Mutual dislike
So, John Prescott has kissed goodbye to the headlines that said the end was nigh. He's blaming his current plight on the media - "they don't like me and I don't like them".
His defence is simple. Yes, he did champion the cause of Philip Anschutz - the man he sees as the saviour of the Dome. But no, he had nothing to do with any decision on whether a super-casino will go into it.
His difficulty remains that his officials did tell other parts of government about his meetings with Anschutz and that a casino in the Dome was a key plank in the long-term business strategy (see the memos produced by Newsnight last night)
Also there are allegations that his department leant on others not to make rival bids for a casino.
His defence - and, for now, it seems to be a pretty solid one - is that all times he got his permanent secretary's approval - and that he separated himself from decisions about the casino bid. Until someone proves that he knew something or that he was lying, I think he is on safe ground.
However, he will not enjoy the fact that Sir Alastair Graham - the standards watchdog - now says there should be a proper enquiry into whether he's breached ministerial rules. And Sir Phillip Mawer is now investigating whether he broke Commons rules.
I note that, so far, none of Prescott's senior colleagues are rushing to his aid - they are watching and waiting to see if there is another revelation - to see if he has to go. They are contemplating life after him. Most of them hope he can survive - many of them think he may not.
Talking of revelations I seemed to stir up a hornet's nest by pointing out yesterday that certain blogs are running unsubstantiated and politically motivated allegations about the deputy prime minister's private life. I was not attacking them. I read them - from time to time. I enjoy them but there is, rightly a difference and a distance between what they do and I do.
PS. In his interview with John Humphrys this morning (listen here) John Prescott pretended he didn't really know what the internet or blogs were (even though there was a election).
But if, like him, you are mystified or even intrigued by the talk of political blogs, my colleage Alan Connor from the Daily Politics has put together on some of the sites you have might heard of.
PPS. I'm on a train. John Prescott is sitting five seats away.
I'm 
Comments
I like the way you use the word "unsubstantiated" It reminds me of the way they use "allegedly" on HIGNFY.
It might be me, but I listened to the JP interview this morning - quality radio by the way - and I heard him say "they don't like me and I don't like them" and it was about the Tory Council NOT the media. Why is it being reported as about the media - does that make better headlines? As I say, I could be wrong - but isn't it worth checking and then making a correct to your various 91Èȱ¬ websites?
Nick,
Trust you will use your proximity to the DPM to ask whether he will pay back the taxpayer for his ranch visit.
Will you also ask him to reconcile his three different versions of what was discussed during the visit?
"there is, rightly a difference and a distance between what [ blogs ] do and I do."
Yes? 'Rightly'? How, exactly?
The anatomy of the death of a political party goes something like this - I base this on my experience of the Tories. First there's a bad story every six months, then every week, then every day. It can't get any worse you think. Then you get multiple bad stories every day running for several days. This is simply because old news has caught up and the party's public relations can't keep up. Despite this a party can still survive as long as it doesn't start to turn in on itself. It's not true that "a party loses an election", rather once a party turns in on itself it loses itself. Look at the Tories they survived (just) once John Major arrived, but it was the back stabbing over Europe "what did them in." But what comes between bad news and back stabbing? Nobody (ministers or media) supporting struggling senior Ministers, that's what. And that's what your're seeing with John Prescott and Nick's blog.
"pps. I'm on a train. John Prescott is sitting five seats away."
Does he have a woman beside him.... ;)
"certain blogs are running unsubstantiated and politically motivated allegations about the deputy prime minister's private life"
of course they are politically motivated! they are political blogs!
the blogs in question don't claim to be unbiased in any way shape or form. its just up to us, as readers, to make our minds up.
unfortunately, it is the 91Èȱ¬ that is being dishonest , for it claims to be impartial, but the vast bulk of its news output is from a left-wing perspective.
Nick,
Why didn't you mention Prescott's failure to deny allegations of other extra-marital affairs? He was asked eight times to give a straight answer - the fact that he couldn't, surely implies that their is some truth in these rumours.
Does this matter? Depends, who the ladies are i.e. does he routinely prey on junior staff? Given that his own GVN has rightly cracked down on bosses who abuse their position - if this is the case, then surely his own standing becomes untennable.
BTW I'm a Labour party member and I reckon
A) the 91Èȱ¬ should be reporting this story more vigoriously
B) Prescott should come clean about his Private Life and then either quit or brazen it out. It's the drip, drip reverlations that are killing us on the door step.
Poor Old Pressa completely out of his depth and no one to turn to. As a dear old friend of mine (aged 86) says "When I want to get things done I turn on the little old lady act." But listening to the interview this morning it didn't kinda sound too convincing when Pressa tried it with the "Interweb" or whatever he called it.
Is this the kind of politician we want to run the country especially as Teflon will probably be away for the next six weeks at "Cliff's" or "Bella's" place.
How true the song....The working class can kiss their xxxx. I've got the foremans job at last! (Sung to the Red Flag)
Keep the pressure on Nick!
In the interview on Radio 4 this morning, Prescott refused to give a straight answer as to whether he had had another affair. Surely he must realise that almost everyone listening is going to take this as a tacit admission?
If you've a clean conscience and you're asked, "have you had any other affairs", you would reply with a very firm "no". Unless you were afraid of being called a liar if evidence to the contrary ever leaked.
Thats a bit risky isn't it- we all know Prescott has a pretty good right hook and you never know he might be a reader of this blog- (however I somehow doubt this after recent publications). I said yesterday that the media pick on Prescott unfairly and you are quite simply waiting for something big enough to happen so you can force him out!!
I've got to say Nick, that I do enjoy reading your take on the current events.
On the JP issue, here we have a "wounded" member of the New Labour pack and the "wolves" are now circling, sensing a "kill" - can't blame the Tories as this is what Labour did to them.(And of course, there are many more important stories out there - Mid East / Afghanistan / Nuclear debate). I would urge all the media to impose a bit more self-restraint and perspective.
Since he's so close, do him a favour.
Go over and say, "John, these unfounded rumours about more affairs are obviously untrue, so here is your opportunity to flatly deny them. Have you had any other affairs: YES or NO?"
And please, hold him to "yes" or "no", rather than the usual stream of drivel he spouts.
Thanks.
"PPS. I'm on a train. John Prescott is sitting five seats away."
And four seats away, and three seats.
Last summer I worked at the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (as it was then). The DPM was, at that time, responsible for planning policy, through a lower ranking minister (then Yvette Cooper). Planning policy determines which buildings can be used for what. So any landowner wanting to convert a cinema (or Dome) into a casino would have to clear it with the planning department... and the DPM could call in any case for personal decision. The DPM was, therefore, a direct target of lobbying. It was a direct conflict of interest.
John Humphries was grilling Prescott on Today this morning about whether or not he's had another affair.
Prescott dodged the question and then said : "people must judge me on what I do on the job"
Is this quite what he meant or somehow Freudian?
Nick, the issue is less about whether JP can influence who the licence is awarded too, but whether he tried to increase the number of supercasinos above the agreed limit of 1, in order to benefit Anschutz. If there had been an increase in the limit, then the Dome's chances of success would be guaranteed.
You say you read political blogs from 'time to time'. Shouldn't you read them everyday?They are generally much faster than the 91Èȱ¬ in breaking stories.
What exactly is the difference between what they do and what you do?
Malcolm
Far be it from me to presume to defend Nick - who is more than capable of defending himself - but I think the point is that it depends what you mean by "stories".
Standards are slipping at the 91Èȱ¬, but I don't think they have yet slipped so far that the Political Editor simply peddles Internet gossip?!?!
Is he "five seats" Prezza now too???
The difference between the blogs and you Nick is that the blogs are prepared to keep at it until the truth comes out. Long live the blogs of Ian Dale and Gudio
Re Jonathan at 8, As you are a Labour party member, you have my deepest sympathies and condolences.
It must be like being on a bus, knowing you are going to crash, and the driver can't hear the screams.
Isn't it time to stop dancing around the issue and name exactly who the bloggers are?
It's only by identifying them and explaining their political motivation and history that people can judge the validity of their claims.
If for instance Guido is who people say he is, then he has a clearly defined political agenda as well as something of a colourful past of his own.
It's time to start explaining who these people are and what might be on their minds.
The bloggers look like they could be about to claim their first political scalp in this country but hardly anybody outside the inner circle at Westminster and possibly a few political anoraks knows who they are or what they might be up to.
The bloggers are becoming the story - it's time to start telling it.
I note you and JP were sitting fairly close together. I hope he was in First Class as befitting a
VIP Politician ( sorry to be sarcastic) and you as a leading Political Editor!!!
I hope JP at least saw you and offered you some light refreshment
or did he shake your hand crushing your bones !!!
Could be worse ..Nick...he could have
sat next to you.
While Casanova Prescott is all over the headlines Jolly John Reid is slipping out bad news.
Foreign Murderers on the run barely get a mention now.
P.S. While I was reading about JP's troubles it struck me that he does likes his foreign travel. Is this simply a case a Lame Duck minister ripping the *rse out his expense account and stocking up hotel towels?
"His defence - and, for now, it seems to be a pretty solid one - is that all times he got his permanent secretary's approval"
Pretty solid? He got his subordinate's permission?!?
And as for "politcally motivated" - this really gives you away, Nick. It's only the Lefties who close ranks about left-wing politcians, without caring for the truth, with the whine "It's all a plot!"
It seems ironic that JP spends time in the ranch of a billionaire and candidly throws in the Doha round where we are resisitng, though maybe not as much as the US, changes for the benefit of the worlds developing nations.
I wonder how many third world farmers he was thinking about on his tax-payer funded trip?
I love Prescott!
I see him as a good straight talking politician. If he were to go i would like to see Jack Straw fill his large boots. As he has similar qualities and is very good at forming arguments.
"Isn't it time to stop dancing around the issue and name exactly who the bloggers are?"
Nick himself linked to one of them in a previous post - Iain Dale - who was interviewed by Paxo the other night. So, its pretty clear who he is.
As for Guido - some people know who he is, some don't. He's got a phone number, fax number and email address on his blog if you want to get in touch.
Of course Political Blogs are political - flipping heck, what do you expect? However, in my experience, many of their readers aren't.
I'm a working single parent, never had a political bone in my body & have never belonged to to a Party because I hadn't the time or interest - until Blair & Bush's invasion of Iraq. I can't live with that, the people and children being killed and maimed there could be my children or my family.
Blair's illegal invasion opened my eyes to politics and turned me into an avid 91Èȱ¬ News watcher & and blog reader - and a sometime demonstrator.
Yet I'm still not political - just stressed and worried about what this Government's doing to my country and others - and the NHS, our freedoms and communities, our values and rule of law and so on. I long for the day when I can stop constantly worrying about the people of Iraq and our civil liberties etc, trust the Government and have a slightly less stressed out life. That's all I really want.
Until then, I'll keep reading the blogs - though maybe less of the 91Èȱ¬ because you insulted your readers by implying we're dummies who need idiot guides.
Website blogs should have every right to remain anonymous and the former political agent for the conservative party, who now runs the 'Guido' website should be allowed to slag Labour off whenever he wants to.
It's called Democracy but It's failed the Tories for ten years.
Gary
>>> "Isn't it time to stop dancing around the issue and name exactly who the bloggers are?
It's only by identifying them and explaining their political motivation and history that people can judge the validity of their claims."
You talk as if somehow bloggers are secretive about their political affiliations and motivations and/or pretend to be impartial.
Nothing could be further than the truth.
Even without knowing Guido's background and identity, his motivations and agenda are perfectly self-evident from his blog. None of us out here need to know who he is in order to know where he's coming from on a particular issue, he, like Iain and pretty much any political blogger I could mention, is an entirely known quantity.
There's no point hunting for secret cabals and conspiracies amongst bloggers, because there aren't any.
It's been implied by some that Guido and Iain are being fed their material and worked by CCHQ - that's not true, certainly in this case, and if a blogger were found operating on that basis their reputation and credibility would be gone in an instant.
I predict that John Prescott will have resigned his position by the end of t his month.I think that there is a good chance that Tonmy Blair will also resign on the same day.I have always thought july 2006 was the likiliest time for Blair/Prescotts resignation and it seems thiings are moving strongly that way.
All this needs now is something like what happend to John Leslie: someone on the telly to "accidentally" name the "alleged" new mistress, and Prezza will be gone by lunchtime.
I'm guessing the 91Èȱ¬ won't do this (and why they pre-recorded Iain Dale's interview on Newsnight?) was because they didn't want to "do a Gilligan"?
He's a real nowhere man
Living in his nowhere land
Making all his nowhere plans
for nobody
Hi Nick further to my earlier message I saw you on 91Èȱ¬ on the mentioned Train !!!JP looked at you as he came out of a meeting fit to kill
if looks mean a lot !!! Thats when I know the Media are doing a good job and that relates to Lab Lib Con as well all of the bunch. Only 5 seats away ......maybe JP wanted to contribute to the Blog.
Interesting stuff Nick.
I have been regularly criticising Prescott in the letters page of the Hull daily Mail since May 3rd.
More recently though The Hull Labour Party have been trying to gag me by arguing that because I fail to disclose my Conservative links (I am a web site editor for the party) it makes my letters come across as dishonest.
Do you think that every member of the Conservative Party should have to declare their membership when writing to the media?
Nick Watson wrote:
"Isn't it time to stop dancing around the issue and name who the bloggers are".
Well after much investigation I think I have identified Iain Dale as .... Iain Dale. Do I get a prize?
"I am five seats from Prescott"
What incisive, heroic journalism Nick. You could work for the Sun (although there is precious little difference between that comic and the 91Èȱ¬ these days).
Try to remember that you are not 'the news' but merely the messenger.
I'm going to take my own simplistic guess on the Blogs v. Journalists divide: Journalists answer questions, Blogs ask them.
Both are vital to getting the truth out.
Ian Dale and Guido are in the business of pointing at things and saying "Surely that's wrong?" They are whistleblowers: telling us where we should be looking to see what is really going on in government. They can draw conclusions and make cases, but ultimately their message is that there is something up here that needs to be answered.
Nick, on the other hand, is in the business of telling us what is going on in Politics... and he has responded to those questions that people are putting to him: while this may not reflect well on JP as a human being, he has a solid defence so far against the accusation of illegality. Investigations continue.
Therefor it is entirely correct that blogs bring up the story before Nick does: because the blogs are posing the questions that Nick is looking for the answers to.
Mr Prescott is wasted in politics, comedy's where he should be - a poor man's Benny Hill.
saw you on the news last night, attempting to buttonhole prezza while pauline nearly walked into you. the feverishness of your attempt was rather undermined, for me, by the knowledge that you'd been sitting less than two metres from him for the previous couple of hours, as you mention above.
surely you weren't just putting on a show for the cameras?
Regarding the "difference and distance" between Nick's blog and other non 91Èȱ¬ political blogs, Nick's blog is subject to the 91Èȱ¬'s Editorial Guidelines on privacy, which you can read here.
They say that the 91Èȱ¬ should:
"normally only report the private legal behaviour of public figures where broader public issues are raised either by the behaviour itself or by the consequences of its becoming widely known. The fact of publication by other media may not justify the 91Èȱ¬ reporting it."
I should declare an interest and say that I work for the 91Èȱ¬'s Editorial Policy unit that draws up the Guidelines.
Thanks to Nick Reynolds - for his insight that the 91Èȱ¬ has an OFFICIAL gagging policy on the private lives of public figures. I always assumed the 91Èȱ¬'s failure/ slowness to pick up on certain stories was editorial squeamishness not official policy. I wonder if the next Conservative government will feel the full protection off this policy or will it get 'updated' by then?
MR PRESCOTT HAS BEEN A PUTZ, I AM
SUPRISED THAT HE HAS PLACED HIMSELF
IN SUCH A POSITION, BU I NOTE THAT
SO MANY MEMEBERS OF PARLIAMENT
SEEMED TO BE DAZZLED BY THE WEALTH
OF BUSINESSMEN AND WOMEN, THAT THEY
FORGET THE ELECTORATE AND THEIR
EARLIER STATEMENTS AND BACKGROUND
WHAT A GREAT PITY ''
Read account of "Pressa's" radio interview.
Good advert for the teaching of the English Language.
Pity the poor beggars trying to translate for the foreign press!!
You know, I don't think I give a monkey's whether John Prescott ultimately resigns or not. Frankly, I find the whole matter rather boring and sordid.
But hold on, surely that is the whole point. The reason that the press and the British public have been baying at the heels of Blair's government for years - right from the time of Alastair Campbell onwards is this somewhat unsavoury aura about them. It started with 'spin.' Now spin is not about telling lies, but it is about manipulating, or managing the truth. Campbell, Mandelson, Blunkett, Prescott; not to mention the reasons for going to war in Iraq - all the time there has just been this sense of something 'missing.' What is it?
INTEGRITY
All the media witch hunts of the last few years have really been a cry from the heart of the British public, desperately seeking unmitigated integrity from their government - which seemed so promising at the outset - and being repeatedly disappointed.
I reckon the next general election will be won by the political party most successfully projecting their integrity. I have a feeling that David Cameron may have got the message. Blair? Brown? I'm not so sure.
Then again, maybe the nature of liberal democratic government is such that complete integrity is unachievable. If true, that is surely very sad.
John - this has been our policy for a number of years. It applies to all public figures not just politicians, and to politicians regardless of what party they belong to. It's not a "gagging order" and won't change if the government does.
Five seats away physically, but mentally he's on a different astral plane - from you and from the rest of mankind....
"I seemed to stir up a hornet's nest by pointing out yesterday that certain blogs are running unsubstantiated and politically motivated allegations about the deputy prime minister's private life."
Can you substantiate that Nick? How do you know I don't have any evidence?
I'm far from done with Mr Prescott.
"private legal behaviour of public figures where broader public issues are raised either by the behaviour itself or by the consequences of its becoming widely known."
The argument made by Labour during Major's premiership was that if a minister's wife couldn't trust him then neither could the rest of us, and he was therefore unsuitable for office. As I recall it was a line of reasoning the 91Èȱ¬ accepted (quite rightly) unreservedly.
This is all very reminiscent of the Clinton defence - perjury is OK provided it's about your sex life, again an argument left-wing commentators never seemed to apply to Jeffrey Archer.
It saddens me that some one that once had such firm socialist principles and fought against tory sleaze should now be such a sell out.
Its all about big business in new labour now, all the labour bigwigs are swanning around entertaining dodgy dealings, claiming that they are doing nothing wrong.
But it is not enough to say you are doing nothing wrong, as a government you should be seen to be doing nothing wrong.
Its time for a big change in the labour party, sooner the better
I was the chap who took your picture
with william(wilberforce)behind you.
Also informed you of the president arriving at the guildhall(HULL)
Now that I have set the scene,may I say what a great natural real bloke you are.
Although a pleasure to have met you,I am a great fan of John Prescott,he has done a lot for Hull,and the working class,if there is such a thing.For the country I feel that because he talks working class,he appears to most as a man of the past,and is that a bad thing.
The primer you have linked to is way out of date. It is also very limited in its outlook. It does not for example mention my blog which, after Tom Watson, is the second longest running blog by an elected politician.
Nick
I think a very important aspect of political blogs which you and other members of the MSM dont fully reconise is this.
It is very "public spirited" and enterprising, that people like guido do the hard work and come up with basic insite and research. However the most exciteing thing is that the ordinary, usually very busy tax paying members of the British public, are making many regular comments and finally having a voice. That even the likes of 91Èȱ¬ political editors may read.
But even more historic than this. Thousands of new visitors to blogs,every week, can now read the opinions of their fellow citizens. Mainly uncensored and MSM,PC free.
This is not just important. In terms of real PEOPLE POWER this is,"cant be put back in the bottle, Earth shattering stuff." The long term implications of which "I do not have the operational paramiters in which to calculate."
I suggest you and the rest of the MSM give it some more deep thought.
Well with the middle east in crises should John prescott be in charge of the country?
On the positive side we can all be amused by his antics across the summer so we can be distracted from the world's problems.
On the negative side maybe having a buffoon in charge of the country and a Middle-East envoy who is been investigated by the police might not enhance the reputation of the UK or help the crises.
What the country needs is Prescott kept in the front pages for our amusement but with someone else being in charge. This should be Blairs mission for the week. I see a move to the cowboy section of DEFRA.
Am I mssing something here? What has John Prescott's sex life got to do with anything? This isn't a minor point: filling the news media (including blogs) with gossip and trivia keeps the real stuff out of the spotlight.