Crucial week for tony blair

[Apollo 0]

A huge week for Tony Blair

By Nick Assinder

BBC News Online political correspondent

By the end of this week the political landscape in Britain may just have changed out of all recognition.

It is even possible that Labour's most successful prime minister may be on his way out of Downing Street.

Despite his recent attempts to make light of claims he is facing his most difficult week ever, Tony Blair knows full well his premiership is on the line like never before.

He knows it because, as much as anybody else, he has placed his career in that position.

He is on record as stating, during one of his monthly press conferences, that his personal authority is on the line over top up fees. The vote is on Tuesday shortly before 1900 GMT.

And he told the Hutton inquiry into the death of Dr David Kelly that, if the central allegation that he spun Britain into war is sustained, he will have to quit. The report is being published on Wednesday.

Confidence vote

He has also suggested that if Lord Hutton finds him personally responsible for the process which led to the naming of Dr Kelly, his position would be untenable.

So, for Tony Blair, the stakes could not be higher.

If he loses the Commons vote on top up fees on Tuesday night - in what promises to be one of the most dramatic events of this parliament - he will most likely be forced to either resign or call a humiliating vote of confidence in his leadership.

He would almost certainly win that confidence motion a few days later, but it would leave him dangerously weakened.

If, on the following day, Lord Hutton levels any significant criticism at him when he announces his findings in the Royal Courts of Justice, resignation talk will mount.

If there was a resignation it would pitch Labour into what would almost certainly be a period of crisis as the party wrestled with the process of replacing a sitting prime minister. Almost anything is possible.

Not simple

Of course, things may not be quite that simple and there are plenty of other combinations of events and conclusions that may leave him either vindicated or in place, but damaged.

It may be, for example, that the Hutton report falls short of being fatal in itself, but is damaging enough to leave the prime minister's future in the hands of the Commons debate with Michael Howard a week later.

Both men's futures might then hang on the outcome of that clash.

What Mr Blair would most dearly love would be to win the fees vote on Tuesday and to be cleared of any hint of wrongdoing by Lord Hutton a few hours later.

That would put him in a hugely powerful position to go on and win the Commons debate.

Spin doctor

Mr Howard might still be able to inflict damage in the clash over events not directly covered by the Hutton report.

And until Lord Hutton delivers his findings no one knows precisely which events he will cover and which he decided were outside his terms of reference.

But under those circumstances it is hard to see Mr Blair not continuing until the next general election.

Meanwhile, of course, there is a whole cast of other figures who will also be affected by Lord Hutton's report.

Politically the most likely to attract attention are Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon, long seen as a potential casualty, and former spin doctor Alastair Campbell.

But the two days in the middle of this week are now overwhelmingly about the future of one man - Tony Blair.

From the BBC

[aj_addons 0]

crosses fingers and hopes to see the back of blair but thinks that as usual hell find some way to wriggle out of it , probably useing hoon as a scapegoat

[EiZei 0]

Can't say that he didnt have it coming.

[Badgerboy 0]

Votes are in.....

316 For - 311 Against

[Apollo 0]

Quote[/b] ]316 For - 311 Against

Euh ,youre talking about Blair's plan to top up university fees.

Not that it has anything to do with the subject of this thread ,but to talk on that subject ,in my oppinion this plan will only lead to elitism in university's ,more chances for the wealthy.Personally i don't find such plan's fitting for a leftist prime minister ,however it wouldn't be the first time that Blair is making un-leftist decissions.

[Badgerboy 0]

It does have ramifications for Blair, and is related to this thread. Read the article posted above.

Depending on how this and the Hutton enquiry turn out, will dictate if Blair resigns or not. At this moment in time, it looks quite unlikely.

[Major Gripe 0]

According to that ever reliable source of political news, the Sun, the Hutton report clears Blair, Campbell and Hoon of any wrongdoing and says that the BBC and Gilligan are primarily to blame. Dr Kelly himself is at fault for having unauthorised meetings with journalists and the report goes on to say that he killed himself as he felt he had been publicly disgraced. Overall I'd say its been a BRILLIANT week for the government and we can look forward to the continuation of the 1000 year Blair Reich.

BTW Heard all the above on the radio

[Placebo 29]

Love him or hate him (I mostly love him), I don't think anyone can seriously have thought he would be in a position where he had to resign, one of the luxuries of holding the PM's job is that the odds are stacked in your favour simply because of your position, kind of like in a world title boxing match if it ends in a points decision and it's close it will always be given to the title holder

[theavonlady 2]

Strike two:

Judge's Report Clears Blair, Says Tabloid Leak

Quote[/b] ]LONDON (Reuters) - A judge's probe into an Iraq weapons expert's suicide has exonerated Prime Minister Tony Blair, according to Britain's tabloid Sun which Wednesday published what it said was a leak of the report.

[aj_addons 0]

Ah well i thought he would find some way sneak out of it and by the looks of it im right , right wheres that mailorder magazine with the in it m82a1

what i really want is a inquirey into how blair took us into the war in the first place and have it look into fact that we were all told that there would be large stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction(or distraction as its turning out to be)

[Badgerboy 0]

To be fair, this report wasn't investigating if Blair had laucnhed a war in bad judgement, but if he had lied to Parliment, and had been directly involved in the death of Dr Kelly.

On that he was found clear. I'm sure there will be another inquiry into the war itself, as there was one afetr the Falklands war.

[bn880 5]

All I have to say is all of you can forget that anyone from TBA or TBA2 is ever going to get charged with anything in their court of law, especially while they are still in power. Its a joke! Don't you get it, if you want justice against a government you have to deal it by yourself.

No way in hell anyone is going to get impeached or whatever, impossible these days.

[Ex-RoNiN 0]

He did rather well, I thought. Shame about the tuition fees, I was opposed to that, but I was rather pleased with the Hutton Report.

That's what I love about Holland, I actually get to watch BBC

[Badgerboy 0]

Looks like one of the BBC chairmen has resigned over this.

[Apollo 0]

I once had quite some respect for Blair ,as a leftist i regarded him one of the better leftist politicians ,because he is a good talker ,a good diplomat ,a man with knowledge of his position etc.

But it all changed when he stated that he would support the U.S if they would declare war unilaterally.Don't get me wrong ,should Blair have aided the U.S in a war that was supported by the majority of the world then i would have respected him for that.In the diplomaticc buildup to iraq i thought he would act as a transatlantic bridge in diplomacy between the U.S and Europe.He did try to win Europe for the coalition ,but in a wrong way.And with agreeing to join the coalition unnilaterally in my oppinion he had made a big mistake.

Britian has still a lot of diplomatic influence ,especially with the U.S.A .Blair could have send a very valuable message to the U.S by stating that he would not join the war unconditionally ,people in the U.S would have thought twice if their staunchest ally the U.K wouldn't had agreed on this war ,it would have pushed the U.S in a very issolated possition and that would have been an extra detterent to the Iraq war.

I do understand how valuable the U.S.A is for the U.k to.I know the U.k would really think twice before not supporting the U.S .But they have a lot of diplomatic leverage ,as they have a strong diplomatic influence in the world due to their position.The U.K isn't dependant of the U.S ,it's important for them but not that important.

In fact ,i hold Blair ,asside from G.W Bush and his extreme right wing cabinet responsible for the devissions in the E.U that rose with the Iraq war.The U.K have used their diplomatic influence to help the U.S to make a wedge in Europe by bribing money-needing or defense-needing country's to join the coalition.If it wasn't for the U.K the U.S may have never achieved that relativly still small coalition.

I once had a lot of respect for Blair ,but now to me he's just the most right wing socialist i ever seen.Imo not only has he betrayed his belief's ,but also the people that voted for him.

[KJAM 0]

damnit the slimy jug eared git is still around, damnit,

as you may see, i dont exactly like him much, what exactly has he PERSONALLY done, with his own bare hands (figure of speech too, ) to help this country

[denoir 0]

I once had quite some respect for Blair ,as a leftist i regarded him one of the better leftist politicians ,because he is a good talker ,a good diplomat ,a man with knowledge of his position etc.

But it all changed when he stated that he would support the U.S if they would declare war unilaterally.Don't get me wrong ,should Blair have aided the U.S in a war that was supported by the majority of the world then i would have respected him for that.In the diplomaticc buildup to iraq i thought he would act as a transatlantic bridge in diplomacy between the U.S and Europe.He did try to win Europe for the coalition ,but in a wrong way.And with agreeing to join the coalition unnilaterally in my oppinion he had made a big mistake.

Britian has still a lot of diplomatic influence ,especially with the U.S.A .Blair could have send a very valuable message to the U.S by stating that he would not join the war unconditionally ,people in the U.S would have thought twice if their staunchest ally the U.K wouldn't had agreed on this war ,it would have pushed the U.S in a very issolated possition and that would have been an extra detterent to the Iraq war.

I do understand how valuable the U.S.A is for the U.k to.I know the U.k would really think twice before not supporting the U.S .But they have a lot of diplomatic leverage ,as they have a strong diplomatic influence in the world due to their position.The U.K isn't dependant of the U.S ,it's important for them but not that important.

In fact ,i hold Blair ,asside from G.W Bush and his extreme right wing cabinet responsible for the devissions in the E.U that rose with the Iraq war.The U.K have used their diplomatic influence to help the U.S to make a wedge in Europe by bribing money-needing or defense-needing country's to join the coalition.If it wasn't for the U.K the U.S may have never achieved that relativly still small coalition.

I once had a lot of respect for Blair ,but now to me he's just the most right wing socialist i ever seen.Imo not only has he betrayed his belief's ,but also the people that voted for him.

Well put. I agree with you entirely.

Now as for the result of this Lord-Hutton-soon-to-be-Duke-of-Kent investigation - I have never seen such absurd and contradictory conclusions made since Winston Churchill mistook french porn for next year's budget report.

I mean seriously, was the man drunk or on drugs when he came to the conclusions?

He got the facts basically right, but his conclusion are mind boggling.

Hutton says: Yes Tony Blair was in on the meeting when it was decided that Kelly's name shoud be leaked. And yes, the name was leaked to fight BBC.

Hutton concludes: There was nothing wrong about that.

Hutton says: Yes, there was no real evidence for WMD at the time of the writing of the "dodgy dossier", half of it was based on ten year old information, written by a grad student and yes it was partially rewritten by Blair's people so that it would fit their claim better.

Hutton concludes: They did not "sex up" the report.

Hutton says: Sure, the BBC reported what Kelly told them and didn't make things up. They also verified it with other sources.

Hutton conclueds: BBC has defective editorial processes.

I mean, is the man a complete raving lunatic?  

[Acecombat 0]

Ah well and this is justice for you the coalition way  

hey AJ how about sending that .50 barret to the IRA i am sure they'll help you sort out your probs with Blair    , hmm reminds me off the Chris Ryan novel "Zero option".

Well Andrew Marr from BBC says:

BBC political editor Andrew Marr's reaction to the report was: "In the end what it comes down to is a judgement by Lord Hutton - who he believes, whose motives he trusts most and in that, again and again, he comes down on the side of politicians and officials."

And Davies (BBC chairmen resigns)

Announcing his resignation, Mr Davies said the people at the top of organisations should accept responsibility for their actions.

"I have been brought up to believe that you cannot choose your own referee, and that the referee's decision is final," he said.

He would be writing to the prime minister to tender his resignation with immediate effect.

And to top it all of Blair now wants a apology    , ^&$^@*&$^* he still isnt giving up on his WMD deal.

The prime minister said the accusations levelled at him by BBC correspondent Andrew Gilligan were extremely serious.

"If true it would have meant that I had misled this House."

The failure to withdraw the claims "has allowed others to say repeatedly I lied and misled Parliament", he said.

Cant someone drag these ba***ds in to the Hague for us?

[Guest]

Cnn has nothing on this on their front page...   hello?!

[Apollo 0]

edit: Acecombat brought it already up.

BBC on chairman resignation

I don't know how many head's in the BBC will roll but personally i find it a rediculous situation.Is this justice?

this comment of Davies says it all ,what Denoir already mentioned:

Quote[/b] ]But he questioned whether Lord Hutton's "bald conclusions" on the dossier's production could be reconciled with the balance of the inquiry's evidence.

[Placebo 29]

I hope everyone at the BBC resigns, then maybe they'll be forced to turn it private and scrap the TV License "bollards"

[Major Gripe 0]

At least we won't have to deal with boring Brown or Howard for four years, with Blair not resigning we actually have some exciting news; scandals, inquiries, wars, crises in education, meltdown of public services, spin and couter spin to read about.

/Tongue removed from cheek

[aj_addons 0]

Cant help the feeling that blair some how nobbled hutton, cause am i the only one that remembers blair sayed that he had nothing to do with kelly's naming but the during the inquiry i think it was some mod offical (teddit or something) said that blair had organised a meeting at number ten to decide what would happen with kelly, or was i hullucenating again when i asw this on the news

[SgtBarnes 0]

Cant help the feeling that blair some how nobbled hutton, cause am i the only one that remembers blair sayed that he had nothing to do with kelly's naming but the during the inquiry i think it was some mod offical (teddit or something) said that blair had organised a meeting at number ten to decide what would happen with kelly, or was i hullucenating again when i asw this on the news  

You're right. Immediately after the news of Kelly's death, journalists asked him if he had anything to do with his naming. Blair said 'emphatically no'. Hutton acknowledges that Blair chaired meetings about Kelly, but he seems to have given him the 'benefit of the doubt' - accepting that the meetings were about how to avoid allegations of a cover-up.

What i don't understand is how Hutton can call the leaking of his report to The Sun "deplorable", but then say that Kelly's name was "bound to come out"!

Surely the report was 'bound to come out' and the deliberate leaking of Kelly's name 'deplorable'?!  

with Blair not resigning we actually have some exciting news; scandals, inquiries, wars, crises in education, meltdown of public services, spin and couter spin to read about.

Yes, but where are we going to read about these stories? Not on the newly castrated BBC anyway  

[aj_addons 0]

channel 4 news mate thats usually pretty good