Is it fair to assume that McBride was allowed to resign, rather than be sacked, because it will in some way help his financial position? Will he keep pension rights as a result? Is there any 'hardship payment' for a resignation rather than a sacking? Or was this all about buying his silence. If McBride was sacked then surely he would be more likely to have something to say about the Great Protector that is Gordon Brown.
Monday, April 13, 2009
Which ever way the affair is looked at how can Gordon Brown not be implicated? The PM had lunch with Derek Draper at Chequers shortly after Draper registered his Red Rag web site. . .WHY? Why would the Prime Minister invite Draper to lunch? To discuss his work as a psychotherapist? Downing Street were oh so quick to react to the situation, casting McBride adrift, which tells you how worried they are.
What is clear is that there is something very rotten at the core of Labour. The fact that they think there is some orchestrated Tory campaign against them, led by Guido, shows how delusional they are. They are so beleaguered that they are demonstrating all the worrying traits of a bunker mentality. Brown's ability to get on with the more important job of getting us through the recession will be close to impossible.