Political interference stops play in cash for honours scandal

I am not claiming that Tony Blair, unlike David Lloyd George, personally profited from the sale of honours. Whereas Lloyd George put the money in his own pocket, Tony Blair gave the money to the Labour Party. Nevertheless, in my view, as Angus MacNeil MP, points out in his letter, it is still an offence under S.1(1) of the 1925 Act. Lord Levy was Tony Blair's chief fundraiser, he did not act upon his own authority, rather he operated for and on behalf of the Leader of the Labour Party, who is none other than Tony Blair. It cannot be argued by Tony Blair that he did not know what Lord Levy was up to. So, before we even start, there is a joint enterprise. Between them, they conspired, to commit several offences contrary to S.1(1) of the Act. In my view, it is irrelevant whether the money is called a loan or donation, because the money was obtained for the purpose of granting a honour for a reason other than upon merit. And, those who tried to buy or succeeded in buying such an honour are caught under S.1(2) of the Act.

This is not an attempt to perform a trial by media. The media have already reported the story. A MP contacted the police to investigate the media claims. The police have investigated this and other issues. However, the ball which Angus MacNeil MP started rolling has been stopped by Lord Goldsmith, the Attorney General. Lord Goldsmith is a friend of Tony Blair's. This introduces the conflict of interest. If Lord Goldsmith's integrity had not already been compromised on, at least, two occasions already, the changed legal advice on the Iraq war, and the decision not to proceed on the BAE/Saudi Arms deal, there would not be such a problem. However, in English law even a perceived bias by a decision-maker means that that person should stand down. If Lord Goldsmith does not remove himself from this case, he must be removed from office.

The political football should be allowed to take its course.