Just imagine for a moment that the Chief Executive of a FTSE 100 company was under investigation for corruption. The Police were about to interview him under caution and the case was about to be presented to the CPS. Imagine also that this very same Chief Executive was a personal friend of the Attorney General. Does anyone serious think that the AG would not recuse himself from the case?
And that is exactly why he must do so in the case of Cash for Peerages. It is astonishing that Goldsmith, who is not only a personal friend of Tony Blair, but was appointed by him, must stand aside from the case. The Director of Public Prosecutions, Ken MacDonald, has done just that and stepped aside because of his links to Cherie Blair's Matrix Chambers. If Goldsmith had an ounce of honour, he would so the same. But of course we shouldn't be surprised. After all, this is the main who first of all declared the Iraq war to be illegal, then for some strange reason, changed his mind.
Goldsmith's decision on whether the Cash for Peerages case will be brought to court is apparently based on whether he considers it to be "in the public interest". That's that then.
34 comments:
Sir Ian Blair has also said he is standing aside because of conflict of interest.
One extremely important fact you have failed to consider while asking whether goldsmith should setp aside...this is New Labour...of course he won't step aside.
The debate in England is mirroring that which has taken place in Scotland following the sudden resignation of Lord Boyd, the Lord Advocate. In Scotland the law officers - as is the case in England and was the case before devolution - act as government advisers; although in Scotland the law officers are also in charge of the criminal prosecution system. In relation to the Shirley Mckie case - where one branch of the state (the fingerprint service) was criticised the decision to prosecute lay in the hands of the law officers who declined to prosecute. GIven the moves to remove the senior judiciary from the House of Lords with the establishment of a Supreme Court of the United Kingdom (albeit in a hideous building) to ensure separation of judiciary and legislature, it is surely appropriate in both Scotland and England and Wales to fully remove the state prosecution service from the executive. Law officers (and their staff) fulfil a valuable function. That their work can be tainted by this remaining anomaly is unfortunate, and another factor that would suggest to me that we should adopt a written constitution.
I have been a solicitor for 38 years, and whilst standards of honesty in the profession are much, much lower than when I started, you would still expect to be struck off if you went ahead with something where such a brazen conflict existed. Similar standards apply to the Bar. What a great way to get Goldsmith disbarred!
The legal and constitutional position is crystal clear, as I point out here. Goldsmith must step aside
Surely if Goldsmith does not step aside he could face a challenge for Misfeasence in public office? But then again he has been Blairs lawyer for years so such a charge could be easily made but difficult to prove from the kitchen cabinet with no minutes, records or paper trail to link to any decisions.....
Hmm... that would be almost as bad as giving a "temporary" promotion to the investigating officer to the rank of "Deputy Assistant Commissioner" with the assurance it'll be permanent "if all goes well".
Oh shit, hang on, that's already happened!
Are we sure Sir Ian and Mr Tony are not related...?
This tells you all you need to know about this Labour government.
They have no standards of how they should behave.
If Goldsmith had an ounce of honour
I think anybody considering that phrase would probably be able to give you a pretty accurate idea as to the likely outcome here.
You are nuts - Goldsmith should not step aside.
His intentions show he is unfit for this office and he should be pushed entirely.
The pressure on the investigating officer and his team will be immense, both within and without the police social services.
As for Goldsmith. If he can get away with it he will. I am far more interested in the families of the dead soldiers whose case goes back to the High Court this week. I reckon Blair is far more concerned about that one, as will be Goldsmith. Because if the families are given leave to go ahead with the case Goldsmith's full reasoning will have to be given to the court! NOW that could be a resigning matter for both of the B's
I would have thought that Lord Goldsmith's decision to take charge of this case would be judicially reviewable.
I suspect that - if it came to it - Bliar would use the offices of his chum to stall any prosecution of himself or his immediate circle. This is why Goldsmith should be made to stand aside. He is also both an appointed peer and a Labour donor and therefore close to the investigation himself.
If Goldsmith does not stand aside, and charges are not brought, everyone will draw the reasonable conclusion that Goldsmith stopped the investigation to get his pal off the hook. There would also surely be legal challenges, leaks galore and significant pressure for a full public inquiry or further investigation into possible abuse of office etc.
There have been many whiffs about the conduct of NuLabour over the years, if the unthinkable happens,
and pal Goldie steps in to save his chum, the stench of it all will extend to high heaven.
After all, he(Bliar) has his legacy at stake...
Goldsmith will not stand aside. He is, after all, NuLabour. He showed how easily he can be leant upon in 2003. He will decline to prosecute, Blair will then declare that this was because there was no case to answer and that he and all concerned have been exonerated. An incoming Conservative government will be reluctant to re-open the case for fear of being seen to be vindictive and doing so for political reasons. Blair and his cronies will get away with it.
The plates are all still spinning, but for how much longer?
Goldsmith is playing a holding game, he knows he can still change his position up until the point where he has to consider if a prosecution is in the public interest.
Come come, Iain.
Who better to advise on a criminal investigation into Labour donors who became peers, than a Labour donor who became a peer?
This is an unelected member of the government that introduced the Councillor's Code of Conduct that prevents councillors making decisions on the very issues that they have been elected on.
I've seen a councillor declare a prejudicial interest and leave the room because he had a phone from the same network as the applicant for a mobile mast siting. Although this was OTT in itself, it stems from the fact that there is one rule for the Government and another for the great unwashed.
If Lord Goldsmith remembers his legal training he ought to remember Hewarts old maxim that "justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done." Or is it another area that New Labour has reformed?
These New Labour cretins are really totally inept. The very best political move would have been for Goldsmith to stand aside immediately (before the inevitable uproar), and then 'influence' from a distance. Goldsmith doesn't even have enough sense to make political capital out of his 'probity'.
In any event, Yates' 'investigation' has been brought under control by his 'temporary' promotion and Ian Blair's 'if all goes well' comment (cf Machiavelli). And, no matter what the outcome, Yates' findings will have zero credibility.
As to Harman's assertions - well yes, what else would one expect from this paragon of integrity, honour and truthfulness?
We've reached the point now where the Government cannot be bothered to get the politics right, or even put up plausible lies. That's a measure of its contempt for the electorate.
I tell you that if this was a Tory government under the same circumstances it would be headlines on the BBC, but as it is labour you will hear nothing about it on the BBC.
You should realy go for it on 18DO
But 18DO is a bit timid
Strapworld- The appeal Judges have given the families of the dead soldiers leave to proceed. Next Sunday Blair is going to have to stand at the Cenotaph, knowing this war was illegal, that he lied over WMD, stand near Gen Dannatt and face a march past of the crippled and bereaved. It would be better that he went this week, and hand over to his annointed one, rather than make out stomachs turn with his fake show of mourning.
Pedant
As I understand it, the Bar can't do anything if Goldsmith has presided as a Judge even in a part-time capacity. I don't know if he has or not.
The only other option is to complain to the department of constitutional affairs.
Either way, instead of us all getting wound up about it - which I really am, is to simply start putting the complaints in. You can only but try.
Look at what happened with Inigo Wilson.
They might ignore the one but they can't ignore the many. Then again Nulab say no more. My complaint is going in tonights post as the Bar will not accept a email version of the form as it has to be signed and therefore posted or faxed.
Instead of talking about this we should Complain to the relevant profesional bodies, The Bar Council may be able to deal with this matter as lon gas Goldsmith does not sit as a judge.
If he has or does the it woul dbe the Department for Constitutional Affairs that handle the matter.
Bar Council complaints form can be downloaded from here;
http://www.barcouncil.org.uk/document.asp?languageid=1&documentid=616#ParaLink
The DCA complaints section is here;
http://www.dca.gov.uk/compleng.htm
I will be downloading the forms and sending them off, if they are sent enough then they will have to take some action.
This is one bandwagon we should all jump on.
How could the Labour Party treasurer not know where the 16 million pounds came from? If he didn't know about them at all, where were thy kept and who dispensed them? There's this accounting problem here, not just cash for honours.
I do not know if Goldsmith has sat as a part-time judge, but if so I do not believe that would be a bar to disciplinary proceedings. I know of at least one case where a part time judge has been convicted and suspended from practice by a Bar Disciplinary Tribunal. Moreover by taking the decision for or against prosecution into his own hands the Attorney General will certainly lay himself open to judicial review; especially if, as has been suggested, the proposed charges include false accounting.
Slightly interesting fact about Peter Goldsmith: when he was at school in Liverpool he was a vehement Conservative - used to speak for the Conservative Party in school debates at the time of general elections.
Please keep me in the loop on any campaigns where pressure is being brought to bear. This is a scandal.
>>>If Goldsmith had an ounce of honour <<<<
ROTFLOL
Oh how much I'd like to see Bliar looking like this!
Another thought: How many of the Downing Street gang will decide to give "no comment" interviews? The Attorney-General may advise that this is their best course of action. He could then go on to advise against prosecution "in the absence of any signicant admissions by the proposed defendants."
Yes but you are spookily quiet on the little bit of local trouble with Ellenor Bland, the until-recently Tory Candidate who has been sending another of those "humourous" emails, beloved of Tory councillors it seems, bemoaning the presence of ethnic minorities on theses shores.
It's not that I care about the email, it is that the miserable tart has blamed her husband for sending it, from her account, signed "Ellie".
Let's have more women-only shortlists of people like her - oh yes please.
The government has hidden behind the not in the public interest curtain for years to hide their embarrassment.
Trumpeter : Could Blair really get away with a prepared (and evasive and don't cha know who I am) statement followed by no comment to any questions. And then have the PMOS and Blair himself say that he is "fully helping the police with their enquiry". He'd be gone from No.10 before tea-time and Labour would be out of power for a generation. High stakes indeed
Post a Comment