What an afternoon it has been for conspiracy lovers. First the Speaker summoned Ken Clarke to the Commons to answer an urgent question from arch theorist Michael Meacher about the Bilderberg meeting, and then MPs took it in turns to ask William Hague whether the Prism allegations meant they were under surveillance from the state. It was quite difficult to distinguish between the two, given we learnt little from either.
First, Bilderberg. MPs arrived hoping that the scales would fall from their eyes as the minister revealed the great secrets of this high-powered conference.
‘The people who attend change slightly each year,’ explained Clarke, presumably referring to their metamorphosis into lizards upon arrival in Watford. He added: ‘All of the people who attend, attend as individuals.’ He could have added ‘and they leave as lizards’, but sadly, he didn’t. In fact, he didn’t really say very much at all, other than that it was his last year on the steering group and that the meeting was just one among many that he attends ‘as part of the background to my, er, activities’. That was clearly a sinister reference to some reptilian frolics, but no-one, not even Ed Balls, who was also at the meeting, thought to probe Clarke further.
Meacher seemed to know a little more about this. Clarke had advised him to ‘find different people he exchanges tweets with on his internet’, but those tweeters have at least enabled him to offer a summary of what the conference does when he responded to Clarke. He accused the Minister Without Portfolio of filibustering, and then listed the attendees and known activities of the conference. Behind him, David Blunkett was barely able to contain his giggles. ‘They have come here in order to concert their plans to deal with a particularly awkward stage in Western capitalism, and as such, we, the public, are entitled to ask some questions and to hold them to account,’ fumed Meacher.
Mind you, it wasn’t just Meacher who seemed exercised about a possible conspiracy. A few Tory MPs also wanted to know whether any decisions had been made by the group on the future of the European Union. Meanwhile Ed Balls was full of praise for the conference, which he attended too, leading Clarke to tell him that ‘everything he said is of course entirely right’. That’s a sure sign of a conspiracy.
But then the debate moved on to the Prism revelations, and a statement from William Hague. James has dealt with this in more detail here, but it’s worth noting the grave conspiracy at work on the backbenches today. Tory MP after Tory MP stood up to read a question that if not written by the whips was certainly the sort of question a whip dreams of when in the sweetest of dozes. Their contributions can be summarised thus: the spooks are great, people who don’t like them are bad, and law-abiding citizens have nothing to fear. Whether or not you agreed with them, the consensus in the Chamber was a little unsettling. If only the whips could preside over such a conspiracy of loyalty in the Tory party every day.
Comments