It's all in the emphasis

Compare and contrast:

Sky News reports that:

"Tory MP Nadine Dorries has been paid an undisclosed amount of compensation by ex-Gordon Brown adviser Damian McBride."

BBC News reports that:

"Tory MP Nadine Dorries says she has been paid undisclosed damages by former Downing Street spin doctor Damien McBride over e-mail smears."

Has Nadine Dorries received (or been promised) the damages? If so why do the BBC report it as only something that she "says"?



The Sky report continues

"Mr McBride quit Downing Street in April when emails, containing unfounded allegations about MPs including David Cameron, shadow chancellor George Osborne, as well as Ms Dorries, were leaked."

The BBC equivalent report runs

"The Mid-Bedfordshire MP took legal action after the existence of the messages - said to refer to her private life - was made public.

Mr McBride, who sent the unfounded smears to Labour activist Derek Draper, resigned after they were made public. "

Again the BBC cast doubts on the reports "said to refer to her private life"



The Sky report also informs us:

"The damages are the result of the first of three cases that the MP for Mid Bedfordshire has brought against Mr McBride, Derek Draper and 10 Downing Street.

Ms Dorries told Sky News she will pursue the other cases "vigorously", until her name is cleared.
She also Tweeted: "The first hurdle in clearing my name down. Two to go.""

Oddly the BBC report that:

"Ms Dorries is still considering legal action against No 10 and Mr Draper.... She has until April to decide whether to launch separate defamation actions against Mr Draper and Downing Street."

Have the other cases been brought or not? If they have why are the BBC casting doubts?



Sky go on to tell us that:

"The Prime Minister was forced to apologise for the emails amid heavy criticism of a "dirty tricks" culture within No.10.

Mr Draper, a former Labour spin doctor, resigned as editor of the website LabourList over the affair.""

The BBC report it slightly differently:

"Mr McBride is understood to have made a "fulsome" apology to the Mid-Bedfordshire MP and expressed a wish to get on with his life."

That Damian McBride, what a mensch...

Nadine Dorries to sue over spin doctor Damian McBride's email slurs

The Mail reports that:

"Three key figures at the centre of the email smears about Tory MPs will be sued, it emerged last night.

Conservative Nadine Dorries is poised to issue writs against Gordon Brown's former spin doctor Damian McBride, Labour activist Derek Draper and Cabinet Secretary Gus O'Donnell.

The move raises the extraordinary prospect of the Prime Minister being summoned to court to give evidence. "

The last days of Gordon Brown's government of all the failures should be really entertaining.

Smeargate update

Guido Fawkes has the best updates on this and saves me having to buy papers such as the News of the World. You can read extracts from the NOTW's findings about who really knew about RedFlag's formation and it wasn'y just Derek Draper and Damian McBride:

"A new email shows that Labour’s General Secretary Ray Collins chaired a secret meeting to create the Red Rag website now ensnared in the Smeargate scandal.

The email’s existence links the dirty tricks site to the very TOP of the Labour Party.

And it exposes the LIE, put out by Downing Street, and repeated by government ministers this week, that the smears project was just a minor aberration cooked up by a couple of renegades acting alone—and which would never have seen light of day.

The new email, written by Labour’s then internet campaign chief Derek Draper, PROVES that the meeting took place, reveals WHO was there, WHERE it was held and WHAT was on the agenda. It shows that Collins travelled across Westminster for a summit in the offices of trade union bigwig Charlie Whelan. Whelan, one of Gordon Brown’s closest friends and his former chief spin doctor, was described last night by a Labour insider as the Prime Minister’s “unofficial Mr Fix-It”.

Joining Collins and Whelan at the meeting were the two men whose leaked smear emails later brought the scandal to light: Damian McBride and Draper."

This piece is even more interesting, if true it takes the RedFlag idea and its way of operating to the heart of Gordon Brown's inner circle.

Meanwhile The Times claims that (and I am trying to sound surprised at this "revelation") :

"ED BALLS, the schools secretary, used Damian McBride, the disgraced spin doctor, to smear ministerial rivals and advance his own ambitions, a Downing Street whistleblower has claimed.
In an explosive new twist to the e-mail affair, a No 10 insider has revealed that Balls was the mastermind behind a “dark arts” operation by McBride to undermine colleagues. He claims the education secretary is running a destabilising “shadow operation” inside Downing Street to clear his path for the party leadership if Labour loses the next election.

The insider said: “There is now an operation within an operation at No 10 and it answers to Ed Balls.” The whistleblower, who has had a ringside seat on the power struggles inside No 10, claims that Balls:

— Engineered McBride’s move from civil servant to special adviser
— Repeatedly protected McBride when colleagues called for him to be sacked
— Was in constant contact with McBride, sending him up to 20 e-mails a day
— Instructed McBride to brief against cabinet rivals
— Exploits a weekly “strategy” meeting, which he chairs at Downing Street, to shore up his power base.

The whistleblower claims the prime minister is “strangely naive” about Balls’s activities: “He doesn’t see what’s going on. He unwittingly helps Ed by sidelining the ministers Ed sees as a threat.” All the claims are denied by Balls, who labelled them “completely fabricated and malevolent nonsense”. A spokesman for Brown also dismissed the claims.

Senior Labour figures have confirmed there is widespread anxiety about Balls’s activities. The revelations will fuel concern that the government is in terminal decline, with senior ministers more worried about positioning themselves for life after defeat than about rescuing the economy. The whistleblower, who has never spoken to the media before, was prompted to speak out through loyalty to Brown and the Labour party. He was angered by an interview given by Balls last week in which he distanced himself from McBride, who was forced to resign over plans to spread scurrilous rumours about senior Tories."

I say 'let Ed Balls take over from Gordon Brown'; I can think of few Labour "big beasts" who are as unlovable as Ed Balls (Harriet Harman) excepted of course.

If you read nothing else today...

Read David Davis in The Independent asking "How can Jacqui Smith escape responsibility for this outrage?
It's astonishing that she didn't know what was going on with Damian Green" and Tory Bear asking about the disappearing Mirror article and what's happened to Derek Draper's PC.

Gordon Brown is shocked

Apparently Gordon Brown claimed that he was "horrified" and "shocked" and "very angry indeed" about the smears emanating from his Head of Strategic Planning. It's odd that Gordon Brown should be horrified and shocked as his team have been smearing people for years; Daniel Finkelstein in The Times lists some of the most recent examples: "Harriet Harman, David Miliband, Ed Miliband, James Purnell, Stephen Byers, Ivan Lewis and Alistair Darling etc. etc.

Yes I can see that Gordon Brown would be "horrified" and "shocked" by his Head of Strategic Planning sending smearing emails about Conservatives; didn't he realise it was his job to smear Labour opponents?

Sorry seems to be the hardest word

The Conservatives have been asking Gordon Brown to apologise for the smear campaign that was discussed by Derek Draper and one or more others. The BBC are reporting under the heading "Brown 'sorry' over e-mail slurs" that:

"Prime Minister Gordon Brown has apologised over e-mails sent by his former aide Damian McBride.

Speaking on a visit Glasgow, Mr Brown said he was "sorry about what happened" and took "full responsibility". "

Now call me picky but has Gordon Brown said sorry for the slurs or just "what happened"? Is "what happened" the slur emails or the discovery of them?


The line that really made me laugh though was this one:

"The prime minister added: "I take full responsibility for what happens. That's why the person responsible went immediately.""

So Gordon Brown takes "full responsibility for what happens" and that is "why the person responsible went immediately". Surely if Gordon Brown takes full responsibility he should go immediately; no?


I am also a little confused by this; I have heard it reported that Gordon Brown said that all that could be done about Smeargate had been done and that the role of Tom Watson MP in this scandal had been explained. I am not sure that either of these statements is true; a full independent enquiry would get to the bottom of "smeargate" and the role of Tom Watson MP in this scandal has not been fully explored; until copies of all emails between Derek Draper and Damian McBride have been made public along with their distribution lists, I would say that many questions still remain unanswered.

I understand that Cabinet Secretary Sir Gus O’Donnell has ruled out an inquiry into whether Tom Watson knew about the "Smeargate" emails. Apparently he is happy to accept the minister’s denials and so the case is closed. Is anyone else (apart from Gordon Brown and Tom Watson) happy at this verdict? Do I smell the whiff of whitewash?


The prime minister added: "I take full responsibility for what happens. That's why the person responsible went immediately."

Bye bye Derek

It seems that Derek Draper is out of favour with the Labour party and is to be "investigated independently by the British Association of Counsellors and Psychotherapists to reveal if he really is guilty of the allegations made about him, what the background and details of the story are, and how all of this affects his standing as a therapist."

Is this the end for Derek Draper or will he make another comeback?

When Derek Draper is interviewed about Smeargate remember his words in that email

In response to some of Damian McBride's ideas Derek Draper emailed:

"These are absolutely totally brilliant Damian.

I'll think about timing and sort out the technology with Andrew this week so we can go asap.

Do we want to tip off anyone about Red Rag having set up? Walters? I could do it and say LabouLlist had been sent the link anonymously."

So Derek Draper was so appalled that he wrote "These are absolutely totally brilliant", sounds believable...


And by the way, who did Derek Draper CC on the email?

"Dodgshon, Andrew; Whelan, Charlie"

I haven't heard much in the media from either of these two gentlemen.


So we have Derek Draper replying approvingly to smear ideas emanating from Gordon Brown's Head of Strategic Planning and CC'ing Gordon Brown's former spin doctor currently working at Unite. Hmmm, I think it absolutely clear that Gordon Brown never knew anything about RedRag or the smears that were being suggested and to suggest otherwise is just not fair on the man who is steering the UK into bankruptcy.

The unanswered questions about RedRag and "smeargate"

The Mail are moving the smeargate story nearer and nearer to Gordon Brown and they have some questions that they think need answering, some are similar to ones that I have posed over the last few days, but here's the Mail's list of questions. I suggest that David Cameron asks a couple of them at the next PMQs (1, 2, 3 & 7 look most promising lines), assuming Gordon Brown doesn't find another excuse not to attend:

"1. Who was party to email exchanges suggesting smear stories against Tory MPs?

2. Who was aware of the proposal to set up the Red Rag website? Specifically, was the Prime Minister aware of the proposed website or the concept behind it?

3. Were any members of the media copied into email exchanges using the Government email system, proposing the setting up of the Red Rag website, or suggesting smears of the Conservative Party?

4. Was the use of the Government email system for exchanges about the Red Rag website or smear stories against the Conservative Party in breach of the Ministerial Code, the Code of Conduct for Special Advisers or any other relevant guidelines?

5. In the case of Mr McBride, can you confirm that his actions were in breach of the Code of Conduct for Special Advisers?

6. Can you confirm that Mr McBride is no longer paid by the taxpayer, and that he will not receive any severance pay?

7. In the case of Mr Tom Watson, who is both Minister for the Civil Service and Minister for Digital Engagement, did he have any knowledge of or involvement in the Red Rag website? Are you satisfied that he has complied fully with the Ministerial Code, given that he was referred to in one of the emails published? What action have you taken to assure yourself that this is the case?

8. What action are you taking to find out if the emails sent by Damian McBride are part of a broader pattern of activity by other Special Advisers, and if there are similar initiatives involving either officials in Downing Street or Ministers or Special Advisers elsewhere in the Government?"

I look forward to some prompt answers coming out of the Number 10/12 bunker but somehow I doubt that any answers will be either prompt or complete.

BBC Have Your Say priorities

I would say that there have been three big news stories this Easter weekend: the Somali pirate rescue, the Thailand anti-government protests and the Damian McBride/Derek Draper slurring the Tories story. It was with no great surprise that I Have Your Say has three "debates" on the go:

How can pirates be stopped?
Reports say a US captain held by Somali pirates has been freed. How can the pirates be defeated?


How can peace be restored in Thailand?
An anti-government protest in Bangkok has broken up, after soldiers moved in overnight. What next for the country?


Is UK society 'increasingly fearful'?
People in the UK are growing ever more anxious, a report claims. Do you agree?


How odd, no debate on the RedFlag website and the slurring emails that go to the heart of Number 10. I wonder why the BBC are not keen to let the "masses" debate such a subject...


UPDATE:
I see that the BBC have managed to find an angle on this matter that leads to people discussing anything but Gordon Brown's alleged part in this matter:

"Should the role of political advisers be tightened?

The Conservatives are continuing to demand an apology from Gordon Brown for e-mails sent by a former adviser who discussed smearing senior Tories.
Should the role of political advisers be curtailed?

Damian McBride, the PM's ex-political press officer, quit after his unfounded claims about the Tory leader and shadow chancellor were picked up by a Westminster blogger.

The e-mails were originally sent in January to former government spin doctor Derek Draper, who runs a Labour blog.

Mr Brown has expressed "deep regret" in letters to those involved and called for a tighter aides' code of conduct. Shadow cabinet minister Francis Maude said the case raised "serious concerns" about the entire Number 10 operation.

Should the role of special advisers be more tightly regulated? Have bloggers blurred the boundaries between legitimate reporting and political spin? Are smear campaigns an inevitable part of political life?"

Piffle

Alex Hilton in The Scotsman writes about the Damian McBride/Derek Draper affair and is not a happy bunny but one sentence needs publicising

"Sneering at Tories with lies about sexually transmitted diseases, mental health problems or homosexuality counteracts the very noblest aims of the Labour movement."

Au contraire Mr Hilton, sneering and lies seem to be at the root of the current Labour movement whose sole raison d'etre is keeping hold of power and to whose leaders nothing else seems to matter. Before you disagree remember those who got in Labour's way and how they were treated.

Where was Derek Draper's office?

Tory Bear reports on Derek Draper's claim that his office is in "Piccadilly" not at Labour Party Headquarters. Tory Bear also has a picture of Labour Lists offices at Suite 35, 77 Beak Street, Piccadilly and oddly enough that appears to be the address of one of Mail Boxes Etc (a company who amongst other services rent out mailboxes to companies and individuals who want a London address that is not linked to their real home or office address).

So before you find a new "real" office Derek, where was your LabourList office up until this weekend?

Who else may be involved?

We know Damian McBride and Derek Draper were involved in the Red Rag putative smear campaign, but who else? I believe I have read that Charlie Whelan (Gordon Brown's former spinner-in-chief) may have been linked as may have been Tom Watson (Minister for Digital Engagement and Civil Service Issues) who recently listed as one of his "25 books I’ve read in the last two years that have influenced, interested or amused" this one:

"15. Mudslingers: The Twenty-five Dirtiest Political Campaigns of All Time, Kerwin Swint
These campaigns make Liberal Democrats look like angels."

Who else might have known of the plan? Another former chief spinner maybe; how about Peter Mandelson or Alastair Campbell, both masters of the dirty trick? It is possible that one or both may have been involved, maybe the BBC could ask them some straight questions the next time one of these "gentlemen" infest a BBC studio or radio-car.

More intriguingly, does anyone really believe that such an attack on the Conservative leadership would have been authorised without the knowledge of the Prime Minister? I doubt that any paper or electronic trails to our beleaguered Prime Minister exist as his underlings would not be that stupid, or would they?


I suppose the only way we will know who knew what is if the distribution lists for each email are released under FOI requests, I believe such requests have already been lodged, or if someone inside No 10 does the decent thing and tells all.

Googling (update 28)

Google.com - red rag derek draper - This blog appears at 7, behind The Guardian, LabourList, THe Guardian again, Wikio news, AnnaRaccoon and The Spectator.

The unanswered questions

The Damian McBride/Derek Draper RedFlag affair is still swinging along nicely but there are some important question that seems to be going unasked, let alone unanswered.

First; who, other than Derek Draper, was on the distribution list for Damian McBride's emails? I assume that Gordon Brown was very deliberately left out of the loop, "plausible deniability" and all that, but how about Alastair Campbell, Charlie Wheelan and Peter Mandelson for three? I assume that all those on the distribution lists, that will eventually be made public, will be happy to publish their contemporaneous replies expressing their disgust at the very idea and their clear expression of the view that this project was an appalling idea.

Second; there are many claims that Derek Draper is to be sacked from his position at the helm of LabourList. How can that be when Derek Draper has been assuring us for some time now that LabourList is totally independent of Labour Party control?

Third; apparently Derek Draper said of the ideas that "Some were brilliant and rather funny". Could he please explain which were brilliant, which were funny, which were both and which were neither...

Fourth; will Damian McBride be charged with any breaches of the Civil Service code for his usage of Government property for party political advantage?

Fifth; if Damian McBride has been allowed to resign, rather than be sacked, what implications does that have for his pension? Can that pension be reduced via the "Court of Public Opinion"?


More questions to follow...

Any excuse

I Hazel Blears has decided to try and turn the Damian McBride/Derek Draper attack blog story into an excuse to attack the "Tory blogs".

"Political blogs are fuelling a culture of cynicism about politics, communities secretary Hazel Blears has claimed.

...

In her speech, Ms Blears also complained about a "spreading corrosive cynicism" in political discussion.

She turned her fire on political "bloggers" - accusing them of fuelling disengagement by focusing on "unearthing scandals, conspiracies and perceived hypocrisy" and of being written by "people with disdain for the political system and politicians".

"The most popular blogs are right-wing, ranging from the considered Tory views of Iain Dale, to the vicious nihilism of Guido Fawkes," she said.

But she added: "Unless and until political blogging 'adds value' to our political culture, by allowing new and disparate voices, ideas and legitimate protest and challenge, and until the mainstream media reports politics in a calmer, more responsible manner, it will continue to fuel a culture of cynicism and pessimism." "

Just another warning shot across the bows of us right-of-centre bloggers. So if/when Labour manage to steal or indefinitely postpone the next election, do not be surprised when the Labour government ban all "undesirable" blogs so as to ensure the voices of dissent are silenced forever. Maybe afterwards Iain Dale, Guido Fawkes, Devils Kitchen and myself will be in the same cell at a re-education institution, I wonder if they play bridge...

Another unbelievable excuse

PravdaThe BBC loyally "report" that

" A spokesman for Downing Street said: "Neither the prime minister nor anybody else in Downing Street, except the author, knew anything about any of these private emails.

"The author of these emails has apologised for their juvenile and inappropriate nature and for the embarrassment caused.

"All staff will be reminded of the appropriate use of Number 10 resources." "

It's just a shame that the preceding line reads:

"He (Damian McBride) stayed on in Number 10, and was given responsibility for strategy and planning."

So neither Gordon Brown nor anybody else in Downing Street knew anything about a smear campaign set-up by the man given responsibility for Labour strategy and planning; well it's a theory I suppose.

Derek Draper makes his excuses

Derek Draper and maybe his friends (or ex-friends) in Downing Street have finally come up with an explanation for the Red Rag website story. Take a read and see whether you believe the cover story...

"You may have read about some emails I was sent in January and be wondering what is really going on. I am actually on holiday but I've taken an hour out to hit the keyboard and explain. Behind the hyped-up headlines the story is pretty simple. I've wondered for ages why the right wing have a near monopoly on websites that feature tittle tattle and teasing of their political opponents. But I felt strongly that such gossip wasn´t suitable for LabourList and kicked around the idea of setting up another blog, Red Rag, where such stories might be published.

I mentioned this idea to a few friends asking if they knew of any good gossip that was doing the rounds. Some of them said they weren't interested, but one of them, who works in Downing Street, responded by sending back some details of stories that were being gossiped about in Westminster. In truth these were a bit juvenile and inappropriate and some were in bad taste though I have to admit some were also brilliant and rather funny. As anyone involved in politics knows, though, people come up with lots of daft plans that don't make it off the drawing board. That's why if you visit Red Rag you will see there's nothing there.


Now, my Downing Street friend has admitted the emails were juvenile and apologised for sending them, and for any embarrassment he´s caused. The idea that this was some great smear campaign gives me and my internet work far too much credit and the idea that it was a big project orchestrated in Downing Street is ridiculous. The emails sent to me from my mate in Downing Street were the whole extent of his involvement, and they couldn't have taken more than an hour or so to write. Now people are trying to drag others into this to keep the story going. I can assure you that it was all just a batting around of ideas. Are we really going to judge people for having silly ideas, even if they then put them in emails to mates?

Imagine if all your emails suddenly became available to people wanting to damage you. That is, of course, the other question that needs to be asked: how were these emails obtained? Was criminal activity and hacking involved? Believe me, these are issues I will be looking at when I return from my holiday. "Blog wars" are one thing but hacking into people's emails is surely a step too far?

In the meantime there is no doubt that these gossipy stories were a silly juvenile idea but that is all they were, juicy email evidence or not. I regret having had the original idea even if it didn't go anywhere, but doesn't what's happened show the nature of these right wing blogs? They will stop at nothing to attack Labour people – it's me this week, who will it be next week? And they have the gall to talk of smears.

Let's not forget that the reason we are being attacked in the first place is because of the fact that we criticised the racist comments on one of these sites. And, incidentally, they are furious that my friend in Downing Street emailed me about that too, calling my attention to it, but I am glad that he did.

At the end of the day, though, the lesson is that we should leave tittle tattle and gossip to the right wing blogosphere. We on the left should concentrate on ideas, policy and campaigns, which is what LabourList, whatever is thrown at us, will continue to do."

That Derek Draper he is funny, the story is barely plausible even for a Labour supporter and just read the comments below the article...

Remember Derek Draper's denial that Damian McBride has anything to do with what Labour List publish? Tory Bear does:



Three questions:
1. Who is Ollie Cromwell in whose name theredrag.co.uk
was registered?

2. Why Ollie Cromwell, how keen on making the UK a Republic are the Labour Party?

3. Is this "At the end of the day, though, the lesson is that we should leave tittle tattle and gossip to the right wing blogosphere. We on the left should concentrate on ideas, policy and campaigns, which is what LabourList, whatever is thrown at us, will continue to do." the funniest line in any form of the media this year?

The website that doesn't exist

The Red Rag, for more details see Guido Fawkes, Iain Dale and Dizzy Thinks today and tomorrow.

Could this mean the end of Derek Draper and Damian McBride's political careers? We can but hope.


UPDATE:
1 down, 1 still to go.

John Redwood versus Derek Draper

Take a listen here but thanks to University of Manchester Conservative Future here's a partial transcript from the Kevin Nolan show:

" Nolan: Derek Draper, the former New Labour spin-doctor, now a psychologist as well as a blogger with us tonight as well. Hello to you Derek.

Draper: Hello

Nolan: Lots of these leaders getting a good kicking today, thankfully not literally, by the critics who are saying “how on earth did they allow this to happen”, with up to 35,000 people on the street protesting against them today. Derek, what signal does that send out to those leaders?

Draper: Well, were the people really protesting against the G20? I don’t think so, I think they were protesting about the fact that the economy isn’t doing well and they want it to do better. The whole point is that that is what the G20 is designed to do. It’s designed to get the global economy moving. What does that matter? Because at the end of the day, that’s what’s going to protect jobs and allow people to keep their homes here in Britain.

Nolan: What a terrible job the G20 have done so far then.

Draper: Well, of course they haven’t done a terrible job so far, because they haven’t started yet. What you’re seeing so far is a series of meetings and negotiations and visits and Gordon flying round the world working like a dog to try and set up the situation where when all these world leaders arrive in Britain this week, they will actually be able to make some progress. There’s no magic wand, there’s no miracle cure. This is about really hard work, trying to get the world economy back on track.

Redwood: Why didn’t they take action earlier to tackle these things? I was calling for interest rate cuts over a year ago, when they might have had some kind of beneficial impact by now, why were they so slow, why were they asleep at the wheel?

Draper: There’s been a series of interest rate cuts…
Redwood: Yes, but far too late.
Draper: …I know, but listen. You’re talking as if we’re still in the old world. The fact is that because of the American banking collapse, especially Lehmann brothers, we have a knock-on effect around the world. And that’s something noone was prepared for…

Redwood: Northern Rock was a British bank lending money to British people under a British regulator and they got it comprehensively wrong. And they were warned by people like me not to get it wrong.

Draper: Yeah, well, the British banks, I’m not saying the British banks were perfect. What I’m saying is that the great shock to the system came from America. Now, what Gordon Brown’s been trying to do is to deal with that. And the British banks that are acting personally, I think that people were losing their deposits, losing their money, their life savings they have in Northern Rock and indeed Lloyds TSB, that didn’t happen…

Redwood: But why did the British government allow these mega mergers, creating these massive banks with these huge bonuses that then lost so much money and came with a begging bowl to the state?

Draper: Well, because at the time people felt that bigger…might be better. People thought that there was a strong financial system around the world that would keep these banks going, now we now know that there were actually hidden problems with these banks, especially Northern Rock, but it was in America where these banks had done these subprime mortgages, that was where the real flaw in the system was…

Redwood: But we did subprime mortgages over here as well, Derek. Get real, that’s why people are so angry. Labour have been so complacent about this.

Draper: Well let’s not get party political, because it’s not as if the Conservative Party had been standing up and saying let’s have smaller banks and more regulation…
Redwood: It’s exactly what I was saying in my report a couple of years ago Derek, if you bothered to read it.
Draper: …the Conservative party has called for less regulation.

Redwood: We were calling for tighter regulation for cash and capital which were the things that went wrong. You introduced all this petty mortgage regulation which didn’t stop anything…
Draper: The notion that the Conservative Party were in favour of little details here and there…
Redwood: Try reading the report, Derek, it was crystal clear. We said that your broken Bank of England wouldn’t manage to sort things out.

Nolan: Surely if you listened to yourself tonight, Derek, you would thing that Labour weren’t in power while all of this happened? You’ve been in power for a long time and you’re blaming America.

Draper: Look, the fact is, that however much people try to make party political points about it, voters at home can see on their television screens, that this is a problem that is affecting America, Japan, Iceland, Germany, France, all countries around the world. So voters come to the conclusion that actually this is not in any way something that can be laid at Gordon Brown’s door. The fact is that this is a global problem that started in America, and that Gordon Brown has actually been doing a very good job. People accept this all around the world, from President Obama down, it’s not about apportioning blame, it’s about doing something about it and moving forward.

Nolan: So help me understand this about the G20 summit, Derek. What criteria can we use, as members of the public, to determine whether this meeting has been a success or not?

Draper: Well, the criteria will be, have these countries come together, set forward a path to increase the global regulation of banks more effectively, maybe coordinate their economies a little bit better, maybe refocus things a bit more onto those bread and butter issues about homes and jobs that people care about…but that’s a hard thing to do. It’s a bit like herding cats. But I must say that I’m really glad, and this is not just a party political point, I’m really glad that Gordon, the man who has actually got experience of the financial system and who has the contacts and knowledge to make this happen, is in charge of this rather than a bunch of lightweights like David Cameron and George Osborne.

Redwood: But look, this is the man who has presided over the collapse of four major British banks, something that’s never happened in…
Draper: Collapse?
Redwood: …before under any other government.
Draper: This is the man who has presided over the prevention of the collapse of those banks, don’t be so ridiculous.

Redwood: Well he was the chief regulator of them, he was the Chancellor of the Exchequer running a tripartite regulatory system…
Draper: Of course he wasn’t the regulator, the regulation was at arm’s length.
Redwood: ….Derek you have to let me speak occasionally. He was the tripartite head, he put in a new regulatory system, and for the first time in British history five major banks got into serious trouble, because the new regulation didn’t work.

Draper: And you really think that that’s because of the regulatory system, do you?

Redwood: Yes, of course it was. Because they didn’t control the cash and capital…
Draper: Really?
Redwood: …they allowed the banks to borrow and lend…
Draper: You don’t think that perhaps…
Nolan: Hang on, hang on, let him finish!
Redwood: …huge amounts of money in a way in which we didn’t allow them to do.

Draper: We…you didn’t the Conservatives?

Redwood: We kept much tighter control over them in the 80s and 90s and…
Draper: Did you?
Redwood: …and they didn’t go bust on our watch…
Draper: I thought you were in charge of the big bang in the city of London, I thought you were in charge of this massive booming financial system? Look, the rest….
Redwood: We stopped the banks borrowing and lending on the scale they did in the last 10 years…
Draper: You’re interrupting me now. The idea, that the Conservatives were in favour, during this time, of more regulation, of more caution, of less remuneration of the city, is frankly fantastical. It just doesn’t bear a moment’s scrutiny.

Redwood: Well Derek you should read Hansard, you should read the reports we raised…
Nolan: Ok
Draper: Your report said there should be less regulation of the mortgage industry.

Redwood: It said there should be tougher regulation of cash and capital and that the process regulation of mortgages…
Draper: What did it say about mortgages…
Redwood: DEREK LISTEN for a minute, it said that the process regulation of mortgages wouldn’t work, never has there been so much regulation of mortgages, and never has there been such a mess. What we said was that you need to regulate cash and capital which is what would have controlled the banks, which is what we did in the 80s and 90s, which is why they didn’t go bust on our watch.

Draper: Did it say that there should be less or more regulation of the mortgage market?

Redwood: It said there should be less regulation, but that you should regulate the thing that matters, the thing that stops banks going bust. This is a bank going bust problem, Derek, not a mortgage process problem.

Nolan: OK, thanks very much"