Tory snouts in the trough again

headcone

What a surprise.

Absolute scum.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17503116

ash28

I remember the cash for questions the last time - I can't say I'm surprised - just surprised it's happened so early.

Interestingly in his resignation statement Cruddas seems to be calling himself a liar - been a bit of a crap end to a crap week for the government

RUN_RABBIT_RUN

i wouldn't limit your vitriol to the tories, they're all at it and they have been for years, just look at the expenses scandal.

we're all in it together, and all the politicians snouts are in it together too (the trough that is)

julieq

Loving the fact that the OP sig is a quote from Bevan. Nothing like continuing the class war fights of 80 years ago, eh?

Meanwhile, can someone tell me how asking business to fund the Tories and hoping to influence policy is in any way philosophically or morally different from the Unions funding Labour in the expectation of influencing policy?

The real scum are the Labour and the unions who are opposing every single measure taken to fix the deficit they caused, and who seem to expect "the rich" to pick up the entire tab for their freebies and profligacy.

And as to "noses in the trough", you'd do well to find anyone snorting the slurry than the London Underground Unions who hold the country to ransom time after time.

StevenMarks

So which is worse?

Cash for access with the Tories or cash for policy under Labour?

wotsthat

julieq wrote: »

The real scum are the Labour and the unions who are opposing every single measure taken to fix the deficit they caused, and who seem to expect "the rich" to pick up the entire tab for their freebies and profligacy.

And as to "noses in the trough", you'd do well to find anyone snorting the slurry than the London Underground Unions who hold the country to ransom time after time.

That's all well and good but doesn't excuse the behaviour of Peter Cruddas. I don't expect politicians and their fund raisers to be whiter than white but he's done nothing to dispel the impression that power and influence is for sale in the UK.

Clearly this chap is a moron and a !!!!!!!!ter but what's surprised me is just how unprofessional he was. After meeting him I'm surprised that anyone made any donations at all.

StevieJ

julieq wrote: »

Loving the fact that the OP sig is a quote from Bevan. Nothing like continuing the class war fights of 80 years ago, eh?

Meanwhile, can someone tell me how asking business to fund the Tories and hoping to influence policy is in any way philosophically or morally different from the Unions funding Labour in the expectation of influencing policy?

The real scum are the Labour and the unions who are opposing every single measure taken to fix the deficit they caused, and who seem to expect "the rich" to pick up the entire tab for their freebies and profligacy.

And as to "noses in the trough", you'd do well to find anyone snorting the slurry than the London Underground Unions who hold the country to ransom time after time.

So you think what he was doing was OK then?

Generali

StevieJ wrote: »

So you think what he was doing was OK then?

Wasn't there the same fuss about Major and Blair?

IIRC, a million quid was known in The City for a while as 'A Bernie' due to the delay in banning tobacco sponsorship granted to F1 that was in no way due to a million quid being given to Labour by Mr Ecclestone.

Please let's not pretend that state sponsorship of political parties would be better. That would just entrench the position of the big 2 parties (3 in Scotland and Wales don't know how many in NI, sorry).

StevieJ

Generali wrote: »

Wasn't there the same fuss about Major and Blair?

IIRC, a million quid was known in The City for a while as 'A Bernie' due to the delay in banning tobacco sponsorship granted to F1 that was in no way due to a million quid being given to Labour by Mr Ecclestone.

Please let's not pretend that state sponsorship of political parties would be better. That would just entrench the position of the big 2 parties (3 in Scotland and Wales don't know how many in NI, sorry).

So you think it is OK to offer influence on govt policy for cash?

Generali

StevieJ wrote: »

So you think it is OK to offer influence on govt policy for cash?

No I don't. I see this as just another part of the corporatist system that Labour and Tory parties have built between them.

A nation (and 3 continents in total: USA, Europe and Australasia) has been built on the ideal that Government should control everything they can in partnership with large organizations (e.g. trade unions, professional bodies and large corporations). If you can give a quarter of a million quid then you can get a look in as an influential corporatist body whether that is by giving 20p per union member or shaving a ha'penny from each shareholder's dividend.

chewmylegoff

I wonder if the sunday times and Crudas will both be prosecuted under the bribery act that the govt has made so much fuss over introducing.