No smilies, no avatars, no flashing gifs. Just discuss the issues of the day, from last night's telly via football to science or philosophy.
Started by GreenFuture on Nov 3, 2021 11:11:40 AM
Owen Paterson / Corruption.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2021/nov
/03/uk-politics-live-labour-criticises-pm-as-tories-urged-to-vote-down-paterson-lobbying-inquiry-findings


You've probably seen the story. Worth a thread I think.

Johnson is moving the goalposts faster than badgers can.

What a bunch of cnts.

Will he face any meaningful consequence?

If an MP is paid more by a corporation than the public, is it safe to assume the former will be their priority, and that being an MP is more of side gig / door opener?

Why are constituency voters ok with that? Seems dumb to me.

Will the public just shrug, being so used to this level of shenanigans?

Talk about it here.

Previous
|
Next
|
Top
|
Bottom
darkhorse - 03 Nov 2021 11:15:04 (#1 of 1021)

Well, I guess if the press are on board (whether through the fact they support the government, or are simply cowed by it, like the BBC) then it's just fine.

SinnerBoy - 03 Nov 2021 11:23:46 (#2 of 1021)

It's an absolute mockery to try to get him off. He's bang to rights, no amount of character witnesses would have got him off. He and his supporters are saying that the rules don't apply to them.

To replace the commissioner and lay members with MPs, who are also being paid by companies and would like to lobby for them isn't chipping away, it's smashing it down.

They want to legalise corruption.

GreenFuture - 03 Nov 2021 11:23:57 (#3 of 1021)

My initial sense is that they feel awkward darkhorse. Like they know it's bent as all fk and have to cover it, but don't really want to push very hard.

It's a clear case for recall potential - which would be groundbreaking stuff. You'd think they'd want to chase it for that alone, but no... political loyalty and cowardice probably trump even the assumed (often tacky) prime instinct of a good story.

GreenFuture - 03 Nov 2021 11:25:14 (#4 of 1021)

To replace the commissioner and lay members with MPs, who are also being paid by companies and would like to lobby for them isn't chipping away, it's smashing it down.

The response is worse than the original thing really.

They want to legalise corruption.



Fixed it: They want to further legalise corruption

GreenFuture - 03 Nov 2021 11:28:18 (#5 of 1021)

The govt and media arm of the elite might well go for making the story more about technicalities of the restructuring. Make it sound dull and procedural. They will feel safer to get on that ground in the studios and columns.

Whys, wherefores and tinkerings around the changes, not the appalling morals and politics around the changes per se, or the open corruption that started it.

Jacob_Richter - 03 Nov 2021 11:34:26 (#6 of 1021)

If you're wondering what the Owen Paterson case is basically about, it's this: the healthcare firm that kept him on a six-figure retainer won a £133m contract to produce Covid testing kits without even having to bid. Now, is that right or is that wrong?

https://twitter.com/David__Osland/status/145584837
9259531269

GreenFuture - 03 Nov 2021 11:37:51 (#7 of 1021)

I've long said it would be healthier to clarify things with an official statement of what bungs will buy what policy and contracts.

If one opposes corruption, there should have been a call years ago from opposition to set up an independent committee to scrutinise all major policy and contracts. Full subpoena powers. All under oath. All hearings in public. First question: Who has lobbied for this? Who has paid who?

GreenFuture - 03 Nov 2021 11:43:51 (#8 of 1021)

re above: The going rate 10 years ago was up to £150,000 donation to help write policy, free din dins with Dave and Samantha thrown in.

But a lot hangs by "up to", and the phrase "feed into policy" was also vague.

The companies who pay political parties would benefit from more clarity, even if the taxpaying serfs aren't considered worthy of knowing.

Not sure it requires separate legislation as such, but a succinct itemised list of government corruption services would at least be more honest. Maybe that's the problem with my wheeze.

Atticus - 03 Nov 2021 12:26:29 (#9 of 1021)

The Government is now whipping MPs to vote for the wrecking/reforming amendment.

levelgaze - 03 Nov 2021 12:29:50 (#10 of 1021)

They'll win, on a reduced majority. Rayner standing in for Starmer, so we may at least get a bit of fire from the Opposition.

GreenFuture - 03 Nov 2021 12:51:18 (#11 of 1021)

Tough line for Raynor to walk. She can well give them all barrels, but if she's too effective there'll be mock outrage from the Kleptocacy, used as distraction.

dottie30 - 03 Nov 2021 13:01:41 (#12 of 1021)

Just looking at that PMQs today. Johnson's argument seems to be that Paterson should have been let off because his wife killed herself. On what fucking planet is that a legitimate reason?

For people so gung ho on law and order they aren't all that good at taking responsibility for their own actions are they? If Paterson's wife killed herself on account of this it wasn't because of the investigation - it was because of Paterson's actions which led to the investigation.

tasselhoff - 03 Nov 2021 13:15:26 (#13 of 1021)

Monbiot straight to the point https://mobile.twitter.com/Haggis_UK/status/145586
7078423023638

browserbutton - 03 Nov 2021 13:18:29 (#14 of 1021)

Of course the death of his wife was a terrible tragedy, but to suggest now that the stress of the inquiry caused her to take her own life (and for that reason he should be exonerated) seems a bit distasteful. After all, when interviewed about the circumstances that might have led to her death he said: “We had no inkling whatever.”

https://www.politico.eu/article/conservative-mp-owen-paterson-life-after-wife-suicide/

GreenFuture - 03 Nov 2021 13:19:18 (#15 of 1021)

I don't know context, but that's an incredibly low blow by Johnson.

It's not meant to be legitimate. It's meant to distract.

A family circ like that is legitimate reason for mitigation of consequence after due process and some sensitivity within process. It is not a reason to ditch process and change it for future circs.

Explaining what I just have is too complex for many folks attention spans though. The calculation by wonks who dreamed up this disgusting line is that people will just nod along, with room for inference that those who oppose corruption are insensitive about suicide.

Also, potential Malcom Tucker type thought bubble: Thank fuck, she's killed herself, we can get us all off the hook with that.

Sets the mental health cause back.

solomongursky - 03 Nov 2021 15:22:59 (#16 of 1021)

Mogg: "The suicide of his wife is a greater punishment any that a House of Commons committee could inflict".

FrankieTeardrop - 03 Nov 2021 15:23:32 (#17 of 1021)

Makes it sound like she gave up her life for the greater good of the Tory party

Atticus - 03 Nov 2021 15:23:59 (#18 of 1021)

Hiding behind his wife is pretty low.

FrankieTeardrop - 03 Nov 2021 15:24:14 (#19 of 1021)

about 7 feet low

dottie30 - 03 Nov 2021 15:25:01 (#20 of 1021)

Mogg even quoted Portia from the Merchant of Venice.

FFS - how likely is he to do that with some junkie who just robbed a newsagent?

Previous
|
Next
|
Top
|
Bottom
Check Subscriptions
|
Home » UK News