Newsnight and the BlogSpat

So last night Newsnight duly ran the story about Colin Challen and Ed Balls that Iain Dale and I have been arguing about. What did we learn?

Well, not a lot really. Colin Challen denied having been offered anything in exchange for standing down in his seat, the Treasury said he hadn't been and Tory spokesman Chris Grayling said he didn't believe either of them.

I don't think this alters the story. It may be, for instance, that Mr Brown was applying the rule of reciprocation that I've written about before. Challen might have been given a role on climate change and resigned out of "goodwill". Either way, I accept the idea that Ed Balls and Gordon Brown have induced him to stand aside.

So why don't I accept that it is a scandal?

Not because I am complacent about scandals, as Iain suggests. I think the highest standards are vital. I would never wish to ignore a scandal or argue that true scandal shouldn't be investigated.

And not because I love the Brown-Balls partnership. I think the reliance of the Chancellor on Mr Balls has not been a good thing and that their relationship is stifling and unhealthy.

My problem is more basic. My problem is that I don't think that moving someone to another role for which they are qualified in order to encourage them to vacate an office is scandalous.

I am not arguing that politicians should be subject to different rules from the rest of us. I think what has happened to Colin Challen is exactly what happens everywhere, all the time in every workplace. And why shouldn't it?

Please, don't just assert it's a scandal. Please don't just say that the Murdoch media loves Gordon Brown this week. Please don't just say that commentariat are cut off. That's not good enough. I need a proper argument.

So please just someone, somewhere explain what's wrong with it and why its scandalous.

That, or just give it up.

Comments

I for one agree. Unless CC was forced to move against his will, what's the problem?

[Chris C]

To my mind, to have a scandal, Challen needs to have been give a role which:

a) he is unsuitable for and so his appointment is to the detriment of public service

b) only exists to provide him with a job

Surely, those are the bases upon which this can be a scandal?

[BTLl]

There are two aspect of this business, which are not unique to politics but none-the-less should not be condoned in any organisation.

Firstly has Colin Challen been given a position in preference to a more suitable candidate. He may be suitable but that is far from being the most suitable. Many times I have interviewed suitable candidates who are not nearly as good as other, more suited candidates. Therefore the public are not assured that its public servants are acting solely in their interests.

Secondly the presumption that the position CC vacates will be available to one individual (EB) is presumptive on the electorate and therefore distasteful.

You quite clearly condoning this behaviour and therefore open yourself to charges of cynicism and being biased on the side of the perpetrators of this activity.

I think you have worked in media and politics too long if this seems acceptable and it is a disappointing to a reader that you believe common practice is justification for politicians not acting in the public interest. Your attitude is exactly why many, including myself, have so little time for politics - sadly to our detriment.

[tyger]

BTLL

So little time for politics? And you're reading a predominantly political blog, why?

Danny,

You're absolutely right to call Iain and Paul Staines on this one. If Tory criticism is to have any merit, then it needs to be robust and with foundation. This faux-outrage is seriously undermining Iain's credibility, who appears so desperately hypocritical and myopically partisan.

[Calum Aikman]

Well, I've tried. I've strained every sinew and exerted every muscle to get scandalized about this. I don't even feel mildly upset. I give up.

[partyrichter]

The only scandalous thing is that Gordon Brown wants Ed Balls in parliament. Whenever I have seen Mr Balls on TV he has never failed to make a fool of himself. People are sick of professional politicians.

I think that having Mr Balls in a prominent government position will be an asset to the Tories. They should be keeping quiet about this.

[tyger]

People are sick of professional politicians.

Are they? Who are the 'people' you speak on behalf of?