Photograph courtesy of Flickr user lmg

The messy aftermath of Peter Hain’s resignation will not clear for sometime. Hain has fallen on his sorry sword for not declaring 17 donations in his deputy leadership campaign in time, a feat Gordon Brown disparagingly referred to as “incompetence”. But expect more swords to be self-sharpened in the coming weeks as Deputy Leader Harriet Harman and Scottish Labour Leader Wendy Alexander come under further intense scrutiny in their own cash scandals.

A corrupt Labour? Probably not. But the failures of leading politicians to obey electoral and donation laws, many of which were put in practice by New Labour, begs disbelief. Would anyone have cared if Peter Hain had declared an extra £100,000 more in his campaign? People might have been staggered at the amount of money being spent on a deputy leadership campaign, but given the hundreds of millions being wagered by current U.S. Presidential Candidates, the amount is minimal.

So why did Hain make the “innocent mistake” that has cost him his job? The answer is unclear; but the guessing can only take on sinister undertones. Clearly someone was being protected; even more clear was that here was a leading politician who had shown scant regard for democratic transparency which the electoral laws - introduced by New Labour - were intended to enhance.

Hain had to go. If only because democratic politics demands the highest of expectations from its politicians. Hain’s mistake may well have been “innocent” in his eyes, but the continuing arrogance and lack of transparancy this Labour government displays in its own internal politics sends a disturbing message out to the people it has been elected to serve: “Money talks louder than democracy”

Filed under: corruption, jackprevezer, labour, ukpolitics on January 25th, 2008