News0 min ago
Tories Are Wallowing In Sleaze
Owen Paterson vote: Tories are wallowing in sleaze, says Sir Keir Starmer
https:/
Sleaze rules 'torn up'by 'shameless' Tory MPs
https:/
.. shamelessness.
Definitions of shamelessness. behaviour marked by a bold defiance of the proprieties and lack of shame. synonyms: brazenness. type of: boldness, daring, hardihood, hardiness. the trait of being willing to undertake things that involve risk or danger.
Sleaze rules OK.. are we bothered?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Roobaba. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Paterson was acting as a whistleblower, which is why he was entitled to make representations on behalf of companies paying him. He uncovered problems with carcinogens in milk, savings lives.
Clearly, there should a whistleblowing exemption, but there has been a dispute about who widely that should apply. On top of this, the case itself is far from clear cut, with Mr Paterson being recently bereaved, losing his own wife in very tragic circumstances. Labour and the media can spin this any way they want, but facts are facts. Not that Captain Bandwagon and his Gob-on-a-Stick will care.
Clearly, there should a whistleblowing exemption, but there has been a dispute about who widely that should apply. On top of this, the case itself is far from clear cut, with Mr Paterson being recently bereaved, losing his own wife in very tragic circumstances. Labour and the media can spin this any way they want, but facts are facts. Not that Captain Bandwagon and his Gob-on-a-Stick will care.
//It's also a feature of Toryism not a bug.//
What utter nonsense, labour and other parties have been involved in 'sleaze' over the years too. You are detracting from the problem we have with our politicians and such comments are unhelpful to say the least
Try to stick with the facts, avoid name calling and we might start to get something to stick.
What utter nonsense, labour and other parties have been involved in 'sleaze' over the years too. You are detracting from the problem we have with our politicians and such comments are unhelpful to say the least
Try to stick with the facts, avoid name calling and we might start to get something to stick.
Paterson's wife Rose killed herself because of the anxiety this committee was bringing to bear on their family. Labour and the Daily Mail can cry "corruption" all they like. What they fail to realise is that if this case had been handled fairly from square one, with common sense, none of this would have happened. Spungle is absolutely right- all Paterson was doing was morally right, but technically wrong, and for this, Labour want to hang him out to dry. Paterson is a thoroughly decent man, and deserves better than being persecuted any further. If I was an MP, I would feel morally bound to be a whistleblower if it became my knowledge that milk was being tainted, whoever had brought it to my attention, and despite any perceived "conflict of interest." The rules clearly don't work, someone has died because of this, Labour are playing politics and the media want their "pound of flesh". Saying "corruption" isn't only wrong, but sick, twisted, hypocritical, unfair and unjust.
Large majorities in Parliament are dangerous because the ruling party knows it can do anything it wants without any repercussions.
Arrogance is often a sign that power has gone to their heads.
We have seen it in the past, and the Johnson Government is clearly exhibiting all the symptoms of megalomania brought on by a 80 seat majority.
Arrogance is often a sign that power has gone to their heads.
We have seen it in the past, and the Johnson Government is clearly exhibiting all the symptoms of megalomania brought on by a 80 seat majority.
You're quite wrong, the "lobbying" referred to was whistleblowing. That's why there is such a contrived fuss over it. To be able to drag someone through the dirt for months on end, then make a judgment to which there is no appeal is clearly ridiculous. But Labour are using it to their advantage- and why wouldn't they- they are the opposition, and have nothing positive to offer; and the Daily Mail is selling papers on the back of someone's death.
You are mistaken:
"Paterson said he was acting as a whistleblower over milk safety but the commissioner said this was only true of the initial approach and first meeting. Thereafter, follow-up communications “were intended to benefit his clients rather than to raise a serious wrong."
https:/
"Paterson said he was acting as a whistleblower over milk safety but the commissioner said this was only true of the initial approach and first meeting. Thereafter, follow-up communications “were intended to benefit his clients rather than to raise a serious wrong."
https:/
Stableford
I have to disagree. If Paterson was concerned about milk he could have highlighted the issue without pocketing £500,000.
The MPs' Code of Conduct prohibits 'paid advocacy' .
He is clearly lobbied for these 2 firms, and was paid £100,000 a year over 5 years. A thorough investigation found him guilty of the charge, and the independent commissioner recommended a 50 suspension. Jacob Rees Mogg as Leader of the House, should have carried that out, but instead has ripped up the rule book and acted like a Soviet apparatchik.
I have to disagree. If Paterson was concerned about milk he could have highlighted the issue without pocketing £500,000.
The MPs' Code of Conduct prohibits 'paid advocacy' .
He is clearly lobbied for these 2 firms, and was paid £100,000 a year over 5 years. A thorough investigation found him guilty of the charge, and the independent commissioner recommended a 50 suspension. Jacob Rees Mogg as Leader of the House, should have carried that out, but instead has ripped up the rule book and acted like a Soviet apparatchik.
It's fair comment, Spicerack- but this is an individual case- there is a need for a whistleblowing provision to make it clear that in exceptional cases, if there were some serious wrong, a Member could approach the responsible Minister or public official, even if to do so might incidentally benefit a paying client. That is what has happened in this case, and as there is no such provision, the rules have been applied arbitrarily, the process has been dragged out for months on end, the anxiety has contributed towards the death of a member of the public, and there is no appeal.
THAT is what is wrong- Paterson could have walked on by when he was made known of the issue regarding tainted milk, which in hindsight he probably wishes he had. Instead, he intervened (with a view to saving lives), and this is the outcome. Of course, no-one is really bothered if they already have an axe to grind, papers to sell, or a chip on their shoulder.
THAT is what is wrong- Paterson could have walked on by when he was made known of the issue regarding tainted milk, which in hindsight he probably wishes he had. Instead, he intervened (with a view to saving lives), and this is the outcome. Of course, no-one is really bothered if they already have an axe to grind, papers to sell, or a chip on their shoulder.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.