There are a couple of very interesting entry in the newly published Register of Memebrs' Interest (4th December) from Nick Clegg. First of all we have a number of donations for his leadership election bid including one from Neil Sherlock of Godalming, Surrey. Then we have this rather odd entry,In July 2007 and September 2007 Mr Neil Sherlock, of Godalming, paid for a professional photographer to accompany me on a campaign visit and while at party conference (personal donation). (Registered 29 November 2007)So a personal donor (and former Lib Dem PPC and lobbyist) to Clegg's leadership bid paid for him to be followed around by a professional photographer in July and September before Ming Campbell stood down? Why would someone need a professional photographer to follow them around campaigning and at Conference? A little vain isn't it?
Oh hang on a minute, how about the possibility that, along with the registration of his campaign domain back in July, it was all part of the Clegg leadership bid plot against Campbell? Nah... just a coincidence I'm sure.
P.S. The registration of the photographer in July is also exceptionally late under the rules I believe. Had it been registered when I think it should have been in August perhaps more people would have asked questions?
9 comments:
Nick Clegg's campaign has been seriously disorganised - in marked contrast to Chris Huhne's, which has been slick and media savvy.
Whether or not senior Lib Dems in July had a least an idea that possibly there might just be a leadership campaign (the media were baying for Ming's head at the time you will remember) seems an easy question to answer...
There's a relatively innocent explanation to this: it is an open secret that Ming was going to stand down in any case immediately after the next election and throughout the summer it looked increasingly likely that Brown was going to call an election early (which as we all know he very nearly did).
I don't think Nick Clegg would deny he was making contingencies for such an eventuality. But that is not to say he was actively plotting against Ming - a foolish thing to do anyway since Ming had all but named him to be his successor.
PS Isn't it a bit precious of Rob Fenwick to switch off his comments regarding his post in response to this? Let's all point fingers at him and laugh.
verrrry interesting, still going to vote for Clegg over Huhne though (yet maybe with more scepticism).
James, that is actually quite funny about Rob's post.
Dizzy - you're barking up the wrong tree. Neil S was (amongst other things) one of Ming's speech-writers through to the end and just about as loyal a Ming-er as they come.
perceived loyalty and actual loyalty are too very different things.
Everyone knew Clegg was a potential successor even before Ming decided to jump, so I don't think it's all that surprising that he was looking to beef up his portfolio!
Haha, well that's what you get for giving reasons for switching off comments. Happy to debate with Nick's supporters either on LDV or my blog, if they're prepared not to post under aliases so I know who I'm talking to.
Rob
PS, I agree it was an open secret that Ming was going to stand down. I don't agree that it was an open secret that Ming himself was promulgating
See also:
http://takingstock.accountancyage.com/2007/08/sherlock-strike.html#comments
Post a Comment