Return to: Home | Politics | UK Politics

Secrets, lies and the Blairs

Michael Levy

Published 22 May 2008

Cherie suddenly brought forward the publication of her book to coincide with mine. To top it off, she claimed I didn't "know anything" about her husband and Gordon

Everything had been going so well. D-Day, or whatever they call the end of the agonising wait for publication in the book world, was approaching and there had been only the odd, minor hitch. But then, with the Mail on Sunday's final round of serialisation in hand and interviews with Andrew Marr and Adam Boulton set for a few hours later, the wife of an old friend showed up on our doorstep and shrieked: "Stop!"

Not exactly. But Cherie Blair did suddenly bring forward the scheduled autumn publication of her reflections on the law and love, motherhood and menstruation, conception and contraception, to coincide with my book. To top it off, she answered my widely reported revelation that Tony felt Gordon Brown could never defeat David Cameron in an election by insisting I didn't "know anything" about such matters.

Of course, she must have known that I did know. As soon as the first serialisation of my book appeared, one of Tony's oldest, closest allies sent word through a friend that the Blairites were unhappy at the frankness of my revelations. It was hardly the most auspicious start of "publication week". Still, despite everything that we'd all gone through since I first met a fresh-faced TB at a diplomat's dinner 14 years earlier, I still looked on the Blairs as friends.

Honesty is the best policy

The first round of TV interviews steered clear of many of the book's revelations about personal life alongside the Blairs and the Blairites, and even my fundraising experiences with the likes of Matthew Harding and Bernie Ecclestone. There was not a word about Carole Caplin's massaging TB at Chequers. It was mostly "cash for peerages" or - as it proved a lot easier to explain in a book than in a few soundbites - how cash was not swapped for peerages, but how the marriage of money and politics in Britain has become so poisonous that only state funding and limits on donations hold out any hope for sorting out the mess.

Inevitably, the subject of Cherie came up. She had said I didn't know what Tony felt about his old chum Gordon. So did I? I tried to be as gentle as I could, but I'd long since decided there was no point in telling my story if I wasn't going to be frank and open. I pointed out that Cherie had rarely been present during the hundreds of hours I had worked and talked with her husband and that, yes, Tony did say Gordon couldn't beat Cameron. I delicately stopped short of adding, as I do in the book, that when Gordon contrived to screw up the "election that wasn't" at the height of his honeymoon period, Tony also told me his successor was discovering it was a lot easier to spend a decade in guerrilla warfare against No 10 than to run a country.

Living and learning

The newspaper interviews came next, and the most enjoyable and, I think, insightful was with the Guardian's Jackie Ashley. She got it across that alongside the kiss-and-tell revelations - not literally, because while Cherie's book does sex, mine is more rock'n'roll - I set out to take a serious, deeply personal look at the new Labour project that has dominated British politics for the past decade. The result is, I hope, not bitter. After all, I had risen improbably from the one-room east London flat I shared with my parents to an extraordinary relationship with the man who steered Labour to power. It is honest, and sometimes critical of Tony and of Gordon, of others at the centre of power, and of myself. It is less kiss-and-tell than live-and-learn.

No one's courtier

The final media appearance of an exhausting week was both the oddest and the most gratifying. Having been filmed reviewing political events for Andrew Neil's This Week politics programme on the tennis court, I then joined Andrew and the couchmates Michael Portillo and Diane Abbott for a discussion of Labour's current crisis. Diane at one point hit out at Blair's "courtiers" for piling misery on beleaguered Gordon Brown, prompting Andrew to ask whether she had "Lord Levy in mind". Diane graciously replied: "No. Michael is a good Hackney boy, and no one's courtier."

"A Question of Honour" by Lord Levy is published by Simon & Schuster (£18.99)

Post this article to

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • newsvine
  • Reddit

7 comments from readers

jane
22 May 2008 at 13:19

I have never read such an egocentric article. Mr Levy you are unbelievable! I have alwayss been sympathetic to your situation over the cash for honours affair but sadly some of your interviews and now this article means that my sympathy has gone. Cherie Blair stated that her manuscript was submitted many months ago and it was the publishers decision to bring the launch of her book forward. Further, I am not convinced that you were a confidant of the former PM. I therefore believe Cherie Blair and I am now sad that I have ordered your book.

I should not boast about Diane Abbott "on your side". She may be popular with the media but is loathed in my circles for being unprincipled (ridiculed colleagues for sending their children to grammar schools and then sends her son to a private school) and for being rude and boorish.

njruk
22 May 2008 at 15:40

Good god, man, why ever do you think we care about your smug, self-justifying nonsense? You are but a tiny blip on the radar of British politics and in ten years time people will struggle to remember who you are.

Chas
22 May 2008 at 16:12

"The marriage of money and politics in Britain has become so poisonous that only state funding and limits on donations hold out any hope for sorting out the mess."

It was Lord Levy who made it poisonous. And I do not want political parties to benefit from the toxicity by stealing more of my money. If the Labour party cannot fund itself through its supporters, it should go to the wall.

Phil Linehan
23 May 2008 at 18:44

A book, Plain ¨Speaking, will soon be published (the author chose the title on 1st April 2003) that will give readers a chance to find out, from an informed, impartial and objective source with no axe to grind or scores to settle, what really happened during the most crucial years of Tony Blair's premiership.

Gideon Polya
25 May 2008 at 23:35

If these authors follow self-serving, mass mortality-ignoring, "Austenizing" (air-brushing; see: http://janeaustenand.blogspot.com/) British academic and non-academic historiographical traditions they will have very little of substance to say about the Blair role in the Anglo-American "War on Terror" (post-invasion violent and non-violent excess deaths in the Occupied Palestinian, Iraqi and Afghan Territories now total about 0.3 million, 2 million and 3-7 million; post-invasion under- 5 infant deaths total 0.2 million, 0.6 million and 2.3 million, respectively; and refugees total 7 million, 4.5 million and 4 million, respectively; see "Palestinian, Iraqi, Afghan, Biofuel and Climate Genocides – Silence Kills and Silence is Complicity" : http://www.liberalati.com/?q=node/261 ).

Thus a recent three volume "A History of Britain" by Simon Schama (BBC, 2002) failed to notice the "forgotten" man-made WW2 Bengali Holocaust, the man-made Bengal Famine that killed 6-7 million Indians when the price of rice doubled and then finally quadrupled under a merciless British scorched earth policy of strategic passive genocide (see a recent 2008 BBC broadcast about this involving myself, Nobel Laureate Professor Amartya Sen and other scholars:

http://www.open2.net/thingsweforgot/bengalfamine_programme.h... ).

History ignored yields history repeated (the price of rice doubled in 3 months in 2008). Peace is the only way but silence kills and silence is complicity. As perceived from authoritative UN and medical literature mortality data, the CONTINUING Blair-Bush War on Terror is in horrible reality a War on Arab, Asian, Muslim and non-European Women and Children.

Outstanding Jewish British Nobel Laureate Harold Pinter has recently (March 2008) succinctly stated of Blair and Iraq: "“The invasion of Iraq was a criminal act. The occupation of Iraq remains a criminal act. The British government under Blair and the United States administration are war criminals.It’s as simple as that” (see:

http://www.brusselstribunal.org/Messages190308.htm#pinter ).

shakeybooty
27 May 2008 at 05:06

“Peace ambassador to the Middle East. F****** joke, mate. How he sleeps at night, I don’t know.”

Paul Weller, The Times

shakeybooty
27 May 2008 at 05:06

Go Paul Weller!!!!!!!

Post your comment

Please note: you will need to login or register before you can comment on the website

Read More

Vote!

Should we build new nuclear power plants?

Suggest a question

View comments

© New Statesman 1913 – 2009

Tracker