Oh dear. first off an admission from me. I actually left this debate about 10 minutes early - and it seems according to the Fulham Chronicle that the civility between the candidates did break down in the end after a questioner asked about some of the comment that surrounded my interview with Shaun Bailey - cue lots of mutual tongue lashings between Bailey and Slaughter.
Even so, after what was still a relatively civil debate at Imperial College the Labour & Conservative candidates have been getting back to business by trading accusations of how they are funded by dodgy cash.
Andy Slaughter got the first blow in with the pictured article from the Fulham Chronicle the other week, pointing out that much of the tax-avoiding Lord Ashcroft's millions to the Tories has been processed through Conservative HQ, so it is impossible to deny (as Bailey does) that some of it has been funding Bailey's campaign. Bailey has just replied with a list of "ten questions" for Andy Slaughter to answer about his links to Labour funder and BA wrecker the Unite trade union. He's obviously had to work hard to make up ten since the first one is "are you a member of Unite" - I would have thought that would be easily found out by himself with a quick use of Google.
So while Andy Slaughter says of Bailey that he is "standing for a Tory party which is still the party of the super-rich and priviledged", Bailey demands to kow of Slaughter whether he is a member of Unite, how much money he's received from them and whether he supports "..Unite’s decision to strike against BA, which will damage British business and ruin thousands of people’s holiday plans"?
Given the difficulties of both parties on funding at the moment, might it be an idea to stop throwing so much at each other on this issue?