Give us proof not smears, Lord Levy

It's unclear what Lord Levy was trying to achieve with his autobiography, but the final result in today's Mail on Sunday frankly isn't very edifying. Consequently it won't do much damage to Brown (undoubtedly the reason he secured a large advance and allowed the serialisation five days before polling day.)

The book presents smears in place of facts in some kind of public quest for revenge justice. The only motivation seems to be a feeling he was let down by Labour, including fascinatingly, Tony Blair. But the details don't live up to the headlines.

"I warned Tony about long massages with Carole" gives the implication that something untoward was going on. But he says his decision to talk to Blair about this resulted from "gossip within No10 concerning visits Carole was making to Chequers to give an increasingly stressed Prime Minister long massages". Nothing further is spelt out. A blow below the belt.

The charge that Tony Blair told Levy that "Gordon can't beat Cameron" isn't well enough evidenced either. It wouldn't be a surprise if something like this was uttered - given the infinitely-documented personal animosity between Blair and Brown - but Levy offers nothing by way of corroboration or context to give it credibility - even before the inevitable Blair (quasi?) denials started to drop. Again, nothing proved.

The Cash for Peerages section is interesting. He explains that he did have views about who should get peerages and honours, and he did tell those responsible in Number 10 about them, but stresses he was never involved in the final peerage/honours selection meetings.

However some key details again lack full credibility. When he was accused by a donor, Sir Gulam Noon in The Times, of asking for them for secret loans rather than publicly-declared donations, he merely replies this statement was "the product of an impaired memory."

The lingering impression of Levy is of a bitter, unforgiving man. Not unlike Sir Menzies' Campbell's recent work, he charts every compliment but also records every snub.

He was - disproportionately? - offended when Blair asked Sir Ronald Cohen to help with fund-raising before the 2005 general election, and then again when Blair didn't name check him at a farewell Labour gala dinner. "Tony publicly praised and thanked a number of the people who had helped him [but] he made no mention of me. I said nothing though I'm sure I was not alone in noticing the ommission" (Blair of course did attend his own farewell party at Lancaster House however to make his own high profile public tribute.)

Levy undoubtedly suffered through the cash for honours affair because he was being tainted by rumours and innuendo. So it's nothing short of extraordinary that he chose to go down the same route himself and offer up smearing semi-facts about others.

Comments

[Jeremy Poynton]

Sounds like they all deserve each other.

[Silent Hunter]

An odious book from an odious little, man.

I agree with the previous post - they do all deserve each other.

I do hope that the authorities manage eventually to catch up with Lord Cashpoint and bring him to justice.

[Chuck Unsworth]

Actually I'd sooner that Levy gave us the smears. It's altogether more entertaining than the facts - which are too depressing for words.

Anyway, watching Brown and his people mounting (advisedly!) defences by launching their usual ad hominem attacks is great fun. 'No one pays any attention to Levy any more' - oh, really? Well, will his book sales and syndication better Brown's astoundingly turgid book on 'Courage' (currently remaindered, and receiving no bids at all on Ebay)?