This morning the "Today" programme asked what was new in the Labour funding story! Mr Humphrys ruminated on when they could call a halt to running items on it, implying his impatience with such a turn of events. What is remarkable about this story is how quickly it is changing and how it is snowballing. If Labour do not make a more definitive statement soon about who knew what when, the press will continue to pick away at the Labour version to show just how much was left out.
John Humphrys should try reading the newspapers – as he usually does. That would tell him what is new and what remains to be found out in the story:
1. Mr Brown’s personal fundraiser did know about the Abrahams donations – we were originally told only the Labour General Secretary knew. What was Mr Mendelsohn going to say to Mr Abrahams when they met? Why didn’t he tell the Prime Minister? How long did he sit on the knowledge? If he accepted the advice that Labour thought this was legal why did he want to change it?
2. The Daily Telegraph has posed questions on where Mr Abrahams got all the money from.
3.We need to know who Margaret Jay told about the nature of these donations, and whether Hilary Benn passed on his intelligence about it.
4. Did the Gordon Brown campaign turn down money from Mr Abrahams and if so why?
5. Which events did Mr Abrahams attend and why was he invited?
6. Who made the decisions and who put in submissions for any planning perimssion Mr Abrahams obtained?
November 29, 2007
(Sentence left out – ed)
Today didn’t discuss the story this morning because there just wasn’t much new to discuss. All your points are covered in the statements this week.
As for the Telegraph questions – sorry – since when do reputable broadcasting organisations have to respond to speculative pieces in newspapers with an agenda – should they have a daily Diana/Maddie story to appease ther Express?
Reply: What a pity you conceal your identity behind anon. I will post the full post if you send your name. There were plenty of new news items and questions from the day before, as the paper showed. This is a big political story which is current- Diana and Maddie are not. Where is the Today programme’s spirit of enquiry?
PS Tonight the news has broken that the police have been called in to investigate allegations about this story – doesn’t that demonstrate it is an important story which any programme interested in government and politics should be following?
November 29, 2007
It seems that the Labour government has ever more scandal to be unearthed. Where will it all end? Remember we are only finding out what has been discovered, there is probably a lot more corruption that we will never hear about. This government is completely unfit for office. They have stained the good name of parliament.
November 30, 2007
This is why seasoned Labour party members are so intent on painting the Tories and nasty (or worse) and denegrating them rather than taking them on in honest debate if you ask me – they have to justify all their little undemocratic scams to their activists with the usual cry of 'It's better than having the Tories back in power.'
November 30, 2007
The only good news for Gordon Brown is that no-one is currently asking him about a referendum on the EU Constitution, (oops, EU Treaty).
December 2, 2007
The EU Constitution has been renamed the EU ConstiTraityTution.
December 7, 2007
If Bazman won the European Lottery then gave it all to Labour. Would anything happen to me? In a free country….. This is a serious question. I think something would.
Take it down John.