Did a Gang of Four set out
to create Swivelgate?
Not a swivel-eyed loon, as such
The Tory Party Co-Chairman Andrew Feldman is vehemently
denying that he was the person who made the “bunch of swivel-eyed loons”
(BOSEL) crack about Conservative grassroots workers. He is, I’m told,
considering legal action if anyone repeats the rumour. Analysis by The
Slog suggests that four key players may well have been behind the
alleged insult becoming infamous now…despite having been first uttered by Cameron himself some time ago.
The Slog: Somebody – or more accurately, body of men – have worked very hard to
inflate the swivel-eyed loons row. For starters, there are those who
think Boris Johnson’s younger brother Jo is far more of a cuckoo in the
Camerlot nest than the Prime Minister realises. Boris has said on
several occasions in private that he and his brother Johnson “are
indivisible on policy”. Within days of being appointed, Johnson the
younger urged Cameron to seriously reconsider building a new hub airport
in the Thames Estuary. This is, of course, his Mayoral brother’s pet
project. Previous pamphlets from Jo also suggest he is at odds with his
new boss.
However Downing Street tries to spin the appointment, it was a
serious U-turn by David Cameron. Previously he’d employed civil servants
in the role, but this time he chose a former Whip with a degree of
clout within the Party. And although some see JoJo as pro-Europe, he
certainly isn’t pro-Brussels: if anything, he is something of a
Commonwealth loyalist with a passionate belief in the UK trading more
with Asia in general – and India in particular. This is a view he shares
with Nigel Farage, as well as his brother.
Before we go further by the way – because there seems to me to be deliberate obfuscation going on here – the Top Tory said local associations were swivel-eyed loons, not
Backbench MPs. But some MSM on the Borishunt Fallongove wing of the
Conservative Party have been blurring that distinction…with obviously
mischievous intent.
The story about the BOSEL remark – while known to several hacks – was broken by one man and one man alone: James Kirkup, the deputy political editor of the Daily Telegraph. But of far greater interest to me is who started the Andrew Feldman rumour.
Finger someone like Ollie Letwin (as I did yesterday) and Camerlot can
just write it off as sour grapes. Finger Cameron’s co-Chairman, and you
get Cameron’s biggest fund-raiser sacked….and a major row on your hands.
We now have a major row on our hands. The Sundays are all over the
story – including the Newscorpers – and Lord Feldman is not being helped
by Grant Shapps defending him. I wouldn’t believe Shapps if he said
“Good morning” to me: his business career is a trail of proven
misrepresentation.
The Sun leads with ‘only 20 backbenchers loyal to Cameron’, something
of a canard in that it means only twenty MPs have voted with him on
every issue since May 2010. But it does make for a dramatic headline…and
blurs the line I mentioned above. Camerlot’s Spin-Horse has issued a
careful denial saying that “no member of the Prime Minister’s key Downing Street staff made such a remark”.
For once, however, the Mail on Sunday may be on to something. It
notes, shrewdly (and accurately) that Cameron has himself made the
remark before – using those exact words. I would go further: I know for a
fact that he has used it about Nigel Farage – who in private
gets quite excitable on the subject. Also, the respected FT hack George
Parker recorded last year that the Prime Minister refers to his
backbenchers in this vein at regular intervals anyway. So somehow here, a non-story has been turned into a story – why?
And how? James Kirkup posted the now infamous column
at three minutes before 10 pm Friday last. He did not reveal the ‘Top
Tory’ name. But Matthew Parrish alleges that the remark was made at an
off-the-record dinner. If so, that tars Kirkup with unpleasant intent to
make trouble – especially if he knew Cameron himself had made the
remark previously.
Friday evening later on has the Guardian hack Nicholas Watt claiming
that the Senior Tory made the remark ‘in earshot of journalists’ – note
plural. He also wrote two further interesting comments: ‘Farage,
who knows the identity of the Tory…’ and ‘…The Times, Daily Telegraph,
the Daily Mirror, who all reported the remarks and who know the identity
of the Tory, declined to name the senior member of the prime minister’s
circle’ – again, note plural.
So Kirkup doesn’t have an exclusive. But it’s his story that breaks through. And if Farage knows the Top Tory’s identity…as he wasn’t at the dinner, who told him?
The first column I can find saying “I suspect the Top Tory’s identity will be revealed today” was posted at The Spectator’s site at 6am Saturday morning by James Forsyth.
It’s hard to miss the sense in his piece that Mr Forsyth already knew
the name from somewhere. He’s also relishing what’s about to follow.
At some point after this, the alleged identity of Feldman as the
author of BOSEL breaks in the media. However, if you go to what I think
is the best site to trace this sort of thing - NewsNow – you will see that no other MSM newspaper said anything about Feldman being the culprit until
the denials began. This seems to be confirmed the Independent’s post at
1.09 pm to say ‘the party’s co-chairman Lord Feldman has rebuffed internet rumours that it was him that made the comment’. Did these internet rumours emanate from Tory Home?
By 5 pm Saturday, Kirkup was tweeting, “I have read Lord Feldman’s statement. I stand by my story. I have nothing to add”.
At 5.52 pm, Top Spectator Tory Fraser Nelson posted a column covering the Feldman and Kirkup statements.
At some indeterminate time – probably late Saturday – Tory Home published a piece by Paul Goodman which stirred the brew bigtime:
‘The key problem with the loons claim,
as I point out in the Mail on Sunday today, is that many Tories think
it’s what Downing Street thinks. Three very senior Ministers made it
clear to me yesterday that they believe Number 10 has a very low view of Party activists.
James Forsyth suggests in the same paper today that David Cameron
should write to each Association Chairman to say what a good job he or
she is doing – and how much their work is valued. Lord Feldman should
certainly ring each one over the next few days to make it clear that
this is his view.’
Let’s examine some of the key players involved in what, I am increasingly convinced, is merely another stage in the continuing determination
by genuine BOSELs on the Tory Right to destabilise Camerlot. I think we
can safely take Borishunt Fallongove as being sympathisers for granted,
and focus on those guilty of propagation here…..if not out and out
propaganda.
James Kirkup ran the story without reference
to the name. He may have been involved as an initial catalyst with
others. Certainly he at least sprained journalistic etiquette by running
it.
James Forsyth was egging the pudding as long
ago as June 2012 when he wrote in The Spectator that ‘Inside Ten
Downing Street, it seems that it is becoming a question of when to
announce a referendum not whether to call one’. He is close to Farage,
and very much a pro-UKIP Daily Mail Tory. He is also close to BoJo.
Fraser Nelson makes no bones about seeing Cameron as ‘infected’ by pro-EU sentiments. In January, he accused Cameron in the media
of lying about Britain’s national debt, describing Cameron’s broadcast
about it as “so astonishingly dishonest that it really would have
disgraced Gordon Brown”. He always gets a good press at Tory Home, where
Paul Goodman makes many an appearance….when he’s not writing for the
Daily Mail. But he’s a relatively peripheral player in this one: mainly,
it seems to me, he’s doing his job.
But when it comes to Cameron, only Nigel
Farage is nastier than Paul Goodman. On April 23rd, Goodman wrote a
piece saying that ‘senior advisors to David Cameron are leaving in
droves’. Five days ago he told readers that ‘David Cameron is heading
for the exit. Enter Gove’. Last December he wrote that ‘the 2015
election is already lost’ with Cameron at the helm. Only yesterday
he is reported to have said, “David Cameron has so many problems with
his party because he and his entourage don’t like it very much”.
But Mr Nasty becomes Mr Nice when on the
subject of UKip’s leader. ‘Many Conservative Party members have a soft
spot for Nigel Farage, Ukip’s rumbustious leader’ he wrote in the
Telegraph last September. ‘One in ten who voted Tory in 2010 has
switched to Nigel Farage’s Ukip’ he gushed last January.
However, this excerpt from a Goodman piece two weeks ago at Tory Home might be highly significant: ‘UKIP activists in essence are, overwhelmingly, Conservatives, and many of them are former party activists.
And the UKIP programme for which they campaign is in large part a
Conservative one, too. Very simply, UKIP is a party of the right, and
Mr Cameron ought to be crafting a tent big enough to contain voters from
both the right and centre’. This reads like not so much a Freudian slip as Sigmund’s entire underwear drawer on display.
So in the classic Perry Mason manner, let us
establish timing, means, and motive….in no particular order. Nigel
Farage knows that the only way he can do a deal with the Tories is if
its leader goes. He also knows that many Tory activists have strong
Conservative sympathies. He dislikes Cameron intensely and is very
bitter about the original Dave BOSEL remark which he knows was aimed at
him. Nigel was stirring the pot within minutes of Kirkup’s story on
Friday night, and claims to know the identity of the BOSELer on this
occasion. He has mates throughout the right wing press, and is regarded
by many as an insidious leaker against all opponents. So he ticks all
the boxes.
Paul Goodman is a confidante of Cameron
rival David Davis. He quit Parliament soon after Cameron became leader.
He makes a good living as a freelance right-wing journalist for Tory
Home, the Daily Mail, and the Daily Telegraph – all normally
anti-Camerlot publications. He’s been upping the ante on BOSEL since
yesterday afternoon, and again this morning. He supports many of UKip’s
ideas, and likes its leader. Privately he thinks a Tory-UKip deal is the
only way the Right can win in 2015. He has written in the past about
the relationship between Tory and UKip grassroots workers. He too ticks
all the boxes.
James Kirkup writes an influential column
for the Daily Telegraph. He broke the story when others declined to do
so…probably because the remark was made at a private dinner alleged to
have been off-the-record. He hasn’t confirmed Feldman as the source, but
he hasn’t denied it either. Many in both journalism and the
Conservative Party would regard him as being a bit of a rotter for
running the story at all. Others wonder why recycled old new at this
particular time. Just look at some of his tweets and retweets since
Friday on Twitter - (He’s made none since):
RT @MirrorJames: Tory activists are “mad, swivel-eyed loons”, declares crony of David Cameron http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/conservative-party-activists-mad-swivel-eyed-1895672 … #spitemonkeywin
Paul Goodman @PaulGoodmanCH 17 May Morning, all. How are your eyes today? Steady in their sockets?
Retweeted by James Kirkup
Tim Montgomerie @TimMontgomerie 22h That
the Cameroons think Tory members are loons is no surprise. I remember
two senior Number 10 aides talking in exactly those terms.
Retweeted by James Kirkup
Lord Ashcroft @LordAshcroft 21h Putting “mad swivel-eyed loons” into Google produces 10600 results. Soon be up to Membership levels!!
Retweeted by James Kirkup
Damian McBride @DPMcBride 17h If
Feldman denies being the figure about which the claims are being made,
why does he think journos should have put the claims to him first?
Retweeted by James Kirkup
I think it would be fair to say that Kirkup ticks most of the boxes.
Finally, James Forsyth looks like a catalyst at a crucial time by
pushing the Top Tory identity issue early on Saturday. As with Kirkup –
why now? – you have to ask with Forsyth, why move it on to another
level?
Jo Johnson has the means and the motive, but he wasn’t at the
dinner, and despite what BoJo says, he is nothing like his brother.
In conclusion, it looks to me like Goodman and Farage are in the
frame as having hatched some form of plot. And both Forsyth and Kirkup
look implicated. We shall see: but what I’d like to know specifically is
how Goodman and Farage explain away one ‘story’ which contains two
elments known to be personal hobby-horses: Swivel-eyed loon, and
Activists. It all seems spookily convenient, doesn’t it?
Over to you, chaps.
No comments:
Post a Comment