Punching Balls

In Rachel Sylvester's hypnotically good column this morning she writes:

I am reliably informed that, after one recent Cabinet meeting, Jack Straw threatened to punch Ed Balls during a row about who was responsible for youth crime. The Justice Secretary came back to his department fuming that he had never been spoken to so rudely by a colleague in public and that he was not going to put up with it.

Downing Street has totally denied this. But I wonder.

I suspect they are denying that Jack Straw confronted Ed Balls and said he would punch him. That is not, however, what Rachel claims.

What she claims is that, after a Cabinet meeting Jack Straw threatened to punch Ed Balls. She does not say that he made this threat to Balls merely about him.

So what might have happened is that Straw, fuming, told a colleague something like "if he does that again I'll punch him" or "I feel like punching him". Perhaps this colleague is Rachel's source, hence the use of the words "reliably informed".

And if it's true, it is hardly likely that, assuming he remembered it, Straw would admit the exchange - one that perhaps took place with just one person - when asked by the Downing Street press office. And Balls wouldn't have known about it.

Just a theory.

Comments

[George Causer]

I have a suggestion to end labours funding woes. You pay a pound to punch Ed balls or any other member of cabinet you would pay for the next twenty elections in no time.

[Lee Jakeman]

Jack Straw is in good company. He joins the millions who would also like to punch Ed Balls (including me). Having said that, though, I wouldn't mind taking a swing at Jack Straw too. Perhaps you should have a "politician I would most like to thump / slap" contest?

[Ben]

She does claim that Straw made the threat to Balls. She wrote that he threatened to punch Balls "during" a row. Unless Straw was carrying on the row on his own, he must have made the threat to his colleague's face. If the threat was made later to a third party, as you suggest, then the sentence is disingenuous.

[pregethwr]

I suspect you are right.

However Sylvester writes: 'threatened to punch Ed Balls during a row' present tense.

So misleading at best if your interpretation is right, she should have written 'threatened to punch Ed Balls after a row...".

[James]

As usual, a Rachel Sylvester article full of anonymous "quotes", which she has clearly fabricated in a desperate attempt to string together an argument portraying Labour in a negative light. Such tactics equate to poor quality journalism, and hardly inspires readers' trust.