won't even admit it when his own ministers turn sleaze into an art-form. Whose idea was it anyway? Blair would be stumped.
This story goes to the very heart of how Blair and his wife conduct themselves and the contempt they have for ordinary people.
Getting some coverage from Nick Assinder now.
can this incompetant group of sleazoids sink any lower? I think not!
Good, but what could possibly be an appropriate charity?
The sponsors might also care to follow up an earlier suggestion about whether the copy of the report in question was a politicians freebie (ie paid for by the taxpayer) or properly purchased from HMSO. Next to impossible to prove either way I guess, but a suitably worded parliamentary question - or even PMQ would be grist to the mill
Anon at 11.30 - The Samaritans, maybe?
I would love it if Dave raised it at PMQ's, but he won't. Two reasons. Firstly questions are submitted a few days ago, before this has really blown up. Secondly, and more importantly, Dave is hopeless. He will probably harp on about AIDS in Africa(what is the British taxpayer supposed to do about that?) or icebergs. Nonetheless Blair is going to get it togh over this issue now, and rightly so
BBC Online has now written a formal piece instead of just a gossip piece. Comes top on Google News with a search for "Hutton Report"
Of course, he could also have asked where the copy of the Hutton Report came from.
Did the Labour Party buy it from HMSO or was it one of the (doubtless) many copies provided to Campbell et al when it was published?
I hope Dave does raise it in PMQ's. But he won't. Two reasons. Firstly questions are submitted days before. This has probably only come to Willmill Boy's attention today. Has someone told him yet? Secondly because he is useless. He will probably waste his question on something silly, like AIDS in Africa or the polar icecaps. Both very important I'm sure, but what is the British taxpayer supposed to do about them? Still Blair will get roasted either way, and a bloody good thing too.
Iain, I apologise for dis-believing you yesterday. I guess I hoped, much though I hate this government, that even they would not be as sick as this. Well done for raising the story's profile.
I hope this story does go national. It is an absolutely staggering mix of arrogance and ignorance that now seems, along with incompetence, to have become the hall mark of the Blair administration.
Can you imagine how the family of Dr Kelly must feel? That the government report into his death is being auctioned off like a cheap joke? Blair et al seem to have completely lost any connection with reality.
"Good, but what could possibly be an appropriate charity?"
good lord. words fail me.
this crassness reminds me of Imelda Marcos or the Ceaucescu's - absolutely staggering.
Cameron seriously needs to go for the jugular on this one at PMQs
Cherie got a right roasting on BBC London Live with Vanessa this morning. Most callers were so cross they were actually speechless.
At the very least, Cherie should match the £400 from her personal money, and the Labour party should refuse to accept it (don't hold your breath though).
Just a thought - I wonder where the autographed report is right now? Any thoughts?
And was this a personal copy for sale (bought and paid for) or is it an "official" copy being sold for the benefit of New Labour?
Yet another abuse?
As it presumably wasn't their's to sell can they not be had for sale of stolen goods? (Please!)
Michael O: of course Cameron can raise it. His and Ming's questions are not submitted days earlier. In fact, very rarely are anybody's. But perhaps Ming's should be.
Way back lost in the mists of time I took the Solicitors Finals exam, and the requirements of professional conduct - including behaviour away from legal practice - were pretty stringent. I imagine the requirements for the minor judiciary are harsher still, although I have not been able to turn anything up.
Anyone care to delve in search of a clause along the lines of 'bringing the Bench into disrepute'?
Cameron should not raise this matter. Leave it to EDM and others. There is something unreal about the story and the relative lack of interest from media. A hunch. Ms Booth got wind of MoS story and dashed of an apology to Mrs Kelly and possibly even phone call. Kellys are silent for whatever particular reason which lessens newsworthiness. Also suspect that certain media attendees at event have conspired to look the other way. There seems to be some collective shame or guilt about that has made this a fringe story. Something odd. And shame on those present who did not immediately see Despicable writ large on the item sold.
Did they pay for it? Is that a serious question? When did either of the Blairs put their hands in their own pockets for anything?
As I said before, class shows - and the lack of it shows even more.
Well done Iain for giving this story due prominence - Radio 4 did a big piece on it tonight too.
The story's just gone national on Radio 4 this evening. Let it roll.
I doubt Cameron will raise it, but if he devoted a large chunk of PMQs to issues that question the character of Blair it could be devastating, as this matter is impossible to defend.
Following John Reid's comments, you can already hear Ming Campbell's question, as he asked before: "Is the Home Office fit for purpose?"
The demand for an apology over the signed Hutton Report auction is on all the news channels now. It is coming up on Channel 4 News. It will be in all the papers tomorrow.
Unbeliievable Breaking News:
Channel 4 run the story about the Hutton Report auction and Labour provided a statement:
"This was not a Labour Party event. We know nothing about it."
Well it made Channel 4 TV news too.
A good matter-of-fact report. Ended with: "A labour Party spokesman said 'it was not a Labour Party event. We know nothing about it'" - Honest - that was Krishnan Guru-Murphy verbatim - with just the hint of a 'pull the other one it's got bells on' smile playing about his lips.
Channel 4 have been provided with a statement by Labour saying that "this was not a Labour party event and we know nothing about it" Wow!!!
Where are you Iain - this story is at long last getting bigger by the hour. Re-enter stage left if only to take a well-deserved bow.
Pardon my ignorance but what happens with the Early Day Motion now ..... is it debated at a specific time or does it just sit on the records to be contemptuously ignored?
Substantive questions are tabled in advance. But most questions at PMQs are supplementaries, of which there is no formal notice. So this may well come up tomorrow.
If anyone has the original signed copy, please notify email@example.com
(N.B. International lawyers will ultimately be used to verify any submissions if England & Wales prosecutions are, perforce, pursued by the Devil's own, discretion remains guaranteed via other means (these days offshore confidentiality) even if in anyway ISP and other ultimately anonymous means or inadvertantly indicated and otherwise deniable means are used by those submitting relevant data: even beyond any ensuing "nuclear" option by a government or double-agent persecution against the consumer, xsk's, part [the others being Houston-Riyadh axis or any other affiliates other (at this time) verifiable or unverifiable person or persons].
Anyone with extra news can state a wish to skype (still unmonitorable - echelon - suck urmtr'sxxxx) can indicate so with a mere gesture and will be contacted between on a wednesday or a sunday between 1800GMT thru 2300GMT for chat or info xchange via secondary and tertiary conduits.
What more can be said.
Ammonia on said pieces will be considered, in the first instance, as an index of North Thames muppetry.
In the tertiary instance, such stuff is gold dust.
Sleeping the woods....
PB remains an ever honourable servant, to the death, as he already did.
Griswold said above:
A hunch. Ms Booth got wind of MoS story and dashed of an apology to Mrs Kelly and possibly even phone call. Kellys are silent for whatever particular reason which lessens newsworthiness.
Whether or not Ms Booth made such an apology to the Kelly family (which in itself would be a first), that should by no means be the end of the whole story - she has brought shame and disgrace on herself, her husband - the Prime Minister and on public life in this country. She should be thoroughly ashamed. As for becoming a judge - what a sick joke that would be.
Micahel Oakshott - what are you on about?
Questions for PMQs aren't submitted!
Post a Comment