« The winners and losers from Fawkes v McBride | Main | Boris says Labour has lost the moral authority to govern »


McBride should be prosecuted for Malfeasance (Misconduct) in Public Service. Tom Watson, as Minister for the Civil Service should be asking the Police to investigate.

WHO says that no other Minister or official was involved in the emails - as Gordon insists. Him? McBride? Watson? We are entitled to an independent investigation - and the Police should be doing it.

Hope he doesn't get Jack Stone to compose the letters for him - or do the proof reading!

I would point out that Brown in his letter to Gus O'Donnell called the claims 'unsubstantiated' rather than 'untrue'. This strikes me as a somewhat intriguing choice of words.

"One gets the feeling that Mr Brown is sorry but sorry for being found out rather than for any hurt his operation has caused".

I believe that you have caught the overwhelming view of NuLab's recent legal innovation, "The Court of Public Opinion"

I may be missing something, but a quick trawl around the Labour Websites seems to show that they have been poleaxed by all this.

The lights are on - but nobody's home

So is Brown saying that what McBride did "did not break any rules"?

Notice how it's never Labour that's the problem, but the rules?

Dodgy donations? We need to change the rules.
Cash for peerages? Change the rules.
Expenses fiddles? Change the rules.

This shouldn't be allowed to wash. Brown isn't sincere in the slightest. While he was composing his little tribute to Ivan Cameron, straight out of the Jo Moore playbook, he had this scumbag McBride working on the only thing Brown has ever shown sincerety over- smearing and trashing his opponents.

What's all this about then?

McBride is also guilty of a criminal offence of sending offensive material by electronic means!!

Boudicca is also spot on. How on this earth can Brown say what he has said? There has to be an Independent Enquiry!

Brown is the most insincere person in public life. He is the King of spin. his whole political life has been one of finishing off his enemies by smears.

Goodness me I hope Cameron does not let him off this massive hook?


There are a lot of bar stool lawyers on this site.

I am just doing some research into Nadine Dorries. It seems she has been involved in a few scandals herself.

Wasn't there an allegation about her using taxpayers money for electoral campaigning purposes?

Courtesy of RedBox:-
Dear Gus

I am writing about the Code of Conduct for Special Advisers, and the proposals I want to make to tighten this up.

I am assured that no Minister and no political adviser other than the person involved had any knowledge of or involvement in these private emails that are the subject of current discussion, and I have already taken responsibility for acting on this - first by accepting Mr McBride's resignation and by making it clear to all concerned that such actions have no part to play in the public life of our country. I have also written personally to all those who were subject to these unsubstantiated claims.

Mr McBride has apologised and done so unreservedly. But it is also important to make sure such behaviour does not happen again. Any activity such as this that affects the reputation of our politics is a matter of great regret to me and I am ready to take whatever action is necessary to improve our political system.

I would therefore now like a more explicit assurance included in the special advisers Code of Conduct that not only are the highest standards expected of political advisers but that the preparation or dissemination of inappropriate material or personal attacks have no part to play in the job of being a special adviser, just as it has no part to play in the conduct of all our public life.

I also think it right to make it a part of the special advisers contract by asking our political advisers to sign such an assurance and to recognise that if they are ever found to be preparing and disseminating inappropriate material they will automatically lose their jobs.

I think you will agree that all of us in public life have a responsibility to ensure that those we employ and who are in involved in our parties observe the highest standards.

Like the overwhelming majority of figures in public life across the political spectrum, I entered politics because of a sense of public duty and to improve the lives and opportunities of those less fortunate than me. My undivided focus as Prime Minister is on acting to make Britain a fairer, safer and more prosperous nation and, in particular, on guiding the country through the current economic difficulties. The public would expect no less and would also expect the highest possible standards from all their politicians and all those who work for them.

Yours sincerely

So that that then! He must be joking.

Lord Heseltine was spot on. There should be a return to the jobs being done by the civil service. I hope Cameron follows that suggestion with a promise to the people that he will not have political appointees in every department-as Labour- that job will be returned to an IMPARTIAL Civil Service.

joshuwahahahahaha, it's quite legit for you or devil's kitchen to post that if you wish. Publish and be damned. It's not alright for the Priime Minister and Minister for the Civil Service to direct a civil servant to use public resources to orchestrate a politically-motivated smear campaign, all at the taxpayers' expense.

Once again, socialists can't distinguish between party and state.

If Brown thinks this story is over, he can think again.


What are you talking about? You are making some pretty serious allegations against the Prime Minister, are you going to say sorry? perhaps you could write a letter to him....

I understand your over excitement with this scandal, after all it does detract away from the fact that Mr. Cameron does not have any policies, but you really do need to calm down dear. Mr Brown is sending out nice letters to those involved.

Bit of an update for you too.

David Cameron says he welcomes Mr.Brown writing these letters. Therefore the matter is closed. End of scandal, now go open the rest of your easter eggs before Easter is over.

Tim, that initial story has now changed. No apology, just regret about "unsubstantiated" claims.

Comment from PB.com
"To demonstrate my point, from the thesaurus on my Mac:

unsubstantiated rumors unconfirmed, unsupported, uncorroborated, unverified, unattested, unproven; unfounded, groundless, baseless, without foundation, unjustified.

1 these suggestions are totally untrue false, untruthful, fabricated, made up, invented, concocted, trumped up; erroneous, wrong, incorrect, inaccurate; fallacious, fictitious, unsound, unfounded, baseless, misguided. antonym correct.

Which would you expect to see in an apology?
by glw April 13th, 2009 at 5:45 pm"

The wording puts me more in mind of the tone of Maguire on his blog over the last 24 hours.

I think that the victims of this smear operation deserve better from the PM, much better.

And Brown's attempt to undermine the current code of conduct is yet another attempt to spike the real story. He is directly responsible as the Minister in charge for Damian McBride's behaviour. He knows that.

The behaviour of Brown and his team has been appalling since this whole story started breaking on Friday. Brown has really nailed his sticky mitts to the current mindset of those running his operation at No10. His very worst traits have been on clear display.

joshuwahwah, thanks for your concern. I still don't think a few insincere letters is enough to atone for directing civil servants to do political dirty work at the taxpayers' expense.

If Brown cared so much, why didn't he fire McBride on Friday evening when this broke and send the "apology" letters then?

Both Sky and the BBC have reported the PM's spokesman making it clear these letters do not contain a whif of an apology. They are 'explanations', most likely in the Brownly fashion of 'I'm sorry you were upset, however, the most important thing is that no rules were broken'.

Does anyone know if David Cameron said sorry for this?

Please read the whole thing before replying.

August 5th 2008 The Times

A Tory parliamentary candidate who bombarded his Liberal Democrat rival with hate mail and vandalised the party's Watford headquarters was facing jail today after admitting more than 70 offences of criminal damage and harassment.

Ian Oakley, 31, of West Drayton, northwest London, admitted mounting a two-year hate campaign against Sal Brinton, who he considered his main rival to defeat the sitting Labour MP.

Oakley admitted making silent phone calls to her home and sending lesbian magazines and letters addressed to "Sal Bitchton" to her workplace.
Related Links

The candidate, who resigned from the Conservative Party after his activities were discovered, also slashed tyres and wrecked shutters at the party's local offices.

His campaign of harassment was motivated by a “desire to change the political landscape in Watford" after he was chosen to be Tory candidate in 2006, St Albans Magistrates Court heard.

Donna Rayner, for the prosection, said he targeted Ms Brinton because he regarded her as his "main rival" to unseat Claire Ward, who had retained the seat for Labour in 2005.

“Mrs Brinton had lesbian magazines sent to her home address and her work address," she said.

“Campaign material was sent to her office which had been defaced with such phrases as ’Go back to Cambridge, you evil bitch’ and ’Suck my c*** Sal Brinton’.”

His extraordinary campaign later broadened to include anyone associated with the Watford Lib Dems. From February to May this year, Oakley hounded Russell Wilson, a Watford borough councillor, with letters accusing him of paedophilia and daubed graffiti on his home branding him a "scum scum perv".

“Letters were in fact sent to his neighbours stating he was a member of a child-abuse ring,” Ms Rayner said.

“A further letter said he was a ’sick c*** and child abuser’ was sent and torn Liberal Democrat leaflets were put through his door.

Brown set up the whole of this poisonous snakepit paid for by us Tom Watson, Draper doing Labourlist, Campbell, Mandelson the whole b***y lot should be sacked forthwith. Brown construc ted this horror - Admit it and resign too.

Can someone alert Tim or Jonathan to the post@18:29.

Why would someone need to alert them to that post? it is a fact, the truth, what you scared of? it was only a question. I asked if David Cameron said sorry for this scandal, that's all.

Have just done so, ChrisD!

Oh joshuwahwah you poor love..or is it Dolly Draper? This horror show of a Prime Minister is a farcical figure who's leading a horrific government. As we know, he is pathologically incapable of apologising but i'd suggest you get used to the idea that in no more than a year or so this pathetic government will be gone..just get over it!

Look guys, come on fairs fair. This is a fact. It says in the opening paragraph that he admitted the offences. Are you now saying that this was OK? surely this was actually worse because he carried it out.

I was merely asking if David Cameron gave an apology seeing as he has been so insistent on Gordon Brown issuing one. You can't have one rule for one and one for another.

I have already stated that what has happened this weekend was a disgrace and I am deeply disappointed with the Labour party. But I do believe in fairness. And if there is to be fairness then surely Mr Cameron should have said sorry for this incident, if not it is pure hypocrisy.

Thanks for alerting me to joshuwahwah's 1829 comment. It's close to being off topic but it's not irrelevant. The behaviour of our Watford candidate was a disgrace and we probably should have apologised for it but it's a different order of things from Brown having such a close adviser get up to what has been revealed this weekend.

joshuwahwah, you can publish that if you want as it has two attributes that McBride/Brown's smears don't- it's true, and it wasn't paid for by the taxpayer.

You'll have to do better than that on here. Is that the best your paymasters can feed you?

Thanks Sally, my trusty old PC was playing up a bit there, so not able to do so.

Thank you Tim.

I only asked a question and produced an article to back it up. In light of your reply. I agree that it is a slightly different kettle of fish. However what he did was twice as bad because he carried out the acts. Also, you say that he did not apologise. Do you in light of this think that Mr. Cameron asking Gordon Brown to say sorry is a little bit hypocritical? And before I get slated, I think GB should say sorry as this was a disgraceful event.

In reply to Cleethorpes....

'oshuwahwah, you can publish that if you want as it has two attributes that McBride/Brown's smears don't- it's true,'

Your getting yourself into a bit of a tangle today. Are you saying that the story in the Times is true as opposed to a story that might not be true? which story are you referring to?

PS: I have no paymaster from the Labour party.

Oh you deluded soul..you just don't get it. The account you give above is of a distasteful personal feud between two candidates. The behaviour of the Tory candidate is reprehensible and I would like to think that the respective Conservative Association apologised to the person concerned. Did the Tory candidate work closely with David Cameron? NO! Was he one of his special advisors? NO! Did he work where Cameron lived? NO! If the answers were YES then you would absolutely expect Cameron to apologise because there is absolutely no way in the world that if he had a head and eyes, he wouldn't know what was going on...and I assume you accept that Brown knew therefore what McPoison was doing. Furthermore, are you trying to say that Brown has apologised? Please..he'd foam at the mouth if he had to utter the word 'Sorry'..he's pathologically incapable of doing it. He has eventually decided to write letters of regret. Gordon Brown is a joke.. a sad joke and we are all on the receiving end. I mean I almost feel sorry for him when he says that by a) accepting McPoison's resignation (geez thanks Gordon..dead good of you!?) b) by making it clear to all concerned that such actions have no part to play in the public life of our country, he believes he has "taken responsibility for acting on this" ..so let me get this straight..Brown does the obvious and then states the obvious and he feels this is him 'acting'..pathetic!

Tim, I agree with your position. I simple thought that the content of the post crossed the line on what is acceptable in the comments of this site.
As we have discovered this weekend, some stuff is simple unprintable in public. I think that the poster could have made his point very clearly without resorting to posting that bile.
Most of us are well aware of the disgusting behaviour of the individual involved. I think the enormity of this story is lost on him.

The case of the Tory candidate in Watford has already been dealt with and is known to have truth about it. As for the article on Devil's Kitchen about Nadine Dorries, I don't care whether it's true or not- that's between the person who published it and Nadine Dorries. You, The Times and Devil's Kitchen are NOT being paid for by the taxpayer.

What matters is that in this case, Gordon Brown has directed a civil servant to come up with a smear campaign against opponents, and gave him the run of the Number 10 bunker in order to achieve it.

In terms of your paymasters, I'm prepared to believe you don't have any in the Labour Party. Then again, that's what Dolly Draper said.

Was he a member of the Conservative party?YES. Was he selected to represent the electorate? YES. Was he selected by the Conservative party? YES. Were the Conservative party led by Mr. Cameron at the time? YES. Did he commit acts that were worse than conspiring to tell crude stories VERY MUCH YES.

As I have said, I think what has happened this weekend was a disgrace. And I think GB should say sorry. All I am saying is that it seems hypocritical that the leader of the Labour party has to say sorry for two people conspiring to start a website with crass stories. In contrast to the leader of a party whose parliamentary candidate admitted to 70 criminal charges.

"Among Mr Brown's suggested revisions to the code is the proposal that special advisers should not be allowed to use official resources for party political purposes."

But they are temporary civil servants who specifically are excluded from the rules of impartiality - they are almost bound by their job description to use public resources for party political purposes. The boundary between Party and State is still deliberately blurred. Labour purloins from the public purse for party propaganda. Finish, Alan Milburn is the prime example which should have been attacked a lot more vigorously, these SpAds are just an extension of the principle.

As for joshwawa, "I am assured" in the second para (the first para says "writing about the Code of Conduct - no admission of anything) does not constitute acceptance of the offence to me. It indicates rather he did not press too far in his inquiries into the matter.


Agreed. joshuawahwah could have made his point without publishing the offensive material itself. He did fortunately edit it somewhat - otherwise I would have overwritten it.

joshuwahwah, the Watford candidate was not running his smear campaign on the specific orders of the Party leader and was not being paid public funds and using public equipment and resources to do it.

Now come on Tim. My post at 1829 was close to the bone. This however by Cleethorpes needs editing.

'What matters is that in this case, Gordon Brown has directed a civil servant to come up with a smear campaign against opponents, and gave him the run of the Number 10 bunker in order to achieve it.'

Joshuwahwah, I find it amusing that you and others of your political persuasion trot out the 'no policy' line, whilst simultaneously accusing Cameron of plotting the end of the NHS, the closure of all the country's state school and probably next week will allege he's planning to bull-doze all inner-city areas or something

So which is it? No policies or dubious allegations?

Are you suggesting that Gordon Brown only hired Damian McBride to make the tea at 10 Downing Street?

So is Nadine still considering legal action?

If she is I hope there is an opportunity for us to support her through this site.

Browns mob have gone too far this time, something needs to be done whether he makes an apology or not.

'So is Nadine still considering legal action?'

I don't think she will get anywhere now. Although I hope she investigates if she can. The Defamation Act 1996 S.(2) allows for a retraction and an apology.

This needs editing:
"What matters is that in this case, Gordon Brown has directed a civil servant to come up with a smear campaign against opponents, and gave him the run of the Number 10 bunker in order to achieve it.'"

Alright then,

"What matters is that in this case, Gordon Brown has directed a Government PS to come up with a smear campaign against opponents, and gave suitable direction and resources in the Number 10 bunker to a suitable SPAD in order to achieve it and such campaign to be run in a hands-off manner.'

Was he a member of the Conservative party?YES. Was he selected to represent the electorate? YES. Was he selected by the Conservative party? YES. Were the Conservative party led by Mr. Cameron at the time? YES. Did he commit acts that were worse than conspiring to tell crude stories VERY MUCH YES.

Without having the time to investigate, I think you'll find that individual Labour candidates have in the past actually been caught trying to rig elections through misuse of postal ballots, which is worse still. However, even that did not cause a national scandal. That's because political parties are large organisations and, regrettably, it is impossible to completely prevent all bad behaviour.

The difference is that this happened in the heart of govt, by someone close, and well known, to the Prime Minister personally. If McBride was at all competent or intelligent (and if he wasn't, he shouldn't have been in his job in the first place) he must have understood Brown's personal attitude towards such behaviour, much better than any of us. And knowing this, he went ahead with these emails. What does that tell you about how Brown himself behaves in private, and the example he himself must be setting?

Furthermore, this is not just one aberration. On the contrary, it is just another example - albeit an extreme one - of Labour's foul habit of continually vilifying and abusing anybody who disagrees with them, rather than engaging in anything approaching honest or reasoned debate. The only real difference is that on this occasion they were caught red-handed just making stuff up. But everyone knows, even the people who in their hearts don't want to admit it, that Labour in principle doesn't have any problem with this, and does it all the time when it thinks it can get away with it.

I just want to clarify something for joshuwahwah.

McBride = worked directly for Gordon Brown, under his nose and under his instruction in Downing Street

Oakley = nutjob candidate who had absolutely no association with David Cameron other than his party membership

One deserves an apology, one clearly doesn't. See if you can work that one out.

PLEASE Everyone leave joshuwahwah alone. He's been sent by the remains of the team to distract attention from Brown's total lack of morals in employing Watson, McBride, Draper, - the whole department (which one IS joshuwahwah?)

There's a "vipers' nest" - Tam Dalyell says so. He adds "how do you employ a man like McBride in the first place? Do you think that Jim Callaghan would have given such a man the time of day? No.
"Or, for that matter, Harold Wilson? Or John Smith? Certainly not."

Mr Dalyell added: "I am very upset on behalf of the Labour Party, and so are a great many other members of the party. If I was a Labour MP at the moment, I would be as sick as a parrot.

"There's a "vipers' nest" - Tam Dalyell says so. "

And at the heart of that Vipers nest is Gordon Brown, for make no mistake none of this would have happened without Gordon Brown wanting it to happen.

It was Gordon Brown who brought McBride into No10.

And as McBride was cc'ing he emails to Wheland, Drapper and Warson MP, one must presume they were in on loop.

Why was Whelan, who was supposed to be working for Unite getting cc'd these emails, he wasn't 'placed' at Unite was he?

Draper's website was being funded by Unite.

Unite weren't a supporter of Brown were they?

Tom Watson MP was given his post at No10 for his services to Brown in getting rid of Blair.

So maybe not so much a vipers nest but a spidersweb with the spider at the centre of operations, Gordon Brown, for no one other than Brown has the means to organise all this.

joshuwahwah proves what most of us have been saying. This will not end until the bunker boys and girls -paid from the public purse- are placed in the ranks of the unemployed.

This joshuwahwah- is obviously one of those labour supporting bunker people, juveniles with briefing notes.

He says it was wrong what McBride said then brings out old allegations about a woman who has been libelled. I do hope she takes proceedings against McBride and calls Brown as a witness. In a court of law he would crumble, especially if the right lawyer is employed!

I do not bother about bar room lawyers, young joshuwahwah, I just go to the relevent legislation!
Now go back to the kindergarten and be a good child.

"Boxwallah", have a look at this


Now from this I see that Richard Harrington is now the PPC for Watford and NOT Ian Oakley.

Now someone who has been on CH for longer than myself please confirm to me that

1 Ian Oakley is no longer the PPC for Watford or for that matter for any other seat?

2 I read that he plead Guilty to the Offences cited. What punishment did he receive from the Court?

David Cameron has been very strict indeed towards Prospective Conservative Candidates who have in some way transgressed and even MPs such as Derek Conway and MEPs such as Den Dover have been punished.

I have also personally experienced the dirty tricks of Lib-Dems at Local Council Election level. "Let he that is without sin cast the first stone".

All of this does not in any way mitigate or excuse the activities of Mc Bride or the Labour officials holding his lead.

and let's not forget that Gordon Brown paid a civil servant to make these lies up, granting him the use of Number 10's resources after having specifically hired him for the purpose and directing him to do so.

"Now come on Tim. My post at 1829 was close to the bone. This however by Cleethorpes needs editing.

'What matters is that in this case, Gordon Brown has directed a civil servant to come up with a smear campaign against opponents, and gave him the run of the Number 10 bunker in order to achieve it.'" - joshuwahwah

Sounds like fair comment by Cleethorpes Rock.

Tom Dalyell should stop giving vipers a bad name.

As for Brown. It seems he is not man enough to apologise. All he has doneis regret that politics has been given a bad name by unsubstantiated claims.

Who cares? Can we have some policy yet? There's a country to run.

I want an apology from Brown too,for screwing up the Country and my pension

I want an apology from Cameron for selling out conservatism.

In fact a total lack of morals is even more important than conservatism or pensions. People can get policies wrong - and do. But if they are evil at heart they must be got rid of without pity.

That Evil Man is the hypocritical 'son of the manse' for planning all this - Gordon Brown.

@Joshuwahwah 19:27

Your reading of the 1996 Act is somewhat selective - please read it again. It's online by the way!

Cleethorpes Rock,

Everything you have said amounts to "fair comment".


I have access to the Act through Westlaw and I also have a paper copy.

As for all the bunker boy, I am paid by the Labour party etc. I am afraid that is all bull.

If you people cannot see that someone committing 70 serious offences is far worse than 2 people talking about setting up a smear website then I despair.

I have said that GB should say sorry for this disgusting incident. But if you lot (Tim is the exception) don't think that 'Cameron' should say sorry for the cretin in Watford then you are deluded and quite clearly not members of the Conservative party I know.

Eurgh handwritten letters from Brown.

That means they may have contained some crusty bogey bits that dropped from his fingernails...


An offer of amends made under s2 can be refused. Although I don't know the facts in this case, I think that someone might argue/allege that s4 ss3 (a) and (b) applies, don't you think!


As I am not privy to any allegations made by any party then I seriously cannot comment. I was merely stating that an apology can be taken into account. Please do not just look at the act, that is merely a guideline. The main beef can be fond in case law of which I have the time nor inclination to post.

Oh and whilst we are on this whole subject. Wasn't David Davis accused of making smear allegations in 2005 during a leadership campaign. This is an interesting story from the Daily Mail



Perhaps you'd like to quote the cases you are relying on - it looks perfectly clear to me.

"If Brown thinks this story is over, he can think again.2

Exactly my thoughts, it would be tactical lunacy for the Tory Leadership to let this one drop. This case will at least draw something of a line in the Westminster dirt.
The great victory of this spat goes to the blogs and the blogging community.


See Milne v Express Newspapers which confirms my view of s4 ss3 (a) and (b)

The comments to this entry are closed.



ConHome on Twitter

    follow me on Twitter

    Conservative blogs

    Today's public spending saving

    New on other blogs

    • Receive our daily email
      Enter your details below:

    • Tracker 2
    • Extreme Tracker