Front page of today's Western Mail. Major scoop by Tomos Livingstone. Big headlines screaming out "Hague wrong to lift lid on his private life". "B******" thought I. What influential personage has stepped into this debate now. A foreign leader perhaps - Obama or Sarcozy or Merkle or Van Rumpy? A leading British politician perhaps - cabinet member or royal family or former party leader? No it was no other than Mrs Sally Bercow, wife of the Speaker, and wannabe Labour politician. Wow.
Now I daresay Tomos was under pressure to come up with something to give the story 'legs' for another day. But surly he could have come up with something better than this. Mrs Jones from Merthyr perhaps, or Mrs Williams from Bala or Mrs Griffiths from Llandudno. They would all carry more significance. It was a front page article of less significance than anything I've seen for a long time. Irrelevant desperation is what comes to mind.
UPDATE - and I see that the Telgraph has done the same thing. Perhaps its only me who thinks this is utterly pathetic.
6 comments:
This is one, which on reflection, I disagree with you on Glyn.
If it wasn't for the fact that Christopher Meyers appointment was paid out of the public purse there would be no issue in my book.
But the public purse was used by Hague to appoint Christopher Myers to his personal staff; a young man that Hague has shared hotel room(s) with.
I am surprised you don’t see the “public purse issue” Glyn.
At best that was a gross error of judgment on Hague’s part.
Hague has to go.
I think you're far from alone in thinking that. You are of course far more charitable than me in describing Mrs Bercow as a "wannabe Labour politician": I'm not all that convinced that she wants to be anything other than a minor celebrity. I wouldn't be all that surprised to see her go from being rentaquote on the news to presenting some lamentably bad documentary or "reality" programme. (It's certainly more likely than any of the nonsense that's been said about Mr Hague.)
But speaking of names in glittering lights, congratulations on being the best new entry in the top 30 MP blogs. That is very much well-deserved.
I know you disagree Christopher, and while I'm usually happy to let comments through, I can't let unproven assetions against our Foreign Sec. and a good friend through. There is only a 'public purse issue' if you do not believe what he says. I've shared a room with a man myself - but only once since the rugby tours when I shared a hall with several men. I went to Conference at the last minute a few years ago, and Alun Cairns offered me a bed. I accepted - never again was my promise to myself. I'd rather sleep on the pavement.
James - I hadn't noticed. To be honest I've never voted or taken much notice of these polls. Always think votes are cast for friends or political allies. I just blog for fun - or to make a controversial comment where I need to be careful about the wording (as I've just done tonight). Don't suppose anyone will notice, but I enjoyed writing it - which is the point of blogging.
"What influential personage has stepped into this debate now[?]"
The Conservative Telegraph and Mail both run stories over the weekend detailing that Hague paid for first class air tickets for Myers (In re 'Two days in Bangkok', sorry, I meanr 'Two days in Bahrain').
And what's this drip-drip tally-tattle about non-sugar-daddy Hague buying his non-love interest (so we are told) Myers?
Christopher, stop being absurd. For starters, the Mail and the Telegraph are independent companies in the business of selling newspapers: you may not like their editorial line or the Conservative Party, but that does not make them one and the same thing. It's socialists who go around blurring boundaries and restricting press freedom in setting up their Pravda, their Izvestia, and their Trud.
Secondly, there is really nothing out of the ordinary about Mr Hague making a political choice of special advisor. It is futile to make insinuations about it, as it is a political appointment. If one were to try to make political appointments insinuation-proof, they would cease to be political appointments and turn into yet more Sir Humphreys. And where would we stop abolishing political appointments? Clearly the cabinet has to go after the last Prime Minister (who left starting a family suspiciously late) gave a peerage to a non-MP (who happened to be gay) and made him First Secretary of State!
What these pathetic insinuations demonstrate is quite what a good job Mr Hague is doing. Actual criticism on policy issues has been notably absent. Where, one may wonder, is the Shadow Foreign Secretary? He does seem to think he is already Leader of the Opposition, but he hasn't said anything memorable about foreign affairs for quite some time.
They also demonstrate what a good job the Government in general is doing, if this is really all anti-government blogger Paul Staines can find to complain about.
Mr Wood,
William Hague is an asset to Parliament, and this is not really disputed by either side of the House.
To suggest that he should leave as a result of unsubstantiated rumours that public money was mis-spent by him, when /proven/ misspending MPs still remain in their seats unchallenged, smacks of a very weak-minded acquiescence to the shrill cries of the newspapers.
Post a Comment