Andy McSmith's Diary: 1987 was a 'gorgeous' year for politics – and tabloid gossip
|
Version 0 of 1. George Galloway was asked on LBC about his nickname ‘Gorgeous George’. He claimed that it attached itself to him because he was “quite handsome then: it was 40 years ago.” We will have to take his word for it that the nickname dates from the mid-1970s, because the public record goes back only 28 years, to the year when he first arrived in Parliament as Labour MP for Glasgow Hillhead. Not long before his election, he had been accused by a tabloid journalist named Alastair Campbell (yes, same person) of living the high life at the expense of the charity, War on Want, of which he was General Secretary. An internal inquiry cleared him of the charge, but the press interest in Galloway’s lifestyle did not die away. On the contrary, it took off anew when he confirmed that one of his trips abroad, to Athens, had included a spot of extra-marital rumpy-pumpy with an old school chum. Rarely has a newly elected MP hogged the tabloid headlines as he did in 1987. That is when the nation first heard of Scotland’s Gorgeous George. In the same interview with James O’Brien, Galloway said he had “kind of given up” on blocking people on Twitter. If there is any way he could find it in his heart to unblock me, I could watch his Twitter output as he storms to victory – or defeat – in the London mayoral election. The Labour MP Paul Flynn has a suggestion for improving Prime Minister’s Questions – and discouraging David Cameron from firing counter-questions in place of answers. “Would it not be a good idea perhaps to change the name of Prime Minister’s Questions to Prime Minister’s Answers so at least the Prime Minister will get the point?” he suggested. The Speaker, John Bercow, agreed that there needs to be a change in PMQs, but – as the saying goes – don’t hold your breath. As that inveterate Europhile Ken Clarke was speaking in the Commons yesterday – with John Redwood, who wants us out of the EU, sitting behind him shaking his head in disgust – contributors to social media argued over whether the nation’s longest-serving Tory MP would be an asset or a liability to a pro-EU campaign. No good asking me: I am far too biased in Clarke’s favour. I love the contemptuous way the old bruiser deals with the anti-EU case, such as the line he used on Sunday Politics to explain why there is no point in returning control over fishing regulations from Brussels to Westminster: “The trouble is,” he explained, “the fish don’t know they’re British.” Legal highs are to be made illegal under the Psychoactive Substances bill trailed in the Queen’s Speech – which has thrown up questions about what the authorities mean by a legal high. People get a kick out of all sorts of things. As the Home Office minister, Lord Bates, was introducing the bill yesterday, a Labour peer, Lord Howarth, inquired: “If the Bill were already on the statute book as presently drafted and he felt moved today to send Lady Bates a bunch of flowers – the perfume of which would make her feel much more benevolent towards him and much happier about his absence on ministerial duties – would he be in breach of the law?” The answer, basically, was that the government has not yet worked out exactly what they are banning, but they are sure going to ban something. And it will be something more dangerous than a bunch of flowers. |