Dodgy Dave, Don't most people get sacked for back handers? Options

[GMR]

Good points GMR. What's your feeling about Clegg? I'm not a violent man but whenever I see him on the box these days I want to punch him in the face. Hard. Is that wrong?

I think the LDs have too much power (considering they came third with reduced support). This a good example why PR isn't a good idea.

[GMR]

Really? They weren't lobbying on their own behalf then? These major players became heads of huge bank accounts by paying a quarter of a million pounds for just a picture of them with Sam 'n' Dave? Think on.

What you are talking about happens with all parties. Why criticise Cameron when Blair and Brown did the same. And having a private dinner party isn't proof of lobbying. I can't see anything wrong with having dinner with the PM. If there was proof of having influence then at would be another matter. Even if they did have influence they would still have to get it through the Commons. Powerful parties are allowed to talk to governments; how they react - governments - is a different matter.

[Andy Capp]

I think the LDs have too much power (considering they came third with reduced support). This a good example why PR isn't a good idea.

What do you think the government would have done if it were not in a coalition? What examples do you have of differences we might have seen?

What you are talking about happens with all parties. Why criticise Cameron when Blair and Brown did the same.

Because Cameron is the PM (Blair and Brown are not) and we got rid of Brown and Blair for these reasons (amongst others), yet he and his party seems not to have learned the lesson.

[GMR]

What do you think the government would have done if it were not in a coalition? What examples do you have of differences we might have seen?

The government could have carried out what was in their manifesto rather than bartering.

Because Cameron is the PM (Blair and Brown are not) and we got rid of Brown and Blair for these reasons (amongst others), yet he and his party seems not to have learned the lesson.

We didn't get rid of Blair; Brown and his people forced Blair out.



To your second point; I disagree. You will never get perfection with anything; therefore the question is how swift do they deal with any problems that come up and the Tories acted quickly.

[Andy Capp]

The government could have carried out what was in their manifesto rather than bartering.

Do you have an example of where the Tories had to give-in?

We didn't get rid of Blair; Brown and his people forced Blair out.

Blair and Brown was a euphemism for New Labour.

To your second point; I disagree. You will never get perfection with anything; therefore the question is how swift do they deal with any problems that come up and the Tories acted quickly.

I don't see it a case of perfection; that isn't what we have here. We have rank stupidity in the Tory party. Did these highly paid professionals not think that it might look a bit dodgy if they allow a party sponsor to gain access to the lodger at No 10. Not only that, but to blurt it to any old soul in a candid interview that their money could be an investment.


"Meet the new boss ... same as the old boss" - P Townsend.

[GMR]

Do you have an example of where the Tories had to give-in?

One example is over inheritance tax. Another was that they wanted to reduce the 50p tax to 40p when they came into power.

Blair and Brown was a euphemism for New Labour.

And?

I don't see it a case of perfection; that isn't what we have here. We have rank stupidity in the Tory party. Did these highly paid professionals not think that it might look a bit dodgy if they allow a party sponsor to gain access to the lodger at No 10. Not only that, but to blurt it to any old soul in a candid interview that their money could be an investment.


"Meet the new boss ... same as the old boss" - P Townsend.

This is about one individual overstepping his mark, not the rank stupidity of the Tory party.


Party sponsors have always had access to high ranking ministers; in all parties. As for stupidity; that goes across all political parties.

[Jayjay]

What you are talking about happens with all parties. Why criticise Cameron when Blair and Brown did the same. And having a private dinner party isn't proof of lobbying. I can't see anything wrong with having dinner with the PM. If there was proof of having influence then at would be another matter. Even if they did have influence they would still have to get it through the Commons. Powerful parties are allowed to talk to governments; how they react - governments - is a different matter.

But this wasn't just having dinner with the PM was it? Peter Cruddas SOLD dinner with the PM. If any Pm wants advice we pay civil servants a vast amount of money to discover facts. On the published list there are bankers, oil companies, hedge fund managers, no sign of Pensioners Alliance, or any charities they couldn't afford the fee.

[gel]

He is what's known as a tame MP; some might say lame!

See in news that his papa was dishing out bread to the Parish paupers;
how quaint/reiteration of the Class status quo!!

[Andy Capp]

One example is over inheritance tax. Another was that they wanted to reduce the 50p tax to 40p when they came into power.

What profound effect has this had on the country that has made the coalition inept?

And?

"And?" what? ... we didn't vote New Labour back for another term, and one reason was because of the 'cash for...' system.

This is about one individual overstepping his mark, not the rank stupidity of the Tory party.

I don't think it is. Even if it is, he was a part of the Tory Party and presumably was being 'managed'?

Party sponsors have always had access to high ranking ministers; in all parties. As for stupidity; that goes across all political parties.

Including the present government. We were promised a 'new kind' of politics.

[GMR]

But this wasn't just having dinner with the PM was it? Peter Cruddas SOLD dinner with the PM. If any Pm wants advice we pay civil servants a vast amount of money to discover facts. On the published list there are bankers, oil companies, hedge fund managers, no sign of Pensioners Alliance, or any charities they couldn't afford the fee.

Peter Cruddas acted beyond his authority and for that resigned.



This wasn't about the PM asking for advice but a private dinner; as I said a common practice within politics. The PM didn't do anything illegal or anything previous PMs hadn't practiced.

[GMR]

What profound effect has this had on the country that has made the coalition inept?

That isn't what you asked.

"And?" what? ... we didn't vote New Labour back for another term, and one reason was because of the 'cash for...' system.

We did when Blair was leader. As for "cash for..." all parties were involved and wasn't the reason why Labour didn't get back in (or just the reason).

I don't think it is. Even if it is, he was a part of the Tory Party and presumably was being 'managed'?

"Presumably" isn't a fact; just your assumption. As for you "thinking"; with biased overtones which helps you draw your conclusions.

According to the Tories he wasn't managed; I am not defending them but saying you need more than just your prejudices to convict somebody.

Including the present government. We were promised a 'new kind' of politics.

No government or person can promise purity; what he meant by that is a quick and swift response to wrong doings; which the previous government failed to do.

[Adrian Hollister]

Peter Cruddas acted beyond his authority and for that resigned.

Peter Cruddas was just caught out - if the PM and the Tories want to show that this is not just 'western style' corruption, he should open this up to independent review and openly declare lobbying, funding and direct/indirect personal gain.

Bet he won't though as IMHO he stands to loose too much....

[Ron]

Peter Cruddas was just caught out - if the PM and the Tories want to show that this is not just 'western style' corruption, he should open this up to independent review and openly declare lobbying, funding and direct/indirect personal gain.

Bet he won't though as IMHO he stands to loose too much....

I wonder how much of this is envy?

[Andy Capp]

That isn't what you asked.

The question was to understand why you thought the Tories would have produced a better outcome if they had not been in a coalition.

We did when Blair was leader. As for "cash for..." all parties were involved and wasn't the reason why Labour didn't get back in (or just the reason).

I know, hence why I said one of the reasons.

"Presumably" isn't a fact; just your assumption. As for you "thinking"; with biased overtones which helps you draw your conclusions.

He was either managed or not. If he was, it was poor management; if he wasn't, why not and he should have been. Either way, it doesn't show the Tories in good light.

According to the Tories he wasn't managed; I am not defending them but saying you need more than just your prejudices to convict somebody.

I repeat; if he was, it was poor management; if he wasn't, why not and he should have been. Cameron made this a promise of government.

No government or person can promise purity; what he meant by that is a quick and swift response to wrong doings; which the previous government failed to do.

Cameron's first response was to refuse to release details. It was only after an avalanche of protest that he had to capitulate. He has since ducked and weaved on the subject.

A slippery slimy Tory.

[Andy Capp]

I wonder how much of this is envy?

I doubt it is much.

[Jayjay]

Peter Cruddas acted beyond his authority and for that resigned.



This wasn't about the PM asking for advice but a private dinner; as I said a common practice within politics. The PM didn't do anything illegal or anything previous PMs hadn't practiced.

Personally I have never been asked to a private dinner party and been asked to pay. Could it be Cameron didn't know what Peter Cruddas was doing? He didn't know where donation money was coming from? It was pure coincidence that the diners were hedge fund managers, bankers, property developers just when the 50p tax rate went down, planning law was changed in developers favour and bankers bonus' wasn't halted. It was pure coincidence that no charities, childrens grroups, pensioners groups were invited to dinner?

I quite agree this is normal practice for the Tory party, Neil Hamilton and Tim Smith did the same when John Major was in power.

[Squelchy]

I think you'll find that what the hedge fund managers and investment bankers really wanted (and got) was Britains Veto in Europe last year.

The City was afraid that a Tobin Tax would cost them money.

[Dodgys smarter b...]

I wonder how much of this is envy?

I doubt if Cameron is particularly envious, but maybe you're right. He could be. He's worth a little less than the others.

[GMR]

Peter Cruddas was just caught out - if the PM and the Tories want to show that this is not just 'western style' corruption, he should open this up to independent review and openly declare lobbying, funding and direct/indirect personal gain.

Bet he won't though as IMHO he stands to loose too much....

Why should he when no other party will do the same? They all hold internal enquiries.

[GMR]

The question was to understand why you thought the Tories would have produced a better outcome if they had not been in a coalition.

No, that wasn't the question.

I know, hence why I said one of the reasons.

Excellent.

He was either managed or not. If he was, it was poor management; if he wasn't, why not and he should have been. Either way, it doesn't show the Tories in good light.

Some forces are outside ones controls. Not everything is in black and white. There won't be a party now or in the future (including the past) who won't have a rogue party member/ politician. It's life, even though not as us ordinary people know it.

I repeat; if he was, it was poor management; if he wasn't, why not and he should have been. Cameron made this a promise of government.

I think you are being naive here. Read above. The problem with politicians (Blair being another good example) promise things that aren't realistic.

Cameron's first response was to refuse to release details. It was only after an avalanche of protest that he had to capitulate. He has since ducked and weaved on the subject.

A slippery slimy Tory.

I agree he was slow but that doesn't mean he was "A slippery slimy Tory" putting it another way; he was no different than other politicians.