WDB
Full Member
Posts: 7,425 
|
Post by WDB on Dec 17, 2021 9:32:41 GMT
Most of us here remember ‘sleaze’ from the early 1990s. Individual Tories — Neil Hamilton, Jonathan Aitken… — abused their positions to enrich themselves. This embarrassed their prime minister, John Major, who took steps to remove the offenders, and introduced the Ministerial Code to improve standards in future.
Now it’s 2021 and we have another Tory government. But this time it’s not a few greedy individuals; the corruption comes right from the top. The Ministerial Code is for information only, party donors get peerages, Tory cronies get a ‘VIP lane’ for public procurement contracts. Independent regulators are to be ignored or abolished.
It’s no surprise that Boris Johnson behaves this way. His entire parasitic existence has been free of concerns about truth, honesty or paying his own bills. That one of the two major parties of state has been so utterly corrupted by this appalling man is beyond depressing. But this morning’s news of the huge Tory defeat in North Shropshire gives hope that the electorate has finally seen that 2019’s ‘least worst option’ has been an utter disaster.
|
|
|
|
Post by EspadaIII on Dec 17, 2021 10:27:51 GMT
Even as a life-long Tory voter (and proud to be so), some of the shennanigans are beyond the pale. The only aspect when this cronyism has been for the benefit of seciety has been the vaccination programme. Labour would have been totally out of their depth with Corbyn in power. We would have made New Zealand look positively liberal (in the best sense of the word) and heavily vaccinated.
However, what I don't understand is why are donors paying to upgrade No.10? Surely, as with the White House, every new Prime Minister is entitled to arrange the property in the best way for their family and to live in a property that is sufficiently modern that it is safe and comfortable. What does the tax payer not pay for this?
The by-election victory is meaningless. It is a protest vote about the idiot former MP and Covid. Come the next election the Tories will be back in.
|
|
|
|
Post by bromptonaut on Dec 17, 2021 11:26:08 GMT
Even as a life-long Tory voter (and proud to be so), some of the shennanigans are beyond the pale. The only aspect when this cronyism has been for the benefit of seciety has been the vaccination programme. Labour would have been totally out of their depth with Corbyn in power. We would have made New Zealand look positively liberal (in the best sense of the word) and heavily vaccinated. However, what I don't understand is why are donors paying to upgrade No.10? Surely, as with the White House, every new Prime Minister is entitled to arrange the property in the best way for their family and to live in a property that is sufficiently modern that it is safe and comfortable. What does the tax payer not pay for this? The by-election victory is meaningless. It is a protest vote about the idiot former MP and Covid. Come the next election the Tories will be back in. There's literally zero evidence that a Corbyn led administration, which would have been collegiate and included big hitters like Starmer, Benn, Lammy, Nandy and Miliband would be ineffective. And please don't mention Diane Abbott who is far more clued up then the racist and misogynist coverage would have us believe. There is public money for the PM's flat at Downing St. The issue requiring donations was that the Johnsons, and I would hold them jointly and severally liable, wanted far more than the cash available from the public coffers. This is the issue that could bring him down as it appears he lied, or at least was economical with the truth, in his dealings with Lord Geidt. I'm sure that Paterson's conduct was a factor but believing that alone turns a 20k+ majority into a loss by all but 6k votes is the logic of cloud cuckoos. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2021 11:40:46 GMT
Not sure I can contribute anything to political discussion any more, other than to say if there's even 1 person in this country prepared to vote Conservative at the moment it's 1 too many, and the couple of thousand who did so yesterday, in full knowledge of this administration's record, then each and every one of them needs a check up from the neck up.
The current government is nota Conservative (and Unionist) one. It is an English Nationalist government driven by UKIP rubbish. It must be gone. The sooner the better. How anybody didn't realise this would happen in December 2019, and still voted for it to materialise, well words fail me.
|
|
|
|
Post by EspadaIII on Dec 17, 2021 12:50:56 GMT
This all stems from the fact that there is an unsatisfactory issue in this country with status and money. It is simply jealousy and the press (from all sides) prey on it. I don't think it unreasonable that elected members should have second jobs. They need life experience to be able to govern and the pay of MPs is poor compared to other countries. Doctors, surveyors and lawyers etc need to 'keep their hand in' if they become unelected.
There was an issue a few years ago when David Cameron had a John Lewis kitchen fitted. It's not exactly a Smallbone or Seimatic kitchen but there they went again "oooh he's having a John Lewis kitchen at public expense". Ridiculous. We are a major nation. We should be paying and housing our elected officials properly. Just because HMQ lives like a pauper doesn't mean that our elected officials should. I also think that civil servants should be made to experience the results of their actions on the public; e.g. designing forms to enable people to claim reasonable money from the government, but then the forms are so complicated that they fail to acheive what they were designed to do. Frankly; in some small respects Trump was right - drain the swamp. Too many people with vested interests in Whitehall. Everyone scratching everyone else's back. They all do it. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2021 12:57:26 GMT
HMQ lives like a pauper Trump was right - drain the swamp. 1 - Beg pardon? 2 - Trump IS the swamp. |
|
WDB
Full Member
Posts: 7,425
|
Post by WDB on Dec 17, 2021 14:19:57 GMT
Tories are fatherless-ones. They will behave like fatherless-ones and we can’t really blame them for it, any more than you can blame the seagull for stealing your chips; it’s all they know how to do. But we need people who are not fatherless-ones not to enable those who are fatherless-ones, using weak reasoning like, [kermit voice]“Oh, you know, better safe than sorry.”[/Kermit voice] But the fatherless-ones are firmly in charge now. We can only hope they trip themselves up — which, to be fair, they are plenty capable of doing. Least-worst option, my arse. Two years ago this week. Great Aunt Maud seems to have been at it since then, but I think it’s aged reasonably well. To be honest, the extent of the Tory fatherless-oney has surprised even me. And Esp, I broadly agree that we should reward our elected representatives appropriately. If the furnishing allowance for an official residence is too low, the government can ask parliament to grant more money for it. That’s legal and constitutional. What is neither is simply getting a crony to make up the difference and thereby creating a conflict of interest. That is an example of corruption. And you’re right that ‘second jobs’ aren’t all bad, where they allow MPs to maintain experience that they can usefully bring to their public work. But that’s a chasm away from selling your parliamentary position and contacts as a ‘consultant’ to a property developer or a pharmaceutical company. The test is whether the member would be considered for the job if they weren’t an MP. In too many cases, all but a tiny number of them Tories, they would not. Since the Faragists gained control of the Tory party, we’ve had reassurances from David Davis that Britain would not be like Mad Max. And now we have Johnson promising us that the UK ‘is not remotely a corrupt country’. In between, we’ve had shortages of just about everything except £900-a-roll wallpaper. Ten years ago, to even imagine such assurances could be necessary would have been unthinkable. But that’s what Johnson’s Tories have brought us to. We’re a laughing stock abroad and a failing state at home. Shameful. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2022 12:21:48 GMT
On to the Nationality and Borders Bill then. That's me and EIII that I know of on this forum who could, under this legislation, have their British citizenship stripped without notice.
Anyone else fall under that category? Anyone got an Irish granny, for example? Goes without saying it also applies to my wife, children, mother, sister, nieces, aunts, cousins etc etc...
How do you feel about it EIII? All Jews fall under this legislation. Did you expect the party you (proudly) voted for to bring in legislation that contains such provisions, and will this discourage you from voting for them again? I recall you were reluctant to vote Labour due to suspicions of anti-semitism, well now here is a real world threat to all UK Jews being brought in by the Tories. Are you comfortable with this?
I am not comfortable. It pretty much means that, if I were to engage in an act of protest against the government, the Home Secretary could wield this legislation against me. I have engaged in such things before and may wish to do so again. However, this gives me pause for thought. And anything which does that, is illiberal and indeed a signal of creeping Fascism.
In a competitive field, this is quite likely the most disgraceful act this government has sought to pass.
|
|
|
|
Post by EspadaIII on Jan 5, 2022 15:37:11 GMT
Sorry - I'm lost on this one. I do not have another citizenship. My parents and grandparents were all born in Britain and in many cases my great grandparents were born in countries that do not exist. My right to settle in Israel is a right given to anyone with one Jewish grandparent (Hitler's definition of a Jew) but that right could be withdrawn at any time by a change in legislation. It's not like Shamima Begum whose direct ancestors are Bangladeshi by birth, so she is extitled by birth to Bangladeshi citizenship.
I am very proud that our Chancellor, Home Secretary, Secretary of State for Health, the Business Secretary and the Secretary of State for Education are all members of overtly ethnic minorities, many of whose parents were born outside the UK, and who have reached those levels due to hard work and good education by their parents and themselves. If they felt a problem with this new legislation presumably they would object?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2022 15:56:20 GMT
It's my understanding that anoyone who has a right to obtain citizenship of any other country will, under this legislation, be at risk of their British citizenship being removed at the Home Secretary's discretion, and not be informed about it. It is also my understanding that all Jewish people have a right to citizenship of Israel should they wish to apply. Which would mean you are in the same boat as me, and anyone else with any right to obtain another citizenship. Meaning the entire population of Northern Ireland too, of course, who all have a right to Irish citizenship should they wish to take it.
I'm talking about the new Bill currently going through Parliament, not the Shamima Begum case. However, of course, seeing as you mention it, I am a Shamima Begum, as are my children, with grandparents born outside the UK. Are you saying it's all right for my category of British Citizen to be "second class" British Citizens?
All of those government Ministers you mention could of course also be theortically at risk under this proposed legislation. Presumably though they feel it wouldn't be applied to them because of their priviliged positions, so are happy to support - it will only be a law for "other people". It would even in theory apply to the curent Home Secretary who is proposing this legislation - but of course never in practice.
I'm not sure what there is to be proud of in any of this.
|
|
|
|
Post by EspadaIII on Jan 5, 2022 16:28:51 GMT
I am sure the Home Secretary understands this... Hence my lack of worry.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2022 16:33:27 GMT
Now you've lost me. You are not worried by this, because the Home Secretary and other government Ministers are arrogant enough to be content that this law would not be applied to them? That's odd. I can't say I share your confidence that you or I would be considered above the law. You're unconcerned that you are being made a second class British citizen? I can't say I'm too keen on the concept.
|
|
WDB
Full Member
Posts: 7,425
|
Post by WDB on Jan 16, 2022 23:43:19 GMT
|
|
bpg
Full Member
Posts: 2,811
|
Post by bpg on Jan 17, 2022 13:51:38 GMT
That's UK democracy in action. Appeal to the majority council house Tories to give them power. True, blue Tories are not sufficient in number to create a majority they have to appeal to the masses who do not fit the mold though are required to give the real Tories a mandate to govern. This kind of politics appeals to the masses and makes them feel part of the process. Just read the comments in the DE, it's like a playground. If you don't agree with someone insult them rather than engage in any kind of discussion. I don't have a facebook or twitter account I suspect it's a similar level of debate there.
The concept of compromise does not appeal in the UK, nail your colours to a mast and that's it, job done. Democracy consist of black or white or in the UKs case red or blue. That is your choice, a whole rainbow to choose from and stick the blinkers on and limit the palette.
|
|
|
|
Post by EspadaIII on Jan 19, 2022 20:02:15 GMT
Crossing the floor...
My son who is interested in politics and once was a member of the Conservative Party (until Boris was elected leader), reckons that once an MP crosses the floor (as happened today) they should face re-election in a by-election.
What does the pub think? I see some merit, as even though I know MPs are elected personally to represent a constituency, most people do vote along party lines and a Tory who suddenly becomes Labour (or vice versa) no longer represents the majority who elected them.
|
|
