Monday, February 11, 2008

Curse of Petsy strikes Charles Clarke

Petronella Wyatt is well-known in political journalism circles for an ability to put the black spot on the careers of interviewees. She seems to have an uncanny ability to get people to say or do things which are totallty indiscreet - a valuable quality for a journalist, but a dangerous one for politicians.

Perhaps the most famous example was Janet Anderson, a rising New Labour star until she unwisely agreed to be interviwed by Wyatt shortly before the 1997 election. During the course of the interview, Anderson revealed that there would be "more sex under a Labour Government," and of course her career never quite recovered.

Now Charles Clarke has become the latest victim of the Curse of Petsy with a spectacularly ill-judged interview in the Daily Mail which has only served to provide plenty more ammunition about Gordon Brown for Labour's opponents, with Iain Dale suggesting CCHQ should thank Clarke "for doing our dirty work for us."

I can only imagine this outpouring of bile was occasioned by Gordon's failure to restore Clarke to the Cabinet in the enforced reshuffle following Peter Hain's resignation. As the Sunday Tel's Paddy Hennessy reveals here, he certainly won't be coming back now.

free web site hit counter


Anonymous said...

If indeed there was any more sex under Labour, then I have to bemoan the fact that I didn't get my share.

Anonymous said...

Maybe Charles Clarke is positioning himself for a defection to the Conservatives?

Fat Steve said...

Aren't Charles Clarke's comments a bit of positioning? He thinks that Gordon Brown is going down, and will take a lot of senior Labour people with him. The various Millibands and Ballses will be unpopular and seen as discredited, rather like the senior members of John Major's government. This could just leave Charles Clarke as Leader of the Opposition.

Politaholic said...

It's hardly a scoop is it? Clarke has quite a bit of form; what is it, the third or fourth time he has had a well-publicised go at Brown? Trouble is, from what we know of Brown (control-freak, can't take criticism, etc), what Clarke says sounds all too true. But then I suspect that in these respects Clarke and Brown are not terribly dissimilar. Takes one to know one, as it were.

Anonymous said...

Personally I can't stand the simpering little tart - all her articles seem to be one long flirt in an overly obvious way and not journalism at all.