Tory MP's Arrest: 'Stalinesque'

Cal wrote:No, but 3000+ new laws & offences since the New Labour Experiment gained control of the judiciary. New laws & offences = new powers of arrest. I rest my case.

You drew a causal relationship between new laws and this case, but haven't shown there is one, have you?

Cal wrote:judiciary

You do know that the judiciary isn't the same thing as the executive, legislature and police force, right?

The judiciary is still quite fierce about its independence: no real shortage of grumpy old bastards in the legal profession, even if I say so myself.

This is absolutely horrific. The secret police arresting a politician for doing his job. Nice.
Iain Dale has some good questions regarding all of this and makes some good points:
1. As an Opposition Health and Trade & Industry Spokesman, Robin Cook built his parliamentary reputation as the receiver of leaked government documents. Why is Damian Green's behaviour any different to Robin Cook's?

2. Many journalists - David Hencke and Robert Peston being two examples - have built their journalistic reputations on being receivers of Whitehall leaks. Why is Damian Green's behaviour different to theirs to warrant an arrest?

3. Why are Ministers allowed to leak with impugnity? Why aren't they covered under the same law which was used to countenance Damian Green's arrest?

4. What did Jacqui Smith know and when did she know it?

5. Did she instigate the police investigation? If so, was it motivated by a desire to give a warning to future whistleblowers?

6. Why did the Serjeant at Arms lay lown like a puppy and have her tummy tickled by the Met?

7. Did she consult Mr Speaker before giving permission for the Met to search Damian Green's Commons office?

8. Why was Damian Green kept locked up for nine hours and reportedly only questioned after seven? (as was reported last night).

9. If the job of an Opposition spokesman is not to hold the government to account, then what exactly is it?

10. If Damian Green has been arrested, why haven't the journalists to whom he gave the stories been treated in the same manner?

11. What role did the security services play in this. Have they been monitoring Damian Green?

12. Why is the media not trumpeting the virtues of free speech and the rights of whistle blowers?

13. Why aren't Labour bloggers as outraged by Green's arrest as they would have been over Sarah Tisdall or Clive Ponting? (I will be doing a separate post on this later).

14. Why were counter terror police used to search Green's four home and office premises? He was arrested under a so-called Common Law, not an anti terror law, as I understand it.

15. Have the Police impounded Damian Green's various computers? If so, how is his constituency casework corresponded safeguarded? How can any MPs' constituents now believe that their casework is totally confidential?

http://iaindale.blogspot.com/2008/11/da ... ed-to.html

Lenty wrote:6. Why did the Serjeant at Arms lay lown like a puppy and have her tummy tickled by the Met?

That's one heck of a question. Pix pls.

It takes a special mind to take the arrest of a Tory MP and turn it into an attack on Labour...

No government minister was informed, no powers introduced by a Labour government were utilised. Jackie Smith didn't initiate the investigation, a senior civil servant did, saying "leaks of sensitive information over an extended period risked undermining the effective operation of my department... ministers were not involved in the decision to seek police assistance or in the subsequent investigation and were only told of the arrest after it had occurred."

Gorrable wrote:It takes a special mind to take the arrest of a Tory MP and turn it into an attack on Labour...

No government minister was informed, no powers introduced by a Labour government were utilised. Jackie Smith didn't initiate the investigation, a senior civil servant did, saying "leaks of sensitive information over an extended period risked undermining the effective operation of my department... ministers were not involved in the decision to seek police assistance or in the subsequent investigation and were only told of the arrest after it had occurred."

Every autocrat needs a useful idiot. Well done.

Cal I think the point is that you are beginning to see conspiracies where there are none.

I bet if it was a Muslim MP he would have got 28/42 days before being released.

Peter Crisp wrote:Cal I think the point is that you are beginning to see conspiracies where there are none.

Anyone can find conspiracies if they look hard enough, my gripe is that Cal nearly always points the finger of blame at the police, assuming that the collective 140,000 officers in this country are all evil maniacal dictators who take pleasure in tormenting society with fascist control and abuse of power!

As one of that 140,000 I am always defensive of the police. We do a difficult job in an ever more difficult society and yet we only ever get negative media coverage (sadly Cal I think you believe a little too much of what you read and hear).

The police are simply tools of the government. There are perhaps a handfull of police who can actually influence anything. The rest of us just do our job to the best of our ability to try and safeguard people who obviously dont appreciate what we do.

Green's defiant statement came at the end of a day in which nine counter-terrorism officers conducted simultaneous searches at four locations: Green's constituency office and home in Ashford, his office in the House of Commons and his London home.)

These are the worrying bits. I believe MP privilege is meant to protect this sort of area (I think the speaker would have to "ok" the search of his office in commons, don't know about t'other), and constitute/MP correspondence is also meant to be confidential....(unless I've missed something)

Gorrable wrote:ministers were not involved in the decision to seek police assistance or in the subsequent investigation and were only told of the arrest after it had occurred."

Then why the strawberry float was Boris Johnson told beforehand? He alone, hmmm? Yeah, they'd really go to the London Mayor and not talk to anyone from the Government of the day. What a load of patent bollocks.

Peter Crisp wrote:Cal I think the point is that you are beginning to see conspiracies where there are none.

We'll see. Private Eye are going to have a field day!

Peter Crisp wrote:Cal I think the point is that you are beginning to see conspiracies where there are none.

I liked the one where all the women conspired to "take all the men away from him" best.

Cal wrote:

Gorrable wrote:It takes a special mind to take the arrest of a Tory MP and turn it into an attack on Labour...

No government minister was informed, no powers introduced by a Labour government were utilised. Jackie Smith didn't initiate the investigation, a senior civil servant did, saying "leaks of sensitive information over an extended period risked undermining the effective operation of my department... ministers were not involved in the decision to seek police assistance or in the subsequent investigation and were only told of the arrest after it had occurred."

Every autocrat needs a useful idiot. Well done.

Hard as it is for you to admit, the government had nothing to do with this. A civil servant - Sir David Normington, to be precise - complained to the police, the police investigated, the police arrested Damian Green under a law that's been around for longer than Gordon Brown's been alive.

If you're not going to answer any of the points I've raised, please feel free to ignore this post rather than feeling obliged to post another meaningless one-liner.

FatDaz wrote:

Peter Crisp wrote:Cal I think the point is that you are beginning to see conspiracies where there are none.

Anyone can find conspiracies if they look hard enough, my gripe is that Cal nearly always points the finger of blame at the police, assuming that the collective 140,000 officers in this country are all evil maniacal dictators who take pleasure in tormenting society with fascist control and abuse of power!

As one of that 140,000 I am always defensive of the police. We do a difficult job in an ever more difficult society and yet we only ever get negative media coverage (sadly Cal I think you believe a little too much of what you read and hear).

The police are simply tools of the government. There are perhaps a handfull of police who can actually influence anything. The rest of us just do our job to the best of our ability to try and safeguard people who obviously dont appreciate what we do.

I got no beef with the police. But there was a raid a few doors down the other day and I asked the policeman what was going on and he didn't even acknowledge my existence, let alone give a response. Talk about community relations, I just wanted some cool gossip...

So the Official Secrets Act 1911 is a Gordon Brown creation, is it?

Eighthours wrote:

Gorrable wrote:ministers were not involved in the decision to seek police assistance or in the subsequent investigation and were only told of the arrest after it had occurred."

Then why the strawberry float was Boris Johnson told beforehand? He alone, hmmm? Yeah, they'd really go to the London Mayor and not talk to anyone from the Government of the day. What a load of patent bollocks.

Oh, and David Cameron, the Speaker of the Commons, and the Serjeant at Arms of the Commons also knew beforehand.

Hexx wrote:

Green's defiant statement came at the end of a day in which nine counter-terrorism officers conducted simultaneous searches at four locations: Green's constituency office and home in Ashford, his office in the House of Commons and his London home.)

These are the worrying bits. I believe MP privilege is meant to protect this sort of area (I think the speaker would have to "ok" the search of his office in commons, don't know about t'other), and constitute/MP correspondence is also meant to be confidential....(unless I've missed something)

Ah. The Speaker did ok this...and apparently he better have had "good reason" or will face calls for his resignation.

Eighthours wrote:

Gorrable wrote:ministers were not involved in the decision to seek police assistance or in the subsequent investigation and were only told of the arrest after it had occurred."

Then why the strawberry float was Boris Johnson told beforehand? He alone, hmmm? Yeah, they'd really go to the London Mayor and not talk to anyone from the Government of the day. What a load of patent bollocks.

Look into the resignation of Ian Blair and you'll see the kind of relationship Boris has fostered with the Met.

Eighthours wrote:

Gorrable wrote:ministers were not involved in the decision to seek police assistance or in the subsequent investigation and were only told of the arrest after it had occurred."

Then why the **** was Boris Johnson told beforehand? He alone, hmmm? Yeah, they'd really go to the London Mayor and not talk to anyone from the Government of the day. What a load of patent ********.

[/quote]

Ministers weren't involved in the decision. Being involved and being informed are very different things. I still doubt they were informed, but if they were it's irrelivant.

Granted, if a minister was informed they could say 'this is a bad idea', but would you really prefer it if ministers went around stopping arrests because they dissagree with them? Would you be making the same argument if we were talking about preventing the arrest of a Labour MP? Once the police have decided they're going to arrest someone, it would be completely improper for the government to attempt to stop them.

Or are you arguing that the government suggested or in some way encouraged this arrest? Because that's an entirely different argument, one which there's literally no evidence for.

Cal wrote:Every autocrat needs a useful idiot. Well done.

No call for that, really. Poor form.