by Peter Watt
I have a very personal experience of what it is like to be brutally cast asunder by the Labour party. The circumstances were different than those which have led to the position Phil Woolas finds himself in – but I suspect that the personal impact was similar.
I was general secretary of the party when, in November 2007, the Abrahams 3rd party donation scandal erupted. It happened on my watch. I took responsibility and in a blaze of negative publicity I resigned.
I knew that once I’d resigned an important part of the “handling strategy” of the donation story would be to rough me up a bit. I wasn’t naive. I accepted it as part of the rough nature of politics. The more I was damaged in the short term, the less the party was going to be damaged in the long-term. That had to be the right thing for the “greater good”.
What I was not prepared for was the massive toll this took on me, my family and friends. I expected that the party would support me personally, behind the scenes. That they would caveat their attacks. Issue some statements of personal support that recognised my contribution to the party over many years. With a few notable exceptions, what I got was a character assassination. It went beyond being “roughed-up” to being a full blown assault. The personal impact was devastating.
In the space of seven hours on November 26 2007 I went from being part of a safe and familiar tribe to being a pariah. I was offered no support from the party from the moment I walked out of Victoria Street.
It felt like I had no friends and I was incredibly lonely. I was also scared and I think, with hindsight, depressed. I certainly wasn’t sleeping, couldn’t watch or listen to the news without feeling sick and was hardly eating. The party that had been my life, that I’d believed in – that had nearly cost me my marriage – had become my enemy. I scoured internet coverage desperate for a sign that the party was quietly briefing something a bit more positive about me. But it wasn’t there.
My poor family. We had to stay with a succession of family members over a period of weeks living out of suitcases as our home was being staked out by journalists. One of my children was bullied at school because of me; another kept reading the papers and crying at what was being said about their Dad. My wife, Vilma, had to try and keep it all together. As weeks became months and then years, life slowly settled down.
So what? Wel,l there will always be people who, for whatever reason, suddenly “become the story” in politics. Sometimes that will be their fault, sometimes not. Sometimes they may actually have erred and sometimes not. But the party, and I mean that in the broadest sense, has two options. It can respond to the situation with either cold, hard political thuggery, or it can do what it has to do politically but with a degree of humanity. To have no sense of duty of care, no sense of our basic values and no regard for the personal impact of whatever events are in play is cruel.
In the last few days we have seen a complete lack of humanity in our approach to Phil Woolas, the treatment of whom has been nothing short of disgraceful. And before anyone says it – yes I know that he was found guilty of a breach of the representation of the peoples act. The leaflets and stories that formed the heart of the case were controversial to say the least. I would not even attempt to question the outcome. It is for Phil to explain his case.
No, the reason that I say that he was treated disgracefully is very different. He has been a party member for 35 years, an activist since his days in NUS, an active trade unionist, an MP in a three way marginal seat since 1997 and a man who, until 11.00am on Friday was seen as a loyal member of Ed Miliband’s shadow ministerial team. He was abandoned by the party to which he had given much of his life in a callous act of political brutality that had absolutely nothing to do with our values.
Phil may not have been everyone’s cup of tea politically. He was definitely found guilty of breaching electoral law by telling untruths about one of his opponents. But does that overwrite his history and contribution to the party of so many years? Of course the party had to react and be seen to act in a tough way. But did it have to put the boot in? Did anyone stop and think before beginning a political character assassination of what the impact on Phil or his family would be?
He would have expected that the party would have to put some necessary distance – but abandonment? That is just cruel.
Personally I wish him and his family well, life must be tough at the moment.
Tags: donation scandal, General Secretary, Labour Party, Peter Watt, Phil Woolas, resignation
“In the last few days we have seen a complete lack of humanity in our approach to Phil Woolas, the treatment of whom has been nothing short of disgraceful. ”
I’m somehow managing to contain my grief
Self-pitying shit.
He got caught for lying, but was guilty of so much worse. Don’t forget it.
New Labour was forged in the heat of driving out its left-wing members- and for their politics, not for their lies and racism. A case of ‘live by the sword’ I’m afraid.
Thanks for that. Obviously few were aware of how you were treated but could guess. It is horrendous how Phil W is being treated. Only when one is faced with LD leaflets especially the old “Liberal Focus” leaflets can one begin to understand why Phil went so far. He is a strong politician and I for one would like to see him back in the fray.
Hmmmm.
I have a fair amount of sympathy for Watt, who did seem to take a disproportionate amount of blame for donations scandal (Dromey dodging the bullet and ending up in parliament). I have less sympathy for Woolas – he and his agent were acting on their own.
I’m not a Labour supporter or member, but I imagine the approach taken is necessarily harsh as the actions of Woolas betray the principles of the party. Where I think some sympathy should be shown is that the actions of many others in the party are also below par and Woolas was unlucky to get caught.
Perhaps where Labour is most inconsistent (as are the other parties to be fair) is over the principle that actions have consequences. Expense cheats remain in the party, those who smear colleagues, such as Whelan, remain very close to the party so the level of punishment that others face can be seen as a little arbitrary.
The Augean stables must be cleansed
As a Lib Dem i am delighted by the outcome of the case, but as a human-being I also agree with Peter Watt’s comments and I think it is very two faced of the Labour party leadership to be disowning Phil Woolas in the way that they have been. I am also amazed that Ed M went on Channel 4 news to stick the knife in so publicly. I guess Phil will now feel like David M does about Ed!
Woolas knew that the content of his leaflets was untrue. Further, he knew the content of leaflets in his name contained words and phrases which few (if any) fellow Labour candidates would have used on their own literature. His crime wasn’t being caught, it was starting the whole exercise in the first place. Labour’s high command liked to use dog-whistle politics when they were in command of the story; when race and religion is used in the Woolas fashion out of their control they have had to let everything related to him go.
Dear Mr Watt,
I write as a (very!) long time Conservative Party member. I recall thinking at the time that the way the Labour Party briefed against you (it was obvious ) was a total disgrace. It was wholly unrequired. Your “scalp” had been taken for the political purposes required (sorry, but true). The appaling behaviour of Brown’s group (and much wider than that) was, frankly evil. They were scared, totally devoid of human values and, frankly, accidentally and negligently evil. I am also amazed at the way Mr Woolas is being treated (not by the press and the Lib Dems and Tories who have a fair point, he behaved very badly and probably deserves this outcome) but by Labour (Harman et al). A shadow minister last friday, now a non-person. They could have been much more human (“A terrible mistake by an honourable man who has done much etc etc”, but no. ). I cannot bear Mr Woolas and I could have been nicer!
Possibly why I cannot stand the values of the Labour party…
Best wishes and I hope you and your family have recovered.
Poor Phil.
He lied, committed fraud, and cheated the electorate. He behaved in the most shameful and despicable manner possible for a politician, and has brought upon himself the justice he deserves. For the damage he has done, I hope to God he gets a prison sentence.
Sympathy for him? Give me a break.
‘Did anyone stop and think before beginning a political character assassination of what the impact on Phil or his family would be?’
Did Woolas stop to think exactly the same thing? When I read such drivel, I have some respect for people like Guido Fawkes who can accept the blindingly obvious even when it is damaging to his own political allies.
Phil Woolas .. etc.You reap what you sow… waiting for others to reap… Harriet and Sally in particular.
I think the reaction by some betrays a denial of their own identical behaviour in respect to lying about their opponents… the idea that “this is not part of Labour Party values” just makes me laugh. And Simon Hughes’ reaction just makes me sick to the stomach. For some this may set a “worrying precedent” but for the rest of us it comes as a relief that candidates might be forced to actually tell the truth in their leaflets…
I sympathise with this view but I suspect the problem here was Phil’s desire to fight an appeal, thus dragging out the story even further. Knowing a bit about how these things work, I can well imagine that the party might have offered him a deal in which they agreed to ‘see him right’ in the longer term in return for him accepting the verdict with good grace and moving on.
“Hung out to dry by Labour: I know how Woolas feels”
So now, Peter, you and Woollas know how the entire country feels, especially the British hard-working classes who labour have utterly abandoned, and the poor who labour trapped in poverty, removing incentives and opportunities for them to make their own lives better, whilst continuously increasing their hopeless dependency on the state and increasing the burden in the tax-payers.
Labour abandoned this whole country in order to bend over backwards to appease the international banking and corporate elite and shafted this country in the process.
Labour have shown themselves to be an elitist, nasty racist party. They remind me of a cruel caricature of the old nasty tory party.
It’s not the lies that bother me, but the deliberate attempt to stir up racial tension to get re-elected. That is unforgivable.
Peter,
Now you know what the rest of us feel like having been on the end of Labour bullying, lying, smears and lies for 13 years.
Phil Woolas is a spineless, despicable piece of flotsam and deserves all that he gets.
What I’m still waiting for is to hear some kind of statement from Milliband. Having seen and known about the flyers, why was he elevated to a shadow position. There are only 4 possible answers
1) Milliband didn’t see anything wrong about the flyers
2) Milliband didn’t care about the flyers and thought Woolas would get away with it
3) Milliband was so detached he didn’t know about it
4)Milliband is just continuing in the tradition of lying, smearing, corrupt labour
If you only trim 5cms from a hedge that grows 10cms a year, eventually the light will be blocked.
It was about time electioneering was reigned-in and I am delighted that a Labour MP has been used as an example for justice.
You’d need a heart of stone not to laugh.
Woolas made accusations that his opponent “made a pact with the devil” and worked with extremists and terrorists. He stated that his opponent was a fraudster who committed numerous offences, most of which carry prison sentences if proven.
Woolas did not just steal an election, he coldly and repeatedly tried to destroy a man’s life. The Lib Dem has family too. The Lib Dem has friends too. The Lib Dem has his liberty, his good name, and feelings too.
I shall waste no tears for a man as vicious as Woolas.
woolas deserved all that he got/gets. he is the worst sort of mp – one who simply toes the increasingly corrupt line that is seen as “acceptable politics”.
Time to start carting this type no matter the hue of their politics to the ‘scrubs.
“….an activist since his days in NUS; an active trade unionist; an MP in a three way marginal seat since 1997…” In other words another useless apparatchik who has never done an honest day’s work in his life. Woolas is all too typical of the “Honorable” members who have graduated from the Mandelson and Campbell School of Ethics.
I very much agree with RDC above. I have yet to read your book Mr Watt although it is on my list to purchase once the price drops!! I too was aware of the quite dreadful behaviour directed towards you and the unbelievable briefing never mind lack of support. Shocking and really says much about a party and its members. It actually confirms my views that too many of our MPs are egotists in that they focus on their own interests without much compassion for the situation of others.
I have read the judgement on Mr Woolas and have no doubt that the right decision was reached. The material he used against his opponent was appalling. I am also aware that the Labour Party insurers met the some £800,000 costs of his representation at the Election Court. I am also aware that fast action had to be taken by the party because of the appeal procedure and the fact that the party just may have had to cough up money to meet costs. This all makes sense to me.
What does not make sense to me is the harshness of casting Mr Woolas aside and the statement that regardless of the success of any appeal he was no longer welcome to be part of the family. Just to think – only a matter of weeks ago he was selected by the leader to be an oposition minister. I thought at the time this was very foolish as somehow it smacked of the Court’s proceedings not been taken seriously. Considering that many of us were aware of the proceedings and had access to blogs detailing testimony etc, this beggars belief. Now a few weeks later he is not worthy of any personal sympathy for the situation he is in by the leadership of the party. They may want to put across how tough they are but they also come across as inhumane. They also have misjudged the public mood as many do not condone the actions of Mr Woolas but are sympathetic to the situation he is in.
Finally, offenders before our courts have their rights enshrined in law. Their Human Rights are paramount. Why am I left feeling that Mr Woolas has had his rights denied? He is entitled as a citizen to appeal any decion and like all who transgress the law he cannot be discarded until the appeals process is complete. Another shameful episode regardless of the actions of Mr Woolas by the Labour Party.
I think George Silver (Nov 8 2:14pm) gets it right. The parameters of political behaviour need to be dragged back towards decency and MPs (and general secretaries) need to stand up for propriety, rather than kow-tow to the powerful and corrupt.
What amazes me about Mr Watts’s post is its naivety: he’s been mixing with a group whose behaviour was generally vile, he supported them and now they’ve turned on him. What does it remind me of? Those simpletons who truly believed that Stalin meant well and carried out his wishes with zeal – until the 3 am knock came on their own door. Then it was too late.
Now, Mr Watts, it’s too late for you and for Woolas. Maybe others may heed the lesson and start the generation-long process of returning your party to the paths of righteousness, but I’m not holding my breath.
Good luck to you Peter.
I’m an ex-member of the party, and know how unpleasant and vitriolic many Labour supporters can be. They’re not interested in truth or ‘right and wrong’, they’re interested in the short term advantage of the party and anyone or thing that stands against that is liable to be trashed. It’s all in a ‘good’ cause, don’t you know.
Don’t take it to heart (as much as possible). Get on with your life and move on. They weren’t worth it anyway…
Thanks for the comments. Look my case is simple – people are entitled to their views. That’s politics. Phil should not and would not expect anything else. What he should expect is better treatment by the Party.
I had a lot of sympathy with Mr. Watts at the time, as obviously did many others.
The odious Jack Harperson got away with it, but then, any surprise?
Phil Woolas obviously over-egged it, but has it not occurred to anyone that whilst such allegations as he made can rarely be proved, he may have had good reason, rather than sheer medacity, for making them? – however impolitic. To believe that such activities do not go on is the height of naivety.
And as others have pointed out, The Labour party’s insouciance followed by over-reaction when found out is so typical.
Sorry, mendacity.
While I feel the court verdict etc were correct, I do feel rather like Woolas has been hung out to dry by his party – they didn’t disown him over the content of those disgusting leaflets, and Ed Miliband even gave him the Shadow Immigration brief, presumably giving him the impression his party was standing by him.
Yet as soon as he loses his case, they drop and disown him – whatever you may think of Woolas (and I’d rather not offer my own views, there might be children reading this…), that seems rather bizarre behaviour from his party.
And while we’re at it – if Labour want to do the right thing and prove they actually disapprove of the material output in Woolas’ name, perhaps they could disown the people who actually came up with these lies and insisted they were put into the literature in the first place?
Right, but I’ve just heard Woolas’s victim on the PM programme saying he stood to lose his life savings if he lost the case. Isn’t that also potentially a case of being disgracefully, and probably wrongfully, ‘hung out to dry’ ??
Ah, but of course, he plays for the ‘opposition’ so a bit of ‘collateral damage’ is an inevitable part of the political process, and only the ‘little people’ pay the price..
Funny old world..
Quite simply, Labour is the nasty party!
Interesting that you use the word ‘tribe’ in your article referring to your previous incarnation.
Ever reflected that this tribalism could be the root cause of your party’s behaviour?
Time and again, the Labour Party’s actions have been beyond the pale – the examples are legion try the big red book of new labour sleaze – but rarely is a squeak heard from people within the tribe. Individual thinking and personal morality pushed to one side for the greater good. No wonder Labour is a very sick party.
Sorry but there’s something snivelling and whiny about Woolas. He has the air of the boy who would grass you up for smoking at school. Happy to see the little turd getting the boot.
Call me an old softy but I would like to see political allies and opponents alike treated with humanity. I’d like to think that no-one who purports to seek to make the world a better place would kick a man when he’s down.
My own dealings with Peter Watt were in 2003 and oh, what a difference!
On that occasion he was indulging in what seemed to me ‘a callous act of political brutality’ of his own; demanding one of my colleagues – who had just lost his mother a day or two before – must tender his resignation from his council role that week or face automatic expulsion from the Party on the day of his mother’s funeral. (An empty threat as it turned out, based on a blatant misreading of the Labour Party’s rules).
Hard to think of a better example of someone willing to ‘put the boot in’ on someone; someone who in this case had not been accused, let alone found guilty, of any criminal or civil offence.
We all learn by experience. It seems that following his own fall from grace Mr Watt is now a sadder but wiser man.
Watkins doesn’t come out of this with flying colours either. First few paragraphs of the judgement make clear that there is a serious mismatch between his income and the donations he was able to make to his campaign. Confirms he was nearly kicked off Rochdale Council for non attendance.
I can’t understand why Woolas’s lawyers didn’t get full disclosure of Watkins’s bills for the election leaflets – they were given access to a complete annotated set, Watkins admitted he had distributed ” well in excess ” of 500000 leaflets( probably nearer a million) but this wasn’t followed through forensically.
Dear Peter. I have read your book and almost sympathise with you. You were young, bright, keen, ambitious, enthusiastic, clueless and utterly lacking in basic political survival skills and instincts. Your book is an object lesson in how to commit political suicide, and should be compulsory reading for anyone contemplating a political career. If you realise that now, there’s hope for you yet.
Anyone who saw Phil’s utterly pusillanimous Rabbit-in-headlights double-act with the completely delicious and very redoubtable Joanna Lumley would be aware of his uncorrectable lack of personal qualities. A competent politician should have managed at least a draw/win, or even a win/win result. Mr Woolas was unable to continue after the third round of 15. He was equally unable to control the conscienceless “activists” who directed his disgusting campaign. Clearly, he lacks judgement, charisma, ethics and has an unacceptable lack of moral fibre.
I do have sympathy for Watt – far more than Woolas but the Labour party under Blair / Brown has become so entrenched in evil, so bedeviled by “power at any cost” corruption that it is no surprise. I bet there are another 50 Woolas’ in Parliament and, yes, all Labour.
Whether you are all uneducated tribalists I doubt but the fact of the matter is the Laboiur party will not come to power for many generations (although of course they have breeded their own generation of Labour-sucking, benefit frauding and thieving populus who somehow vote for them!)
I know many people on benefits. All could work. 2 families actually have horses yet claim disability!! That, my friends, becuase of a background of “how not to behave” from people who are stupid enough not to know better. Comparisons with Russia and North Korea not far away! Labour deserve to go to hell and rot there.
He got caught lying and trying to stir up racial tension.
Excuse me while I weep for this poor, mistreated soul.
Anyone with any knowledge at all of campaigning would know that even 1 million leaflets would cost nothing like the £ 200,000 claimed by Labour .
Assuming you do not have your own printing facilities , a brief look at google would tell you that 5,000 A4 colour leaflets can be had without haggling for £140-150 hence a million leaflets would be under £ 30,000 .
This answersRichard Scorer’s point as to why Woolas’s lawyers did not follow it through – they knew his £ 200,000 claim was a load of bullsh1t .
Watt,
You knew about the dodgy Abrahams donations and your ignorance is no defence. You were General Secretary.
Your experience of Labour should have told you how they deal with people that threaten the reputation of the party.
Woolas was exactly the same. He knowingly trashed the party’s reputation by smearing his opponent. Labour’s punishment has been swift and total.
It cannot be said that this is judges trumping Parliament. This law was passed by Parliament. If the MPs in 1983 did not want their number to be exposed to this kind of enquiry then they would not have made it law. Perhaps they could not conceive that anyone would act the way Woolas did.
Good to see the normal anti-Tory vindictiveness kept for one of their own.
The Tories would have left a bottle of whisky on the table and a pistol in the drawer. Woolas will probably shoot the leader and exit thro the back window.
Sanctimonious hypocrites the lot of them.
Peter Watt raises some vital questions about how the Party deals with resignations from its ranks and the discipline of its members. Yet the issues Watt raises are very much compromised by his self-pitying and sentimental “life must be tough at the moment”.
I (re-)joined the Labour Party after the General Election and I am satisfied that Woolas has been suspended, having preferred that he was disciplined sooner by the Party and not appointed to Ed Miliband’s shadow cabinet. Woolas, both in his demagogic “tough on immigrants” stance as Minister and the disgusting election pamphlets published on his behalf during the General Election campaign, represents the worst of the now old New Labour Party, the ghosts of which need exorcising quickly. Rather than spout such emotive drivel, Watt could do better to use the energy and his talents to help revitalise the Labour Party post-New Labour, and make Labour a credible, society-centred and truly fair and progressive alternative to the Coalition.
That’s if Peter Watt would prefer Labour that way.
After 35 posts(mine was 6,Ithink),it is clear there is a polarisation between the tribe, who think politics has no moral rules, and the others who are utterly sickened by the internal behaviour of the party. Which party in Scotland had an elected MP commit suicide?Which party has now had an MP prosecuted and found guilty in a court of law? There is not a chance in hell of a future Labour victory until somebody cleans up this mess.
Got to love the self-importance of the commenters arguing that there’s something deeply wrong with the Labour Party because it cracked down hard on somebody committing a serious electoral offence and stirring up racial tension to boot. Obviously if we were reasonable, we’d be much nicer to the racist cheat…
Yes, Woolas has worked for the party for years. But you do not come back from this and if the party hadn’t kicked him to the kerb (as basic morality demanded anyway) we’d be putting up with the aforementioned self-important windbags complaining that Labour is inherently racist. Loyalty to the Labour party does not earn you the right to bring your party down with you.
At least this way all the windbags are doing is pretending to feel sorry for Peter Watt.
tim moore “the ghosts of which need exorcising quickly ”
Just thinking do these include, Harman, Balls, Cooper, Milibrand ?
In fact were does one stop.
The truth is, it is because of Woolas’ long history with the party that the words have been harsh – surely he should know better.
As a former Minister for Immigration he knew *exactly* the dangers of racial aggravation, yet his campaign materials played on this.
It is somewhat sad his career is likely to end like this, yes, but it is hard to feel too much sympathy of somebody who brought it upon themselves.
Oh for goodness sake, please take your head out of your arse or out of the clouds, or wherever it is.
This modern-day Judas Woolas almost destroyed a man’s reputation through his pre-meditated smears.
You get back what you dish out.
The real mystery is why Miliband re-appointed Woolas when he knew as well as anyone the kinds of things W had said. Worrying too.
@James says: November 8, 2010 at 12:08 pm
James – Labour HAVE no principles. Of that we are sure after 13 years. To stay in power was all that ever mattered to them
I’m afraid this reflects on your own personal morality, Mr Watt. Woolas lied. He lied to gain office. He let his colleagues down. He sullied his position as a representative of the community. And you wonder why he is being shunned.