La Hain (2008)
Joe Blogs, voter or the view from Old Palace Yard
So, what about the resignation of Peter Hain? This is who he is to me: An erstwhile anti-apartheid campaigner who was a minor member of Gordon Brown's Government and who committed the rather clumsy error of not declaring all the donations he received for his deputy-leadership campaign. That he has had to resign now is not indicative to me of a Government that is in crisis, lurching unsteadily from one disaster to another, much less of a Government that I would now no longer consider voting for.
In fact, may be I am just very naive (very possible) but I think it is a shame that the Hain matter could not have been settled in-house by the Electoral Commission, rather than getting the police involved.
The one thing that mitigates against this wish, however, is the 'think tank' (The Progressive Policies Forum) that Hain set up. If I remember the reports aright, it has no office, no staff, no documents... it looks very much like to me that it was set up to obtain money under false pretences with donors being encouraged to think that they were contributing to an intellectual organisation when in reality it was going to the election campaign. That would be a mean thing to do.
Yesterday, Gordon Brown said that it was right to wait until the Electoral Commission had given its verdict over Hain's sin of omission before deciding on his future (Source). I think he was right and I respect him for doing so. But if it was right to wait, it was certainly wrong for him to accuse Hain of incompetence a few days ago. Brown qualified what he said by adding that "Mr Hain made a mistake he had 'readily admitted to' but there had been 'no corruption'" (Source). This only inspires in me a "Well that's alright then!" attitude. Brown should either have deflected any questions, given his full support to Hain or sacked him.
Good leaders do not criticise their staff to outsiders. If there is criticism to be made, it stays within the organisation. If I may bring football into the post, how often does Alex Ferguson - the most successful manager of the Premiership generation - criticise his players in public? Never. The team comes first. Always. Criticising the players ultimately only demoralises them and leads to further trouble for the leader - as ex-Newcastle boss Sam Allardyce found out not long after he said that he was not happy that his future was in the hands of his players (Source).
Speaking of ultimate things, how does the Hain affair affect me politically? As you might have guessed from the above, it doesn't. As scandals go, Hain's is unimpressive and rather dull. So long as he does not re-enter the Government this side of an election (assuming he is not convicted of any offence), it will drift from my mind. In short, if Gordon Brown was worth voting for before Hain's resignation, he is still worth voting for now.
By way of a coda, political blogger Guido Fawkes is claiming the credit for Hain's resignation. Read the full story at his blog here. The blog is mightier than the sword!
So, what about the resignation of Peter Hain? This is who he is to me: An erstwhile anti-apartheid campaigner who was a minor member of Gordon Brown's Government and who committed the rather clumsy error of not declaring all the donations he received for his deputy-leadership campaign. That he has had to resign now is not indicative to me of a Government that is in crisis, lurching unsteadily from one disaster to another, much less of a Government that I would now no longer consider voting for.
In fact, may be I am just very naive (very possible) but I think it is a shame that the Hain matter could not have been settled in-house by the Electoral Commission, rather than getting the police involved.
The one thing that mitigates against this wish, however, is the 'think tank' (The Progressive Policies Forum) that Hain set up. If I remember the reports aright, it has no office, no staff, no documents... it looks very much like to me that it was set up to obtain money under false pretences with donors being encouraged to think that they were contributing to an intellectual organisation when in reality it was going to the election campaign. That would be a mean thing to do.
Yesterday, Gordon Brown said that it was right to wait until the Electoral Commission had given its verdict over Hain's sin of omission before deciding on his future (Source). I think he was right and I respect him for doing so. But if it was right to wait, it was certainly wrong for him to accuse Hain of incompetence a few days ago. Brown qualified what he said by adding that "Mr Hain made a mistake he had 'readily admitted to' but there had been 'no corruption'" (Source). This only inspires in me a "Well that's alright then!" attitude. Brown should either have deflected any questions, given his full support to Hain or sacked him.
Good leaders do not criticise their staff to outsiders. If there is criticism to be made, it stays within the organisation. If I may bring football into the post, how often does Alex Ferguson - the most successful manager of the Premiership generation - criticise his players in public? Never. The team comes first. Always. Criticising the players ultimately only demoralises them and leads to further trouble for the leader - as ex-Newcastle boss Sam Allardyce found out not long after he said that he was not happy that his future was in the hands of his players (Source).
Speaking of ultimate things, how does the Hain affair affect me politically? As you might have guessed from the above, it doesn't. As scandals go, Hain's is unimpressive and rather dull. So long as he does not re-enter the Government this side of an election (assuming he is not convicted of any offence), it will drift from my mind. In short, if Gordon Brown was worth voting for before Hain's resignation, he is still worth voting for now.
By way of a coda, political blogger Guido Fawkes is claiming the credit for Hain's resignation. Read the full story at his blog here. The blog is mightier than the sword!
