Stephen Byers is a fantasist

Former minister barely influenced policy in government, let alone out of it. This is a cock-up, not

By James Macintyre Published 22 March 2010 15:34

Unsurprisingly and pretty understandably, the Tories are fighting hard to squeeze as much juice as they can out of the deeply embarrassing and rather obscene attempts allegedly made by Stephen Byers, the former transport secretary, to make money by claiming to have influence over current ministers.

As Byers has referred himself to the parliamentary watchdog, the opposition will probably not succeed in gaining a seperate inquiry into what it is portraying as a "cover-up at the heart of government". Yet there is no doubt the claims are damaging to Labour.

Given the lessons of the MPs' expenses scandal -- that the perception of swift action is everything in our "24-hour media" -- Gordon Brown would do well to be as plainly critical of Byers in public as his aides are being in private today. And certainly Harriet Harman faces a difficult task addressing the matter in the Commons this afternoon.

But this story does not compare to the effect of the expenses scandal across parliament, nor -- as some broadcast commentators are claiming today -- the widespread "cash for access" affair under the Tories. Because essentially, Byers is not just a loner who made little impact as a minister, but also a fantasist.

As Christian Wolmar explains today on Comment is Free:

The claim that the intervention by Byers saved several hundred million for [National Express] does not . . . stand up. The liability for franchisees is limited, since no private company will sign a deal with unlimited potential liabilities, and in this case the amount of the contingency and the bond placed with the department was around £75m, the amount which National Express duly lost.

The one concession Adonis made was to allow National Express to keep its other two franchises rather than be forced to relinquish them, which the government can, under its "cross-default" rules that are supposed to stop owners of several franchises retaining profitable contracts if they abandon loss-making ones. Adonis initially threatened to foreclose on C2C and East Anglia, but then announced he would not do so as it was not in the interests of passengers, pointing out that they only had a couple of years left anyway. In fact, he was fearful of a legal challenge by National Express as the rules had been badly framed.

In truth, the department has always been ready to do deals with franchisees. First Great Western was bailed out a couple of years ago when it was in trouble, and allowed to keep its franchises in return for promises of extra investment. Therefore the notion that it was Byers which made the difference is fanciful.

 

 
 

9 comments

writeoff's picture

Mon, 2010-03-22 15:57 — writeoff (not verified)

Never mind all that. he is flogging influence, real or imagined, it should be a hanging offence. Brown shoot just have him taken out and shot. Lobbying makes a huge difference. Otherwise, why on earth would we have relaxed laws to encourage problem gambling? The whole grubby business needs outlawing and access to MP's made completely transparent - who they meet and why. You should not be able to buy your way to a meeting any more than a peerage.

The Old Man's picture

Mon, 2010-03-22 16:53 — The Old Man

The MPs being prosecuted for theft are all Labour, aren't they? And all those named in the current scandal are Labour. L is for Labour, L is for...

Boudicca's picture

Mon, 2010-03-22 17:25 — Boudicca (not verified)

Is 'fantasist' a polite way of saying he's a liar?

Do you think it is acceptable for a fantasist to stay in the Privy Council and be called Right Honourable - when he patently isn't?

kingfelix's picture

Mon, 2010-03-22 19:18 — kingfelix

A fantasist?

I take the point about what wider lessons can be learned if that is indeed the case. But, on the personal level, does it make a jot of difference? Byers is peddling an influence that he appears not to possess, rather than peddling an influence that he does...

He's like a taxi, only he can't actually take you where you want to go. So?

Sue Davies's picture

Mon, 2010-03-22 22:17 — Sue Davies (not verified)

Funny that it is all the most appalling new Labour Blairites! ... first they ripped off ordinary LP members by a secret takeover of the party in which even MPs like Kilfoyle did not know about 'the party' within the party.. then they out-thatchered Thatcher with their neo- liberalism and cynical/naive faith in markets... now they're stitching us up again, to ensure that we are lumbered with more of the same with Cameron and Osbourne- when what most people are crying out for are the changes that even the most 'right-wing' Old Labour Party would have implemented as a matter of course eg. progressive taxation, re-nationalization of the railways and energy providers, restoration and support for the Post Office, decent pensions and free provision of care for the elderly. I actually hate this crew - they have frittered away the best opportunity for making real changes and a better Britain since 1945. Even more of a shame is that in the last few months, the government has been making some good moves - eg. Ed Milliband actually seems to understand the issues about global warming and renewables - but it is all so late in the day.. and who can believe these changes after the awfulness of Byers, Hewitt and Hoon

kenny jenkins's picture

Tue, 2010-03-23 01:21 — kenny jenkins

Cock-up or Conspiracy? There are cock-ups and cock-ups and you need to ask yourself: Is anybody really this stupid? How could somebody this dim stay alive for 50-odd years. Seriously. There are roads to be crossed. There are shoelaces to be tied. There is all that breathing to be done and you've got to get the in and out in the right order. A much likelier explanation is that having milked the Labour Party for all he could get he's now working for the Tories. This looks like deliberate sabotage. Remind me, what's the penalty for treason?

straus's picture

Tue, 2010-03-23 01:33 — straus (not verified)

I was just as shocked by the behaviour of Margaret Moran. Her office staff claimed she was too ill to carry out her consultative work as a constituency MP, yet she was quite fit enought to tout herself to a bogus PR agency. If a unemployment or diability claimant had been caught out like this, they would probably be taken to court or at least have their benefits withdrawn. And yet taxpayera have to go on funding this charlatan for another two months and stump up the money for her "goodbye payment" and pension.

nilsson's picture

Fri, 2010-03-26 03:20 — nilsson

Moran was bouncing all over her chair with excitement at the prospect of a nice little earner after her worthless stint as an MP ends and she collects her £54,000 golden farewell. Her claim of being in with a 'girly gang' is the epitaph on the Blair's Babes nonsense. MM must be one of the least meritorious occupants of a seat in the Commons since Horatio Bottomley.

joan bailey's picture

Fri, 2010-03-26 12:54 — joan bailey (not verified)

I recall Peter Ustinov saying he could never be an m.p as he has the wrong shaped spine i.e so twisted that where true and moral code were they were facing the other way.Bur he was unfair to cabs, more an unlicence mini cab with a grubby back seat.

Latest tweets