Since the publication of the Downing Street memo last week there has been a lot of speculation about who wrote it. Iain and Guido think it was Philip Gould, who, let's be honest, has a history of writing and leaking such things.
The official Downing Street line has been to dismiss the memo by saying it was not written by any of Blair's staff, or Labour Party-funded staff in his personal office. There has been no denial of the memo's existence or of it's validity.
Whilst Downing Street's line is what led Iain and Guido to Gould, are there not a number of political appointees who work on the Civil Service side in Number 10? Wouldn't these be people who fall between the gaps of the very specific groups in the PMOS's official statement?
It is pretty much an accepted truth these days that Gordon Brown will takeover from Blair as the next leader of the Labour Party - thereby becoming Prime Minister. It is also a well known fact that Brown very much has his own "team" in the Treasury that will inevitably move next door into Downing Street when the time comes.
Could it therefore be that this memo emanated from those who fall through the cracks in the official line who known that they are about to lose their jobs? Was the memo actually a plea by those that know they have no future salary prospects in Downing Street for someone, anyone, to stand against Brown?
Obviously the contents of the memo is astonishing, and in my mind quite an accurate reflection of how poor the Government actually is. But rather than it being by someone like Philip Gould, might it just be by a bunch of disgruntled employees who really are not looking forward to the hatchet man next door ruining their summer with compulsory redundancy?
You'd think they'd all be in a Union for their own protection, wouldn't you?
7 comments:
What do you think of the theory that it was Peter Mandleson?
I don't.
Heh, as I pushed submit, I knew that was going to be the reply. So, you don't think there's any possibility it may have been him at all?
Let me put it like this, my speculation stems from conversations I've had with others. That's not to say it isn't possible though.
Fair enough, and point taken.;)
Just shows how bad things have got over there that people don't care anymore and are just throwing more fuel on the fire in anger and frustration...
Iain and Guido are right, it was Gould. The giveaway was the flaky, slightly over-dramatised phraseology that Gould uses, as well as the overarching preoccupation with public perception and electoral considerations.
The only other possibility is that was a spoof - ie someone who has made a study of how operates Gould and was pretending to be him.
All in all, it seems the logical source and I wonder what else will come out from the 'cracks' as Gordon Brown becomes certain.
Post a Comment