Secret shares, Visas, Directorships, Mistresses – why Blunkett had to go
David Blunkett was due to appear before the Work and Pensions Committee yesterday morning
Tony Blair claims that he did not call that meeting in order to sack his work and pensions minister. The formal statement from the Blair camp says: “David Blunkett chose to resign because he had reached the conclusion that the position was untenable and that we would be unable to continue.”
Eyebrows were raised when Blair took Blunkett back after his shenanigans with Spectator publisher Kimberly Quinn. For an increasingly isolated prime minister to back his work and pensions secretary through a series of financial scandals would have been unthinkable.
“I would like to say that whatever mistakes he has made, I’ve always believed and believe now that he is a decent and honourable man who has contributed a great deal to his country, who has overcome immense challenges that frankly would have daunted the rest of us,” said Blair of Blunkett yesterday.
Blair is now in the ignominious position of being the only prime minister in British history who has had two ministers “resign” twice.
And when Blunkett packs his bags today he will be almost as unpopular as Peter Mandelson, the first of Blair’s ministers to resign over a scandal, get re-instated and then have to resign again.
Ostensibly the crunch came yesterday when it emerged that Jewish charity ORT paid Blunkett £20,000 for helping with plans for “future development”. The charity is backing proposals for a £46m state-funded school for Jewish children. Both Blunkett and the charity refused to specify quite what he was being paid the five figure sum for. The damage was done.
The ORT link, on top of last week’s revelations that Blunkett invested in DNA Bioscience without telling Parliament, made his position totally untenable.
At a press conference Blunkett said he stepped down to “protect the government from diversion from the policies that we’re carrying out, from the reforms we’re bringing in”. And he added that he was “deeply sorry” for any embarrassment caused to the Prime Minister.
Once known for his sound judgement, Blunkett has been in freefall since the end of his relationship with Quinn. Aside from the emotional damage, the saga has really hit his wallet. The former minister’s legal bills have already reached £80,000, according to friends. While Blunkett earned £130,000 a year when managing to hold down a ministerial position, this went down to a MP’s basic salary of £57,000 when he resigned last time around. Parliamentary rules stipulate that outgoing ministers must wait three months before taking on extra-curricular positions regardless of their shortfall income.
In his four months out of favour, Blunkett earned around £90,000 from a combination of lecturing fees, newspaper columns and unauthorised non-executive positions. Blunkett’s legal fees are mounting up. The shares Blunkett bought in DNA Bioscience, which he was forced to sell last week in a bid to keep his job, were in trust for his sons. His main asset is an ex-council house in Putney, valued at up to £400,000, but the lawyers have been eating away at that money. He assured his sons that he would get back their inheritance.
The whole affair has been a heavy blow for the prime minister. As soon as he announced that he would not stand for re-election, Blair was in trouble. He looks an increasingly solitary figure. The opposition has not lost an opportunity to give him a kicking. Michael Howard told Parliament yesterday: “We have seen the slow seepage of [Blair’s] authority turn into a haemorrhage. For how long will this country have to put up with a lame duck prime minister?”
But while you would expect the Tories to have a pop Blair has much bigger problems closer to home. He is trying to force through an agenda on education and law and order that is totally alien to many Labour MPs. His majority was cut to just 66 at the last general election and for a man used to operating with around 3 times that, this spells real trouble.
Blair faces a crunch vote next week when Labour MPs will oppose key clauses of the counter-terrorism bill. Most problematic are proposals to give the police powers to hold suspects for up to 90 days without charge. Senior Labour MPs are publicly speculating that the bill will fail. Financial scandals are usually the preserve of Labour MPs, while the Tories such as Cecil Parkinson and Jeffrey Archer usually fall on sex stories. Blunkett has managed to combine both sins.
And that can’t be far from Blair’s mind.