Another Cameron sleight of hand

ONCE again, the Tories are demanding we look at the hand and not the coin.

It is questionanable as to whether Bob Quick was wise to raise his concerns about the actions of the Conservative Party in relation to the police investigation into Damian Green. But instead of addressing the substantive question – have the Conservative Party, deliberately or otherwise, corrupted the inquiry? – they’re demanding an apology from Quick for even suggesting it in the first place.

It was Cameron who, on the day of the opening of parliament, actually said that Green had been arrested on the orders of the government! Presumably, since he has not until now come across as particularly thick, he knew this was a lie. He must have known that to say publicly – in the chamber of the House of Commons, no less – that Green’s arrest was entirely for political reasons, he would undermine the inquiry and make it almost impossible for charges to be brought.

But he has done Green no favours with his silly posturing and headline-hunting at the expense of the process of law. True, there will undoubtedly now be no charges brought. But for those with the judgment to suspend their judgment until all the facts are known (in other words, excluding every member of the Tory Party), there will be a serious question mark hanging over Green: did he escape charges because there was no evidence against him? Or because the Tory Party made it impossible for him to receive a fair trial by bullying the police throughout the length of the inquiry?

Advertisements

22 Comments

Filed under Conservative Party, David Cameron, Parliament

22 responses to “Another Cameron sleight of hand

  1. Tom

    Off topic – my wife just echoed the sentiment of yours when it comes to use of technology in the home. Happy Christmas x

  2. richard

    Maybe he got off on the same grounds as Hain, i.e. that there was insufficient evidence for their to be high confidence of a conviction.

  3. richard

    Off topic (sorry) but it seems that while my earlier comments didn’t find favour with your audience a stack of local councils and govt. departments do agree that dole cheques are cheaper than pay cheques;

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/britains-job-bloodbath-1207378.html

  4. Rory

    Really Tom… this post beggars belief.

    If in the 80s, Gordon Brown was nicked by counter terrorist police and the policeman in charge then called the Labour Party ‘corrupt’, I think your reaction would be similar to Cameron’s.

    A police investigation into what Green was or was not up to is fair enough but comments like those from Quick don’t go very far to achieve that end.

    And if you believe that Cameron lied in the chamber, I assume you will be taking this matter further?? No… thought not.

  5. John

    “It is questionanable as to whether Bob Quick was wise to raise his concerns about the actions of the Conservative Party in relation to the police investigation into Damian Green.”

    Are you on the wind up Tom? It’s not remotely questionable. If anyone seriously thinks Bob Quick’s remarks were acceptable then they need their head examined.

    Your attempt to try and lambast the tories for this is clearly partisan and unreasonable also.

    If during the Cash for Honours enquiry the police had stormed into Westminster to search one of your collegues offices and take constituency files then Labour would have behaved exactly the same way.

  6. Andy

    I think you need to update this post Tom – Quick has “unreservedly apologised” to the conservative party.

    Perhaps your post was a touch high and mighty ..

  7. Bob Jones

    First it was his political opponents the man was criticizing, now Quick is having a go at the Mail for revealing something that he & his wife publicized themselves – their trumped-up taxi service run from, what appears to be, a lavish home (which our tax £s helped pay for).

    The man has no honour does he? He’s against freedom of the press today, whatever next?

    It’s his own fault, what’s he doing running a business from his home if he doesn’t want people to know where he lives? Like many NuLab plods, he’s missing a dose of common sense right there …

  8. Zorro

    As I understand it, Quick labelled the Tories as corrupt due to a Sunday Mail story which gave out some private details about him, ‘private’ details which were in the public domain if you looked in the right place. Perhaps the guy shouldn’t have been running a private business from his private residence given his main job?

    However he definitely should not have alleged the Tories of corruption, that was completely out of order, as he himself obviously realised if you look at the speed of his apology.

    Honestly I would be dissapointed in you Tom, if my opinion of you wasn’t already so low…

  9. richard

    Call-me-Dave has categorically denied that they came from the Conservative party which suggests that he knows exactly where they came from but isn’t telling 🙂

    On a more positive note, while Bob Quick may have flushed his career down the toilet, at least his wife’s home-business seems to be doing well…

  10. John

    “Honestly I would be dissapointed in you Tom, if my opinion of you wasn’t already so low…”

    There really is no need of that. Tom is a Labour MP and as such this is a partisan blog with a clear vested interest in trumping any Labour success, playing down even the biggest failures, and overly lambasting the Tories for anything remotely linked to them.

    Not only is that obvious, but Tom was keen to highlight it just a few days ago, and to be frank, any of us would be the same in his position.

    To his credit however, Tom has allowed us free comment here with which to disagree and point out the obvious partisan nature of some of his comments. As such, it’s not only unwarranted, but wholly disrespectful to also use these comments as a means of making derogatory personal remarks against him.

    (Sorry for the off topic)

  11. Chris' Wills

    I wonder what party Mr Quick votes for? (that’s rhetorical by the way, voting is a private affair).

    Totally out of order for a serving officer to say what he did and to blame the conservatives for what a newspaper revealed about his wife running a business from their home.

    As most people know, the address of everyone can be gleaned from the electoral role. One wonders what additional risk he believes his family has been exposed to.

    Is he applying for the top Met job?

  12. Mr. Charlie

    Oh, it’s all gone quiet over there,
    It’s all gone quiet

    Oh dear. Whoops! Mr. Quick apologises unreservedly.

    Your turn, Tom?

  13. Johnny Norfolk

    I smell Mandleson behind all this to divert attention from the economy or what is left of it.

  14. richard

    I wonder whether Mr Quick is a member of the Labour party…?

    Answers on a postcard please.

  15. Your response, considering the offending political-policeman has now apologised in full, is as well judged as your typo in the title of this post! I hope, as an MP, you scrutinise legislation a little more thoroughly.

    Although as a ZaNuLab stooge, I doubt it.

  16. Andrew F

    Presumably, since he has not until now come across as particularly thick, he knew this was a lie.

    Are you sure we want to concede that ground.

    I’m just sayin’.

  17. I gotta say, I’m warming to Tom for his willingness to at least publish, if not acknowledge or adress, criticism on his blog. I shall go and purge myself with soap and, if the wife is willing, a Gladstonian flagellation session after saying that!

  18. richard

    I think Tom meant less thick than Gordon…

  19. man in the street

    I appreciate that one is meant to use the reply facility here to engage in intelligent discourse however in this instance I have to call you a Dagenham and claim my £5.

  20. ani

    Old Holborn
    December 22, 2008 at 4:14 pm
    Are you mental?

    Tom Harris
    December 22, 2008 at 4:18 pm
    Define “mental”

    Hmmm, – how about prancing about provocatively in fancy dress and daring the police to arrest you?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s