Charlie Whelan's role in Labour's election campaign

Andy Leeds

Yup: Unite are buying the election, and will have any re-elected Labour Government in their pockets.

Billy Blofeld

Peter,

You are a journalist. Why can't you work this into a big media story yourselves?

It is corrupt and needs to be fully exposed. in public.

Journalists - if you do your job, it will leave the Tories free to do theirs (they do have some policies to tell us about don't they?)

pete-s

No mention of the taxpayers money that has been given to the unions via the Labour gov under the pretext of training or some other scam name!

strapworld

Mr Hoskin. This is the politics of cowardice! You highlight the cancer this man and his ilk cause. You suggest the money the union is using is via the taxpeyer, and then because of the Lord Ashcroft affair, the conservatives should lay off!

God sake man WHY publish this if that is your conclusion?

The aAshcroft 'affair' was handled so badly by the Conservatives that I fear for the future. But I would be far far appier if they had a team brought in by Cameron, headed by Lord Tebbit! to take on labour on this disgraceful man and the unions acting undemocratically.

Lord Tebbit. David Davis, Iain Duncan Smith, John Redwood, Lord Carey (Former Archbishop of Canterbury), People who can take the issue in so many directions the Labour Party would not be able to counter it.

Get a good Company to assist, someone like Peter Bingle doing that would be superb.

But to igniore this, to allow them to get away with it will identify Cameron to me, and the rest of the world, to be the bloody wimp he is proving to be.

One must fight FIRE with FIRE.

2trueblue

So, the Tories shouldn't make anything of it? Well then, who will? The media are so biased that it lets it all go by. This truely is not a free country. The public are so cowed and uninformed because we have a supine media.

Holly ......

Off topic sorry,but I thought you may like this one.
UK's balance of trade...
It widened,unexpected? in January to 7.98bn.
The sharpest monthly fall since July 2006.
Unexpected by the 'experts' maybe,the general public have more of a handle on things as we are living it.
Stirling falls as ratings agency Fitch warns UK credit profile has deteriorated.
It would appear the markets don't want Brown
or Labour either.

Nicholas

Whelan is another of the 1960's communist dinosaurs whose lumbering forms cast long anachronistic shadows over our present politics. These people, with Brown, belong in the last century Kremlin or East Germany but not here, whatever they now pretend to be.

Until the left grow up (unlikely - they are still busy trying to infantilise everyone else) British politics cannot move forward to a mature place.

Liberty

Ashcroft is just the Tory non-dom but according to almost everything I read and hear he is the ONLY non-dom, that it is fishy, possibly illegal, at least immoral and he has bought the Tory party and marginal seats. This has been assiduously encouraged by Labour knowing that their friends in the BBC, etc will keep it going as long as possible. Why haven't the Tories stated as often as possible that being a non-dom is legal, he hasn't bought the Tories, that Labour has more, etc? they should hold the BBC by the nuts until they give a fair appraisal of the issue. It makes no sense unless they want Labour to win.

Hawkeye

I agree with Billy Blofield. You're a journalist Pete - get off your butt and write it yourself.

Vulture

Strapworld is right: I though Andy Coulson was supposed to be organising such counter-attacks. You can't just ignore Liebour dirty tricks or they will kick the crap out of you with big and dirty boots.

Time Dave got his soft pink paws dirty and took some advice from the likes of Jon Gaunt, Richard Littlejohn and Kelvin Mackenzie. He must hit back hard.

How about for starters a poster focussing on the 44% rise in violent crime under Liebour which has been revealted today.
Show a burglar coshing an old lady with the slogan : VIOLENT CRIME IS UP 44 % UNDER LIEBOUR. VOTE LIEBOUR AND GET MUGGED.

That's the way to do it!

Incidentally, why is Charlie Whelan so flaming ugly? - the man needs a niquab NOW!

Colin

Well, one thing's for sure.

The way this election is going, it won't be won on the playing fields of Eton.

The Tories need to grow a collective backbone and start fighting. they should start by attacking brown, head on.

Stay away from technicalities, tractor statistics etc. Smash him head on, where he's vulnerable and where his pressure point is - PERSONAL INTEGRITY...

His psychological comfort zone is all about preserving the carefully constructed "son of the manse", "can do no wrong" story. He probably even believes it himself. However, over the past two years or so, the Tories have, on occasion managed to squeeze that pressure point, almost to destruction - e.g. his lies over the election that never was and his massively adverse reactions to attacks on his integrity at PMQ's in the aftermath, (see youtube).

Brown has the demeanour of a man desperate not to be found out. He's the terrified kid with his head under the bedclothes, the Ostrich with its head in the sand and into the bargain he's Colonel Reed from Hurt Locker, all rolled into one (Watch the scene, you'll see what I mean).

His carefully constructed world cannot be taken to pieces, bit, by bit. It needs to be pulverised by overwhelming, sustained force.

The electorate know what brown is. In political terms at least, he's a pathological liar. We know he's dodgy, we know he's arrogant and we want and need to be reminded of these things, and more, every single day.

Then there's Mandelson...

If ever there was a man, ripe for being put to the political and legal sword, it's him. He probably can't believe his luck. He presents a target bigger than Diane Abbots's a*se, but so far, they haven't laid a glove on him either.

Ctesibius

Still, no amount of 'Unite' money on earth will stop him looking ugly.

Pete Hoskin

Billy Blofeld: it's a bit peculiar to attack me when I've just written a post on this (and I know that's not everything this story deserves, but...). And The Spectator spends more time than most focusing on Whelan et al.

strapworld: I say that the Tories "shouldn't spend too much time" on this. Of course it needs exposing - and the Tories can play their part in that. But I think it could be to the detriment of the Conservative campaign if they focus on something which could seem Westminster-centric to many voters. Indeed, as I've posted before, I think Labour could be hurting themselves with the effort they're spending on Ashcroft.

And, as for why I'm publishing this when I think the Tories should "lay off", well, erm, I'm not the Conservative party...

Carroll Barry-Walsh

Oh for heaven's sake: stop being so pathetic! The fact that the unions - and one union in particular - have such a stranglehold over the Labour party is a political story and one which the electorate is entitled to know about. He who pays the piper etc. It was a key political issue in the 1979 elections and the ones subsequent to that and should be an issue now if the union's influence will hamper the steps necessary to get the public finances into some kind of order.

Of course the Tories should be making something of it, as should journalists. Ignore the McBride angle - that is the petty stuff which turns voters off - but the fact that the unions are seeking to control Labour and its policies and that this is likely to be bad for the country as a whole, as it has been in the recent past is a point which should be hammered home.

strapworld

OT. Channel 4 last night. Rawnsley's programme on Cameron. now in Daily Mail page 2. Confirms everything I have been saying about Cameron.
CLARKE. "Cameron sidelining us" goes on to admit that the shadow cabinet is sidelined
Does Cameron make decisions in Shadow Cabinet? Not a lot said Clarke.

Do people really want another Blair in charge?

The tories have really voted in a chancer!

Pete Hoskin

pete-s: that's why I put in the reference to taxpayers' cash above.

Hawkeye: see my response to Billy Blofield above. I take your point, though.

Senor Frizby

Labour have fallen foul of the famous Oscar Wilde quote "Scandal is made tedious by morality". However, when scandal is corruption that will sail us all into the abyss the general public can get whipped up into a frenzy and act to stamp it out.

A tour of a national news sites comments section echoes the combination of disgust and hilarity at Mandelson's moralising. Cameron is trying to rise above the negative aspects of the campaign and remain positive but it may not be enough against the foul play of desperate and morally bankrupt Labour party.

Richard

@Peter
I see a story so Toxic it prevents Tories from attacking the Union bias.....This Ashcroft is a little more than a dead horse then?
Labour was after all created by the Unions and every unionist ticks a box on donations to opt in or out. They at least have a choice not like those who make ashcrofts money.

M. Rowley

Isn't it uncanny how Whelan shares the same demented, swivel-eyed look of his mate Ed Balls.

Billy Blofeld

Pete,

I'm not attacking you. I'm encouraging you to now go and make this into a story that fizzes in the media.

Reading Andrew Rawnsley's book it is clear that there are lots of people in Labour blabbing their mouths off about the past at the moment.

If you dig away - you can turn this into a story.

Any attack I made is at the journalistic profession in general. Why is a corrupt and failed administration allowed to bluff and bluster by the media in general?

So no offence intended - but please do get stuck in - you are lucky to be paid to follow your nose and dig into this sort of stuff. Proper old school investigative journalism........ go on... do it.....

Pete

The real sadness is for the rank and file members whose union dues pay for fully indexed 2/3rds pensions for all the union bosses from age 60 - when those bosses did nothing to help the members keep their own pensions.

How much of the union dues is for anything that helps the members themselves?

Hawkeye

Pete, thanks for responding. Please persuade Fraser and the rest of the gang that a series of front covers exposing Labour's dirty tricks is good journalism and the rest of the media will pick up on it. I reckon there is two or three good covers in there - Labour's non doms, the Unite funding, the misreporting of crime and other statistics.

Having said all that, I appreciate that you are NOT the conservative party in print. It would help if the tories showed a bit more spine. I wish they would assume that the election campaign is in progress and just start trouncing Labour.

The tories should not waste time responding to Labour's accusations because it seems that the vast bulk of them are just made up anyway.

Billy Blofeld

Hawkeye,

I agree. Fraser's digging away at Gordon Brown's lies over cuts versus investment were eventually picked up on by the rest of the media (who really are too lazy to put in the spade work).

Most of our news these days, is rival reporting of press releases.

Come on Speccy. England Expects.

Sacre Bleu

Since the unions pretty much control or dominate most of the media outputs, be it newspaper or tv and it is their clear intent to support their masters, I fear there is little that can defeat them. They know that jobs of fellow union members in other areas will be on the line should the Tories take over and Unite must be one of the most powerful and susceptible. Looks a bit like the Miners battle to me and it will take a hard hitter to win this one. Unions have their place but they dominate at their peril as unfortunately the miners found out. Their union bosses did not give a shit for their members, putting one over the toffs or the bosses and winning brownie points was most important to them and their image. Brown knows this game well and you can bet the date of the election will be delayed as long as possible to enable the media to do its bidding. The general public seem to be unaware or fed up with this constant drip of lies and misleading information, it only switches them off. Brown and his crew know this and will prolong it as long as possible. Don't rule out a June election.

Paul Hawkins

Richard,

Your comment is misleading. Those who pay the political levy have no 'choice' in how their money is spent.Generally,the political levy is spent on Labour supporting activities but there is no requirement to detail this to members.It strikes me this is not very different from the Ashcroft scenario?

2trueblue

Billy Blofeld. There is no one of note that can/will stand up and do anything of significance to shine a light on any of Liebores lies. We have an uneducated electorate because we have a press full of people who say things like 'Well, erm I'm not .......
Well, erm, the truth is, they are just not up to the job.

strapworld

Mr Hoskin, re your reply to me 10.18am

Howe can it be detrimental to the Conservative campaign when we are informed that the Unions are ploughing far more cash into the marginals than the ever so wicked and ever so bad Lord Ashcroft?

Could you enlighten me as to just what the Conservative Campaign consists of please!

Richard

@Peter

There cnnot be any unionists who think that a tick in the box for the political levey would be a sanction for funding the Green party.
Ashcroft on the other hand does not give his employees any on the donations and loans his companies make.
Any chance you could follow up on the Met investigation on Ashcroft and the Failure of Cameron to inform the electoral commision about a 3.5 million loan from Ashcroft?

In2minds

Lord Mandy is still banging the Lord Ashcroft drum with the fervour of the demented. The reason for this is clear, his long term aim is to suggest that the only way forward is public funding for political parties. This would lift the burden of dependency on millionaires and trade unions from the backs of politicians, Mandy is not too keen on unions. There would be no benefit to the public or voter but Mandy thinks he can spin it so has made an early start. It will probably end up being an EU directive anyway, so Ken Clarke could support it too!

Ian Walker

This is the Conservatives' biggest problem. Where Labour has a cabal of pocket journalists happy to push their personal integrity to one side for the sake of the socialist cause, right-leaning journoes spend article after article arguing whether the Tory Party's strategy is too Cameron-centric or similar minutiae.

You defended yourself, Pete, by claiming that you had written this post, but immediately apologised that it wasn't enough. You're certainly right about that. Why not do your country a favour and let's see this story shouted from the headlines?

Pete Hoskin

strapworld: you seem to be overlooking that I said the Tories shouldn't concentrate on this "too much".

Of course, they should point out Labour's hypocrisy over all this - but, as I think Ashcroft and the bullying stories have shown, the public isn't all that interested in things that might be perceived as Westminster-centric.

Ergo, there is - at the very least - an opportunity cost attached to focussing on these issues. That is, the Tories could spend the time focussing, instead, on issues like the economy, etc.

Indeed, as I've said a few times in the case of Labour and Ashcroft, there could even be more than an opportunity cost attached. That is, if voters feel that the politicians are wasting time not dealing with "doorstep"-style issues. And start to resent them, even more, for it.

Anyway, that's just my opinion - so you're welcome to agree or disagree. But at least I'm being consistent.

Hawkeye and Billy Blofield: thanks for your comments - I do, and will, try to take them on board!

Ronnie

I'm quite sure that those in the Murdoch press could have a look in their archives and learn a few things from the 'who run's the country?' election that saw the end of Callaghan's labour government.

It's not rocket science and I'm sure the Tory, or at least anti-Labour vote would harden as a result. As long as the timing is right.

How we can contemplate Whelan and the rest of Brown's vile back-room crew getting away with this is beyond me.

Greenslime

Blofeld, it is not only that the 4th Estate is stuffed full with people who are lazy and/or stupid and/or incompetent - which it is. Many journalists are, or seem to be, by nature quite left-wing. I heard a classic story yesterday of a business journalist at one of the former broad sheets who doesn't really understand business. He ended up writing on the subject by accidental default but has near zero interest in the area and would rather shout out that all business people are capitalist roadsters out to stamp on the masses. He has absolutely no empathy with any problems which companies face in the current climate. In my own experience, this is not an uncommon situation.

Holly ......

Ctesibius,
No amount of 'unite' money on earth will get Labour re elected.
No amount of 'unite' money on earth will make Labour any better a government.
No amount of 'unite' money on earth will make Brown a better PM.
No amount of 'unite' money will make Harman less of a freak.
So they can waste as much money as they like.
This latest poll is not as clear cut as it first suggested.
Labour will be gone at the election closely followed by the unions...again.
Why do strikes occur more under a Labour government?

oldtimer

Definitely worth a story in the Spectator. It gets to the heart of the campaign which is going to get even uglier and dirtier than it is now. As Rachel Sylvester points out, Whelan has form, lots of it.

For starters you could point out that handy money go round that feeds the unions £millions of taxpayers money for "modernisation" which then gets recylcled back to the Labour party. Then you could point out how high the stakes are - for both Conservatives and Labour and the union paymasters. Whoever wins will seek to legislate the other out of effective power. Labour will push the alternative vote. Conservatives wil put a lid on individual donations and give union members more control over their decision on political donations. Each is trying to castrate the other. It will be a nasty street knife fight.

How can the Spectator pass up such a story and call itself a magazine that should be taken seriously?

Richard Holloway

Where has the fight gone? The public are no fans of Unite or old school militant unions. Why is there no massive media bombardment of Charlie Whelan's links to Draper and those emails. No massive attack on the Union that has Labour eating out of its hand? WHy is there no attack of what will happen to this country if Labour are re-elected and are held to ransom by Unite? It's as if we don't want to win.

Publius

Meanwhile, as Mr Hoskin dithers, Guido gets his teeth in.

Marcher Baron

Richard, I wonder just how many union members actually know they can tick a box to avoid paying the levy. I don't remember ever doing so, but I did write to my union to make sure I opted out. It would be a useful piece of legislation for a non-Labour government to make it an opt IN facility.

London Calling

Two Wrongs don’t make it Right though Does it?…

So the cycle of deceit is such…The Union Unite support a Labour Government who do not represent the very people they were elected to represent and use Union membership fee’s to support this aim? Excuse my Dockers rights but my ancestors didn’t die hungry for this? Militant Man can stick that Red Wedge where the sun don’t shine and switch off that Billy Brag Tune he danced to (No offence Billy, but you were hoodwinked to mate).

Reform the Union, get rid of the Militants and get some sharp minds to run it and respect the foundation forefathers…

As for Lord Ashcroft…Rachael is right, he’s no better, if not worse because he owes Britain a few Million quid and we could do it right now if he’s so obliging…otherwise I want my wig back….

If Cameron has promised him a seat for cash after the election, then puppets rule the Government and we shall be fooled no longer…

This is a plague on both houses…and both should be exposed as such in a our Democracy…

Brian McGann

Re: the comment by Ronnie, at 12:43pm, the election where the question "Who runs the country", (verbatim: "Who governs Britain?") was put to the electorate was the one of February 1974, when Ted Heath called a snap election in the middle of industrial action by the NUM.The electorate's answer to Heath's question "Who governs Britain?" was "We're not 100% sure, but it probably shouldn't be YOU."... The February '74 election resulted in a hung parliament (yes, one of them - sound familiar, now?) and an ensuing minority Labour administration led by Harold Wilson, who governed for some seven months before calling a further election, which he and the Labour Party won with a very small majority, of three parliamentary seats, to be precise.