Tories in Trouble Already?

[Pogues Mcgogues]

So with PM Cameron's Director of Communications Andy Coulson looking to be investigated again for tapping into people's phones in a not so distant previous life, William Hague (quite wrongly) having rumours spread about him of having an affair and promoting the person he had it with to a top job, crazy cuts on the horizon, 'cancer targets' looking already to be unable to achieve and talks of Lib Dem defects and a fresh unease in the party over the coalition, are the Tories in trouble already so soon into this new government?

Personally I think the Hague thing shouldn't realy matter, and it's probably just gutter tabloid nonsense, but it seems weird to me that such a fresh government is already beggining to show major cracks so soon in other areas.

[Snufflebutt]

So with PM Cameron's Director of Communications Andy Coulson looking to be investigated again for tapping into people's phones in a not so distant previous life, William Hague (quite wrongly) having rumours spread about him of having an affair and promoting the person he had it with to a top job, crazy cuts on the horizon, 'cancer targets' looking already to be unable to achieve and talks of Lib Dem defects and a fresh unease in the party over the coalition, are the Tories in trouble already so soon into this new government?

Personally I think the Hague thing shouldn't realy matter, and it's probably just gutter tabloid nonsense, but it seems weird to me that such a fresh government is already beggining to show major cracks so soon in other areas.

Edited September 6, 2010 by Snufflebutt

[llcoolphil]

So with PM Cameron's Director of Communications Andy Coulson looking to be investigated again for tapping into people's phones in a not so distant previous life, William Hague (quite wrongly) having rumours spread about him of having an affair and promoting the person he had it with to a top job, crazy cuts on the horizon, 'cancer targets' looking already to be unable to achieve and talks of Lib Dem defects and a fresh unease in the party over the coalition, are the Tories in trouble already so soon into this new government?

Personally I think the Hague thing shouldn't realy matter, and it's probably just gutter tabloid nonsense, but it seems weird to me that such a fresh government is already beggining to show major cracks so soon in other areas.

[eFestivals]

So with PM Cameron's Director of Communications Andy Coulson looking to be investigated again.

Isn't it 'strange' how Labour didn't see the need to investigate further when they held the reigns of power and could have ordered on, particularly seeing that not a jot of anything new has come out about Coulson since they lost power?

It's nothing to do with them being no less controlled by Murdoch than the Tories of course.

As Murdoch so recently told your previous glorious leader who goes by the name of Teflon Tony when he said Rupert owed him favours and should delay Mandleson's book being published, "I don't owe you, you owe me".

Edited September 6, 2010 by eFestivals

[pink_triangle]

I don't get the Hague 'thing'.... he seems to be being let off the hook remarkably easily. Why did Myers resign? Why the ridiculous press statement referencing miscarraiges et al??

[eFestivals]

Coulson - the real story is actually about two foreign newspapers having a bitch. Go away and look it up.

hmmmm .... you don't want to go believing everything that an ex-Sun editor is putting about in favour of the man he still works for.

Hague - Internet nonsense - and why even raise it in a thread about tories in trouble if you think it's nonsense?

"Internet nonsense"? Hmmmmm.

How often does someone who is hired as a driver suddenly turn out to have such great foreign policy skills that they can get promoted to be special advisor to the Foreign Secretary?

And how often does a Foreign Secretary claim that the honeymoon suite is the perfect twin-bedded room for him and his advisor, and a money saving too - when there's far cheaper twin rooms available in that hotel?

The story about Hague and Seb Coe playing "horses" while dressed in just their underpants in a Chelsea gym isn't one of those "internet rumours". And of course, this is a part of the very normal exercises that gyms suggest their members do.

[Snufflebutt]

Wasnt it just hagues way of indirectly saying I have sex with a woman, Im not gay.

[Steve P]

True. Though it was an extremely crass statement.

To me it sounded like, 'Look I'm not gay, I can't be because I have sex with a woman. Don't believe me? Well, my wife was actually pregnant though had a miscarriage'

A horrendous statement imo, and if I was his wife I'd be the most angry, her situation is being used as a political football.

He didnt need to say anything. If poiticians commented on all romours about them then they would get no work done.

[llcoolphil]

hmmmm .... you don't want to go believing everything that an ex-Sun editor is putting about in favour of the man he still works for.

[llcoolphil]

A horrendous statement imo, and if I was his wife I'd be the most angry, her situation is being used as a political football.

He didnt need to say anything. If poiticians commented on all romours about them then they would get no work done.

[eFestivals]

And you don't want to believe everything Labour tell you about it not being a witchunt for Coulson. This all happened when they were in power - if they weren't happy with the police investigation then, why didn't they do somethiong about it?

Oh, I know.

As for your last question, the answer is Rupert.

If we were to go through the skill sets of political advisers in the last government we would find identical stories.

While it's impossible to rule out anything from that bunch of shitsters, that's a new one on me.

Care to give some examples?

Because we know this for fact

We do - it's been confirmed by the hotel.

Ive played Rugby with a straight lad who got an erection whilst getting changed after a match. That make him gay?

Nope, not by itself. It requires a knowledge of his sexuality. Likewise, so does a definitive statement about Hague's sexuality.

But that doesn't alter the fact that the rumours about Hague are very long-standing and are far more than merely "internet rumours" - there's some certain strange goings-on that have been known about for many years (some going back over 20 years) that would make all but the most sexually naive person question whether he's as straight as he says he is.

[Snufflebutt]

Rubbish. While I agree that his statement was way over the top in terms of the talk of miscarridges, there was no way he could say nothing.

[RABun]

The fact that he may or may not be gay and having an affair with his driver is none of our business. The only pertinent point is whether the man was appointed as an advisor because he is qualified or otherwise capable of advising or if he was appointed to the post for some other reason not related to his suitability to the role.

As for whether Hague is gay or straight or having an affair or not i don't care and i dont really see it as relevant.

[eFestivals]

And anyway, lets just say the rumours were true - would having an affair have brought the Foreign Secretary down? Don't think so in this day and age.

Yep, they would do - because he's denying it.

As anyone who has been vetted will know, the security services don't much care what criminal or other dodgy acts a person might have got up to in the past, but they want to know of it else that person is open to being blackmailed.

So from that I'd suggest that if Hague has denied it during his vetting but the security services have definitive knowledge of him having had gay affairs they'd be straight to Dave Moron and demand that Hague was sacked. Moron would have to go thru with it (tho perhaps not immediately if they wanted to save Hague a bit of face), because the impact back on him from refusing that request to sack Hague for security reasons would bring down his govt (and you can be sure that the security services would make that happen).

So, that leaves Hague being as straight as he claims, or the security services don't have the proof they'd need, or he's fessed up to them privately and they're happy to run with it.

[eFestivals]

As for whether Hague is gay or straight or having an affair or not i don't care and i dont really see it as relevant.

It is relevant cos of the potential blackmail element - see my post above.

[Snufflebutt]

The fact that he may or may not be gay and having an affair with his driver is none of our business. The only pertinent point is whether the man was appointed as an advisor because he is qualified or otherwise capable of advising or if he was appointed to the post for some other reason not related to his suitability to the role.

[eFestivals]

Its only where theres a financia aspect do I think it would have mattered. They are actually saving the taxpayer money by sharing a room

Not when they book - as they did - the hotel's most expensive suite they're not!!!

[Snufflebutt]

Yep, they would do - because he's denying it.

As anyone who has been vetted will know, the security services don't much care what criminal or other dodgy acts a person might have got up to in the past, but they want to know of it else that person is open to being blackmailed.

So from that I'd suggest that if Hague has denied it during his vetting but the security services have definitive knowledge of him having had gay affairs they'd be straight to Dave Moron and demand that Hague was sacked. Moron would have to go thru with it (tho perhaps not immediately if they wanted to save Hague a bit of face), because the impact back on him from refusing that request to sack Hague for security reasons would bring down his govt (and you can be sure that the security services would make that happen).

So, that leaves Hague being as straight as he claims, or the security services don't have the proof they'd need, or he's fessed up to them privately and they're happy to run with it.

[eFestivals]

Excellent post, I take your point. Assuming he's straight, that begs the question, why go on about the miscarriage? A denial would surely have been enough. The miscarriage aspect I think gives this story legs - just the fact it is so personal. We'll get journalists taking about this for a while yet - Nick Robinson said that he'd never seen a statement like it in politics.

There's two angles to it I'd guess...

1. he protests too much, to try to cover up for him being gay.

2. he's been falsely accused, and that's hurt him more than he'd hurt if he'd done something he'd rather others didn't know, and led to such an extreme response.

As I've said above, there's been rumours going around that he's gay for over 20 years, so it might just be the case that he's had enough of them. He's not bothered to ever respond to them until now as far as I know.

Actually, I've just thought of something where he's done similar before. If you care to remember, there was all that "I drink 20 pints in a night, I'm hard I am" thing (that's not quite what he said) after he was accused of being pissed on a half or something ... and in that case, the claims he made about his drinking were soon proved to be total bollox.

And so, on the basis of that, I reckon he'll "retire" () and "go back to being a successful businessman" before xmas. Despite the fact that he's only a 'successful businessman' via exploiting his political contacts; it's easy to be that success when you're corrupt.

[Snufflebutt]

Actually, I've just thought of something where he's done similar before. If you care to remember, there was all that "I drink 20 pints in a night, I'm hard I am" thing (that's not quite what he said) after he was accused of being pissed on a half or something ... and in that case, the claims he made about his drinking were soon proved to be total bollox.

And so, on the basis of that, I reckon he'll "retire" () and "go back to being a successful businessman" before xmas. Despite the fact that he's only a 'successful businessman' via exploiting his political contacts; it's easy to be that success when you're corrupt.

[llcoolphil]

Oh, I know.

As for your last question, the answer is Rupert.

[llcoolphil]

Actually, I've just thought of something where he's done similar before. If you care to remember, there was all that "I drink 20 pints in a night, I'm hard I am" thing (that's not quite what he said) after he was accused of being pissed on a half or something ... and in that case, the claims he made about his drinking were soon proved to be total bollox.

[Ed209]

Not when they book - as they did - the hotel's most expensive suite they're not!!!

Edited September 6, 2010 by Ed209

[Pogues Mcgogues]

This is the point. The last government were happy to be in Rupert's pocket so there is no point whining about it now. There isn't even any new information of substance. It was unbelievable that Coulson knew nothing about it before and it is equally unbelievable now.

[eFestivals]

I was thinking of the current labour leadership contenders' pasts. David Miliband has never done anything outside of politics and has no idea how ordinary people live their lives - but was a political adviser then coincidentally managed to secure a safe labour seat. Ed Balls (and ok he does know a bit about economics) had to quit as Brown's adviser for being a c*nt, got a pocket load of cash for nothing then secured a safe labour seat. It's the whole jobs for the boys system. We dont know what Hague was being advised on but most of us have people in our lives who we trust will tell us when we are being a dick etc. How many labour MPs empoyed their wives because they were the best person for the job but didnt test that in open selection. And Harriet Harman's husband seemed to do very well out of being married to harriet when he was looking for a winnable seat.

These things are very very different to Hague's 'advisor'.

The Milliband's have degrees in a relevant subject, and worked for Labour in advisor's jobs before Labour were in power; same for Balls. So while them as MPs is defo is the result of who they know, it's a fairly standard route to becoming an MP. Dave Moron ended up as PM via a very similar route, and while that route is worthy of its own criticisms it's a long way from the situation with Hague and his driver-turned-foreign-expert.

And again with Harman and Droman, while it's dodgy as f**k (and made a candidate against the constituency's wishes, contrary to Pogo's statement that that doesn't happen), again that's a long-used route via which people end up as MPs, and it's not like Jack doesn't have long-standing publicly-known Labour leanings. Lady Astor anyone?

None of these are remotely like a "driver" suddenly getting promoted to be advisor and permanent sidekick to the Foreign Secretary - they're in a completely different ball-park, playing a totally different game.

20 years of rumours and no definitive concrete evidence tells me it's because there is no definitive evidence - you cant keep that sort of stuff quiet for that long. And he will have been vetted before this appointment and, no doubt, several times before and, again, you cant keep repeatedly beating a vetting procedure - especially when you are going to get the cabinet job Hague has.

Hmmmm ... while I agree that 20 years of rumours makes it less likely, Hague wouldn't be the first in a public position who managed to keep something like that private, so by itself it doesn't rule anything out.

As for the vetting, who knows what differences there are between what he says in public and what he revealed during vetting? Given that he'll have been vetted long ago when in far more minor positions, and perhaps brought the security services a blackmailer previously (which would show him as not open to blackmail), then it's certainly possible that he's gay but in the closet but they're not concerned by it.

These things don't of course prove anything towards him being gay, but they do show that it's not possible to 100% rule him out as gay on the basis of those things.

Edited September 6, 2010 by eFestivals