Turning up the heat
We’re learning what a canny political operator John Yates (pictured right) of Scotland Yard is - offering the Today programme a pre-recorded interview when he must have known that his force was about to interview and arrest Lord Levy.So, you see and hear him today but you don't see or hear him asked questions about his investigation into honours.
People close to Tony Blair are spitting blood about what they believe are leaks from the police and what they see as smears against elected politicians. They believe that the police have found very little evidence but can’t "let go" of this investigation.
If only the police were telling me what evidence they've found I could tell you but, in the meantime, you'll have to put up with my attempt to pieces this jigsaw together.
We know that the police investigation has changed since Christmas. It is now investigating charges of perversion of the course of justice. That’s legal-ese for a cover-up and suggests that the police have either been given inconsistent stories by witnesses or believe vital documents - perhaps e-mails - are missing.
There have been a series of allegations in the media in recent days which, for the first time, Downing Street are flatly denying - in the past they refused to comment at all. reported that there was a second secret computer system in Downing Street. This has been denied. The and the suggested that there was a Labour Party e-mail system that acted, in effect, as that second computer system. Downing Street says that their firewall security system doesn’t allow any of their staff to use any other e-mail system. In any event, we're told, the key people at the heart of this investigation do not have passwords to use the Labour Party system even when they're using other computers.
Having said all that, the police must have some reason to make arrests - a serious thing to do. They are, I believe, seeking records - which could be e-mails but might be other notes or diary items - of meetings at which the granting of honours were discussed.
For a prime minister who’s leaving this year anyway, this is putting huge pressure on him and the rest of the party who feel that they’re being judged as guilty by public opinion before any charges have been brought - which, of course, they may never be – and before they’ve had a chance to defend themselves in public, let alone in court.
At this stage I don’t sense that this is leading to pressure for Tony Blair to go early. Why? Partly because he’s set a rough date to go already which Gordon Brown is content with. Partly because if people moved against the PM now they’d be implying that he was guilty.
The question that they will be asking themselves now is - what next? Could the police ask the PM for another interview? Is it possible that that interview would be under caution? Could they treat him not as a suspect but as a witness - which could involve him taking the stand if someone else is charged? I merely speculate because I simply don't know but neither does Tony Blair.
He is rarely so out of control of events that have such consequence for him, his party and their collective reputation.
I'm 
Comments
So, "no whitewash in Whitehall". Though the mention of the white stuff does suggest that Blair may have to look once again to a Hutton/Butler/Stevens style inquiry for a way out of this one.
On the other hand, TB must be getting an idea how Gerry Adams felt after the Northern Bank robbery when he told police to "put up or shut up".
"I’ve been talking to people close to Tony Blair who are spitting blood about leaks from the police, and what they see as smears against elected politicians."
Funny how those same government officials don't pull out the "unelected" card when the police say something they agree with. I'm thinking in particular of Tony's draconian anti-terror legislation, which he's always trying to shore up by saying it's something the police have told him they need.
Excellent piece Nick.
The briefers certainly don't like being briefed against do they!
They reap what they sow...
"I've been talking to people close to Tony Blair who are spitting blood about ... what they see as smears".
Forgive me, but is the irony in that statement deliberate? People who publicly say 'no comment' but then go on to smear the police under lobby terms, complain that what the police are doing amounts to a smear!
If the police have nothing, then maybe the 'smear' allegations will have some merit. If the police succeed in bringing a case, however, I hope that the Blunketts, Puttnams and Jowells of this world will have the decency to slink into embarrassed obscurity.
Of course, if one of them is Chairman of the 91Èȱ¬ by then...!
Interesting that the arrest and subsequent bailing of Lord Levy hasn't rated a mention on the 91Èȱ¬ News website. Are they 'just obeying orders?'
Ah didums! So the politicians feel that they are being tarred with the brush of corruption before charges have been made, well isn't that sad. They now all know how the average teenager feels about ASBO'S.
Did they really think that they could get way with being so openly corrupt without getting someone's back up? And, if they are so certain that the political institutions are being dragged down by continuing sleaze allegations, then I suggest to them that they set about sorting their house out; outing the crooks; spilling the beans on nepotism; you know a good old socialist purge! Or, is honesty a thing of the past, is politics a millstone capable of wieghing down even the most virtuous soul? Apparently so.
What I don't understand about the police approach with the 'alleged' deleted e-mails is why they haven't seized the PCs of those involved for computer forensic examination.
Surely the way that this enquiry seems to be heading requires a more direct approach by the police to finding evidence, if it exists, than a series of police interviews, whether they are under caution or not.
Cash for peerage, what an utter disgrace! This should be fully investigated and those found guilty of it should be prosecuted.
I found this on E-bay and feel that it adds more light to the situation. Thought the more I see of it the more I do not like it
Best
Eddie :-)
The fact that Downing Street is commenting, both officially and unofficially, on the progress of the police investigation is entirely improper. Any comment from or with the blessing of the Prime Minister risks being construed as pressure from the very top on the investigating officers. I am surprised, Nick, that you have made no comment on this aspect of the matter.
I'm happy to wait for Yates to do his job.
The so-called moral outrage by the Tory press etc.concerning the cash for honours is laughable. there isn't an aristocrat or inherited peer sitting in the Lords who is not there due to their forfathers doing exactly that. Its the way it has always been. Those who are able to be "of use" to those in power have always been rewarded in this way.
"If only the police were telling me what evidence they've found" sounds as if they are less leaky than the offices of those that are doing the complaining.
This row though seems to spin on what constitutes an email system. Note that no-one is saying that there aren't separate networks present in no10. Thus if one of them uses eg a database system, which can be used to pass secure messages to a select individual or group, but doesn't have the classic email electronic configuration and protocols, then hey presto only one email system.
Try asking if there is more than one digital network capable of passing information electronically to specific individuals or groups and you might just get a different answer.
Nick - I am convinced that, above a certain level in government, both national and local, officials and politicians genuinely come to believe that they are 'above the law'. In these circumstances, again they believe that it is 'alright' to say more or less what they like when under scrutiny. I recall a certain tv interview with Tony Blair (for example) where he VEHEMENTLY denied that he had said a certain thing previously - even when pressed - and when the interviewer played the tape of him saying precisely what the interviewer had suggested, Tony Blair responded by saying 'Well, that wasn't what I meant'.
I rest my case.
I think the PM will stay till after the elections in Scotland and Wales, if massive loss of Votes will take the blame and leave. But should the Police Investigation really became more serious, then who can tell, politics is a funny old game!!
It was Blair's idea to politicise the police, it just seems to have backfired upon him...in much the same way that electors thought they were voting in a party capable of running the country in 1997, but that also seems to have backfired on all of us.
Tskk tsk this would never have happened in Alastair Campbell's day, but he had the good sense to clear off before the full impact of nulab's incompetence became clear.
Is it just me ... or is "The Trial of Tony Blair" inching ever closer to real life?
Of course the second email system may have nothing to do with 'desk-bound' PCs. What about these Blackberry's that politicians seemed so enamoured of? The second email system could be sending and receiving messages from these and this would have nothing to do with Downing St. firewalls.
God forbid that we are being governed by Blackberry!
When politicians are interviewed by the police, do they give a straight answer, or do they tell the police how bad it was under the previous government? If they answer questions to the police like they do in the House or to the media, I can see why the investigation is taking so long.
I find it amusing that TB et al are saying that it's unfair to criticise them when they can't respond, since when did politicians ever act fairly? Perhaps Tony should be locked up for 90 days while the police see if they can dig up any evidence against him, then he might really have a complaint about unfairness ...
The essential government (and media) complaint is because the police are doing their job properly - which includes not telling anyone what evidence they have found or what their lines of enquiry are, until they're ready to go to court with the facts.
If only the politicians could match the same standard!
I'm angered - but not, sadly, surprised - by how quickly senior politicians have moved to their usual defensive persecution complexes. There's nothing more pathetic than people who run the country complaining about how unfairly the police are treating them. With every media outlet watching, desperately filling space with speculation while they wait for the facts? The one thing we can be certain of is that the officers on this case are going to go out of the way to do everything right.
(P.S. Loved the plaintive 'If only the police were telling me what evidence they had found' in your article. Raised a large grin.)
Chill out Nick, your political master will get what he deserves, one way or another. That goes for "Prime Minister" Gordon Brown as well.
John Yates is doing a great job so far, in spite of all the political shenanigans being conducted by the Labour party and some of their supporters in the press (you know that the police cannot reveal details of the case to you during an investigation)!
Your last comment about TB being in control has to go down as the most bizarre quote of the decade. How out of touch with reality can someone possibly be...!!
David
"I am convinced that, above a certain level in government, both national and local, officials and politicians genuinely come to believe that they are 'above the law'."
That is pretty much what Frank Field was implying on his blog, when he criticised the police: