Cameron withdraws whip from Derek Conway

It seems that David Cameron has withdrawn the whip from Derek Conway. This is after it was revealed that not only had Freddie worked for him during his time at university, but that also his other son Henry had as well.

There appears to have been no evidence of any work at all being done by Freddie. What is more Freddie did not even know who his fathers office secretary was. Surely there would have to have been some contact between Freddie Conway and his fathers office?

Anyway, David Cameron has now acted decisively. It is a shame that Gordon Brown does not.

The BBC has this on the fact that Derek Conway has been reported to the police.

So what of Derek Conway?

Derek Conway has been hauled up before the Commons Standards and Privileges Committee, not because he hired his son, Freddie as a researcher, or that he was a full time student at Newcastle University, but because there is no record of him doing anything like enough work to justify the amount of time he was paid for.

To be fair, it could be just a case of appalling record keeping on Derek's part,
but as a taxpayer, I expect my taxes to be accounted for, and in this case this has not happened.

David Cameron has not withdrawn the whip from Derek Conway as he has been punished, and apologised to the House of Commons.

Fair enough, just about, had it ended there, but alas it has not. It turns out that Derek's older son, Henry had a similar arrangement, but only whilst he was at university. At this point one has to move on from thinking things are a little unfortunate to politically untenable.

According to this article from the Daily Mail, (which broke the Henry story)
David Cameron would not withdraw the whip for the Freddie offence but would have sacked him from the front bench. Things would be different if it was more serious. It is now.

Oh, and that is 1,000 posts on my blog!

Alan Johnson denies wrong doing

Alan Johnson has got himself into a spot of bother over "illegal" donations.

Apparently he received a donation of £3,334 form a Labour party member, registered to vote in this country. He accepted same. It now turns out that the donation did not come from one Waseem Siddiqui, but his brother Ahmed Yar Mohammed who is treasurer of the Croydon Labour party.

Clearly this is wrong. Donations should not be made in this way. We all know this is exactly the same thing that happened over the David Abrahams affair.

But.. What is a campaign team supposed to do? They checked that Waseem was entitled to donate, even that he was a member of the Labour party. What more are they supposed to do? This does not appear to be like the Abrahams situation in that no one is claiming (yet) that someone in Alan Johnson's campaign knew the actual source of the money. So I can't see anything wrong with what Alan Johnson has done.

On the other hand Ahmed Yar Mohammed has clearly set out to avoid and breach the law, so should be expelled from the Labour party, and investigated.

The BBC has this.

So is Peter Hain just another brick in the wall?

Because now he has resigned that will inevitably up the pressure on Harriet Harman and Wendy Alexander. Possibly even more people.

The mood in Labour must be quite bleak at the moment as the drip drip of bad news stories continues day after day.

Peter Hain resigns as his donations are referred to the police!

Peter Hain has resigned as Work and Pensions Secretary after the Electoral Commission referred his donations to the Metropolitan Police.

About time too. Had someone who had failed to notify the DWP of a change in their circumstances over a benefits payment said "Sorry I was too busy" they would have asked them to tell someone who gives a damn.

Peter Hain will apparently now work to clear his name. Well I am not sure what he means by that. He seems not to have been accused of corruption but breaking the law through incompetence.

The BBC has this.

Peter Hain: The Minister for Incompetence!

Well, the Daily Mail has made much of Gordon Brown's comments on Peter Hain, saying that his failure is one of incompetence rather than corruption.

What concerns me though is Peter Hain's apparent attitude that he was to busy to comply with the law.

Could a benefit claimant who had got work but not quite done the paperwork after wards get off? No Ifs, No Buts, could they?

Nuff said. Peter Hain can not run that department. It would be one rule for him and another for his "clients".

Donorgate: Peter Watts to be charged

According to the front page headline of the Daily Telegraph today, Peter Watts, former General Secretary of the Labour party is to be charged over donorgate.

The interesting thing will be where else this goes, after all we know that this arrangement has been in place for years so others must have known it and indeed set it up.

Not good news for Gordon Brown.

For more on donrogate see here.

Donorgate: Jane Hogarth and Courtney Coventry

Some will remember Jane Hogarth as the Labour fund raiser who was made redundant apparently in June 2006(See Guido here). She was it seems the go between for David Abrahams, possibly up to as far as the PM, as well as the person who dealt with Courtney Coventry and her husband John, who also style themselves as the Count and Countess of Rozel (tough I hasten to add, not to Labour).

I understand that a number of people wish to speak to Jane Hogarth, including the police, but it appears that she has gone missing. What is more, Labour claim they do not know where she is.

Since then Labour say that she has not been working for them. The only problem with this is lots of people think Labour are lying through their teeth, and according to my sources with good reason.

Jane Hogarth has been out soliciting donations for Labour. Sources tell me that she has definitely been in touch with Courtney Coventry and her husband in the last few months. What is more Jane is aware that Courtney is not a UK citizen. Jane does not know if either John or Courtney are registered to vote in the UK, and neither does Labour, because they have never asked. If there was a donation and they were not registered then that is a breach of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000.

It is interesting that the first priority of Labour's fund raisers is to get the cash and worry about the law second.

More Labour Sleaze over Paul Myners?

This is beginning to stretch credibility. Just how can a government be so institutionally corrupt without the ability to hide it just a little bit?

Paul Myners was appointed to head the governments drive to get people to save for their pensions. Good idea. When appointed in July we were assured that he was just a businessman, no party connections, and oh no, no donations to any political party.

Hmmm.. Then last week on Question Time he laid in to David Cameron and George Osborn as "toffs" etc. You can make up the rest.

Well, it turns out that in May he donated to Gordon Brown's leadership campaign.

Obviously his position is way past untenable, but then so is whoever said he had not donated to a political party.

Why do they think they can get away with this sort of thing?

Bizarre.

The Independent has this.

hat tip to 'Me' on politicalbetting.com for the link.

Labour Lawyers organised Donorgate?

According to this shocking article in the Guardian today Labour Lawyers and officials were involved in setting up David Abrahams round about route of donating £650,000 pounds to Labour in clear violation of the spirit of the recently enacted Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000.

Later advice has of course shown that this practice is illegal.

We know that previous General Secretaries of the Labour party have denied all knowledge which does beg the question, who did not only know, but ordered this deception?

Just when you think this might blow over, it gets worse!

For more on Donorgate see here.

Labour Officials helped set up Abrahams secret donations

According to the Guardian tomorrow officials in the Labour party helped David Abrahams set up his secret donations, including working with Lawyers to set up covenants.

Its a bit of a shame they did get get advice on the legality of the scheme... ir perhaps they did?

More news later.

I forgot to add, labour are saying nothing. They are not even denying it.

For more on Donorgate see here.

Wendy Alexander: Emails will clear my name!

Well, no they won't. For a start you are the brother of Wee Dougie, and along with Ed Balls, his name is mud in the Labour party right now because they are both juvenile idiots seeming to have no political experience at all. However I digress.

Wendy Alexander, the soon to be ex leader of the Scottish Labour party, (but please note, hanging on long enough to do them serious damage) claims email correspondence will clear her name for she laughably claims she asked questions.

No they won't.

There are only two relevant questions to ask, and they are of the donor, and indeed the donee, (that is wee Wendy) must ask them. They are:

Are you donating in a personal or business capacity?

If personal, are you registered to vote in the UK mainland, or if business is the company incorporated in the UK.

That is it. No ifs, no buts.

Not hard is it?

The BBC has this.

For more on Donorgate see here.

Sean Connery rushed into surgery!

Sean Connery has been rushed into surgery today to have his sides sewn up after they split.

Aids report that he was found laughing so hard that not only had his sides split but was sitting in a suspicious patch of "liquid".

Beside him were reports of the funding scandal Wendy Alexander is embroiled in. Having passed a law almost specifically designed to stop Sean Connery donating to the SNP, which he has now complied with it appears that Sean suffered from far too much laughter seeing them caught in their own trap.

Doctors say that the operation has gone well. There was no need for anesthetic as the laughter was far better.

Visitors to hospital report Sean is sitting up in bed, still laughing his a*se off.

Guido has this.

(PS, for the daft, this is a joke)

Donorgate: Labour's fifth man?

There is an article in the Telegraph online, which will probably make it into the paper today. It leads on Peter Hain and his "administrative error" (which will be the subject of a later post) but goes on to give some interesting information.

George Crawford, a Newcastle based solicitor has been doing some digging and found that a George Crawford had donated £36,000 to Labour in 2004. The thing is that was not George Crawford the solicitor and he suspects his identity may have been stolen. He has has a complaint to Northumbria police who have passed that on to Scotland yard.

So Donorgate looks set for yet another round.

Meanwhile, no one responsible for this has resigned except Peter Watt. Wendy Alexander still hangs on despite the fact that her position has gone way passed untenable. Peter Hain is still there as well. Harriet Harman who ought as a lawyer to know still is as well.

Shocking isn't it? More on Donorgate here.

Donorgate: What is the point of more laws?

When the current problem is Labour party senior figures failing to comply with the current ones either through incompetence or sheer mendacity.

For more on donorgate see here.

Peter Hain admits failing to declare all donations, Again!?

Just what is going on. Peter Hain was forced to confess last week that he had not declared a £5,000 donation last week. He blamed that on an "administrative error" Now, after Guido wheedled out the truth from a donor and Peter Hain's SpAd, Joe Carberry Hain has confessed to other donations not reported at all.

Peter Hain claims that this was part of a process of his team double checking all donations according to the BBC here. Anyone believe him?

Wendy Alexander: I won't resign!

Oh yes you will, but maybe just not yet.

In a laughable statement Wendy Alexander insisted she will not resign, and indeed the Electoral commission will exonerate her of any intentional wrongdoing. Her statement is as follows:

I deeply regret the damage which recent publicity has brought to the Labour party.

However, I reject any suggestion of intentional wrongdoing on my part. I intend to address these matters with the Electoral Commission, with whom I am co-operating fully.

I am confident when all the facts are known I will be exonerated of any intentional wrongdoing.

Well, it will soon be a police inquiry because intent is not in the law it is one of strict liability. She will have to show that they did check it was a permissible donation and frankly I don't think they can do that. It does get worse though. As I said in this post, it is clear that her husband knew the wheels had come off three weeks before she stated she had only just heard about it.

There is much speculation that she has been pressurised into staying on by Gordon Brown's team as her going would cause immense trouble in Westminster, not least for the hapless Harriet Harman who as yet has still failed to declare massive loans used to fund her successful campaign to become Labour deputy leader. It is clear Harriet Harman is in breach of the law and as a former Solicitor General knows she cant claim ignorance as a defence.

Well, it is true that Wendy Alexander resigning now would be a disaster for Labour north and south of the border. Wendy was supposed to be rebuilding Labour in Scotland and to be frank they have few other options out of a very limited talent pool. It would cause immense problems for Labour at Westminster as well. If Harriet goes who is next? Does she know where Gordon Brown has buried the bodies?

The problem is that Wendy Alexander will have to be arrested and questioned under caution and will have to resign at some point so all that is happening is the pain is being drawn out. All the other consequences that Gordon is afraid of will follow any way.

It is not a question of if Wendy Alexander resigns, but when.

The BBC has this.

Donorgate, the hole gets bigger!

One of the most interesting things about donor scandals is how the donors don't like the party they have donated to spinning against them.

The Independent on Sunday carries this front page entitled "I accuse" in which David Abrahams not only says that he told Jon Mendelsohn of his donation methods in April but suspects that the seating arrangement was no accident. This was at a meeting in April.

The article goes on to say that 10 senior Labour officials were in the know, and whilst he won't reveal them in the press, he will pass that all on to the police when they ask.

David Abrahams has also penned this piece in Independent on Sunday as an op-ed article in which he makes clear his motivation for keeping his anonymity and how losing it would be a deal breaker.

Then there is this in the Sunday Times in which David Abrahams claims that 10 senior Labour officials knew about the way in which he donated. No rogue official then? Labour are of course denying this.

Donorgate: Its like watching a really bad accident in slow motion

Words fail me.

We now hear that Peter Hain, he of the moral high ground and perma tan forgot to declare a donation of £5,000 from .. Jon Madelsohn? He of the I am Gordon Brown's chief fund raiser.

We have Harriet Harman's team on the verge of war with Gordon Brown's over her donorgate donation as they seem to have passed it on.

This is just getting to bizarre for words.

All politicians are sullied by this. Let us not forget that. As a Conservative party we can't promise to be purer than pure or whiter than white, that is impractical, however we can aspire to deliver. It is better to under promise and over deliver than to be caught in this latest sleaze storm.

Donorgate: Has it got worse?

The donorgate scandal will not only not go away but seems to be getting worse.

According to this article in today's Telegraph people are beginning to question how a man of David Abrahams apparent means and wealth could donate quite as much as he has through third parties.

There is speculation that he is just a front.

If so, where does the money really come from and what influence is it trying to buy?

This could get worse. Hard to believe I know, but it could.