An unusual session of Prime Minister's Questions today in that it left a mystery hanging in the air. David Cameron brought a scoopette with him: news of a letter from the Government Chief Whip Geoff Hoon, to the Labour MP Keith Vaz, thanking him for supporting 42-days detention for terrorist suspects in last month's crucial vote. Hoon wrote: "I trust that it [your] support will be appropriately rewarded!...with thanks and best wishes, Geoff."
The Tory leader understandably saw this as evidence that Gordon Brown had, despite his denials at the time, done some dirty deals to win the vote. Vaz's support was critical as chairman of the Commons Home Affairs Select Committee. Without his conversion after initial doubts, the vote would almost certainly have been lost. (Labour aides claimed today his support was never in doubt but that is not how it looked at the time).
Cameron asked Brown what being "appropriately rewarded" meant. Brown insisted Hoon was merely thanking Vaz for doing the right thing. At that point, with Brown taking advice from his parliamentary aide Ian Austin sitting in the row behind him, Speaker Michael Martin cut short the exchange and moved on to the next questioner. So we were left none the wiser.
Labour is dismissing the row as a storm in an eggcup, claiming that Cameron had not produced a shred of evidence to support his suggestion that Vaz was being offered a knighthood or other reward. A spokesman for Hoon insisted he had made "a light-hearted, jokey remark" to an old friend. The exclamation mark in his leaked letter does support his case. But we will be watching future honours lists to see whether the MP for Leicester East features. Maybe he will now have to wait a little longer than he might have done.
I once warned Michael Howard, then leader of the Conservatives, that if he continued to support the US and its' invasion of Iraq, his party would be in opposition for the next two elections. That is what happened.
Gordon brown had a chance to stand up for history, for better or for worse, but instead he took the weaker option of hiding behind his predecessor and the protection of the 'special relationship' with the US.
Therefore, and somewhat unfairly in my opinion, he inherited a mess borne of creeping discontent, one which should have punished others rather than a leader who had just started his time. Never-the-less, he is headed for a sharp and shameful ejection from office unless he sets in motion that which would set him apart, an historic policy and identity of strength, and something I think deep down he believes in anyway. He must speak out against his predecessors actions over Iraq, and against the invasion and subsequent occupation. He can start by showing the world, but in particular the British people, that he is not afraid to withdraw British troops, and then do so, the same being much needed in Afghanistan. He can then launch a full public enquiry, one with full public confidence, into why the UK contributed to this invasion, and what role his predecessor had in that. If handled swiftly, releasing conclusions along the way, he would not only restore public confidence in politics, but Gordon Brown would be remembered as a strong leader who helped to correct the most devastating foreign policy mistake of modern times.
Sincerely,
Colin Ball, a simple family man from the UK who decided New Zealand was better for his family.
Posted by: Colin Ball | Thursday, 03 July 2008 at 01:50 AM