A whistleblower's view

Christian Gowers

It's going to mess up the ID card plan, that's for sure

Andrew Zalotocky

What's going on here is intimidation, plain and simple.

It's about intimidating the Opposition with (a) the threat of arrest, (b) the threat of having their activities seriously disrupted by the seizure of documents, computers, etc., and (c) the threat of negative headlines in pro-government media outlets (especially the BBC) that portray the victim as a criminal.

It's about intimidating whistleblowers, journalists and bloggers who might expose the government's deceits. They want you to think "if that can happen to a member of the Shadow Cabinet, what could they do to me?" every time you publish anything.

A red line has been crossed. The government has stepped outside the realm of normal democratic politics into the realm of brute force and they must be made to pay a heavy price for it.

Rory Channing

Fraser, you are way ahead of the field on the Reckless Debt Splurge and the Demon driving it, and in illustrating -- directly or indirectly -- what one of Brown's former colleagues described as his "psychological flaws".

The media response to all this, generally, has been dire. But The Times plumbed the depths today in its coverage of the Tory arrested over immigration policy leaks -- with what it called a News Analysis: "A warning to moles...", which is essentially intimidatory propaganda.

The piece offers no reader facility for direct feedback -- enough said?

Did Labour's Clunking Fist not also use anti-terror laws to justify the ejection of one of their own, elderly members from a party conference a couple of years ago?

Hammer away at Brown's "psychological flaws" because that derisive critique, after all, came from his own side. It will haunt him in the next election.

mitch

how many so called secret documents did brown leak while in opposition?

Wilhelm

So the liebour government makes laws on immigration.
Then liebour breaks their own laws on immigration.

Well kicking out illegal immigrants is not a tax
revenue like fags, booze and car tax.

As comrade Gordon Broon said yesterday about the Bombay bombings ''Id just like to say on behalf of the world '' liebour sleaze stinks.

So there.

kinglear

I find it hard to believe Brown did not know. When you are as paranoid as he is, the temptation to arrest someone as annoying as Green is to the government must be overwhelming

Dave

We are asked to belief that the police informed Cameron, Boris, The Speaker and the Sergent at Arms in advance but did not inform Brown or Smith?!

The Laughing Cavalier

Fraser you are far too trusting of Brown. I don't believe for one minute that this wasn't heavy-handed bullying of an opposition politician with the aid of of a politicised police service. It is proof positive of NuLabour's contempt for Parliamentary democracy. As the economic situation worsens we may expect more of this from a wounded government at bay.

strapworld

Does it not strike you as strange that David Cameron's press conference this morning at 8am received absolutely no attention from SKY. or from what I can ascertain BBC television and radio!

Has the arresting of a conservative politician led to a blackout on conservative press conferences?

First they came for......

Gawain

If Brown didn't know that is even more worrying. Shouldn't the Prime Minister have been informed before a member of the shadow cabinet was arrested ? I think you're being far to soft, this is control freak Brown, the great clunking fist you're talking about, I would place an outside bet that he knew.

If you're right then we have a police force that is beyond democratic control. The opposition parties should withdraw all co operation in Parliament and create a right, royal stink. Otherwise they might as well let Brown write their election manifestos.

jennywren

Listening to Radio 4 a little while ago it was said that Cameron was aware that Green was to be arrested. If true it is inconceivable that someone in the Government, and probably Brown, knew too.

More lies?

Hj

I presume he was arrested under one of the various catch-all "anti-terrorism" laws (i.e. the ones peddled as "anti-terrorist" by the government but which, in reality aren't restricted to terrorism at all). The proposed 42 day arbitrary detention legislation was peddled as anti-terrorist but, in fact, didn't mention terrorism at all anywhere in the wording and certain didn't limit itself in this respect.

salieri

"Conspiring to contravene guidelines" - what a bizarre kind of offence. If guidelines (on anything at all) are legal requirements, they cannot be guidelines. If they are not legal requirements it cannot be a crime to breach them. And as for conspiring with others unknown to break them: who dreamed up that one?

Time for an explanation from the lollipop lady. Or will she merely invoke s. 4 of the Living and Breathing Act 1997?

oldtimer

My first thoughts were Reykjavik-on-Thames twinned with Harare-on-Thames, or that this is the apotheosis of Labour`s joined up thinking - Banana Republic meets Police State.

David Davis made some good points in the interview I saw, especially concerning the involvement of some nine anti-terrorist police. If so many were involved it must have been really serious. And we are asked to believe that the Home Secretary and the Prime Minister were not advised beforehand - and yet Boris Johnson and David Cameron were?

It has the odour of a dirty tricks operation to discredit the Conservatives. If it is, it will backfire spectacularly.

liz Brown

This is truly terrifying - an utter abuse of anti terror legislation and luckily for Damien Green, he hasa hig pubci profile - but what of the ordinary man in the street - who can shout for him? I cannot beleive that the ghastly Stasi womin Smith had no prior knowledge of this ( if she didn't, then she isn't doing her job properly) and I detect Mandleubum's fingers all over this. Which Cabinet Official informed the police - questions need to be answered........

David Bouvier

So those guidelines:

"Principles: The elements of misconduct in public office are:

a) A public officer acting as such. [home office civil servant - check]

b) Wilfully neglects to perform his duty and/or wilfully misconducts himself. [if communicating with parliament is misconduct]

c) To such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public's trust in the office holder.

[ummm.... that would be the public's trust - i think we would expect civil servants to blow whistles in some cases]

d) Without reasonable excuse or justification.
[got a few of those]

"It should always be remembered that it is a very serious, indictable only offence carrying a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. A charge of misconduct in public office should be reserved for cases of serious misconduct or deliberate failure to perform a duty which is likely to injure the public interest."

"Before deciding to proceed with a charge of misconduct in public office you should consider whether the acts complained of can properly be dealt with by any available statutory offence. If the seriousness of the offence can properly be reflected in any other charge, which would provide the court with adequate sentencing powers, and permit a proper presentation of the case as a whole, that other charge should be used..."

Something is very badly wrong. If this was worth the arrest, then the same should happen to the officers and officials who authorised it.

Captain Coma

Didn't John Pienaar state on BBC radio last night that Green's arrest was concluded after talks at the highest level between the police and government?

I find it impossible to accept that Our Beloved Supply Teacher Jacquie Smith (little heart dots the "i"!) didn't know in advance, or that she didn't clear it higher up.

You are too kind to Brown, Fraser. Covering your back in case the door gets kicked in?

The Bellman

Actuallty, if they came for the communists, the socialists and the trade unionists *first*, I wouldn't mind at all.

I'd draw the line at the Jews, of course, because Mrs Bellman is one.

But they haven't, have they?

strapworld

Mr Nelson.

Where was the fight from cameron, this morning? Where IS the shadow home secretary? Just what has to occur to get the Tory Front Bench shouting, in unison, on this absolute outrage?

The Speaker has placed himself in a very dangerous position. HE has to defend ALL politicians and this shows he did not.

Also is it not dangerous to allow the police to search someone's office without the member in question being in attendance? They would not 'place' items there...would they? Likewise the constituency offices.

They were obviously searching for emails or correspondence to assist their case against the civil servant.

David DAVIS has proved he NEEDS to be re-instated to the front bench today.

Perhaps someone in the office of Mr. Cameron could do us all a favour and stick a 'banger' up his rear end!!

Frankly, on this evidence, he couldn't fight himself out of a brown paper bag.

Archie

Strapworld: spot-on! Been saying it for years!

James Mathias

It embarrasses the police, sure; but it also lets them read years of Damian Green's emails on the computers they've seized. That might be worth any transient pillorying.

Robert

If the Met is so out of control then there needs to be a wider clear out at the top. Obviously Ian Blair's grubby fingers are aLL over this. The "anti terror" legislation is a cathch device to give more power to the state. The officers in charge of this case should be back on traffic duty. Fae from intimidating leakers , I have it on good aothurity that the deluge will now be released and a show trial beforte the next election will show this corrupt government for what it is.