It would be very easy to gloat over the resignation of Damian Green. I'm not going to do so. What I will do is note its real political significance. This can be very simply stated.
He did not tell the truth.
He has paid the price for not doing so.
That matters enormously. In a world where Donald Trump daily suggests that there are no boundaries to the untruths that politicians can say, and after the Brexit campaign similarly eroded such boundaries in the UK, evidence that a politician can be held accountable for the statements that they make is incredibly important.
Of course there are massive political consequences for Theresa May from Green's resignation. And of course it does show, after the loss of two other ministers already this autumn, that the government appears to have no credibility and even less talent available to it. But please just remember and celebrate the key issue here, which is that honesty matters.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Didn’t David Davis say he would resign if Green was sacked?
Another broken promise, I fear
I’d imagine the fact that Green ‘resigned’ gives Davis enough wriggle room to stay. Besides, if he resigned, there’s surely nobody else who would want to take over the role? I suppose you could replace him with a half brick – couldn’t do any worse a job.
If Green was sacked….
A resignation is not a sacking.
Words have meanings for reasons. (Well some do)
He was asked to resign
I think that’s darned close to a sacking
“I think that’s darned close to a sacking”
Yes, of course, but it’s enough wiggle room for a slime ball to get through without touching the sides. 🙂
It will be instructive, perhaps, to see how the right wing media covers this particular resignation.
I might have to go round the library and see which gutter rags they carry. Sure as hell ain’t buying them 🙂
The BBC usually do a front covers segment, google it. It means you don’t even have to pick up one of those filthy rags.
That’s one interpretation. I’m wondering myself if he hasn’t been got shot of because much more damaging revelations were going to come out if he stayed a minister. It really seems a bit late in the day for May to be developing any concerns about honesty in her ministers. If honesty matters to May, why is Davis still there, and why has Boris ever been there at all? Not to mention Duncan Smith…
Al Capone was ‘done’ for tax evasion.
Nail on head, I think.
Whether Hard Brexiters threatened to expose more detail, or whether a potential libel route would do that, or both.
Getting away with lies, contempt and compromising behaviour has almost been given precedent by a succession of refusals to accept culpability.
After positioning to keep him in office against a tide of obvious validity not to, and only a week ago three senior Tories spoonfeeding Peston that Green ‘definitely’ was safe, it seems probable May/Green reacted in fear of unknown detail.
This from informed political commentator Paul Waugh: “The old Watergate adage – that it’s the cover-up that gets you not the crime — is a bit tired, yet in Green’s case what did for him was his bizarre decision to lie that he’d known about the porn. Some Tory MPs are upset about “coppers’ revenge”, but the minister himself clearly was at fault. And if you can’t trust his word on the porn, can you trust him on his account of other alleged misconduct? Some in No.10 feared more allegations could emerge in coming weeks.” Exactly.
Interesting that when David Davis lied he was not sacked. In this new world of ours, only lying about matters with sexual connotations seems to be grounds for dismissal. presumably the ministerial code has an exclusion clause about lying for the sake of the party.
Don’t many of the government ministers and the prime minister herself lie on a regular basis
Liz Taylor says:
December 21 2017 at 9:05 am
“Don’t many of the government ministers and the prime minister herself lie on a regular basis”
See the comment above yours from Keith Roberts.
There are lies, damned lies and ……party loyalty.
And aprurient press which just loves a sex scandal – much more interesting than politics apparently 🙂
There is a word one could use, but it seems to have disappeared from politics these days, has it become a dirty word? He lied. Those were lies. He’s a liar.
There, in three different forms.
Truth has an opposite word, and it’s not untruth, or misleading statement.
It’s lie.
But I expect lawyers need many more “subtle” words in order to justify their existence and the three weeks they spent examining Green’s misconduct and his choices.
No subtlety in what Green did. And the poverty of vision and morals remains exposed in politics, first and foremost in its supposedly leading parliamentary party.
Lie gives rise to libel claims
Although in this case it seems pretty hard to see what his defence would be for his actions
“….Truth has an opposite word, and it’s not untruth, or misleading statement.
It’s lie….”
Sounds good. Impressive oratorical point, but not sound, I’m afraid.
All sorts of things we believe to be true are not so.
To be a ‘Lie’ there must be the knowing intention to mislead.
Maybe he was actually sacked for being pro-EU and telling lies was a cover?
I feel sure it was start to finish a Brexiters’ mission accomplished.
May and Green thought they had beaten it off, or at least gave out that confidence as a tool to do so.
It is hugely significant that those that aired the issue in the first place had a second wind.
Because it shows that their target is May, and her misplaced protection of Green now gives them more ammo.
And the conspirators have a fixer on the inside, Williamson probably even pushing minute by minute to get the Deputy PM job.
The Brexiters went for Green because they feel May will screw up their Hard aims and so their aim is to get her out even though it risks Tory control. He voted Remain but that’s irrelevant when he’s a political game-player with driven motive – ie. perfect CV for a hatchet man.
Going to result in a snap election soon.
* he voted Remain should say Williamson voted, not implying Green by ‘he’
Brian Cartor says:
December 21 2017 at 11:48 am
“I feel sure it was start to finish a Brexiters’ mission accomplished…….
……….Going to result in a snap election soon.”
Not unless it’s forced.
Like her or loathe her May is holding her party together (after a fashion). She sits astride a fence of razor wire. She must have her knickers Chobham plated. 🙂
Jeremy Hunt said that Damian Green lied on the Radio 4 Today programme this morning. This is being reported on the Guardian website this morning. Does this mean that libel cases will be made against Hunt and the Guardian?
I suspect not
As I said,It is very hard to see what’s defence Damian Green could put forward on this issue if he wanted to sue
Despite this further ‘resignation’ I suspect the polls will still show a solid 40% for the Tories-the immovability of this ‘block’ is a major obstacle to change. despite manifest incompetence from May and the Government this block will not shift and indicates that there is still significant belief in TINA. Because of this, even if the Front bench were found to be brothel owners, this 40% would not shift.
This is worrying because it means the pace of change could be very, very slow. It’s unusual for support to sustain itself like this when a Government has these problems. In the past, the alternative was a neo-liberal, Tory-lite Labour; now the alternative is, to some extent, the first departure from neo-liberalism after 50 years of its hegemony – so the 40% will stay. I fear.
To be honest I’m sad that yet another man has had to use hard core porn at all. Honestly – I know that we don’t all do it – but it seems to be a weak spot I wish that men could comes to terms with better. I mean Green is old enough to know better. And he should have thought about the consequences more too given his position.
It may also have something to do with power as well – the more power human beings get, the more we think that different rules apply to us.
I find the whole thing sad.
I’m sickened at how the BBC is portraying asMay brave and strong for sacking Green. She obviously had little option. However, if she’d refuse to sack him no doubt she would also have been called brave and strong.
Agreed
Yes, Carol, but what a refreshing variation on ‘strong and stable’.
Also similarly meaningless.
Nothing the BBC does dismays me any longer. They have descended beneath my contempt in the field of current affairs and news coverage.
According to the Guardian, May now wants an investigation into how the info on Green was leaked.
What the hell is going on here?
So what would have happened had there not been a leak Mrs May? A cover up? He either had porn on his Government sponsored computer or he didn’t. That is the issue. I’ve seen people escorted out of the office for this at work and rightly so. Who cares if it was leaked.
Had Green been totally innocent however then such an investigation into a leak would be appropriate.
As ever with May it is all very mixed up and unclear.
The question is whether the police should have leaked
There is a public interest defence
A minister resigned
Seems to me that they have a prima facie public interest defence….
The content (legal we are told) of his work PC are a matter for his employer and not the police. The police have a responsibility not to disclose information obtained in their enquiries as confirmed by the Met Commissioner etc and there may be data protection issues.
It cannot be right that police retain information obtained in an enquiry 9 years ago, which led to no charges, and then make it public when they are retired and away from any disciplinary action.
There is no doubt there are concern about the conduct of the police
But first you presume he had an employer – he did not
You also ignore the fact that the police officers have a public interest defence – which may save them
Once the precedent has been established that the police have a political role in society and can use or abuse their powers to those ends it is very difficult to rein back from there.
That precedent was firmly established a long time ago.
Nothing short of a complete re-writing of police powers would put Police Commissioner Pandora back in the box.
One of the few things that the media can still do is get round the establishment’s defence of inadmissible evidence in formal proceedings.
It can be massively abused as a witch hunting tool, but sometimes (albeit rarely perhaps) it is still used to good effect.
On precisely what grounds Green’s being ousted from office is actually a ‘good effect’ probably depends on all manner of judgements.
One liar more or less in government is somewhat immaterial.
I am just enjoying the government’s discomfort from my particular partisan perspective. The justice of the case is not of great consequence to me, I’m afraid.
Who can we have next? If we can’t vote ’em out, let’s have ’em hounded out.
Sometimes the ends justify the means, though I accept it’s a dangerous process and liable to cut both ways.
For Theresa May this is retribution a long time in coming … for trampling the farmers crops ? 🙂