The Sunday Telegraph has got hold of a letter written by Prof Sir Christopher Evans to business colleagues after he was questioned by police. The full text is here. It does seem that there always has been a lot of 'informal comment and discussion' over potential honours prior to their award.
Evans was first honoured by John Major, something that was a surprise to him and there had been no prior contact.. But, let's see his story on how he got his Knighthood:
I was an active public supporter, as well as a financial donor to the party. I openly accept it also provided to me access at senior levels to promote what I feel are critically important issues concerning the development of medical science in our country.
In November 2000, I was informed by letter that I had been awarded a knighthood for my services to bioscience and enterprise. Whilst the possibility of an award had been mooted by various people in Labour circles I was surprised, proud and honoured when it arrived.
So, cash does get you access and various people bring up the subject of possible honours for discussion and debate with the future recipient. I wonder if these discussions were preceded or followed by a subtle reminder of how the party needs friends to 'support' it. I also wonder if Sir Chris opened his chequebook in the aftermath of such discussions, something he doesn't address in his letter.
Over the last 10 years I have also become increasingly well known to the Government through my work and support for the Labour Party. I have attended countless functions, select dinners, meetings attended by the Prime Minister and the Chancellor, various cabinet ministers, and the usual entourage of advisers. Over that time there have been countless mentions of my future role in politics, that I would be "just right" for contributing to the House of Lords or that I could be a good candidate to follow in the footsteps of David Sainsbury, the former Science Minister.
Once again Cash = Access = Discussion of Honours, but does the sequence go on to = Donation = Honour?
In that period I also met Lord Levy on a number of occasions... He was always pushing me to make larger donations to the party. In late 2004, he asked me to consider making a sizeable donation to the Labour Party, which could be put in place for the next General Election campaign. He wanted £1 million.
Why did I give that support?
Why indeed? Here is a guy who has given money, got access and had people saying he should be in the Lords. At the same time Scooter Levy turns up asking for a million. Coincidence? surely a man as sophisticated as Sir Chris doesn't need the connection spelt out. But let's hear about their discussions
Did we ever discuss honours and politics? Did he ever say on the countless occasions that I met him and his wife over the years that I was deserving of a future honour or I should have a political role and make a difference? Yes, he did. So what? Why should I be embarrassed by that fact or such comments? Were conversations also taking place about making donations to the party? Of course they were.
And the famous P or K note?
Michael Levy and I had a conversation about a "K" or a "P" (knighthood or peerage). I remember it well. It took place about seven years ago - five years before I made my loan to the Labour Party. He was talking about how I saw my long term future - would I go into politics. He thought I would be eventually put forward for some kind of recognition by the Government and was speculating whether I might one day be awarded a knighthood or be offered a peerage. It was one of countless conversations we had that covered subjects ranging from family life to the state of the party.
Well, he did keep giving and he got his K and nominated for a P. Was he interested in a Peerage? You bet.
Finally he promises to start talking, someone should start worrying...
I feel that both Lord Levy and I are just dispensable pawns in a bigger game that is already being played out. I can assure you all that if that game continues, I will not remain silent much longer and I will do everything that I can to prove beyond doubt the truth of what I have said to you all in this letter.
What's going on at
What's going on at Blairwatch?
There seems to be a trend over recent weeks of regurgitating other news and blog articles.
Whilst this in itself is not a problem it does make BW less relevant and interesting.
I think you made a big mistake by removing comments, and effectively banning certain topics of discussion.
Now you look like your too afraid to talk about the big things and instead concentrate on little details to obscure that fact.
After a number of years of being (almost) a daily visitor I know this is not a perception change on my part.
Totally agree with
Totally agree with Anonymous. In fact none of the changes over the last month or so, starting from control on news stories, have been positive. Makes me wonder whether New Labour haven't taken over - "If it ain't broke, break it!"
What a shame. This was one of a few good UK sites that was prepared to openly criticise, and present the "war criminal" option. The "recent comments" feature was excellent, and encouraged participation. Now, there is very little I can't find elsewhere.
re lack of new original
re lack of new original posts: Posting has been slower than usual here recently, for the most mundane of reasons I'm afraid. It's due to life, jobs, families, health, deadlines etc taking up our time and energies, not to mention other projects. But, there have been 15 posts in the last 12 days... Whilst some of these have been cross posting of others work, or 'snippits', which is a reflection of the time pressures I just mentioned, there has been original work too, notably Davide's writings on "The Trap". There is a balance to be struck between not posting anything when we have no time, and posting something to 'fill a gap' which I tend to do. If we are getting that balance wrong, sorry, but thats the nature of a blog run by 4 guys in our spare time, with other committments . Your criticisms on that score have been noted though.
As for 'censorship' etc, I don't think any comments have been removed or edited since the issue last came up. Incidently - in the lifetime of this blog [almost 2 years] , and the last 10,000 comments, around 100 have been touched, and 90% of those have been over 2 brief periods when we were deluged. It should also be noted that the vast majority of those deleted have been from the same few ip adresses/users and or referrers.
As for the Nu Labour gatekeeper insinuations - I'm sorry, but I'm not going to bother to respond other than to draw your attention to the last post I did, which was[ admittedly] a cross posting of a Craig Murray article, with my additional reference to CIA torture methods, and the repulsive response of the UK government to those US torture methods from Hansard.
I would have thought that met the "openly criticise" criteria, and presented the "war criminal option".
OK, I am responding [bait taken], but that post is on the front page, with [off a quick scroll down], 3 posts on Nu Lab corruption, 3 posts on torture and rendition, 3 posts on the errosion of democracy in the UK/US, and ref to the more draconian aspects of the EU, plus a post on 7/7 and what is about to emerge and 2 [very good and detailed IMHO] synopsis/previews of the Adam Curtis Trap series by Davide amongst others.
If Nu Lab have taken over here, they are doing a piss poor job!
What's up with the recent comment's block? Is it not showing for people? It's in the sidebar now... If it's broke, I'll try to fix it: ;)
Meanwhile, back to the topic of the post if that's OK with people - which was, I believe Nu Labour sleaze and corruption...
recent comments block is not
recent comments block is not showing for anonymous users, I can't work out why sorry. Is it showing for people when they are logged in, or is it just there for admins?
The "sidebar" disappeared
The "sidebar" disappeared around the time you fixed the wysiwyg editor; thought it was my Firefox, but just I've just loaded your pages through MSN and IE with the same results: No comments "sidebar".
"If Nu Lab have taken over
"If Nu Lab have taken over here, they are doing a piss poor job!"
If? If? If Labour do anything they do a piss poor job!
That'll be why I am doing
That'll be why I am doing such a piss poor job of fixing the recent comments sidebar issue... :)
Anonymous and peacewisher, I
Anonymous and peacewisher, I disagree. Since we got rid of the tedious conspiracy lot we've covered The Trap in real detail (and more to follow), the unreported story uf the US releasing al Qaeda figures in return for troops captured on a secret mission in somalia, racist and islamaphobic reporting in Fleet St as well as New Labour corruption.
In addition we have had a real improvement in the quality of debate within the threads.
We've also been working on a new project, of which you will hear more soon.
That'll be why I am doing
That'll be why I am doing such a piss poor job of fixing the recent comments sidebar issue..
Nah ringverse; if you were Nu-Lab you'd a levied a tax on it's use by now.
Ha ha get it, "Levy".
No 'comments block'  here,
No 'comments block' here, either.
No complaints either . Thoroughly appreciated Davide's work on The Trap.
Agreed, Quarsan, that
Agreed, Quarsan, that David's "The Trap" is an excellent piece of work. However, until that appeared I was seriously thinking of giving up on this site. Even Mike Smithson's "PoliticalBetting" site was showing a broader range of user comments. Particularly peeved that you have avoided the "Ugly Rumours" stitch-up.