It is, of course, possible that there is much more to the Green Affair than we currently understand. Perhaps it will emerge that Green was accused of bribing or threatening the official involved, or perhaps there will be some other such matter come to light. But I shall proceed here on the assumption that the case is as it seems: namely that an opposition politician has been arrested, had his Commons office and home searched, and has been held and questioned for nine hours, because he was accused of embarrassing the government.
It seems to me that the press is far too relaxed over the Green Affair. I thought it absolutely astonishing that the arrest of an Opposition politician for embarrassing the government merited just a couple of minutes coverage on last night's BBC 10 o'clock News, even though journalists had been aware of the story for hours (e.g. it was noted on ConservativeHome from 8.45pm). So that's how it goes?? "And in other news, a man has taught his dog to bark in time to Beethoven's Fith, a 100 year old woman still carves her own hedge sculptures, and an Opposition MP has been arrested for embarrassing the government."
This morning's Today programme was no better. Phil Woolas was permitted to draw an analogy between Green's arrest and the questioning of MPs over the cash-for-honours affair. This is absurd. The issue in the Green case is not that people are sceptical that he committed the crime of which is is accused (a potential source of scepticism in the cash-for-honours case). Rather, it is general astonishment that it turns out to be a crime for an opposition MP to embarrass the government!
Assuming, as I say, that the prima facie appearance of the Green Affair eventually proves correct, there seem to me to be two broad categories of possibility here. In one set, Jacqui Smith should resign. In the other, Gordon Brown should resign. I don't see a third set of possibilities.
The two broad categories are this. Either:
- The police are not allowed to just arrest opposition MPs for embarrassing the government, search their houses, and, qua agency of the Executive, enter and search their Commons offices (in an act of constitutional violation ranking, in Britain, just above abolishing the monarchy and suspending elections) except (if even then) on explicit instruction or authorisation of a senior minister.
- The law, as it stands, does indeed allow opposition MPs accused of embarrassing the government to be arrested and have their homes and Commons offices searched, without any senior political authorisation.
If the first situation is true, then Jacqui Smith should resign, either because the police did follow procedure and she or one of her ministers authorised this, or else her chain of command is so out of control that the police arrested an opposition MP for being embarrassing without first obtaining the proper authorisation, or (perhaps worst of all) it isn't permitted at all for the police to arrest opposition MPs and search their Commons offices for being embarrassing, even with senior ministerial authorisation, but they are so out of control that they did it anyway.
If the second situation is true, then Gordon Brown should resign, because a government of which Gordon Brown was part introduced laws for which Gordon Brown voted and that he has not promised to repeal, allowing the police to arrest opposition MPs for embarrassing the government.
Which is it? Assuming that the characterisation of Green's arrest - that it was for nothing more substantial than embarrassing the government (a category within which I include releasing information received, without duress but in violation of the official secrets act) - is correct then I see no third option. I demand a resignation here, and believe the Conservative Party as a whole should demand a resignation. Whom is the government offering?