There’s been a weird rumbling noise in Islington today and I’ve been trying to work out what it is.

But at last I have the answer. It’s Emily Thornberry grinding her teeth.

Share This

Oh dear. It would appear that Omar’s boss has been ticked off again.

Last autumn, Emily Thornberry sent out what emerges came to 10,400 unsolicited letters to constituents using Commons stationary. Following a flurry of complaints, the Parliamentary Standards Officer Sir Philip Mawer has written to confirm that the cost of this stationary will now have to be paid back:

“It is clear to me that Ms Thornberry should not have used pre-paid envelopes at all for this exercise (since her letter was unsolicited) but should have covered the cost of the stationery and envelopes and the postage required directly, either from her Communications Allowance or out of her own pocket.”

…

“She has indicated that she will reimburse the cost of the pre-paid envelopes she used and I have asked her to do this.”

This whole adventure is estimated to have cost her around £4,250.

Of course, the “unwise” Ms Thornberry has form. Still, could be worse. At least she didn’t back Peter Hain in the deputy leadership contest!

UPDATE: Following my latest Swinsongate story, Young Labour have airbrushed their news story out of existence. This is at least better than retrospectively turning it into a different story entirely.

Share This

People wondering why the BBC left Emily Thornberry’s name off their report about her altering Electoral Commission press releases may be interested to note that her name has now been added to the story, along with the following statement:

* Earlier versions of this story did not include the name of the MP as it was a straight report from Sir Philip’s report in which she was not named. We added the name, and some extra background, once we became aware of her identity.

This may seem uninteresting to some, but to those who have for a long time bemoaned the Beeb’s habit of airbrushing its mistakes out of existence, this is the equivalent of the Berlin Wall coming down.

Rejoice!

Share This

Jonathan Calder asks a pertinent question about this story: Why doesn’t the BBC name Emily Thornberry?

As he says, the matter is published on the Parliament website. It’s a bit odd when the BBC are being even more secretive than Parliament.

I’m not clear whether this is intended to protect her or mischievously give the story legs.

Share This

There’s been some hoo-haa recently about Emily Thornberry MP buying up former housing association property at auction. Interestingly, she denies it is an investment, claiming the property will be used to, as Ms Thornberry puts it, “provide cheap and cheerful accommodation for some young people,” while the Islington Tribune article that appears in suggests it will be used for renting out to her “Parliamentary aides”. Does this mean she will be subsidising staff income by providing subsidised property? If so, my reading of the PPERA 2000 is that she will need to declare it as a donation in kind, either to Islington Labour or her Parliamentary Office.

All rather cheeky for someone who has adopted such a high moral tone about Islington’s housing crisis. But the fact is, Labour’s muddle over social housing in Islington doesn’t end there.

The latest episode in the council’s decision to sell off its commercial property portfolio is that apparently 50% of existing residents have either declined to buy their property, or failed to stump up the cash in time. I can see why these shop owners are nervous; Structadene’s bid does indeed appear to have been over the odds and they can expect to see major rent increases. I could bore you for hours about how the existing system gives rich landholders enormous benefits by enabling them to speculatively drive up the price of property and effectively squeeze the little guy out and increasing their property portfolio still further (in fact, if you are a long-term reader, I probably have). Perhaps Structadene will be model landlords and that the shop keepers who missed out were simply badly advised. Either way, the council has a legal obligation to sell to the highest bidder (courtesy: HM Labour Government), and will be using a substantial proportion of the money raised from this sale to invest in social housing.

Given that Structadene’s bid was so high, you would have thought Labour would be delighted. After all, back in April they were demanding that the District Auditor should investigate claims that the council was flogging these properties “on the cheap“. In the event, the money raised from this sale is £69m - £9m more than the optimistic forecasts. Now they’ve done a huge, vaulting, 180-degree U-turn and are claiming to be the resident’s new best friends. It really does beggar belief.

Share This