IT’S NO secret that I’m on friendly terms with Tory blogger Iain Dale. But his post today is nothing less than a peurile attempt to smear a retiring Labour MP in a way which, had it been directed by a Labour blogger at a Tory MP, Iain would no doubt condemn.
So, what has he said, exactly?
The anouncement certainly came as a surprise to SNP activists in Rutherglen and Hamilton West since they’ve seen McAvoy out and about campaigning for what they assumed was his re-election.
“…for what they assumed was his re-election.”? So, MPs only campaign for their own re-election? They don’t campaign for, say, their own party generally? My predecessor, Lord Maxton, helps out during most elections here in Glasgow South; according to Iain Dale, that makes no sense because he’s not standing for election. Go figure.
It could of coyrse (sic) just be absolute coincidence that his announcement comes after Jim Devine claimed a male Labour whip advised him to claim his expsenses in the way he did.
Er, yes, it could be exactly that – coincidence. Plus the fact that Tommy is 66 years old, which, in most people’s view, would make his announcement entirely understandable.
This claim was followed up by the Labour Party launching an internal inquiry to identify the whip whom Jim Devine fingered:
Inquiry? If Jim Devine fingered the whip in question, then there would be no need for an inquiry. If he refused to name the whip, then what would be the point of an inquiry? It couldn’t possibly come to any conclusion about the whip’s identity, any more than you can identify unnamed MPs who brief to journalists.
Conciidentally that was also the day (February 10th) that John Ward suggested Tommy McAvoy may be the whip;
First of all, who’s John Ward? Oh, he’s a blogger? Well, why didn’t you say, then? Case closed…
Ward doesn’t offer any evidence at all to support his conclusion that it was Tommy, other than because he’d eliminated some of the other serving whips at the time. And his in-depth knowledge of the whips is rather exposed anyway when he says that Helen Jones “may terrify the bejesus out of most Labour MPs”. Hardly a description that a single Labour MP would recognise.
Iain then dredges up some well-worn stuff about Tommy’s property purchases in London, almost as if, in some way, that linked him to Devine. Which it doesn’t. At all. In any conceivable way.
But as far as investigative or intuitive journalism goes, this is the “best” bit”:
Finally, and as an aside, I’ve noticed of late that suggestions for friends on Facebook have been throwing up a significant number of Labour MPs. It made me wonder if they were setting up pages as part of their re-election campaigns.
If it is for re-election why did Tommy McAvoy set one up if he was retiring anyway?
You see what he did there? “It made me wonder if they were setting up pages as part of their re-election campaigns.” It made him wonder? And if a piece of information causes a Tory blogger to wonder about the possibility of something, then that is evidence, is it? “If it is for re-election…” If. IF!
Iain clearly doesn’t understand either the Labour Party or parliament itself. Why should he? He’s neither a Labour Party member nor an MP (yet). Many Labour MPs choose to go through the mandatory reselection process which occurs during each parliament for one of three reasons: they want to stand again; they haven’t made up their mind about whether to stand again and want to keep their options open; or they intend to stand down but would prefer to announce closer to the election.
I was surprised to discover that Tommy is even as old as 66 – he’s certainly a very young-looking 66 – but who can honestly blame him for wanting to stand down after 23 years as an MP and 13 years as a government whip?
The claims Iain makes are entirely unfounded and unjustified. They are gossip, nothing more. And to suggest, with a nod and a wink, that Tommy has somehow been pressed by the party into standing down against his wishes is nothing more than a smear against a good man about whom Iain Dale knows nothing.
























Wednesday 28 October 2009 at 5:02 pm
Equality is a measurement. It has no inherent morality and can be appallingly unfair.
It is often applied simplistically.
Fair is always fair.
Wednesday 28 October 2009 at 5:08 pm
I don’t know the man, but I must say, his name would make a great Scottish expletive.
Scrivens!
Wednesday 28 October 2009 at 5:37 pm
This is another strange affair.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article6893765.ece
That has cost many lives thanks to Labour. Do you have any comments on this instead of muck raking.
Wednesday 28 October 2009 at 5:58 pm
I’m not sure I like even the remotest possibility of sharing my country with primitives who choose to institute a set of rules which condemn women to explicit servitude, homosexuals to death and Jews to extinction.
Still. That’s yer multiculturalism, innit?
Wednesday 28 October 2009 at 6:07 pm
Stern is described as an “expert” on global warming. In fact he is just a bureaucrat who knew & still evidently knows virtually nothing about it except that this professional bureaucrat has been given a cushing living & guaranteed media coverage for any inanity he wishes to spout.
“Sir Nicholas Stern made a revealing comment in his OXONIA lecture of
January 2006: “in August or July of last year, [he] had an idea what the
greenhouse effect was but wasn’t really sure”. It seems that, starting
from a position of little knowledge of the issues, he has swiftly espoused the official view …” http://www.staff.livjm.ac.uk/spsbpeis/WE-STERN.pd... page 4
Presumably the government knew he was both ignorant & accomodating when they hired him for the job. Yet further proof that global warming is a deliberate lie & there is not a single politician who is not a wholly corrupt fascist parrasite who claims to believe in it. am glad to hear you are not among them Tom.
Wednesday 28 October 2009 at 6:26 pm
Many people in this country are already ‘green’: they don’t run a car or have unnecessary appliances, are economical with gas and electricity and don’t jet off abroad. It’s called being poor.
The poor have already embraced the eat-meat-as-a-treat lifestyle although they prefer chips and curry sauce to tofu and lentil burgers. Some have embraced the eat-as-a-treat lifestyle. They’re called OAPs on state pensions who have to choose between paying for heating or food.
Wednesday 28 October 2009 at 6:57 pm
You aren’t muck raking Tom, and unsurprising that a tory bufton troll suggests you are.
The Tories who adopted Liz Truss can make prats of themselves, and I see no reason why Anyone should desist from comment. It is not a secret, and unsurprising that the Bufton tendancy, who are less than keen on Chameleon take up arms to point to this valse profane.
Thus Sir Iain Dale, listed on Wiki as an official in Dave Davis’ failed Leadership Campaign vs Chameleon has obtained the former leading Tory’s opinion. Funnily enough Derek Conway, who also Used to be listed by WIKI as an official in Davis Leadership campaign has Not been asked to give his opinion, despite having been a Tory Whip in the Major days – Chief Whip I seem to recall. That is a political scandal, and There’s More!
http://quietzapple-musing.blogspot.com/
Sir Iain has not been disposed to reveal his links to Conway & Davis on the thread which makes clear this obscure pot at Chameleon mind . . .
Chameleon/Ashcroft are drawing up some juicy shortlists . . .
As the Late Quentin Hogg qua Lord Hailsham might have said:
“Are there no adulterers on the opposition front benches or the South West Norfolk Conservative Association, and, if there are, should Chameleon insist that they all put their hands up?”
I wonder if this Norfolk seat’s Cons candidacy will be re-advertised?
Wednesday 28 October 2009 at 7:03 pm
I wonder where “jay” can find tofu cheaper than steak mince from any standard supermarket?
What are you giving them Tom? Lidl soma?
Wednesday 28 October 2009 at 7:13 pm
In view of the Lies told by the Press about Tom’s colleagues like Tom Watson
http://www.tom-watson.co.uk/2009/10/the-sun/
The Dully Mail, one of the worst (whose sister “paper” was successfully sued for libel by the same MP) might not a period of modest introspection be appropriate from Tory Trolls with nothing to do?
They truly seem to imagine that they make a useful difference.
Have you thought of setting some sort of test?
Wednesday 28 October 2009 at 7:16 pm
Most sensible folk now take the view that reminding us all of our services Now obviates the Nov 1 type rule. (There were other similar ones)
Quite right too.
Wednesday 28 October 2009 at 7:20 pm
sad to read some of this.
Equality before the Law is important, and to aim at universality is a fine social goal.
Equal height, or wealth are unreasonable goals.
But . . . I suspect that some of your posters are looking to Prometheus as a role model.
Wednesday 28 October 2009 at 8:17 pm
This is an absolutely unbelievable affair. It certainly wouldn’t happen to a man; no Tory is saying Mark Field should step down.
Just as bad as the sexism is the fact that obviously some Tories on the ground are just as keen on policing everyone else’s private life, and just as eager to cast the first stone, as they always were. Back to Basics obviously never went away.
I think anyone who want to judge someone else in this way for something in their private lives should first expose themselves to a full examination of their own private life. If there’s to be a public sex inquisition, let’s start with those who want to be inquisitors.
Wednesday 28 October 2009 at 8:39 pm
@Junican…
I wouldn’t wish to appear overly pedantic, but in your post criticising the political classes for not knowing their sciences, and that “even a dope like you knows”, I’d note you repeatedly referred to water as HO2.
Clearly, since you repeated the claim several times, it wasn’t a simple typo, so I thought Id come along with the stupid stick and beat you senseless a few times, as water is H₂0…
Wednesday 28 October 2009 at 8:45 pm
Maybe they didn’t bother “Googling” her, because they asked her, in the old fashioned way – to her face, about her past.
I don’t get the sense that this is about adultery; more about trust, judgement and a lack of candour on the part of Liz Truss.
Wednesday 28 October 2009 at 8:59 pm
Off Topic Tom
I’ve just submitted my self assessment. Can you tell me if MPs get 6 months overrun in which to submit their expense details to Parliament?
Wednesday 28 October 2009 at 9:13 pm
Oh, and interestingly, in the case of this prospective de-selection, and the failed de-selection of Eleanor Laing, Shadow Justice Minister
http://bit.ly/2nBjzI
despite the pfafff about Open Caucuses & Open Selections & Open Sackings it was the local Tories who decided to let this Cap Gains Tax “avoider” stop on. NOT other local residents who might have taken a less generous view.
After all the screaming about poor Hazel Blears, whose principal sin was the similar but cheaper one might have expected Mr Chameleon to show some leadership and throw bricks . . But no, not this time.
He needs his Cameron Flopsies to balance the ticket – wether they pretend their nanny is a clerk, or fall out with their local tories over their bonking – so she can stay.
Jolly misleading show.
Wednesday 28 October 2009 at 9:30 pm
I don’t believe it is about their trust in Liz Truss: it is about wether they are trustworthy themselves, and looks like not.
Unsurprising.
Wednesday 28 October 2009 at 9:42 pm
Yer actual racist loons are usually keen on making out that their imaginations are the real deal – eh?
I think the Archbishop of C has said that muslims should be allowed to follow their law on marriage, as orthodox jews are – I disagree and think that the orthodox jewish law should no longer be supported in UK courts either.
http://url.ie/2pz6 Lord Toby Harris on Lucy James’ important new Quilliam Foundation pamphlet vs BNP lies about muslims http://url.ie/2pz7
But then, why advise when they can troll without reason?
Saturday 20 February 2010 at 2:49 pm
You are getting very touchy Tom. whats the matter with you, anyone would think your seat was at risk. I think Iain was just asking questions about it all and wondered what it was all about, and was asking as such. none of us understand the workings of the labour party as its so secret so its no wonder questions are asked. Your party just appears to want to provoke the Tories. you will find out what you want when you have called the election and not before.
Saturday 20 February 2010 at 3:39 pm
Dont make me laugh. He’s going cos in a couple of months he wont be on the payroll as a Govt Whip.
Saturday 20 February 2010 at 3:50 pm
Touchy?
Unsure how Sir Iain has the nerve to use the word. His irascibility has become a cultivated feature of his blog for a fair while.
While I’ve had posts rejected elsewhere I don’t recall any other blogger having the folly to decide that repeated rudeness was his best option, as he did.
Saturday 20 February 2010 at 5:51 pm
Tom,
This squib perhaps reveals a willingness of Tory strategists in London (though perhaps not in Scotland) to cooperate with the SNP in squeezing Labour in urban Scottish strongholds.
Labour appears hard to budge in Ruthergen but in other seats like Kilmarnock and Loudon the race will be much tighter.
A few extra gains for the SNP at Labour’s expense increases David Cameron’s options in the event of a hung parliament.
But such cooperation between political foes of course undermines the Union and does nothing for the fortunes of the Scottish Conservatives, currently neck-and-neck with the SNP according to one poll.
There has been little or no criticism of the SNP in Tory publications like the Spectator despite the alleged trafficking of influences involving top figures and David Cameron appeared to go through the motions in criticising the SNP’s conduct during his recent visit.
How ironic if such low-level cooperation (if it does exist) eventually blossoms into a compact leading to a ‘velvet divorce’ between Scotland and England with a Tory England taking the lead in bidding farewell to its northern partner.
Tom Gallagher
Saturday 20 February 2010 at 6:45 pm
I have no idea whether a whip gave Devine that information or not. Neither have you. But if you’re going to make accusations against a specific individual, you should have more than just a hunch to back it up.
But if something is going on here, I assume you would say the same about John Maples and other Tory MPs who waited until after Christmas to announce their retirements? No? Thought not.
Saturday 20 February 2010 at 7:32 pm
Does it help if I say that the Tories certainly don’t inhabit the morel high ground on questions of sleaze and corruption.
One only has to look at the Wintertons to know this.
I voted Labour in 1997 because I expected something better.
That’s NOT what I have experienced over the last 13 years.
It has been a LOT worse when it should have been so much better.
Saturday 20 February 2010 at 9:40 pm
Devine has said on record that he was told he could do what he did by a labour whip. If you have no idea whether a whip gave Devine that information or not that rather suggests that you are doubting his word and his honesty. Isn’t that just what you are accusing others of regarding Tommy McAvoys statement?
OK to doubt the word of some MP’s but not others.
Sunday 21 February 2010 at 8:54 am
If Tommy has favourite films, and is leaving, might he share them with us in your Desert Island Flix feature, please?
The MPs who will stand no more have been an unjustly reviled tranche, their tastes no less interesting for all that.
Monday 22 February 2010 at 2:58 am
The mistake you have made Tom isn’t you haven’t yet realised that Dale peddles in gossip,not journalism.He’s also and unabashed hypocrite, God knows why you are on ‘any’ terms with such a pillock.
Tuesday 23 February 2010 at 9:31 pm
As the likelihood of an overall Labour Majority and fourth government increases a few labour MPs, who may have intended to continue in opposition are deciding to go.
I suspect that this is because they fear that the next labour Government will suffer still more from not only the nasty party’s desperation, but also the billionaires on whom many countries are closing in on, and the media which desperately wishes to assert itself on behalf of the anti Iraq war faction and the aforesaid billionaires.
Not pretty, and those who remain, and those who are newly elected, will need the same steel as Brown.
Tuesday 23 February 2010 at 11:15 pm
Nice Fisk btw, suitable target.
Friday 26 February 2010 at 2:55 pm
This is clearly a classic case of Iain Dale not getting it.
You are correct he doesn’t understand the Labour Party nor Parliament for that matter. He has failed to become an MP for a fourth time. (perhaps because he doesn’t understand what politics is all about except for the Westminster bubble). Perhaps he should get in the real world instead of firing accusations against people.
I think that his analysis is a product of his intellectual incapability to understand politics.
I have to admit Iain’s comments on this blog post made me laugh
“And I could name several Labour MPs who would love to smear him after the treatment he has meted out to them.”
My advice is simple – If you are in a hole, stop digging!
Leave a comment