I cannot share the outrage among my fellow Liberal Democrats at the questioning of Ed Davey over his actions as the minister responsible for the Post Office
Those actions are bound to be of interest to the media. Ed is a party leader and one of the few ministers to have held that role in the relevant period who is still at the forefront of politics.
If you doubt that, read the names of the others: Ian McCartney, Alan Johnson, Douglas Alexander, Stephen Timms, Gerry Sutcliffe, Jim Fitzpatrick, Pat McFadden, Lord Young, Norman Lamb, Jo Swinson, Jenny Willott, Jo Baroness Nevill-Rolfe, Margot James, Andrew Griffiths, Kelly Tolhurst, Paul Scully, Jane Hunt, Dean Russell, Kevin Holinrake.
I wonder how many of them you would recognise if they sat down next to you on the bus. So Ed is bound to be of interest to journalists reporting the Horizon scandal.
Nor do I understand the determination that Ed should not apologise for his failure to challenge the Post Office's story.
While doing so he could fairly point out he was the first minister to meet campaigners and that until a whistleblower from Fujitsu appeared on Panorama in August 2015, there was no hard evidence with which to challenge the Post Office's account. By then the Coalition was over, so the journalists need to talk to the Conservatives if they want to find out why nothing was done then.
No doubt Ed and the people around him could put it better than that, but I fear his current defensiveness is not serving him well.
Some fear the headline "Ed Davey Apologises", reasoning the media will come back for more. But I suspect the headline "Ed Davey Refuses to Apologise" has been more harmful.
If we want something to say on Horizon beyond a defence of our leader's actions, I suggest we think about what Andy Burnham has been saying about the "unelected state" and read the Andrew Rawnsley article in the Observer tomorrow: 'The abuse of unaccountable power is at the wicked heart of the Post Office scandal.'
6 comments:
But if Ed Davey apologises he just yields himself up as a scapegoat, which then lets the people who should be held accountable off the hook.
You're right, Jonathan. He should make a clear straightforward apology (and the other LD for.er ministers, too), and challenge Labour and the Tories to do the same. But much more rides on this for us that for any other party. Moat of the public only ever know a handful of things about the Lib Dems. Often these are oversimplified so much as to be unfair, but that is the environment we have to work in.
I do not think you have really considered what you mean by "his failure to challenge the Post Office's story". Obviously Ed Davey might have an idea of what more he might have done, but if he was given consistent responses about the security of the software, it is not clear how he could have challenged the story. More important is that Ed Davey is fully transparent of what he was told, when he was told and by whom.
There are difficult issues here. It would be highly controversial to propose that ministers (the executive) should interfere with judicial processes and similarly contentious to expose civil servants who are unable to defend themselves. Should a minister apologise for not doing either of these actions?
I think we have to accept that Ed Davey is not the most agile or adept of politicians in interviews. When I voted for him, I had thought that with his experience he would be rather better. Unfortunately I am not sure we have anyone who is very good in the face of a hostile professional interviewer.
This is typical Libdems naivity, most journalists are simply paid promoters of Political Parties or special interests. The Tory ones hate us, The Labour ones hate us. Any sign of weakness on our part will only encourage further attacks.
This is going to be the dirtiest Election campaign ever & the attacks are just beginning, we need to toughen up.
I think there is perhaps an element of "re-fighting the last battle" among Ed's advisers in trying desperately to avoid any apology on video that looks/sounds like Nick Clegg's apology for tuition fees, for fear it will be used in Tory attack ads as well as parody.
But a better brief was needed than "whatever you do, don't say sorry".
Personally, I would have gone with some variant on "I don't think it right to say sorry because that not what I am feeling - I am still full of anger at the lies that were told by the Post Office and Fujitsu to the postmasters, to the courts, to me, to my officials and to Parliament. As John Lyndon once put it "Anger is an energy" and we need to direct that energy at getting faster and full compensations for the victims of this injustice, and brining prosecutions against those who lied repeatedly."
Correct.
Post a Comment