Boy David: "la la la la! I can't hear you!"

"There will be nothing to stop us this time," muttered Darth Ashcroft as he ordered his minions (aka Davy Cameron and chums) to put in for a topical debate on party funding today. The Gord's down on his luck, the media's saturated with Opposition politicians being sanctimonious all over us, and the Tories are safely on the moral highground: it would be like taking candy from an Ewok. Well, nearly.

In spite of various tame hacks rumbling about "Labour smears" [trans: what "questions of legitimacy of a certain donor" are when raised by the comrades], Rachel Sylvester in the Telegraph has grabbed her light saber and given Lord Vader a bit of a mauling in the Conservatives' paper of choice.

Apart from the fact that it all sounds, well, creepy (who calls their key seat strategy SPECTRE ffs?) she also gives the impression that it's all a bit ropey too. What political party spends nearly £6,000 on bottle openers - or is this a euphemism that Westmonster, in her political naivite, is failing to grasp? Fact is, he's donated £2.6m to the Conservatives but none of them want to answer whether he's actually legally entitled to - in spite of all the grandstanding about cheques for a couple of thou not being registered in the right way.

So, let's get this clear. If Davy's going to be all "the Gord and the comrades are corrupt, they should have known about every last 50p donated to their campaigns!" why's he being so see-no-evil about his largest donor's tax status? Sylvester:

"It is a private matter," was the response of his spokesman. But it isn't. People who fund political parties should live in this country and contribute to the public services they hope to shape. In the current murky climate I don't see why they should be afraid to make a public declaration of that position as well.

According to Cameron it's all about whether the political party MEANT to be evil and opaque in its dealings with the Electoral Commission. Natch, it was bitterness of spirit and a choler of the soul that led the Harperson, Hain, and Wendy to behave as they did over their donations. But any mistakes the Tories make are genuine, well-meant, and unintentional according to Cameron:

All parties do make mistakes. There are innocent mistakes and mistakes of compliance. But Labour's mistakes are of a different order.

As excuses go, are we the only ones who find this a little, well, lame and on a par with the bloke (who has previously lectured on the evils of sin) who subsequently claims when caught that he wasn't shagging around, he just tripped and fell and landed in a ... You know the rest.

Written by Lloyd Shepherd on 4 Dec 2007 10:11 AM. Permalink