91热爆

bbc.co.uk Navigation

Clarke speaks

  • Nick
  • 26 Jun 06, 10:00 PM

Well, it was worth the wait.

Charles  ClarkeCharles Clarke has broken his post-sacking silence and done so in a way which will have his successor John Reid - and the man who sacked him - wincing.

You can see what he has to say in full on (UPDATE: you can now watch it here) but these are his key points:

The 91热爆 Office was "fit for purpose"...

"The overall picture of a department 'not fit for purpose' in any of the respects he described I think is and was fundamentally wrong, and I think John was wrong to use those descriptions as I told him before he gave evidence to the select committee..."

"I used to describe myself as... tough but not populist. Each home secretary has to decide their own style..."

The home secretary should not jump on media bandwagons...

"I don鈥檛 know if his timing was influenced by the News of the World campaign or not. I haven鈥檛 spoken to him about it so I can鈥檛 tell you. If it was then I would criticise it. I don鈥檛 think that鈥檚 the right thing to do."

"The home secretary of the day should not simply be running on the bandwagon of some particular media campaign..."

"It鈥檚 very important that the home secretary does his very best to give the confidence to the country that the Criminal Justice System is working properly and effectively and well. I very much hope that John and the way that he does it will stand up for creating a system in which people can have confidence right across the range rather than simply responding to a campaign."

Or criticise court judgements...

"Decisions are taken by parts of the Criminal Justice System which the home secretary of the day is routinely asked to comment on and either criticise or support. I made it my practice not to do that. For myself I thought it was my duty not to comment on particular cases."

And there's more. On Radio 4 tomorrow morning (speaking to John Humphrys on On the Ropes) Charles Clarke will talk about whether Tony Blair's leadership can recover.

Over the weekend there was speculation that Mr Clarke might turn out to be Tony Blair's Geoffrey Howe - i.e a former friend and insider whose criticism acts as a catalyst for his leader's removal. Had Charles Clarke uttered his criticisms in the Commons and not while the nation's attention was on the World Cup, that parallel might have proved apt.

However, done at this time in this way it won't bring Tony Blair down. It will, though, fuel the questions about whether and how Tony Blair can stay in the job for as long as he wants.

Charles Clarke's return

  • Nick
  • 26 Jun 06, 11:34 AM

Remember Charles Clarke?

How could you forget his barely contained anger on the day he was sacked as home secretary after what became known as the foreign prisoner fiasco. Ever since he's maintained his silence. Today that silence ends and his fightback begins.

He's sent to the Commons 91热爆 Affairs Select Committee giving his version of events. It makes one essential point - that although he had known about the problem posed by the growing number of foreign prisoners in British prisons for many months, "it was only in late March 2006 that ministers, including myself, were made aware of the failure to consider for deportation some foreign national prisoners at the end of their sentence". The perception that he'd been warned but did nothing is what, he clearly believes, did for him.

On tonight's Ten O'Clock News and at greater length on Newsnight he will also give his response to the suggestion that the 91热爆 Office is not - and was not - "fit for purpose". It will make for interesting viewing.

Human rights

  • Nick
  • 26 Jun 06, 10:43 AM

I'm beginning to have certain sympathy with my Dad who used to moan about the country being run by lawyers.

The question as to whether would actually make any difference is one that already has the lawyers locking their horns.

The case for - I'm told - is that the grants countries with their own written constitutions or bills of rights (eg Germany) what's called "a margin of appreciation" - a bit of leeway, to the likes of you and me. In addition, Britain could, like France, seek certain "reservations" on the convention allowing considerations of national security to outweigh human rights considerations.

The case against is that, ultimately, the court in Strasbourg would decide and so a new Bill would make no difference.

Rest assured that however expert lawyers may be, there is no single correct answer - giving fresh potency to that old clich茅 that when it comes to the law "you pays yer money and you make your choice".

The 91热爆 is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

91热爆.co.uk