13 Comments

• Antony Hook 29th Mar '07 - 10:02pm

  I don’t think it’s on Conservative Home either.

  This just goes to show that Iain Dale’s blog and Conservative Home are one-sided pro-party mouthpieces and nothing more.

  Lib Dem Voice reports plenty of things that are not politically useful for the Lib Dems.

  It’s called balance or honesty and it’s a good reason to be a Lib Dem.

• Hywel Morgan 29th Mar '07 - 10:43pm

  There’s no reason why LDV should be balanced.

  I’m not even sure it’s true to say that LDV is balanced about reporting stories which are not useful for the party – for example there was nothing about the Burnley vote fraud trial/convictions.

• Iain Dale 29th Mar '07 - 11:29pm

  Not true. I commented on it twice in this thread https://www2.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=6214838&postID=469445909040271912

• Mark Pack 29th Mar '07 - 11:31pm

  And your blog posting (a word used deliberately instead of comment) is where …?

• Ian 30th Mar '07 - 2:33am

  By the way,how many Tory councillors have defected to the Lib Dems in the last two years?

• ColinW 30th Mar '07 - 5:57am

  4. Exactly. Typical Tory hypocrisy. Just like their deafening silence over al-Yamamah & BAE because of their links to Wafic Said & the wodge of cash they got from Mrs Said.

• Linda Jack 30th Mar '07 - 8:41am

  I have been pondering this one. Mr C is very sorry for being a naughty boy and clearly believes that is enough………..hmmm, in my job I think what he did may be regarded as “gross misconduct” and I am sure however grovelling my apology was – it might not swing it.

• Rob Fenwick 30th Mar '07 - 9:07am

  for example there was nothing about the Burnley vote fraud trial/convictions.

  There was, but at the time I thought it better to cover it in the ‘members only’ bit. I think at the time I was getting it in the neck for running too many ‘unhelpful’ stories

• Antony Hook 30th Mar '07 - 2:05pm

  Iain,

  I like your Diary, and might have told you so when I saw you on the Sevenoaks train.

  But you know in your heart that if any other party had been selling these dinners you would have had a lot more to say about it.

  Your Diary is like the whole Cameron-thing, intersting at first glance but too often leaving doubts later that it isn’t old fashioned Toryism.

• Iain Dale 30th Mar '07 - 4:27pm

  Antony, absolutely true. And I don;t deny it. But why would you find that odd? I don;t expect to see long articles on LibDem Voice on the Michael Brown issue, and I haven’t been disappointed. So don’t try and take the moral high ground on this because you are not entitled to. My blog is a Conservative blog. As I have already said above, I commented on the Cameron thing in a Comment thread and made clear that I disapprove of any activity which could be interpreted in a ‘cash for access’ manner. David Cameron immediately apologised after the ruling in sharp contrast to other politicians who have had been ruled against by Sir PhiliP Mawer.

• Rob Fenwick 30th Mar '07 - 4:29pm

  I have to say (I also said this on Norfolk Blogger’s blog this morning) I agree with Iain on this. We’re party political bloggers, not impartial news agencies. That said – I think Lib Dem Voice has run plenty of stuff on Michael Brown, both on the public blog and in the members-only area.

• Antony Hook 30th Mar '07 - 8:27pm

  Fair enough.

• Mark Pack 1st Apr '07 - 11:21am

  Iain – I think you’ve missed the thrust of the hypocrisy question – at least to my mind – which is that in some cases you are very keen for parties to pay back money and in other cases you are, err…, not.

  You present the “pay back the money” argument as being a principled one, so it should then be applied across the board shouldn’t it?

  And that means if a party leader, even your own, has had their fundraising operation ruled out of order, then you should be saying “pay it back” or (agreeing that we’re all political bloggers) saying nothing, rather than saying an apology is enough.