|
|
 |
Downing Street insiders let it be known that Mr Blair was thunderstruck when Mr Blunkett informed him last Wednesday afternoon that Sir Alan Budd had found hard evidence that his private office had fast-tracked a visa for Kimberly Quinn's nanny. The Prime Minister, they claim, had no inkling until then that the Budd inquiry would turn up anything damaging. He had believed Mr Blunkett's categorical assurances that neither he nor his private office had done anything to speed up the visa. As a result, a shaken Mr Blair made absolutely no attempt to dissuade Mr Blunkett from quitting. The Downing Street version of events was seen last night as a desperate attempt to shield Mr Blair from any political fall-out from the ever-murkier affair. The Premier has already been accused of prejudging the inquiry by saying he was sure his Home Secretary would be exonerated. Now he fears Sir Alan's inquiry will prove more politically dangerous than he ever suspected. His report, expected tomorrow, threatens to plunge one of the great departments of state into its deepest crisis in decades. Whitehall was awash with rumours last night that heads - some of them very senior - will roll. The clear-out could extend to the very top following weekend allegations that the department's permanent secretary John Gieve was implicated in an attempted cover-up. Yesterday's Sunday Times claimed that Bill Jeffrey, head of the Immigration Service, told Mr Gieve he would not go along with the Home Office 'line' that Mr Blunkett was not involved in fast-tracking the visa. It said that Mr Jeffrey threatened to 'blow the whistle' on what was happening. It was only this threat that prompted Mr Gieve to tell Sir Alan Budd there was documentary evidence - a fax and e-mails - showing that Mr Blunkett's private office had been involved in fast-tracking the visa. If this version of events is true, Mr Gieve - tipped as a possible future head of the civil service - will be in some difficulty. Eyebrows have already been raised in Whitehall over the fact that his wife Katherine is the family law partner at Bindman & Partners, the London solicitors acting for Mr Blunkett in his court battle for access to Mrs Quinn's two-year-old son. Mr Gieve last night refused to comment on the allegations. At home in Highbury, North London, he said: "I won't be making any statements. I'm going to stick to my rule - you go through the press office." He added: "I'm in the middle of watching a football match at the moment." The scandal has plunged the Government into a debilitating crisis as the finishing touches are put to plans for a May general election. Senior ministers are seething that the Blunkett row has dominated politics since the end of November, squeezing out attempts to focus on the pre-election agenda of security and law and order. There was anger over Mr Blunkett's astonishing weekend claims that Sir Alan had been 'mesmerised' by Mrs Quinn. Labour bosses issued an embarrassed retraction on his behalf yesterday, saying: "David Blunkett has the highest regard for Sir Alan Budd and the work he has done on his report which David believes has done what it was set up to do. Sir Alan is a completely independent and totally reliable operator in whom everyone should have total confidence." The Tories said yesterday that the resignation of Mr Blunkett and of his junior minister Beverley Hughes earlier this year in the row over asylum seekers from eastern Europe have exposed a culture of 'incompetence, collusion and cover-up' at the department. Shadow Home Secretary David Davis said he feared that the Budd inquiry would not be able to get at all the facts of the case "This whole affair has produced an inexplicable sequence of events which looks likely to have involved a cover-up." To the relief of Downing Street, Sir Alan's report will appear just as the political world is winding down for Christmas. If, as anticipated, he unveils his findings tomorrow, Mr Blair will be thousands of miles away on an overseas visit. He will not be back until late Wednesday night. And at Westminster most MPs will already have left for their Christmas holidays. The Commons rises tomorrow afternoon for a three-week recess. With the Premier away and Westminster emptying, ministers hope than any controversy triggered by the Budd report will be short-lived. And they are convinced that by the time Parliament returns in January the dust will have settled on the extraordinary events of the past month.
For the health of our democracy, we, the people of the United Kingdom, must find a way to force Mr Blair to resign
Such defiance of the democratic process and the will of the majority of we people of the UK, must be exposed by voters as a matter or urgency, and not just in the two by-elections we have had this July and the European elections in June 2004. But how can this be done? The most effective way of getting our deceitful PM to resign would be to mobilise the army of Labour MPs currently in the House of Commons and get them to demand it, the loss of their seat to be a penalty if they did not. All voters in Labour-held constituencies need to write a letter along these lines to their local Labour MPs:
Simple, non-violent, protest letters along these lines on a variety of issues could be the basis for re-vitalising our democracy and increasing voters' interest and participation in politics. Download a printable copy of the above letter here. There is another way for the voice of the silent majority to be heard, a voice that made sure broken promises would not only be revealed, but punished in subsequent elections. In the year available before the General Election expected in 2005, many topics are available as ammunition, each one asking questions. A weapon for our purpose will be the results of Opinion Polls in individual constituencies using ICM, NOP, Gallop, Mori or YouGov. Questions suggested for this purpose are listed here. CAST YOUR VOTE ON A VARIETY OF OTHER IMPORTANT ISSUES HERE. Current and prospective Parliamentary candidates of all Parties running for election could share a platform at public forums in every constituency. They would be presented with the results of polls on this issue expressed by the majority of voters in that constituency. The candidates could be asked if their own views and that of their Party manifesto corresponded with the polls, and if not, how they intended to represent the will of the majority of local voters. Local and National Press, Radio and TV coverage would be arranged and the results published on this web site. Here is another powerful strategy for using your vote effectively in the forthcoming General Election. Send your sitting and prospective MPs a letter defining your requirements if they want your vote. This example deals with the proposed EU Constitutional Treaty. Your letters would end: "If you do not answer this letter, I shall take it that you intend to follow the Government line. I shall act accordingly in the forthcoming General Election. Or why not create a questionnaire that you send to all the candidates in your constituency, getting them to give yes/no answers to questions of your choice, and ending it with the same paragraph(above). Download a printable example of the questionnaire. It is high time for the people of this United Kingdom to stop allowing themselves to be manipulated by politicians. We need our representatives in Parliament to genuinely reflect the view of the majority in their own constituency, even if this means going against their personal and/or their party's policy. While they may argue their case, hoping to change the minds of the majority in their constituency, they should ultimately be obliged to reflect the majority view of those who elect them. It will be argued by politicians of all parties that most voters don't have the knowledge necessary to express an opinion on important subjects at issue, and that our vote is a form of delegated democracy. We should argue that it is their duty to ensure that we voters do have ready access to such information as is necessary to form an intelligent opinion. That, after all, is one main purpose of Opposition Parties in our Parliamentary Democracy. Most important of all, such proceedings would rekindle in voters their latent interest and obligation to cast their vote, knowing that the candidate of their choice would be more likely to act in accordance with their wishes. A much higher turnout in elections would be the result. Contact your local Party Chairman. Gain his support for setting up public forums in your constituency on these, as well as any other relevant topics, well before the next General Election expected in 2005. You should then, depending on the integrity of the candidate of your choice, feel fairly certain that your view on any subject being debated in Parliament will more accurately be reflected by your representative in that assembly.
If you have suggestions for additional subjects, or material to include in the pages linked to the subjects listed, please contact the webmaster. |
by
David Hughes, Political Editor, Daily Mail - December 20, 2004
