Tuesday, July 22, 2008

What lefty blogs didn't mention......

I thought I'd take the opportunity now that lunch is over to make a comment about the Charity Commission report into the Sith Smith Institute. The reason I've no real comment on it until now is because is it Guido's little bag, and I consider him a mate who deserves to bask in his own ego over this one because he, quite rightly, initiated the investigation into the "think tanks" activities that was alleged to have crossed the line from impartial charity to party political strategy policy vehicle.

What is interesting is the way that certain bloggers on the Left have decided to read the Charity Commission's report with myopia and suggesting that the whole thing was a "busted flush" and have now moved to open another front based on pure ad hominen circumstantial conjecture. What is most intriguing is the complete lack of reporting of another report that was carried out at the same time.

You see, for those unaware, back when Guido kicked off the whole "Smith Institute" bag a counter-complaint was made against the centre-right think-tank, Policy Exchange. This was led in the blogosphere by people like Unity and my favourite loon, Tim Ireland. their argument went like this. Policy Exchange has links to the Conservative Party. Iain Dale was a trustee. Ergo, Policy Exchange is just like the Smith Institute, these Tories don't just eat babies they are hypocrites as well.

The thing is, whilst they've been eagerly typing away about how the Charity Commission report on the Smith Institute was meaningless (which it clearly wasn't if you read it), they've failed to mention the report into the think-tank that was investigated in a tit-for-tat manner.

This couldn't be because the report , unlike the one into the Smith Institute, found "there was no evidence of party political bias towards the Conservative party or any other political party" could it? Make you wonder where the real "busted flush" was huh?

23 comments:

kinglear said...

Surely Guido wasn't in a basque? I have wondered about him a bit though....

dizzy said...

Clearly freudian slip on my part

Sunny said...

there was no evidence of party political bias towards the Conservative party or any other political party

Of course not.... sorry, how many people have joined the Boris administration recently from Policy Exchange? If you could just clarify that, compared to how many people from PE have joined other parties for whatever reasons, it would be great.

cheers

Tim said...

At the risk of receiving further nuisance calls from a man who regards contradiction to be provocation:

1. First time I've seen that report. Thanks for the heads-up. Can you also point me to the 'Guido' equivalent - i.e. a blogger who has been trailing the pending report for months?

2. My criticism of Policy Exchange stands; Nick Boles used Policy Exchange as an administrative base for a political campaign and Iain Dale fronted a report on one charity without doing the obvious and declaring an interest (that he was a trustee for a very similar charity).

3. I don't recall having anything to do with an official complaint, but you appear to be suggesting otherwise.

4. "Tories eat babies"...? Man, I haven't heard this one since Milton's dipsticks were on the loose. Are you sure you don't want to choose a lower first rung?

5. My interest in the Centre for Open Politics is in defence of the Smith Institute? Is that what you're saying?

6. I used the words 'busted flush' quite deliberately. Guido was hoping for and banking on a far better hand than the two-pair he got.

7. And you're bloody dreaming if you think I'd waste breath on protecting Gordon Brown.

dizzy said...

Sunny, the quote was taken directly from the report. Argue with the Charity Commission.

Tim - go fuck yourself. Incidentally, I only publuished your comment so that you didn't ring me up complaining about it. You do have your own form after all even if you do try to play the innocent little puppy.

dizzy said...

p.s. Tim. Love the crazy wild inferences you've made from my post. Most impressive.... almost sixth former quality actually.

Tim said...

a) Iain Dale gave me his number. I did not ferret around "a very small industry" looking for it. Like you did to me. Nor did I publish it on my website. Like you did to me.

b) Iain had published a comment about me on his website that was untrue, and was refusing all emails/comments from me regarding it. He left me no choice but to call him and confront him about it. And he deleted the offending comment IIRC.

c) Unless you're talking about the two calls to Ellee Seymour using numbers she offered on her own website? Would you like to go over your role in that again? Really?

d) Please do not misrepresent my position in order to make your highly questionable acts appear excusable. Especially if you're going to have the audacity to call me a loon.

e) Surely what you meant to say was "Go fuck yourself. I rest my case." because you have clearly dealt with every point I raised. Bless you and your quest for logic, reason, and sensible debate.

^^ might be sarcasm ^^

dizzy said...

I didn't ferret around anywhere, someone offered it to me. I've told you that many times, you just chose to ignore it. As for misrepresentation, that's a bit rich coming from someone who is demanding his points to be addressed when all they are are off-topic extrapolated inferences of what you think I said rather than what I actually said. Oh yes, and you are a loon. A loony loony loony tune loon of extravagent proportions.

Tim said...

"a counter-complaint was made against the centre-right think-tank, Policy Exchange. This was led in the blogosphere by people like Unity and my favourite loon, Tim Ireland"

No, it wasn't.

It seems pretty clear what you're saying here, Phil. Yelling 'loon' won't take that away.

"someone who is demanding his points to be addressed"

Where did I demand that you address any/all of them? I only noted that you failed to address any of them. Is this one of them off-topic extrapolated inferences of what someone thinks was said one hears about?

"I didn't ferret around anywhere, someone offered it to me."

Your story has changed a few times, but let's go with your first one; you claimed to have called someone (other than Iain Dale) "on the off-chance that they would have it" and they did.

So they offered it to you after you didn't-quite-ask-for-it? Is that the latest version?

But even that's beside the point. If it's ex-directory, it should be obvious that I only want people to have it if I choose to share it with them. I certainly do not expect it to be shared carelessly or published maliciously.

dizzy said...

*yawn*

kinglear said...

Decidedly yawn

Benjamin said...

Dizzy ... I am HUGELY disappointed.

Once again you have allowed a tiny fragment of my life to be wasted by publishing the deeply important/totally bonkers (delete as you see fit)comments your good friend and drinking buddy, Mr T Ireland (does that sound too sarcastic?) on this blog-web-thinggy.

There are those of us with staunch stomachs who find trying to digest the offerings of said Mr T Ireland to be a fruitless exercise (although he might be a fruit {English slang version rather than US} for all I know).

PLEASE, Dear Dizzy, do us a favour .. please deal with your 'friend' in an approrpriate place, which, I humbly suggest, is a long, long way from here.

Yours, with word verification wuu gobo which seems somehow quite appropriate, Benjamin

JuliaM said...

Oh, god....

Nurse! More lithium for Mr Ireland. Stat!

Dizzy, you should know better than to get down in the mud and wrestle with a pig. You both get filthy. The difference is, the pig enjoys it...

Sunny said...

dizzy - my comment wasn't directed at the CC. It was directed at you. You have a brain, why not tell us what you think about these links then?

US said...

It really is time someone organised a Blogebrity Death Match competition - it would be so much fun.

My money would be on Guido walking out of the cage alive at the end of it - not that I've the faintest idea what any of you look like.

Barnacle Bill said...

Don't they let "Tim" out very often?

Mother Superior said...

wasn't Guido the nice law-abiding citizen that got done for drink-driving and driving without insurance. He could've killed someone. So nice you are all triumphalist angels dancing on the head of a pin.

Grow up boys.

cjcjc said...

Sunny - can you not understand thw difference between using charitable funds to further the cause of a specific *party*, as opposed to a specific *policy*.

The Smith did the former.
PE the latter.

The PE guys obviosuly do have personal affiliations.
But the CC concluded that they did not abuse charitable status in pursuit of party interest.
Unlike the Smith guys.

Sorry about that.

tory boys never grow up said...

What right wing blogs fail to mention

1. The Charity Commission do not appear to have issued a formal report on the Policy Exchange and they have certainly not undertaken as detailed an examination of PE as they have done for the Smith Institute. The CC do not even appear to have issued a formal press release on their equiries into the Policy Exchange and I suspect that you are relying on PE's very short statement on this matter. However if you look what is reported here http://www.thirdsector.co.uk/Channels/Policy/login/833094/

you will see that the CC want the PE to work a lot harder to avoid perceptions of political bias. Perhaps you should use you contacts to reveal what else in in the CC's informal report. Remember that the Smith Institute was the subject of similar review back in 2001/2. If you think all is as white as white at the PE you are very much mistaken.

2) that the CC report on the Smith Institute cleared the then Chancellor of any improper involvement (read the conclusions) yet the right wing bloggers now want to waste public money in getting the Electoral Commission to examine undeclared donations by the Smith Institute to Gordon Brown.

So much for logical commentary

machiavelli said...

Who is this Tim Ireland? Is he gay? The hissy fits sound so camp!

Anonymous said...

The CC investigation into the Smith Institute is of a different order of the investigation into PE.

The Smith Institute got caught partly as they stuck the transcripts of their events online, which contained party political comments.

I've heard similar, including from members of the shadow cabinet (Willets) at PE events in the past. The difference being that PE are not stupid enough to post verbatim event transcripts online.

There is no way that the Smith Institute, PE or IPPR should have charitable status. It isn't what they're there for and they all pull similar tricks in order to stay within the letter rather than the spirit of charity law. The difference here is that the Smith Institute got caught.

Nancy's stout said...

tory boys never grow up said...
'What right wing blogs fail to mention'

Who is this prime tit? Someone close to the stinking sewer of Number 10 (nasty but tragic) or a distant individual hell bent on defending this truly awful bankrupt (of ideas, morality and, hey, cash) government? I saw this collection of drips from the end of dog's mickey on Guido. Brown is mentally unsuitable to run a church raffle, when will people like you just hold up your hands and come to terms with the simple truth regardless of your politics? Put the country first.

LightenUpGuys said...

this is all so much good bedtime reading.

Just the thing to put one to sleep.

No wonder the MSM make fun of you.