PRESCOTT: Yes, Brown has rages but that's all they are.
BROWN: And we all know what happens when you lose your temper, don't we?
PRESCOTT (fuming): Very clever remark from a smart arse journalist.
Lest we forget, here's an article from 2006 from the Mail on Sunday which shows Mr Prescott's unique way of bullying his staff. Still, at least he didn't throw any Nokias. Or keyboards.
JOHN PRESCOTT relentlessly pursued his Civil Service secretary from the very first day she began working for him, The Mail on Sunday can reveal. New extracts from diaries kept by Tracey Temple disclose how Mr Prescott repeatedly made advances towards her, despite her attempts to rebuff him, and how he even flirted with her in front of Ministerial colleagues. She describes in detail how the Deputy Prime Minister was 'eyeing her up' when they met for the first time the day after Labour's 2001 General Election victory.
And just five days later she confessed she felt uncomfortable about the way Mr Prescott continually looked at her. The diary entries, published today in The Mail on Sunday, reveal how, after months of ogling, Mr Prescott attempted to force her on to the bed of his luxurious grace-and-favour London flat.
She had gone there along with Joe Irvin, Mr Prescott's then special adviser, as Mr Prescott was supposed to be working on a crucial speech to be delivered at the Labour Party conference. But as soon as Mr Irvin left, the Deputy Prime Minister made his move.
The diaries detail how Mr Prescott intimately touched his £26,000 a-year secretary as they sat in the back of his chauffeur-driven Government Jaguar and how he enjoyed 'dirty' conversations while she sat at her Whitehall desk...
...Legal experts said last night that had Ms Temple chosen to make a formal complaint about the Deputy Prime Minister's approaches, they would have amounted to sexual harassment. This can constitute any form of unwelcome sexual advance in an office or workplace and includes unwelcome joking, leering and making inappropriate comments as well as physical advances.
Until 2001, the onus was upon individuals bringing actions to prove that they were harassed.
But then new regulations introduced by Labour shifted the burden of proof. Employers are now required to demonstrate that the actions did not constitute sexual harassment.
So, no more lectures on bullying please, Mr Prescott.
Prescott should be in jail, not on pr=ime time TV.
But in tolerating his excesses the Labour Party have simply granted open season to the likes of Brown.
One wonders just what goes on in the minds of all the lefty do gooding feminist equality merchants. Totally one-eyed and hypocritical
I think you'll find he has four, Iain, two very large ones and two more that each have their own postcode.
Don't forget Tricia McDaid's revelations.
No doubt Messrs Brown and Prescott will be consulting with their lawyers about the foul allegations that have been made in the press and various books recently.
Or perhaps not.
On same show, one of guests (did not get name) rightly pointed out that Labour Party is being highly bullying in response to allegations of bullying- the smear/denial machine in full swing.
Also- is it that allegations are untrue/lies (per Brown yesterday), OR the lady from bullying helpline has broken confidentiality (Mandy etc today- so obviously allegations are true)
just a reminder...
I fully commend the National Bullying Helpline's chief executive Christine Pratt for going on record to confirm that somebody who had worked at No 10 Downing Street had contacted the charity about allegations of bullying.
If anything, what the last couple of days have shown is both how the Labour Party always try to do their best to both create smokescreens and try to destroy anyone who stands up to tell the truth on such matters.
When will this government ever start telling the truth about what has gone on since Brown became Prime Minister I ask?
After all, the list of candidates to work for the man was not entirely top draw recently was it so people must surely be asking why?
This is a matter that is deeply in the public interest and has to be got to the bottom of.
Everyone in life loses their rag at some point and Brown himself almost did such in an interview with Adam Boulton on Sky News recently put to be in denial just once again underlines why I believe the public continue to have such a vague lack of trust in politicians of all parties who fail to be straight.
Just tell us what really happened, put an end to this sorry debacle and start doing something to restore the honesty, integrity and trust that we so lack in British politics at present.
Oh for goodness sake Iain. That Mail story's bought in revenge and also as it goes, did I mention, in the Mail too. What speculative rot it is.
Ms Temple did not make a complaint and did in fact slow down for long enough to be caught.
You are plainly and simply smearing Gordon Brown and John Prescott and you have no shame whatsoever.
You yourself are renowned for having paddies and losing it. In blog comments here and elsewhere included. Now aren't you?
Have you still got that Hitler picture up? the artist has removed it from their site. You know that? So it is only you - and your derivatives - smearing Brown with it at this moment.
Brown's going to get away with this. He'll probably improve his poll ratings. Ms Pratt was stupid, but she'll now be destroyed. You only have to see the tweets and status updates of people who would be marching on company headquarters if the bully was in business rather than in No.10.
I heard Prescott ranting and raving at lunchtime. The man really is insufferable. The King of Loud-Mouths; good riddance to bad rubbish etc.
Strange thing is, not a SINGLE attack on Rawnsley.
I`ve heard Prescott on two different radio programmes this morning trying to defend the indefensible.
What a humbug that man is........and to think he`d been given the title of "Deputy Prime Minister " .
The sooner we are rid of this lot, the better.
There’s also the time he effortlessly multitasked by attempting to bully Times journalist Marie-Ann Sieghart, at the same time as lying, misusing Govt resources, being utterly thick etc. etc. etc.
Why is that blustering pie-scoffing buffoon taken seriously any more?
Meanwhile on TV Channels that about 8% of the population watch, talent shows from Pakistan featuring contestants who eat live snakes on live TV are shown.
OFCOM concentrated on the complaint centred on the fact that one screening of the show went out at a11 in the morning (before the watershed).
Apparently its OK to offend Western standards of decency on these "Ghetto" TV channels that are freely available in the UK
A PDF copy of the OFCOM report is here:
See page 28 for an in depth analysis of cultural relativism from the UK's broadcast regulator.
And more on the fat bullying creep here, from 2 May 2006:
“Afterwards, about a dozen people came up and commiserated with me, and several used the word "bully" to describe the guest speaker [Prescott].
A parliamentary committee report two months ago declared that the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister was "rife with bullying". It was said to be a culture that came from the top. I could easily believe it.
The reports that have been drip-dripping on to Mr Prescott's head back up the message. His affairs are not with equals; they are with subordinates. He never tries to put his hand up the skirt of a female political colleague, but always a junior, always someone beholden to his goodwill.
Tricia McDaid, a former journalist, recounts how he pulled the top of her dress away from her chest and peered down it. Would he have dared do that to Patricia Hewitt or Margaret Beckett? Or Cherie Blair? Of course he wouldn't. He did it only because he knew he could get away with it, and the woman in question was unlikely to hit back.”
Hang on a minute. This is, one assumes, the same Tracey Temple who had a prolonged affair with Prescott. In the same Mail on Sunday article she goes on to talk about how they "made love" to each other and f*cked after an Iraq memorial service. Tawdry behaviour for sure but to call it bullying and draw some spurious connection to Gordon Brown is beneath you Iain. It's what I expect of Jan Moir and her ilk.
I can only assume that this blog is in full pre election mode (why else would you treat us to 6 separate articles on this topic) and that we will have to wait till May to get the real Iain Dale back.
Yes, she also said "we made love in John's office, we were very lucky we never got caught".
Doesn't sound much like a woman being bullied, does it? It takes two to tango.
We have yet to hear anything from you Iain on the subject of Andy Coulson. How can the Conservative Party possibly justify a proven bully? I quote from his Wikipedia entry:
"In 2008 an employment tribunal upheld a claim of bullying by Coulson whilst he was at the News of The World. Stratford employment tribunal upheld a claim of unfair dismissal claimed by senior sports writer Matt Driscoll and stated "We find the behaviour to have been a consistent pattern of bullying behaviour". The judgment singled out Coulson for making "bullying" remarks in an email to Driscoll."
Mention of Coulson's behaviour seems to be strangely absent from recent Tory prognostications on the subject.
It amazes me that anyone of any sanity can think that Labour is a Party worth voting for and that Brown, Mandleson are telling the truth. Unelected Mandleson even tries to spin that this bulling row is all a Tory plot.
To think Labour believe (unfortunately they have the democratic right) they have the moral right to govern our live, how we live it, when the past leader, a so called socialist makes millions each year, Mandleson who was worth nothing in 1997, having to get two loans to buy a house and got kicked out of office for it, is now a millionaire or very close to it.
Chris Paul -
You are plainly and simply supporting Gordon Brown's and John Prescott's actions and you have no shame whatsoever.
WV = ponce?
A bullying Prime Minister in order to suppress a story about bullying is bullying the National Bullying Helpline.
No need for satire.
The key word is "mail on sunday"
As in, tories have a bit of form trying to smear people as bullies
Prezza during one of his rants - I am sure - said Brown was against emtry into the ERM.
Below is portion of an article about Broon and how he was in favour of entry and how he managed to wriggle out of blame when the ERM went belly up
Broon's behaviour is very contemporary - blame everyone but himself
He (Brown)regarded John Smith, the new Labour leader, as too traditional, too entrenched, to make sufficient changes and win over the electorate. And yet in the two years that followed, it was Gordon Brown himself who was to face political crisis and struggle, as his credibility both in the party and in the country was put to the test. It began in the autumn of 1992 because of his dogmatic position on the Exchange Rate Mechanism.
The ERM fiasco was primarily an embarrassment for the Conservative government. By locking sterling into a fixed valuation against other currencies, an overvalued pound was dragging the economy down, with little room for manoeuvre. But because Gordon Brown had resisted the calls of many colleagues, and particularly the Labour left, to oppose the ERM, when it all collapsed for Britain, he was left facing huge embarrassment himself and accusations of economic incompetence. Worse still, as the crisis deepened, Brown was intractable, insistent that he was right, and unwilling to embrace any option except 'sticking it out'. As the crisis reached its calamitous peak, he became the focus of some serious criticism within his own party. Then on 16th September 1992, everything collapsed, the Government had to pull the pound out of the mechanism, and both they and Brown were left looking like fools. It was a critical mistake, a fundamental error, which threatened his whole political standing.
Using all his experience and media skills, Gordon Brown fought his way out of his corner. His get-out tactic was to use key phrases to attack the government, avoiding in-depth questioning of his own discredited position. These sound-bites he repeated like mantras, and the public mood did indeed focus its anger on the government, so that Labour was let largely off the hook. However, his own party, and particularly the Labour left, were disgruntled and disenchanted with their own shadow chancellor. It was a moment of serious vulnerability for the one-time 'golden boy' and 'rising star' of the Labour Party, and damaged any sense of invincibility, in his pursuit of the Labour leadership. His position had been weakened. Blair's continued to strengthen as a potential modernising leader.
The Labour Party conference that followed shortly afterwards was uncomfortable for him. He faced a critical reception from some sections of the Party. In response, he attempted to manoeuvre by putting his own spin on the debacle: he argued that his position had in fact distanced the Labour Party from its historical reputation as the party of devaluation. Any blame for the devaluation that actually followed would rest with the Conservatives. The fact that he had espoused the same failed policy as the Conservatives was selectively overlooked. Instead, he blamed the Tories, he blamed the currency speculators, he went on the attack - and it was true that Labour was largely overlooked by a public baying for the Government's blood - and he was able to salvage enough of his reputation to retain top place in the vote for the shadow cabinet.
Post a Comment