Tories bankrolled by Non-Dom Lord

Sir_Humphrey

blueboy43 wrote: »

You can tell there is an election, when another Tory activist pops up, to tells us all how this story is more about Labour than the Conservatives !

And he still hasn't come up with an alias.

Blimey, the Tories talk about the public sector spending millions without effective results. :rotfl:

lostinrates

Sir_Humphrey wrote: »

And he still hasn't come up with an alias.

Blimey, the Tories talk about the public sector spending millions without effective results. :rotfl:

Its crazy if we would prefer our politicians to be deceitful!

IMO nickmason has the moral high ground over all of us posting in his own name.

I wish I were so honest. Maybe I will be one day.

Edit to add: I am not under nickmason's pay or influence and would say the same of anyone doing the same for any other party too.

(Hi Nick...:))

cogito

FWIW, this is a copy of my response to a similar thread on Discussion Time. If Labour push this, it will badly backfire on them.

http://order-order.com/2010/02/15/go...pension-steel/

Labour’s non-dom donor Lord Paul, who was stripped of his job in government due to fiddling his expenses, personally bankrolled Gordon’s leadership campaign and has promised all the money required to fight an election campaign. And it’s not like he can’t afford it. Paul made his millions through steel conglomerate Caparo. Hardly a man of the people, or indeed cut from the Labour Party cloth, a party he claims to love and support (ever since he stopped donating to the Tories under Thatcher). Just a brief look at how he treated his workers would be enough to send shivers down the spine of any loyal Labour activist.

Back in 1989 the Caparo took control of the cash-rich Armstrong Engineering. The company’s pension fund was just over 30% in surplus. Under Lord Paul’s control Caparo then spent the better part of a decade refusing to top up the fund despite the fact that it was having to pay out over £6 million due to a early retirements and a redundancy program, this was on top of the £8 million it was already paying to retirees. Lord Paul’s ownership created a fourteen million pound hole in the companies pension funds.
By 2000 the pension trustees and accountants recommended that the company inject £2 million a year into the pension pot to plug the cap. Paul accepted however Caparo never made a single payment and instead announced in 2002 that the final salary pension scheme was to be frozen. The unions slammed this “appalling treatment” by Lord Paul of his workers and inevitably picket lines were formed. As with Robert Maxwell’s raiding of pension funds, the Mirror, the paper most read by trade unionists, remains silent and hasn’t reported a word about Lord Paul so far. Kevin Maguire, the Mirror’s political editor is as close to Downing Street as any journalist, has only recently conceded that the Labour Party should not be taking money from Lord Paul.
With Gordon’s own pension raiding activities, it is perhaps no surprise that the Prime Minster is so at ease accepting donations from a man who profits by raiding the pension schemes of his workers.The money that should be in the pockets of loyal steel workers is now propping up the declining bank balance of the Labour Party via Lord Paul’s off shore bank accounts…

Looking at Labours 97 manifesto this crops up.

We will clean up politics, decentralise political power throughout the United Kingdom and put the funding of political parties on a proper and accountable basis

http://www.labour-party.org.uk/manifestos/1997/1997-labour-manifesto.shtml

Wonder why that flew out the window.

Rochdale_Pioneers

The shrill Tory response to Ashcroft speaks volumes. They know he is going to do them major damage, and the desperate attempt to make everyone out to be as bad only demonstrates that they know its bad. Why else would they have lied and obsfucated about it for 10 years otherwise?

A couple of points:
1. If people didn't know who Ashcroft was, they do now
2. It resonates with the growing perception of the Tory party of the rich for the rich. As an individual story its damaging, as fuel poured onto a fire already blazing which calls into question how detatched the Tories are from everyone else, its a disaster
3. The expose of Tory lies and spin over the past 10 years to cover it up is just as bad. they look shifty and deceitful.
4. Their best defence is "Lord Paul". OK so smear the other parties. Which puts voters off politics even more and reduces their likelyhood to vote Tory. How does "vote for change" fit with this?
5. Ashcroft is not comparable with Lord Paul or any of the other non-doms. Only Ashcroft is deputy chair of the party, goes with leading shadow ministers on policy trips and directly funds the campaign in target seats.

Spartacus_Mills

blueboy43 wrote: »

You can tell there is an election, when another Tory activist pops up, to tells us all how this story is more about Labour than the Conservatives !

No, it is a fair point to make on both Labour and the Lib Dems. They can criticise Ashcroft all they like however when they take the moral higher ground they need to be squeaky clean and they are not. The Lib Dems even went to court to protect their dodgy donations once they found out they were dodgy and thought they would have to pay them back.

Huhne is rabidly anti-all things Tory as he is under extreme pressure in Eastleigh (I reckon he will hold on and increase his majority) but he is ignoring Labour has form and his own party has form.

I see the beneficiaries of this being other parties.

Spartacus_Mills

Rochdale_Pioneers wrote: »

The shrill Tory response to Ashcroft speaks volumes. They know he is going to do them major damage, and the desperate attempt to make everyone out to be as bad only demonstrates that they know its bad. Why else would they have lied and obsfucated about it for 10 years otherwise?

A couple of points:
1. If people didn't know who Ashcroft was, they do now
2. It resonates with the growing perception of the Tory party of the rich for the rich. As an individual story its damaging, as fuel poured onto a fire already blazing which calls into question how detatched the Tories are from everyone else, its a disaster
3. The expose of Tory lies and spin over the past 10 years to cover it up is just as bad. they look shifty and deceitful.
4. Their best defence is "Lord Paul". OK so smear the other parties. Which puts voters off politics even more and reduces their likelyhood to vote Tory. How does "vote for change" fit with this?
5. Ashcroft is not comparable with Lord Paul or any of the other non-doms. Only Ashcroft is deputy chair of the party, goes with leading shadow ministers on policy trips and directly funds the campaign in target seats.

Oh dear, you are struggling somewhat with your partisan rant. You seem to be trotting out the standard labour line here without applying any logic or thought process to it. Qu'elle surprise. Your astroturfing is not quite up to Lib Dems standards, it has to be said. I say that as a tacit Lib Dem voter.

If Ashcroft was a Labour donor and Lord Paul a Tory you would have a complete 180 degree about turn in your position.

How on earth you can whine about the Tories "smear the other parties" approach when that is all Labour has ever done. Look at the outrageous smears at Christine Pratt.

It is the sheer hypocrisy of your position, and that of the Labour Party, which also turns people off politics.

Spartacus_Mills

lostinrates wrote: »

Its crazy if we would prefer our politicians to be deceitful!

IMO nickmason has the moral high ground over all of us posting in his own name.

I wish I were so honest. Maybe I will be one day.

Edit to add: I am not under nickmason's pay or influence and would say the same of anyone doing the same for any other party too.

(Hi Nick...:))

I agree. I could listen to him play drums all day :rotfl::rotfl:

Actually Nick makes some valid points in the debate but the ranting hard of thinking lobby simply play the man and not the message.

baileysbattlebus

Rochdale_Pioneers wrote: »

The shrill Tory response to Ashcroft speaks volumes. They know he is going to do them major damage, and the desperate attempt to make everyone out to be as bad only demonstrates that they know its bad. Why else would they have lied and obsfucated about it for 10 years otherwise?

A couple of points:
1. If people didn't know who Ashcroft was, they do now
2. It resonates with the growing perception of the Tory party of the rich for the rich. As an individual story its damaging, as fuel poured onto a fire already blazing which calls into question how detatched the Tories are from everyone else, its a disaster
3. The expose of Tory lies and spin over the past 10 years to cover it up is just as bad. they look shifty and deceitful.
4. Their best defence is "Lord Paul". OK so smear the other parties. Which puts voters off politics even more and reduces their likelyhood to vote Tory. How does "vote for change" fit with this?
5. Ashcroft is not comparable with Lord Paul or any of the other non-doms. Only Ashcroft is deputy chair of the party, goes with leading shadow ministers on policy trips and directly funds the campaign in target seats.

Your point No4 - OH has never forgiven labour for carrying on with the part privatisation of NATS after saying they wouldn't. His employer btw.

He had intended to vote conservative - until yesterday. He thought they were the best of a bad bunch.

He feels the same as I do about it - it's not the non dom status - it's the lies and deceit over the years.

Perhaps if they tried to stop making the mud stick anywhere but on themselves and DC came out and said they had made a mistake in keeping Lord Ashcroft's status a secret things might not be so bad. If they don't I'll hold them in as much esteem as I did in 1997. About the same level as I hold the gov't atm.

Spartacus_Mills

baileysbattlebus wrote: »

All I can say is it's not the non dom status of Lord Ashcroft or anyone else - though the other parties haven't lied about theirs.

It is the lies and the fact that senior party members were complicit in them.

You can defend it all you like - point out the fact the other parties have non dom donors - which is no secret. The fact is they lied and would have continued to lie.

I can remember the Newnight programme where Lord Young said Lord Ashcroft was a non dom - something that was refuted by the party the next day - saying he had made a mistake.

The only reason it has become public knowledge is the fact that they had no choice - the Cabinet Office were about to release some of the papers.

That is what should be bothering people..

I think we all know most politicians are liars - this just brings it home a bit more.

At least Lord Paul is being honest when he said he would rather give up his peerage than his non dom status.

A rather fair and balanced summation of the issues at hand. The Ashcroft sin is not that of lying. As with all of these issues, such as the Brown bullying one, there have been no lies told simply wilful misdirections to make people thinks something else.

This truly is a plague on all of the main parties houses. The Lib Dems major non-dom donor was a crook.

Sadly the hysterical reply of the Labour frothers really misses the point of one of trust in politics and politicans as a whole. This is not just an issue for the conservative party. It is one for politics.

The Tories handled it badly by allowing it to run and run to this stage. They should hae quarterised the wound a couple of years back. Labour have done a great job managing the media. Their media management and manipulation in the last 12 months has been exceptional. Constant rebuttals to Tory policies within minutes of them being announced, constant press releases and controlling the media agenda. Their work has been sublime and that is one of the reasons for the Tories floundering.

Oh, and to nollag2006 have given me a laugh with your comment "Between non-doms, first class travel snobbery, and moat cleaning expense fraud, I think the Tory elite have lost complete touch with the reality that most British people face."

Nick Winterton a member of the Tory elite. Fantastically funny.

Sir_Humphrey

Spartacus_Mills wrote: »

there have been no lies told simply wilful misdirections to make people thinks something else.

LOL! That one is worthy of my fictional namesake! :rotfl::rotfl: