What the Labour fundraising scandal reveals
Mr Abrahams says that he only very recently became aware of the Act. He says he is a private man who was driven by nothing more sinister than a desire to avoid the full rigour of media inspection (an objective which has spectacularly failed). This is just about plausible. Why indeed should a north-eastern property developer bother himself with the niceties of electoral law?
The case of Peter Watt — only the 14th general secretary of the Labour party since Ramsay MacDonald became the first occupant of the post 107 years ago — is more problematic. He too claims that his breach was ‘inadvertent’, and must have been heartened throughout Monday when BBC news reported this claim without question or apparent irony.
Mr Watt is not only general secretary of the Labour party. He is also the registered Treasurer and therefore the person specifically culpable for any offence committed under the terms of the 2000 Act. Failure to grasp the basic requirements of the law in the very area which was his specific responsibility suggests incompetence on a scale which is very hard to credit.
On Monday Gordon Brown announced an inquiry — the one which reports to Lord Harries — into this catastrophe. Whatever its formal terms of reference this investigation is likely to have certain unstated objectives. The first is to ensure that the previous Blair regime, rather the Brown incumbency, should get the blame — meaning that the hapless Watt bears the brunt of the responsibility. This officially sanctioned story was collapsing by the time The Spectator went to press on Wednesday lunchtime, as it emerged that the circle of knowledge extended very much wider than the office of the general secretary alone.
The second is to ensure that the Labour party — as opposed to Gordon Brown’s government — bears the bulk of the damage. But this strategy means failure to address one of the biggest unanswered questions to emerge so far out of this scandal: what did Abrahams expect to get in exchange for his £600,000? According to his own account of events, he is a simple philanthropist who sought anonymity because he shuns the limelight. All this may well be true.
More articles from: Peter Oborne | this section
Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit
Advertisement
From the economic and psychological bedlam of the global downturn has emerged a particularly dangerous false dichotomy: namely, that there is somehow a choice for ministers over the next few years between economic reconstruction and the repair of Britain’s broken society, and that the government (whether Labour or Conservative) must prioritise the former at the expense of the latter.
The daughter and I spent the last few days before the American election in Arizona.
Fraser Nelson reviews the week in politics
‘A money-financed tax cut is essentially equivalent to Milton Friedman’s famous “helicopter drop” of money.’ So said Ben Bernanke, now the chairman of the Fed, in a speech about how to ward off the ‘extremely small’ chance of deflation, which he delivered in 2002.
Tamzin Lightwater's unique take on the week
The Spectator on Deripaska-gate
Irwin Stelzer reviews the week in politics
Fraser Nelson reviews the week in politics
James Forsyth reviews the week in politics
Fraser Nelson reviews the week in politics
Subscribe to Sky from £16 a month. Get free equipment and free broadband - Join Now. Sky HD - be amongst the first to have it - order now.
Subscribe to Sky from £16 a month. Get free equipment and free broadband - Join Now. Sky HD - be...
PORTA METRONIA, ROME Standing high on the top of one of the seven hills of Rome- the Coelian- this unique
ROME and PARIS: over 350 holiday rentals apartments listed: visit www.romanreference.com and www.parisreference.com or call +39 0648 903612.
Goldsmiths by Design Welcome to Ruffs! You have found a company of Goldsmiths that specialises in the manufacture, amongst other
Spectator Business | Apollo Magazine
Corporate | Advertising | Privacy | Terms
Spectator, 22 Old Queen Street, London, SW1H 9HP
All Articles and Content Copyright ©2008 by The Spectator | All Rights Reserved
Tony Marsh
November 29th, 2007 1:07pmIf the Labour Party is shown to have accepted anonymous donations , how have they coplied with money laundering regulations ? Worth including in any investigation ?
Ausin Barry
November 29th, 2007 4:10pmA hopeless government in disarray, a bolshy military, an increasingly resentful public watching despairingly as the country descends into a dystopian nightmare...coup d'etat anyone?
Margaret, London
November 30th, 2007 12:51am"Peter Abrahams, a property developer of doubtful credentials..."
David?
Alec in France
November 30th, 2007 9:35amYet - although UKIP cash was confiscated on a technicality, these donations can simply be repaid. Just like Blunkett's "erroneous" expenses claim. Scum!
Alan Myers
November 30th, 2007 11:08amThe Garden Girls? Is the suggestion that Clunking Fist's treatment of these admirable Crichtons will be as harmful as the graft at the heart of The Project really serious?
alan maddox
December 1st, 2007 3:41pmThe Labour Party has it's roots in the wish of the working class to have their say and be represented and that is perfectly in order. The rot started when the loyalty and naivety of the labour voters and officials in local parties were used by the Trades Unions and plum,safe Labour seats were "kidnapped" by specific Unions so that one of their members would then have a voice in the House of Commons. Hence morons like John Prescott appeared.He had never set foot in Hull and probably didn't even know where the place was when he was told to go there by his Union and present himself to the local party,who were leaned on by the top dogs at Labour Party H.Q.,much as were local Tory parties lent on by Central Office when they wanted a seat for their man. The poor die hard Labour supporters in Hull had Prescott plonked upon them and this happened in many seats,e.g. Dennis Skinner. The Blair/Brown new wave quite rightly disliked this and hated relying on the Unions and ,in particular,the Labour Party HQ in England. They realised they could rid themselves of these traditional Labour shackles by putting up for bidding the resources of the state as the author says in his article,and let's throw in a bit of patronage,for good measure. Despite the lack of violence what is the difference beween the current so called "New" Labour party and the regime led by Mr Robert Mugabe?
steve
December 5th, 2007 10:00amAlan it may not be as serious, but if Brown is treating his most junior members of staff with this sort of contemptous, nasty, bullying, then it says much about the moral fibre of the man and certainly makes him shrink in my eyes
Dave Burns
December 8th, 2007 2:29pmBrown and Darling are bullies. The lost CDs were blamed on a Junior Civil Servant rather than accept the systemic failures in their own leadership. The bullying of the Garden Girls is a flaw in Brown's makeup. Rather than analyse the problem and come up with a solution he blames the most junior person possible.
jkmccarthy
February 15th, 2008 3:42pmCould Mr Oborne please give the provenance of Lord Butler's declamation as given above in par.2. Further, can he provide with information as to where I can find his statement in written form? Many thanks
Christopher Davison
April 8th, 2008 10:28amThe elephant in the room is wearing a burka and Labour is going out of office for decades due to mass immigration, many reserved British people will not admit that this is the reason.