Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Cheering Tories rewrite history were off the record not all they seem

Rebecca Fowler
Monday 04 December 1995 00:02 GMT
Comments

The cheers of Tory supporters in a video of highlights from the party conference, have been exposed as an editing ploy. Officials admitted yesterday that two prominent members shown applauding the rallying cries of Dr Brian Mawhinney, party chairman, were not even present at his speech.

The video, made as part of a membership drive in the lead up to the general election, has been copied for 1,000 local party offices across the country, to be shown to potential recruits.

As Dr Mawhinney told the audience in Blackpool that Labour was "unfit to govern", the camera panned to the enthusiastic faces of John Whittingdale, a former adviser to Baroness Thatcher, and Connor Burns, recently dropped as chairman of Conservative students for being too right-wing.

But Mr Whittingdale was in his hotel room watching the conference on television and Mr Burns was in his office in Basingstoke. Their cheering responses were in fact recorded during a controversial speech given by Michael Portillo, the Secretary of State for Defence.

According to John Prescott, Labour's deputy leader, the video had been deliberately "tampered with" and he accused the Conservatives of a deliberate deception. "Since Brian Mawhinney has become chairman of the Tory party, they have reached new depths of dishonesty," Mr Prescott said.

Tory officials were asked to explain why audience reactions to Mr Portillo's speech attacking Europe, in which he said British soldiers would never fight for Brussels, were swapped with Dr Mawhinney's. Mr Portillo's message, which infuriated the Tory establishment, is shown being greeted only by sullen and glum expressions. As he issues the line "you can't trust Labour on defence", he is not met with the cheers he received on the day, but silence.

The Conservative Party dismissed the row over their editing techniques as "spectacularly trivial" and denied there was a "Machiavellian" plot.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in