Credit where it's due. Labour have withdrawn the whip from Byers. Hewitt and Hoon. However, surely if they were being consistent they would do the same thing to Margaret Moron and Baroness Morgan.
Were Sir John Butterfill's clumsy meanderings enough to warrant him losing the Tory whip? It wouldn't surprise me at all.
:-). Embarrassments to the Labour Party
What would be the point in withdrawing the whip from Moran, Iain?
The money grabbing sorry excuse for a public servant no longer even pretends to carry out her MP duties so would have no effect on Moran. Instead she should be expelled from the Labour Party.
Surely she is a walking advert for a law to allow recall of MP's by constituents.
I do recall mentioning at the time that the plotters would first get royally stitched up by Brown, but then later come back to feast when Brown fell.
Somehow I do not think even this bust will prevent them returning. They are undead and this is not a silver bullet. Just a splash of holy water and a flicker of daylight, that is all.
Didn't you know Iain? . . .If you have the word "Baroness" before your name, you can "Get out of jail FREE" . . . Just ask "Baroness" Udin or "Baroness" Scotland.
But I understand that Ms Moran is too ill to represent any of her constituents at the moment.
I expect they will all be happy to see her miraculous recovery and will no doubt be ringing her office to wish her well and have a wee chat.
Then again . . . perhaps not!
Perhaps they would prefer to visit her instead - accompanied with pitchforks and burning torches. :o)
So Labour splits just before the election
You're wrong. They have not had the whip withdrawn; they have been suspended from the Parliamentary Labour Party. You might do better to learn a bit about the procedures available to the Labour Chief Whip before blogging.
David, please explain the difference.
As they're obviously completely different, that would be pointless, wouldn't it?
If an MP is suspected of serious misconduct and has to be suspended, they don't thereby get out of their obligation to support party policy. MPs suspended from holding office may not hold any position of responsibility within the PLP, but they continue to receive the whip.
If an MP has done something politically disloyal, then that might lead to the whip being suspended. But that has nothing to do with ethics and propriety of their actions.
Unfortunately the standard of political reporting is so low, especially among Tory stooge bloggers, that these two procedures are continuously confused and no-one ever bothers to check their facts.
The Mark Easton "they're all as bad as each other" foreign trips, Gordon Brown dictated spoiler launched on News at Ten has made even some of us here at the BBC feel, well,uncomptable.
Sorry Iain, my understanding was that they are banned from Labour meetings but must still turn up for whipped votes, in other words carry on as usual.
David Boothroyd said...
As they're obviously completely different, that would be pointless, wouldn't it?
What an arrogant prat.
Credit where it's due? Off you go again defending, tacitly, the actions of a political party and being semi-Labour as usual.
They were caught red handed, does that need repeating slowly? There are also questions about Mandelson and Adonis, and Moran as well as you say.
Labour and the Government knew this was going on and only acted after the furore broke in the media, so let's not slap them on the back in appreciation of their unilateral action shall we? We should be attacking them as viciously and nastily as they did Neil Hamilton in 1997.
So, David Boothroyd, never mind the semantics, what's your view of the actions of these three senior Labour figures?
What, not even the slightest concern?
Which is more important, the nuances of Whips' offices and actions, or the corruption and turpitude at the heart of Government?
I guess this serves to neatly demonstrate your loyalties, anyway.
'A fish rots from the head'
..... and the electors have noticed
Let me say straight away how pleased and proud I have been to serve at her Majesties Pleasure as a government minister - I hope very soon to be undertaking further service at Her Majesties Pleasure in the not too distant future.
Firstly, there is no truth whatever in the quite outrageous allegation that as minister for blogging I have not been able to fully influence government blogging. As I said, or did not say, or perhaps said but did not mean, or inferred, or hinted but did not mean to hint, I have frequently or perhaps not been able to change this and other blogs, not in my or in anyone else's favour and certainly not for payment, although this remains a possibility should anyone wish to pay me.
As an MP, I am frequently asked "do you enjoy any extra-curricular activities?" The answer is of course that as a cab not for hire, this was but is no longer and never was but could be and is of course possibly not a distinct possibility. I have never worked for example for CashMart, leading provider of monies to the parliamentary gentry and neither would I, unless they made a suitable offer of payment. I think I can safely say this goes for many of my colleagues too.
I could have (but did not - on tape anyway - thank goodness!) mentioned that I for example managed to get a small edit in several blogs to the effect that the labelling of blogs under the Regulations of Blog Labelled Products Act 1971 (ammended 2002) was wholly inadequate, at the behest of one or more major (but unnamed) corporations. Luckily, after having had a splendid luncheon on the House of Commons Terrace with the relevant Minister, it quickly became clear that I could never, ever have influenced such a policy. Quite by chance, it was changed the following day in my favour, but that is and remains A TOTAL COINCIDENCE. Lord Mandelson also denies everything, as does Mr Straw. I did not and will not have lunch with thise gentlemen, other than in my capacity as representative of TOSSCO, the company that brings you better communications between governments by means of expensive (no doubt quite rightly!) government contracts. Mr Mandleson has already stated by the way that he never met me, as has Lord Oasis. Lord Oasis is quite right to accuse me of being "a tramp, a meaningless spineless liar and a pathetic chump". I will find space in my forthcoming biography "How Tony Made Me Rich" to quite rightly tell him what I really think.
Ms Hewitt, Mr Hoon and myself have frequently had conversations but I cannot say about what and with whom. Neither can I say that I have not conversations but I will say, and I will say this categorically, that I have had conversations with people. I cannot say which people.
Finally, let me say how proud I am to announce that I am a Cab for Hire! If Mr Dale or other senior bloggers wish to hire me, I am fully available to do their bidding for the not unreasonable, indeed wholly acceptable range of let us say twenty to thirty thousand guineas a day. Cash only please and post to the address on this little piece of paper in the Grand Caymans. Eat after reading.
Come to think of it, Unsworth, I didn't denounce Hitler either. So by your logic I am personally responsible for the entire holocaust.
(Godwining entirely deliberate)
"If an MP has done something politically disloyal, then that might lead to the whip being suspended. "
Ah right. Corruption falls under the heading of "political loyalty" for the Labour Party.
Thanks for clearing that up.
Is this all a coincidence after Hoon and Hewitt (probably with Byer's support) recently plotted to remove Brown ?
@ David Boothroyd
Well the cap certainly fits you beautifully. Care to tell us how you personally managed the Final Solution?
And still no comment about the NuLab troughers.
David Boothroyd, I am not sure you are correct there when you say that "If an MP has done something politically disloyal, then that might lead to the whip being suspended. But that has nothing to do with ethics and propriety of their actions."
An example that comes to mind would be with Derek Conway. His case was not about disloyalty but surely about ethics and standards of his actions, yet when the issue surfaced the action Cameron took was to withdraw the whip, a quote from Cameron himself at the time being "I have decided to withdraw the Conservative whip from Mr Conway".
As a Privy Councellor I understand Byers will go into the Lords. Given his behaviour should he? In fact given labours plans for the Lords and the quoted cost of the 'pay off' to existing members should anyone be enobled from now until the House is reformed? If Brown and Cameron really want to set an example they should not put forwards ANY MP from this parliament and certainly the likes of Jacqui Smith who as Home Secretary is probably expecting a place should never be allowed within a thousand miles of the place. And Martin should have his title withdrawn.
If you want to continue in your recently adopted Private-Eye style, it's Morgan (not Moran) that becomes Moron.
Hislop seems to find this schoolboy mis-naming of Piers Morgan, Peter Carter-Ruck, et al endlessly amusing.
I wish you wouldn't follow him.
A starting point in this would be to find out what else is going on with the two implicated persons, Lord Adonis and Lord Mandelson.
Lord Adonis, for example, has been making strong public statements in the BA strike saga. It would be useful to know if he has been accepting any freebies from BA, such as free first class flights, etc. I hear on the grapevine that others have, including Tory MPs.
It would also be useful to know if lobbyists on behalf of BA have had meetings with Lord A of late. One has heard so.
One other fruitful line of enquiry would be to do FOI requests to see if Byers held meetings with Lord M around the time of the Tesco labelling issue. I feel sure it will be right there in the public record. I have sent one in, but I assume it will take some time to get a reply - maybe after May!
David Boothroyd has made the quite valid point that the Labour and Conservative parties are different. The Conservatives expect, and are expected, to maintain some moral standards. Labour merely require their MPs to vote according to the whip's instructions. Hence Mandelson's and Blunkett's return to the Cabinet; the scandal that destroyed Profumo (and, effectively MacMillan) counts as a mere peccadillo for New Labour Ministers - an affair or three is OK, lying to the House: just apologise if you are caught out so blatantly that you cannot lie your way out of it and carry on. Profumo never pocketed taxpayers money on expenses unlike half the Cabinet, but no-one seems to care.
Butterfill must go - his moral compass is too close to New Labour's.
Post a Comment