Blair: "Nobody in the Labour Party to my knowledge has sold honours or sold peerages."

On the day that the Mail on Sunday broke new allegations about Cherie Blair the Prime Minister took part in a wide-ranging interview on today's Politics Show.  The full transcript is here.

He consistently refused to answer questions about the loans-for-peerages row and again refused to put a timetable for his departure.   He did, however, confirm that he intended to still be Prime Minister at the time of next summer's G8 summit:

"JON SOPEL: So we come back to the G8 next year, you'll still be there as Prime Minister?

TONY BLAIR: I've made it clear all the way through, I carry on doing the job and so I look forward to next year's G8 of course, but er, in the end the most important thing is to do the job."

Related links: 65% do think that Labour raised money by offering peerages for loans poll finding and WhenWillBlairGo.com texting competition.

Comments

[Matt Davis]

Blair: "Nobody in the Labour Party to my knowledge has sold honours or sold peerages."

The British people: Ha hah ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ... .. .... . . . . . . . . ......

[EdR]

"I did not have sex that woman."

[EdR]

Or even "with that woman".

[Henry Whitmarsh]

to my knowledge

That's a lawyers answer, not a politicians answer. My God, it must be true.

[Annabel Herriott]

Bliar will hang on by his finger tips until the nulab conference nextyear, and pack his bags early 2008, so we had better stop squabbling, andstart working together, because there may well be a snap election before the regular time. Voters do not like divided parties.

[Chris]

Jeez, we have finallly found that Blair can become totally un-photogenic! Looks like he's puckering for kissing the behinds of his back benchers in the pic!

[David Belchamber]

"...so we had better stop squabbling, and start working together, because there may well be a snap election before the regular time. Voters do not like divided parties".
Well said, Annabel. I agree that we might have a GE sooner than we think and then we will need to have a manifesto in place which will satisfy the party right across the tory spectrum and one that could well mop up a lot of the Ukip, BNP and Green votes.
ConHome produces a lot of useful comments; can we not pull together the ideas that gain most support into some coherent framework?

[Henry Mayhew]

David Belchamber you are so right. This Conservative / UKIP / BNP split is crazy. There just aren't enough right-wing votes to go round. (Please let's not have the argument about whether BNP are truly right-wing, they are soaking up Tory votes.

[Jack Stone]

You have finally shown your true colours Henry. Anyone who contemplates getting into bed with the BNP is a racist. Fact, no matter how much that might hurt. Surely its about time those who speak up for the BNP were banned from this site.

[Disillusioned]

The BNP have more in common with the far-left than the Conservatives.

[Sally Roberts]

I agree! The day we have anything whatsoever to do with the BNP is the day I leave the Conservative Party for good!

[Chris]

Jack, so you support the curbing of free speech now? I don't belong to the BNP, vote for the BNP or agree with the BNP (Though sometimes they do have good ideas). I do not however believe that we should start banning people we don't agree with, its hardly demonstrating that we are a party willing to tolerate other people's beliefs.

[David Belchamber]

Let's be clear about the BNP. Nobody here is supporting it; I merely suggested that broadly drawn conservative policies might attract some voters away from the BNP, just as Ukip being really a one-issue party at the moment, I reckon the tories, as a mainstream party, could well attract voters away from Ukip at the next GE.
We will need every vote we can get.

[David]

"We will need every vote we can get."

I disagree. We don't need racist votes. If that's what it takes to win again, I'd rather stay in opposition.

[YorkshireLad]

Surely it's a case of winning back those Conservatives who left us for BNP/UKIP, rather than specifically going after "racist votes"?

I don't accept that everyone who votes BNP is a racist. Frankly if someone votes for any minority party whether left wing or right wing its probable the reason is because they've lost faith in the big 3.

[rallie]

The BNP should have no place in british society, we do not need or want racist policies or supporters. However what we need to do is remove the excuses for people to vote for those scum. If people believe that a conservative government will not be racist either banning all immigrants or whatever madcapp thing nulab will protray us, or be like nulab and not talk about, and just let all and sundry come to this country we shall have no fear from the BNP.

[Disillusioned]

"I disagree. We don't need racist votes. If that's what it takes to win again, I'd rather stay in opposition."

Tbh that’s a patronising and simple analysis of BNP voters. To simply characterise BNP votes as ‘racist votes’ is a typical simplification. Most BNP voters themselves are not fanatical white supremacists, a lot are not even particularly racist.

People vote BNP because they’re fed up of professional politicians from the main three parties and they’re tired of political correctness and double standards. ‘Loony left’ policies like banning England flags or Christmas trees or whatever greatly help the BNP and special treatment for certain groups alienate otherwise decent people making them turn to extremism. It’s an unfortunate fact but in some deprived areas there are genuine cases of certain minorities being given preference – such cases are then exaggerated and blown out of proportion by those with a sinister agenda in the BNP. But the underlying fact remains that there are some genuine gripes of BNP voters. BNP voters are usually working class doing low paid work – their wages have not improved much in recent yrs – if we consider why that is one factor is that there is an unlimited pool of cheap labour (immigrants). The market is artificially distorted and low wages are kept low due to unlimited immigration. (And immigration keeps people on unemployment/incapacity benefit, if people won't end up much better off financially stacking shelves in Tesco who can blame them for staying on benefits?)

Housing is a big problem too, while in many instances it’s not the case there is a perception that minorities are given preference – this helps the BNP. And in some cases the perception is justified.

Mayor Ken Livingstone hugged and invited to London Muslim cleric al-Qaradawi who advocates policies that make the BNP look pretty tame – I don’t believe the BNP advocate executing homosexuals and Jews...

The BNP are made up of nasty people, that much is true but most of their voters are people who’ve been failed by all three political parties – although most of all failed by Labour. (Prior to ’97 the far right was not really even spoke of). But simply branding BNP voters as racist and ignoring them is in the long run only going to fuel the far-right, legitimate concerns on housing and immigration need to be considered or they will be abused by racists. (And that's exactly what the BNP are doing; exploiting legitimate problems).

[malcolm]

I'm beginning to wonder if it matters now whether the police charge Levy etc or not.The public is I think convinced that Labour has sold peerages and is generally a corrupt party.The task facing our party is how can we show the public that we can be better? Not an easy task but one thing we can do is take the power to create peers away from the PM.This is something I think we should do soon.
Rather suprised that the BNP should raise the ugly heads on this thread.They usually take votes from Labour not us.Apart from their views on race it is difficult really to characterise the BNP as 'rightwing ' in any way.Personally I would rather not wish to be associated with them in any way and would certainly not wish to form any form of 'rightwing alliance' with them.

[Annabel Herriott]

When you look at the BNP contingent arriving at a count, they dont look like ex Tories, but they DO look like very old LABOUR!

[James Maskell]

"Voters do not like divided parties"

Perhaps, but Im sure they dislike more parties which have poorly thought out policies made by a small group of people at the top with a lack of depth in terms of thinking behind the policies. A General Election cannot be fought on the issue of the environment...we just cant do it.

[Chris D]

"Perhaps, but Im sure they dislike more parties which have poorly thought out policies made by a small group of people at the top with a lack of depth in terms of thinking behind the policies. A General Election cannot be fought on the issue of the environment...we just cant do it." James@23:46
A rather factually incorrect statement. I was under the impression that we had several policy reviews on going at the moment.
Its a pity that you have already decided to dismiss any future policies as "lacking in depth" and only about one subject.

[YorkshireLad]

Exactly ChrisD, we've got to be patient and wait and see what the review groups come up with.

[Matt Davis]

There is not going to be an early election and anyone who thinks so is just plain naive I'm afraid. After all what political party in their right mind is going to call an election if they don't have to when their popularity is at an all time low and they are bitterly divided over their leadership, a division that an election would show up all too clearly. Right now, whilst the media are distracted by Labour sleaze and the evidence of their failing policies is exactly when we ought to be entertaining internal debate and working out who we think we are and what we are going to offer to the electorate, we have plenty of time, which is probably as good thing seeing as how policy formulation is taking us a while.

[Serf]

what political party in their right mind is going to call an election if they don't have to when their popularity is at an all time low

I agree. The idea of a snap election is predicated on a New Leader bounce. If Our Dear Leader resigns and is replaced, and if Labour's poll numbers go up, then there is a chance.

The best way we can stop it happening is to help keep the Conservative Party poll numbers above those of Labour.

Then in 2010, a completely morally and intellectually bankrupt Labour Government, together with a totally demoralised Labour Party, tired and unloved, will slump to a terrible election defeat.

[David Banks]

What a sweet day that will be . Speaking of being morally and intellectually bankrupt , i'm a bit alarmed to see some of the comments above suggesting a cosier relationship to the UKIP & BNP 'fringe of a fringe' and the ( frankly , awful )suggestion that the BNP have some good ideas sometimes. We have plenty of excellent ideas of our own, an attractive, modernising leader and an increasing useless government. We don't need to be looking under stones for the occaisional BNP vote to win , we can do it on our own merits.

[ChrisD]

Can any of the main political parties "afford" a GE in the next couple of years?
I just feel that all the bad publicity over the "loans for peerages" scandal must be making a few people reluctant to donate large sums at the moment.

[Chad]

"Can any of the main political parties "afford" a GE in the next couple of years?"

That's why they will get the state funding fairy godmother and wipe out their debts in a wave of her wand. Magic!

[Chris D]

Chad, I was under the impression that state funding would mean a considerable smaller amount of money being allowed in a GE campaign. I have not seen anyone suggesting that the tax payer would wipe out previous debts which run into millions of £'s

[Tory Solicitor]

Asking whether political parties can 'afford' a generel election is putting things the wrong way round.

There is no holy decree that political parties must spend millions on GEs. If they can't afford it, they will have to do it on the cheap. and that includes us.

State funding is not the answer.

[David Banks]

If the state ( by which we really mean the taxpayer)funds parties it means that some of our hard earned cash is given to loony groups like the BNP. Just remember guys , say no to state funding.Let political adherents fund their parties and leave the taxpayer alone
And is it me , but in the photo above, has Blair just bit a lemon?