A question of judgment
New Labour, supposedly the masters of spin, have contrived to turn a simple property transaction into a political crisis for the Government. Neither Mrs Blair, nor the Prime Minister, have done anything improper in their Bristol property deals.
There is nothing wrong with buying a flat for their son while he is at university, and another one to rent out as an investment. There is nothing wrong with negotiating to get the best possible price - a practice common among property buyers everywhere. But it was a misjudgment to use as one of the negotiators of the purchase a convicted fraudster, Peter Foster, the boyfriend of Mrs Blair's eccentric "style adviser" Carole Caplin.
Mrs Blair is close to Ms Caplin and she insists she did not know about Mr Foster's past when he acted on her behalf. Fair enough, but Mrs Blair is a part time judge and has more influence on government than any previous Premier's spouse. She should be more careful about who she chooses as her friends.
The problem for the Blairs - and why this has become a political issue - is the way Number 10 has dealt with the questions arising from what happened. As soon as the story broke last weekend, Downing Street's spin machine went into furious denial mode.
At briefings to the press, Number 10 spokesmen said the properties were bought without the help of Mr Foster. This was misleading. Four days later Mrs Blair is forced to admit, in a highly unusual public statement, that Mr Foster did "help" her by dealing with the agents and keeping her in touch with developments by e-mail. Indeed, their contact online seemed positively matey.
Mrs Blair takes full responsibility for Number 10 spokesmen issuing a version of events that did not bear up to scrutiny. This limits the political damage to her husband, but does not clear up the matter entirely. Mrs Blair is a remarkable woman with a very busy life. She is widely and rightly admired by many. But she has displayed a sorry lack of judgment in this case.
