Poor old Peter Hain, the pressure just mounts and mounts. Today’s Independent poses a series of questions which in all honesty signal the death for Works and Pensions Secretary.
WHAT WAS PETER HAINS RELATIONSHIP WITH PROGRESSIVE POLICIES FORUM?
DID ALL THE DONORS GIVE THEIR PERMISSION THAT THEIR MONEY WOULD BE USED THIS WAY?
WHY DID THEY GIVE THE MONEY THROUGH A THINK TANK AND NOT DIRECTLY?
WERE SOME OF THOSE WHO USED PPF TURNED DOWN AS DONORS EARLIER BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO REMAIN ANONYMOUS?
WHAT CHECKS DID MR HAIN MAKE TO MAKE SURE DONATIONS WERE REGISTERED PROPERLY?
WILL THE PPF OPEN ITS BOOKS TO THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION?
WHEN DID MR HAIN BECOME AWARE OF THE PROBLEM?
WHAT HAS THE PPF DONE SINCE IT WAS FORMED IN DECEMBER 2006?
WAS IT A FRONT ORGANISATION FOR THE CAMPAIGN?
Further on in the paper, “Pandora” (Oliver Duff) describes Hain as “Parliaments Tango Amnesiac” According to the article, Hain is about to be “Tangoed” by the labour Party. Deputy leadership candidates were required to donate 15% of their donations to Party coffers (what a lovely capitalist idea!) For the Orange mans declared receipts, this amounts to £11500. However, as we now know, there is a big gulf between what was received and what was declared, a small sum of £16233.40 to be precise. Hain has promised a full refund, but hasn’t put pen to cheque yet.
Pandora finishes the sketch with the following:
“Some speculate that No 10 would not be too disappointed if Hain became the first cabinet minister to resign to spend more time with his sunbed”.
Very witty, but the sarcasm surrounding Hains Vitamin C induced pallor hides a very serious trend – yet another Labour MP has been found in receipt of dirty money and yet another Labour MP is waiting for a visit from Inspector McBribe, a very seriously over worked copper trying to keep on top of a plethora of Labour orchestrated financial scandals.
Perhaps during his investigation he might ponder the following:
What is the difference between David Abrahams giving money to deputy leadership candidates through a second party, and other individuals giving money to deputy leadership candidates though a second party business?
I suspect he will come to the same conclusion as the rest of us: nothing at all!