By now I think everyone in the blogosphere has read and maybe written about the Phil Woolas saga.
Mine is not whether the judgement is right, or wrong, but the fact that many questions arise, in my mind, from the case. I have no answers to give, although I’m sure some of you may.
- The judgement was against Phil Woolas, but the offending literature cannot have been produced by Mr. Woolas himself. Doesn’t that mean that the team who did. or didn’t do research and wrote the leaflets should have judgements against them?
- Will the local Labour Party allow that team to serve the next PPC at the by-election?
- If Phil Woolas is ‘kicked out’ of the Labour Party over this, should not the local members in his team be kicked out too?
- In this case there was a slim 103 votes between the top two. Is there a finite number of votes where the literature would not have been deemed damning enough to warrant a by-election?
- In future will it be the case that an official from Central Offices will have to approve literature?
- The Times opinion column today was slated, by comments, for it’s views on how this opens up every election result to a judicial review and that the courts should not have been involved. Is this going to draw a new battle-line in future elections?
- Ed Miliband gave Phil Woolas a shadow ministerial position, although I gather Mr. Woolas did not stand for a shadow post, is this poor judgement on EM’s part or Phil Woolas’ for accepting?
- It has been rumoured that the Conservatives will not field a candidate at the by-election. Would that really be good for democracy?
- Apparently Phil Woolas is going to call for a judicial review. How likely is it that he will get one?
Whatever the answers it really is a sorry affair and another stab at the back of MP’s, coming after so many scandals in the recent past and another one that we can say, it should never have been allowed to happen, and should never happen again.