Owen Paterson

[fillyboy]

Imagine for a moment that someone senior at your place of work was found to have been getting paid hundreds of thousands of pounds to act on behalf of outside interests. Imagine another person was found to have sexually harassed a junior member of staff.

Now imagine if, rather than slinging them out, their mates at the company decided to exonerate them and shut down the HR department instead. I think we know what we’d call it: sleaze, a cover-up, a company not fit for purpose.

It is corruption.

The difference being would be that someone senior at your place of work would have a right to appeal, the right to call witnesses or the right to have the evidence examined, maybe the system is flawed and needs looking at.

BUT, I do agree with you the way this has been handled does come across as corrupt, Patterson should have been suspended and then the system looked at.

Maybe it's time that lobbying is outlawed, or at least money changing hands for lobbying, the rules surrounding all this seem a little vague and fluffy.

 

[JohnD]

"Sleaze is OK"

Say sleazeball MPs

 

[JohnD]

Nick Smith MP

"What has happened here is absolutely shameful.

This is an open and shut case. A Tory MP was found to have broken the rules by pocketing more than £100,000 a year to lobby Ministers on behalf of two companies. Paid advocacy is banned in Parliament.

This afternoon the Tories have voted to change the rules to let one of their own off the hook.

The Prime Minister and his government have supported an amendment that will return us to the worst of Tory sleaze culture."

 

[JohnD]

Stephen Morgan MP

"Some might say this is just a Westminster village story. It’s not. It's really important for our country’s democracy and for trust in politicians. If you care about how MPs' actions and behaviour is monitored, then you’ll be concerned this is another sign that Tory sleaze is back."

 

[JohnD]

Mohammad Yasin MP

"The PM ordered a 3 line whip for Tory MPs to block the suspension of a Tory Minister who broke lobbying rules.

Despite a number of Tory MPs voting against or abstaining on the vote, a majority of Tory Ministers and MPs have just voted to over-rule the independent cross-party committee which found that Owen Patterson repeatedly breached the rules by pocketing over £100,000 a year to lobby Ministers on behalf of his paymasters."

 

[ellal]

The difference being would be that someone senior at your place of work would have a right to appeal, the right to call witnesses or the right to have the evidence examined, maybe the system is flawed and needs looking at.

BUT, I do agree with you the way this has been handled does come across as corrupt, Patterson should have been suspended and then the system looked at.

Maybe it's time that lobbying is outlawed, or at least money changing hands for lobbying, the rules surrounding all this seem a little vague and fluffy.

Comes across as corrupt?

It is corrupt full stop!

As for 'Maybe it's time that lobbying is outlawed, or at least money changing hands for lobbying', that's laughable...

It's always gone on and always will do. How do you propose to do that?

What's different this time is that now not only has the corruption been acknowledged, but it's been shown that corruption is the 'norm' in the UK and become 'acceptable' by decree...

And the dumbed down part of the electorate will just carry on voting for the same old sh*t...

It's odd how Brexiteers were so vocal about an 'undemocratic' EU, and yet remain ambivalent to the most corrupt UK government in history!

 

[Justin Passing]

As for 'Maybe it's time that lobbying is outlawed, or at least money changing hands for lobbying', that's laughable...

It's always gone on and always will do. How do you propose to do that?

Make it illegal for an MP , and others (needs thought) who might be "close" to them:
1) To lobby for any concern outside their own constituency, while in office
2) To get paid/benefits from it ever - even after they leave office
3) To not declare any connections with businesses when they take up office

Tough? Yes. But MPs need to be seen to work to higher standards of probity.

 

[Notch7]

And the dumbed down part of the electorate will just carry on voting for the same old sh*t...

It’s not the electorate that’s at fault, it’s the system: the government and the media.


We think because we have the freedom to vote, we have democracy……..

 

[AngleEyes]

Glad you said that in the way you did. Presumably you consider yourself in the higher educated echelons of the electorate. Last time I asked you who you voted for I got my post deleted for using a sweary word that you obviously complained about so how about another go. Care to tell us all who you voted for in the last GE and don't try to play the old 'it's personal' card as I also pointed out (but it was deleted), I posted several links of posts you started asking others how they voted. Perhaps you could tell us who we should vote for and why although I'd lay money that you won't.

The thread is not about ellal, it's about Tory sleaze.

 

[Notch7]

The difference being would be that someone senior at your place of work would have a right to appeal, the right to call witnesses or the right to have the evidence examined

“The 17 witnesses provided written statements, which the standards committee said they received and read. However, the committee said that they “do not see what further relevant information could usefully be gleaned by inviting oral evidence from the witnesses concerned”

Paterson got his chums to write and support him.

this “right to appeal” is a Tory excuse to change the rules.

If Tories changed the rules to create transparency, then I would support it…..but it wont. The Tory parties very existence is run for self interest - they milk the NHS for all it’s worth and it’s disgusting.



Owen Paterson should be thrown in jail for 5 years

 

[AngleEyes]

corruption is a criminal offence so how come plod are not involved ?

corruption what like kieth Vaz

The thread is not about Keith Vaz, it's about Tory sleaze.

 

[AngleEyes]

Oh dear this May come as a
To some

but

Politics has always been corrupt

it’s just to what degree

blimey it will get to the stage where the UK will be on par with the French

This thread is not about the French, it's about Tory sleaze.

 

[Notch7]

The thread is not about Keith Vaz, it's about Tory sleaze.

Those who voted for Tory sleeze prefer to deflect than own it.

 

[AngleEyes]

The difference being would be that someone senior at your place of work would have a right to appeal, the right to call witnesses or the right to have the evidence examined,

The investigation is lead by the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner. She recommends her findings to the committee, and they review the evidence and apply or over-rule her findings. So the committee are the appeals process, and the commissioner's findings and recommendations are always reviewed before being instigated.

The Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards is an independent officer of the House of Commons...
The Commissioner investigates allegations that MPs have breached the rules .....
The Commissioner also has oversight of investigations ... The Commissioner is the decision-maker for investigations ..., investigating allegations from the parliamentary community about harassment, bullying or sexual harassment by MPs.
The Commissioner keeps the Register of Members' Financial Interests.
The Commissioner ensures all investigations are independent, impartial, thorough and fair.
https://www.parliament.uk/mps-lords...sts/parliamentary-commissioner-for-standards/


The Committee on Standards ...Its role is to:

• oversee the work of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards
• examine the arrangements proposed by the Commissioner for the compilation, maintenance and accessibility of the Register of Members' Financial Interests and any other registers of interest established by the House
• review from time to time the form and content of those registers
• consider any specific complaints made in relation to the registering or declaring of interests referred to it by the Commissioner
• consider any matter relating to the conduct of Members, including specific complaints in relation to alleged breaches in the Code of Conduct which have been drawn to the Committee's attention by the Commissioner
• recommend any modifications to the Code of Conduct as may from time to time appear to be necessary.

https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/290/committee-on-standards/role/​

 

[Vinty]

The thread is not about Keith Vaz, it's about Tory sleaze.

So you think only Tory sleaze is worth talking about.