Fraser Nelson

Hoey’s clarification

Hoey's clarification
Text settings

A chastened and whipped Kate Hoey has, via the Labour Party HQ, issued this “clarification”: 

“The key part of the Boris Johnson statement – ie that I will be the first member of his administration – is wrong.  I have simply agreed to act in a similar position, for example to Conservative MPs John Bercow and Patrick Mercer – in that I have said that I will advise on a non-partisan basis in respect of my lifetime commitment to bringing sport to the people of London. This is not an endorsement of Boris Johnson for Mayor. I will be voting for my party and Labour candidates on Thursday. I am a Labour MP and I am standing for Labour at the next election.. I support the Labour Government. I have and shall continue actively to campaign for Labour in these elections, not least for Val Shawcross, my local GLA member.”

She won’t endorse Boris but she will advise him? We all know her game. And to my mind, all this underscores what a propaganda victory Bercow and Mercer handed Brown (and how daft Cameron was to let them do it). Mercer was being naïve, not for the first time, and quit as soon as he could. Bercow is another case altogether, and is lucky his constituency has not deselected him as they should have done. When you “advise” another party it looks you are jumping ship and sends a message to wavering voters to do likewise. Cameron will be delighted people have finally started jumping in the other direction. What a rich irony it would be if Cameron were to pick off Labour MPs in the same way Brown did last summer. Field “advising” on welfare? Please. Milburn “advising” on health? Please. Do CoffeeHousers have any other suggestions?

Written byFraser Nelson

Fraser Nelson is the editor of The Spectator. He is also a columnist with The Daily Telegraph, a member of the advisory board of the Centre for Social Justice and the Centre for Policy Studies.

Topics in this articlePolitics