Wednesday, April 26, 2006

Charles Clarke's Statement Was an Admission of a Minister Not in Control

Charles Clarke's statement was a prime example of a condemned man who knows his fate. The shortness of the statement was a disgrace. It can't have been more than four minutes long. it contained no new information beyond that he had already given in his various media interviews. David Davis's response was superbly measured and forensic. He asked all the right questions but answer came there none. On past record we know that half the 1000 people released an not deported will have re-offended in some way. If any of these offences were serious, I'll say it again, Clarke's toast. The next 24 hours are going to fascinating.

11 comments:

leon said...

Michael Howard reads your blog! He just asked the question relating to the Newsnight piece last night you mentioned earlier.

jm said...

Surely he's only 'toast' if one of the people released *on his watch* reoffends?

You're not implying that an offense by someone released by Blunkett or Straw should be blamed on Clarke?

Iain Dale said...

JM, yes I am. He is the man who currently holds the position. His government is in power. If he doesn't take responsibility, who should?

dizzy said...

Iain, I reckon he has till the end fo the week personally. Then he will be back in three months replacing John Hutton at DWP. I'm proud of my cynicism.

The Remittance Man said...

Forget about appearing nasty, this is a golden opportunity for the Tories to go for the throat over an issue of genuine public concern.

In fact if they fail to do so (through incompetence or a misplaced desire to avoid "Punch and Judy politics") they run the serious risk of being badly damaged themselves.

Cry Harry and let slip the Rotweilers of War.

RM

Anonymous said...

Any more on this Nigerian in Stockton story that the Lib Dems brought up? Can't be that hard for journalists to check. If its true, Clarke is in more trouble. After all, the PM claimed at PMQ that the system has been working since 1 April...

Rigger Mortice said...

it's about time basher davis was let loose.I am sick and tired of us being nice to these bastards.

jm said...

Oh come on Iain! You're clearly just spinning the line now!

On what basis can Clarke be culpable for Straw or Blunkett's oversights?

If Clarke is responsible for the oversights of his predecessors, does this mean you would you be happy to see Cameron resign as leader of the Conservatives if anything solid turns up about IDS or Howards dealings with loans and peerages?

The Remittance Man said...

I'm afraid I have to agree with JM on that one, Iain. But don't dispair; The Dear Leader was in charge during all three Home Secretariships.

Working on the principle that the PM appointed all three (and that poo floats upwards) a case could be made for setting the rotties on TB himself. I mean, how can we trust him to run the country when he makes such a bad job of selecting the incumbents for such important positions?

RM

jafo said...

Believe it says in the Daily Mail today that one of the savages involved in the Mary-Ann Lenaghan murder in Reading was one of the "released and not deported because no one knows what they're doing at the Home Office" criminals.

Plus, Charles Clarke admitted he knew about this situation last September, since when 289 more criminals have been released. Presumably he therefore did nothing about it for 7 months and, one is forced to conclude, wouldn't be doing anything now if it wasn't all over the newspapers. That assumes he actually is doing something now, rather than merely saying he is.

I note from the newspapers that Charles Clarke was at a corporate do with the Football Association yesterday, to celebrate McDonalds involvement in volunteer football coaching! As he must have known the solids were about the hit the air-conditioning over the released criminals situation, his presence at such an event doesn't suggest he is taking the matter all that seriously, does it?

Ellee Seymour said...

It's not a case of being nasty, but of being an effective opposition. If anyone else had made such a catastrophic cock up in their day job, one which put the lives and safety of innocent people in jeopardy, would they still be in their job?