FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Feel sorry for Zahawi?
Feel sorry for Zahawi?
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
"Mr Zahawi the poor chap is not having a good time. Be is clearly getting careless and forgetful and it may be best for him not to hold any challenging or important public role any more! He obviously needed financial help from the tax payer to keep his stables nice and warm for all those lovely horses. Who could begrudge keeping animals nice and warm? He must have carelessly forgotten he had the money to heat the stables as he was due £27m from his shares held in trust in offshore tax haven Gibralter. Easy mistake. We all do it! Worked out fine though as the nice people in his organisation were able to cut him a deal and keep his penalty/fine down to 30% so he could get accused of doing it deliberately. Good job he had worked with so many of those fine folk in HMRC! Seems though his forgetfulness and carelessness is a pattern of behaviour! He also forgot about the Whatsapp messages with David Cameron about Greensill. I suppose the poor guy has had a lot on his mind!" Typos oops inc: penalty/fine down to 30% so he couldn’t get accused of doing it deliberately (just carelessly) | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"And now they're running with Sue Gray mark two. So they'll do nothing, just kicking the can down the road, hoping everyone will ignore or stop caring about Zahawi if they string out the inquiry long enough." If Sunak feels 1 degree warmer through this guys actions he will be out the door before the enquiry even starts. He doesn't like the heat.. | |||
"And now they're running with Sue Gray mark two. So they'll do nothing, just kicking the can down the road, hoping everyone will ignore or stop caring about Zahawi if they string out the inquiry long enough. If Sunak feels 1 degree warmer through this guys actions he will be out the door before the enquiry even starts. He doesn't like the heat.." Sunak could have booted Zahawi or forced a resignation already if he wanted. The fact he hasn't shows they're gonna play the old wait & hope nothing else bad comes out game. In the meantime expect a lot of: we have a process, we must commplete the process, we can't talk about an ongoing process etc... | |||
"And now they're running with Sue Gray mark two. So they'll do nothing, just kicking the can down the road, hoping everyone will ignore or stop caring about Zahawi if they string out the inquiry long enough. If Sunak feels 1 degree warmer through this guys actions he will be out the door before the enquiry even starts. He doesn't like the heat.. Sunak could have booted Zahawi or forced a resignation already if he wanted. The fact he hasn't shows they're gonna play the old wait & hope nothing else bad comes out game. In the meantime expect a lot of: we have a process, we must commplete the process, we can't talk about an ongoing process etc..." Let's see, I'm putting my money on him handing in his resignation before the end of the week, in other words sacked. He will thank Sunak, and tell the press he has thrown himself on his sword to remove the noise at a time it is not needed. My hunch  | |||
"And now they're running with Sue Gray mark two. So they'll do nothing, just kicking the can down the road, hoping everyone will ignore or stop caring about Zahawi if they string out the inquiry long enough. If Sunak feels 1 degree warmer through this guys actions he will be out the door before the enquiry even starts. He doesn't like the heat.. Sunak could have booted Zahawi or forced a resignation already if he wanted. The fact he hasn't shows they're gonna play the old wait & hope nothing else bad comes out game. In the meantime expect a lot of: we have a process, we must commplete the process, we can't talk about an ongoing process etc... Let's see, I'm putting my money on him handing in his resignation before the end of the week, in other words sacked. He will thank Sunak, and tell the press he has thrown himself on his sword to remove the noise at a time it is not needed. My hunch "Oh I'd be happy to be proved wrong on this 1. Zahawi clearly has to go. | |||
"Mr Zahawi the poor chap is not having a good time. Be is clearly getting careless and forgetful and it may be best for him not to hold any challenging or important public role any more! He obviously needed financial help from the tax payer to keep his stables nice and warm for all those lovely horses. Who could begrudge keeping animals nice and warm? He must have carelessly forgotten he had the money to heat the stables as he was due £27m from his shares held in trust in offshore tax haven Gibralter. Easy mistake. We all do it! Worked out fine though as the nice people in his organisation were able to cut him a deal and keep his penalty/fine down to 30% so he could get accused of doing it deliberately. Good job he had worked with so many of those fine folk in HMRC! Seems though his forgetfulness and carelessness is a pattern of behaviour! He also forgot about the Whatsapp messages with David Cameron about Greensill. I suppose the poor guy has had a lot on his mind!" He is either stupid or devious, probably both | |||
"Mr Zahawi the poor chap is not having a good time. Be is clearly getting careless and forgetful and it may be best for him not to hold any challenging or important public role any more! He obviously needed financial help from the tax payer to keep his stables nice and warm for all those lovely horses. Who could begrudge keeping animals nice and warm? He must have carelessly forgotten he had the money to heat the stables as he was due £27m from his shares held in trust in offshore tax haven Gibralter. Easy mistake. We all do it! Worked out fine though as the nice people in his organisation were able to cut him a deal and keep his penalty/fine down to 30% so he could get accused of doing it deliberately. Good job he had worked with so many of those fine folk in HMRC! Seems though his forgetfulness and carelessness is a pattern of behaviour! He also forgot about the Whatsapp messages with David Cameron about Greensill. I suppose the poor guy has had a lot on his mind! He is either stupid or devious, probably both " Even IF he was stupid, he is surrounded by accountants and tax advisors (heck be was ultimately in charge of a few thousand Civil Servants who are supposed to be tax experts) so there is no excuse for “carelessness”. This was blatant and deliberate (ie a bigger penalty/fine AND forbidden from being a company director or a financial director in the UK). Sunak needs to show some balls here! Maybe he can’t? Maybe Zahawi knows where Sunak keeps his skeletons? | |||
"Mr Zahawi the poor chap is not having a good time. Be is clearly getting careless and forgetful and it may be best for him not to hold any challenging or important public role any more! He obviously needed financial help from the tax payer to keep his stables nice and warm for all those lovely horses. Who could begrudge keeping animals nice and warm? He must have carelessly forgotten he had the money to heat the stables as he was due £27m from his shares held in trust in offshore tax haven Gibralter. Easy mistake. We all do it! Worked out fine though as the nice people in his organisation were able to cut him a deal and keep his penalty/fine down to 30% so he could get accused of doing it deliberately. Good job he had worked with so many of those fine folk in HMRC! Seems though his forgetfulness and carelessness is a pattern of behaviour! He also forgot about the Whatsapp messages with David Cameron about Greensill. I suppose the poor guy has had a lot on his mind! He is either stupid or devious, probably both Even IF he was stupid, he is surrounded by accountants and tax advisors (heck be was ultimately in charge of a few thousand Civil Servants who are supposed to be tax experts) so there is no excuse for “carelessness”. This was blatant and deliberate (ie a bigger penalty/fine AND forbidden from being a company director or a financial director in the UK). Sunak needs to show some balls here! Maybe he can’t? Maybe Zahawi knows where Sunak keeps his skeletons?" Sunak is weak | |||
| |||
"If your go to move was going to lawyers and threatening to sue anyone who made the story public doesn’t really make you look good! "  yeah it doesn’t really shout “nothing to see here, all above board, happy to prove it come see” | |||
"Mr Zahawi the poor chap is not having a good time. Be is clearly getting careless and forgetful and it may be best for him not to hold any challenging or important public role any more! He obviously needed financial help from the tax payer to keep his stables nice and warm for all those lovely horses. Who could begrudge keeping animals nice and warm? He must have carelessly forgotten he had the money to heat the stables as he was due £27m from his shares held in trust in offshore tax haven Gibralter. Easy mistake. We all do it! Worked out fine though as the nice people in his organisation were able to cut him a deal and keep his penalty/fine down to 30% so he could get accused of doing it deliberately. Good job he had worked with so many of those fine folk in HMRC! Seems though his forgetfulness and carelessness is a pattern of behaviour! He also forgot about the Whatsapp messages with David Cameron about Greensill. I suppose the poor guy has had a lot on his mind! He is either stupid or devious, probably both Even IF he was stupid, he is surrounded by accountants and tax advisors (heck be was ultimately in charge of a few thousand Civil Servants who are supposed to be tax experts) so there is no excuse for “carelessness”. This was blatant and deliberate (ie a bigger penalty/fine AND forbidden from being a company director or a financial director in the UK). Sunak needs to show some balls here! Maybe he can’t? Maybe Zahawi knows where Sunak keeps his skeletons? Sunak is weak " Complicit more like. | |||
| |||
"The defenders and excusers are ominously quiet? Comparing notes (in some case with themselves in readiness for multiple profile posting) I guess?" As far as i can see there's not too much to defend (I was one if them who said wait and see), we're now seeing, but I'm still not gonna vote out and call him names when the full information still isn't available. BTW, you're better than those types of posts  | |||
"The defenders and excusers are ominously quiet? Comparing notes (in some case with themselves in readiness for multiple profile posting) I guess? As far as i can see there's not too much to defend (I was one if them who said wait and see), we're now seeing, but I'm still not gonna vote out and call him names when the full information still isn't available. BTW, you're better than those types of posts "Sunak and Zahawi are hoping people will “wait and see” so that it all becomes yesterday’s news. There was a time when something like this would have been enough to ensure resignation. No longer it seems! The past 3-4 years have normalised sleaze, corruption, noses in the trough to such an extent, that people actually try to defend this! It beggars belief. There is no way on Earth you or I would have been able to get away with a 30% penalty, ie “carelessness”. There is no way a multi-millionaire business man does not have top flight accountants and tax advisors. “Guilty as sin muh lawd” | |||
"The defenders and excusers are ominously quiet? Comparing notes (in some case with themselves in readiness for multiple profile posting) I guess? As far as i can see there's not too much to defend (I was one if them who said wait and see), we're now seeing, but I'm still not gonna vote out and call him names when the full information still isn't available. BTW, you're better than those types of posts
Sunak and Zahawi are hoping people will “wait and see” so that it all becomes yesterday’s news. There was a time when something like this would have been enough to ensure resignation.
No longer it seems!
The past 3-4 years have normalised sleaze, corruption, noses in the trough to such an extent, that people actually try to defend this!
It beggars belief.
There is no way on Earth you or I would have been able to get away with a 30% penalty, ie “carelessness”. There is no way a multi-millionaire business man does not have top flight accountants and tax advisors.
“Guilty as sin muh lawd”"I'm a wait and see kinda person, I'd never convict someone without having the full facts. I agree that the last few years have 'normalised' this type of behaviour but you and I both know this kind of things has always happened. We would most likely be jailed if found guilty, unfortunately rhat had never been the case for powerful people. Again, nothing new. Anyway, as I told another poster the other day, the only thing we can do as a population is vote when the time comes. Not that I really expect any better from any of them. | |||
"The defenders and excusers are ominously quiet? Comparing notes (in some case with themselves in readiness for multiple profile posting) I guess? As far as i can see there's not too much to defend (I was one if them who said wait and see), we're now seeing, but I'm still not gonna vote out and call him names when the full information still isn't available. BTW, you're better than those types of posts
Sunak and Zahawi are hoping people will “wait and see” so that it all becomes yesterday’s news. There was a time when something like this would have been enough to ensure resignation.
No longer it seems!
The past 3-4 years have normalised sleaze, corruption, noses in the trough to such an extent, that people actually try to defend this!
It beggars belief.
There is no way on Earth you or I would have been able to get away with a 30% penalty, ie “carelessness”. There is no way a multi-millionaire business man does not have top flight accountants and tax advisors.
“Guilty as sin muh lawd”
I'm a wait and see kinda person, I'd never convict someone without having the full facts.
I agree that the last few years have 'normalised' this type of behaviour but you and I both know this kind of things has always happened.
We would most likely be jailed if found guilty, unfortunately rhat had never been the case for powerful people. Again, nothing new.
Anyway, as I told another poster the other day, the only thing we can do as a population is vote when the time comes. Not that I really expect any better from any of them."I hear you but... 1. Just because this has “always happened” doesn’t mean we should accept it or not be outraged. 2. I honestly do believe the level of corruption has grown exponentially in the last few years. There may have always been a few bad apples but right now we have an orchard! | |||
"Absolute abuse of power." He might have needed to money for a second set of Winter Tyres - expensive they are.. | |||
"The defenders and excusers are ominously quiet? Comparing notes (in some case with themselves in readiness for multiple profile posting) I guess? As far as i can see there's not too much to defend (I was one if them who said wait and see), we're now seeing, but I'm still not gonna vote out and call him names when the full information still isn't available. BTW, you're better than those types of posts
Sunak and Zahawi are hoping people will “wait and see” so that it all becomes yesterday’s news. There was a time when something like this would have been enough to ensure resignation.
No longer it seems!
The past 3-4 years have normalised sleaze, corruption, noses in the trough to such an extent, that people actually try to defend this!
It beggars belief.
There is no way on Earth you or I would have been able to get away with a 30% penalty, ie “carelessness”. There is no way a multi-millionaire business man does not have top flight accountants and tax advisors.
“Guilty as sin muh lawd”
I'm a wait and see kinda person, I'd never convict someone without having the full facts.
I agree that the last few years have 'normalised' this type of behaviour but you and I both know this kind of things has always happened.
We would most likely be jailed if found guilty, unfortunately rhat had never been the case for powerful people. Again, nothing new.
Anyway, as I told another poster the other day, the only thing we can do as a population is vote when the time comes. Not that I really expect any better from any of them.
I hear you but...
1. Just because this has “always happened” doesn’t mean we should accept it or not be outraged.
2. I honestly do believe the level of corruption has grown exponentially in the last few years. There may have always been a few bad apples but right now we have an orchard!"I'm not saying accept it but expect it. I hear you in terms of exponential growth but I feel it just appears that way because of the figures we speak of. The expenses scandal found around 40 MPs. That's a huge number. | |||
"The defenders and excusers are ominously quiet? Comparing notes (in some case with themselves in readiness for multiple profile posting) I guess? As far as i can see there's not too much to defend (I was one if them who said wait and see), we're now seeing, but I'm still not gonna vote out and call him names when the full information still isn't available. BTW, you're better than those types of posts
Sunak and Zahawi are hoping people will “wait and see” so that it all becomes yesterday’s news. There was a time when something like this would have been enough to ensure resignation.
No longer it seems!
The past 3-4 years have normalised sleaze, corruption, noses in the trough to such an extent, that people actually try to defend this!
It beggars belief.
There is no way on Earth you or I would have been able to get away with a 30% penalty, ie “carelessness”. There is no way a multi-millionaire business man does not have top flight accountants and tax advisors.
“Guilty as sin muh lawd”
I'm a wait and see kinda person, I'd never convict someone without having the full facts.
I agree that the last few years have 'normalised' this type of behaviour but you and I both know this kind of things has always happened.
We would most likely be jailed if found guilty, unfortunately rhat had never been the case for powerful people. Again, nothing new.
Anyway, as I told another poster the other day, the only thing we can do as a population is vote when the time comes. Not that I really expect any better from any of them.
I hear you but...
1. Just because this has “always happened” doesn’t mean we should accept it or not be outraged.
2. I honestly do believe the level of corruption has grown exponentially in the last few years. There may have always been a few bad apples but right now we have an orchard!
I'm not saying accept it but expect it.
I hear you in terms of exponential growth but I feel it just appears that way because of the figures we speak of. The expenses scandal found around 40 MPs. That's a huge number."Not sure if you mean to but to me your posts on this topic read a bit like either being an apologist or simply resigned to acceptance. You may just say you are being a realist? | |||
"The defenders and excusers are ominously quiet? Comparing notes (in some case with themselves in readiness for multiple profile posting) I guess? As far as i can see there's not too much to defend (I was one if them who said wait and see), we're now seeing, but I'm still not gonna vote out and call him names when the full information still isn't available. BTW, you're better than those types of posts
Sunak and Zahawi are hoping people will “wait and see” so that it all becomes yesterday’s news. There was a time when something like this would have been enough to ensure resignation.
No longer it seems!
The past 3-4 years have normalised sleaze, corruption, noses in the trough to such an extent, that people actually try to defend this!
It beggars belief.
There is no way on Earth you or I would have been able to get away with a 30% penalty, ie “carelessness”. There is no way a multi-millionaire business man does not have top flight accountants and tax advisors.
“Guilty as sin muh lawd”
I'm a wait and see kinda person, I'd never convict someone without having the full facts.
I agree that the last few years have 'normalised' this type of behaviour but you and I both know this kind of things has always happened.
We would most likely be jailed if found guilty, unfortunately rhat had never been the case for powerful people. Again, nothing new.
Anyway, as I told another poster the other day, the only thing we can do as a population is vote when the time comes. Not that I really expect any better from any of them.
I hear you but...
1. Just because this has “always happened” doesn’t mean we should accept it or not be outraged.
2. I honestly do believe the level of corruption has grown exponentially in the last few years. There may have always been a few bad apples but right now we have an orchard!
I'm not saying accept it but expect it.
I hear you in terms of exponential growth but I feel it just appears that way because of the figures we speak of. The expenses scandal found around 40 MPs. That's a huge number.
Not sure if you mean to but to me your posts on this topic read a bit like either being an apologist or simply resigned to acceptance. You may just say you are being a realist?"I'm certainly not apologising. Resigned to acceptance? Possibly but yes, I feel I'm being a realist. There has been no point during my adult life where politicians haven't taken the piss out of every single one of us. Its nothing new, and I can't see how it changes. Any real changes will have to come from within and that's not likely to happen. | |||
"The defenders and excusers are ominously quiet? Comparing notes (in some case with themselves in readiness for multiple profile posting) I guess? As far as i can see there's not too much to defend (I was one if them who said wait and see), we're now seeing, but I'm still not gonna vote out and call him names when the full information still isn't available. BTW, you're better than those types of posts
Sunak and Zahawi are hoping people will “wait and see” so that it all becomes yesterday’s news. There was a time when something like this would have been enough to ensure resignation.
No longer it seems!
The past 3-4 years have normalised sleaze, corruption, noses in the trough to such an extent, that people actually try to defend this!
It beggars belief.
There is no way on Earth you or I would have been able to get away with a 30% penalty, ie “carelessness”. There is no way a multi-millionaire business man does not have top flight accountants and tax advisors.
“Guilty as sin muh lawd”
I'm a wait and see kinda person, I'd never convict someone without having the full facts.
I agree that the last few years have 'normalised' this type of behaviour but you and I both know this kind of things has always happened.
We would most likely be jailed if found guilty, unfortunately rhat had never been the case for powerful people. Again, nothing new.
Anyway, as I told another poster the other day, the only thing we can do as a population is vote when the time comes. Not that I really expect any better from any of them.
I hear you but...
1. Just because this has “always happened” doesn’t mean we should accept it or not be outraged.
2. I honestly do believe the level of corruption has grown exponentially in the last few years. There may have always been a few bad apples but right now we have an orchard!
I'm not saying accept it but expect it.
I hear you in terms of exponential growth but I feel it just appears that way because of the figures we speak of. The expenses scandal found around 40 MPs. That's a huge number.
Not sure if you mean to but to me your posts on this topic read a bit like either being an apologist or simply resigned to acceptance. You may just say you are being a realist?
I'm certainly not apologising.
Resigned to acceptance? Possibly but yes, I feel I'm being a realist. There has been no point during my adult life where politicians haven't taken the piss out of every single one of us. Its nothing new, and I can't see how it changes. Any real changes will have to come from within and that's not likely to happen."Again yes I hear you but...they really aren’t ALL the same. Some are still good ‘uns. I just feel the one’s in Govt are worse than ever before and while all MPs SHOULD be beyond reproach, those in Government (and in the Executive no less) should be uber clean. I have been clear on these forums that I am a centrist. I have no particular loyalty to Labour, Conservative or Liberal (who should by rights be my go to party except they are hopeless) but I detest with a passion the Government of the last few years. Actually started with Cameron but at that point *I* was resigned to making the best of a bad situation. But Johnson-Truss-Sunak and their gangs have been utterly awful and disgraceful. I do not count them as Conservatives. Not really sure what they are? Grifters! | |||
| |||
"The defenders and excusers are ominously quiet? Comparing notes (in some case with themselves in readiness for multiple profile posting) I guess? As far as i can see there's not too much to defend (I was one if them who said wait and see), we're now seeing, but I'm still not gonna vote out and call him names when the full information still isn't available. BTW, you're better than those types of posts
Sunak and Zahawi are hoping people will “wait and see” so that it all becomes yesterday’s news. There was a time when something like this would have been enough to ensure resignation.
No longer it seems!
The past 3-4 years have normalised sleaze, corruption, noses in the trough to such an extent, that people actually try to defend this!
It beggars belief.
There is no way on Earth you or I would have been able to get away with a 30% penalty, ie “carelessness”. There is no way a multi-millionaire business man does not have top flight accountants and tax advisors.
“Guilty as sin muh lawd”
I'm a wait and see kinda person, I'd never convict someone without having the full facts.
I agree that the last few years have 'normalised' this type of behaviour but you and I both know this kind of things has always happened.
We would most likely be jailed if found guilty, unfortunately rhat had never been the case for powerful people. Again, nothing new.
Anyway, as I told another poster the other day, the only thing we can do as a population is vote when the time comes. Not that I really expect any better from any of them.
I hear you but...
1. Just because this has “always happened” doesn’t mean we should accept it or not be outraged.
2. I honestly do believe the level of corruption has grown exponentially in the last few years. There may have always been a few bad apples but right now we have an orchard!
I'm not saying accept it but expect it.
I hear you in terms of exponential growth but I feel it just appears that way because of the figures we speak of. The expenses scandal found around 40 MPs. That's a huge number.
Not sure if you mean to but to me your posts on this topic read a bit like either being an apologist or simply resigned to acceptance. You may just say you are being a realist?
I'm certainly not apologising.
Resigned to acceptance? Possibly but yes, I feel I'm being a realist. There has been no point during my adult life where politicians haven't taken the piss out of every single one of us. Its nothing new, and I can't see how it changes. Any real changes will have to come from within and that's not likely to happen.
Again yes I hear you but...they really aren’t ALL the same. Some are still good ‘uns. I just feel the one’s in Govt are worse than ever before and while all MPs SHOULD be beyond reproach, those in Government (and in the Executive no less) should be uber clean.
I have been clear on these forums that I am a centrist. I have no particular loyalty to Labour, Conservative or Liberal (who should by rights be my go to party except they are hopeless) but I detest with a passion the Government of the last few years. Actually started with Cameron but at that point *I* was resigned to making the best of a bad situation. But Johnson-Truss-Sunak and their gangs have been utterly awful and disgraceful. I do not count them as Conservatives. Not really sure what they are? Grifters!"I didn't say ALL politicians were the same but politicians from all parties have been outed. We can include Cameron, Clegg & Brown as 3 high ranking MPs even before the BJ show started. | |||
| |||
"I strongly suspect there is more to this and a good chance that he has done more than being careless. If that's the case then prosecute to the full extent available. That said, one of the complaints is that ordinary people would be treated differently which I fully agree with. I also agree that politicians should face the same process and repercussions as everyone else. With that in mind should everyone who has had issues with HMRC be classed as guilty without the full facts being known" Sorry Leroy but that is false equivalence! 1. As a multi-millionaire businessman Zahawi has regular access to top flight accountants and tax experts. 2. As the Chancellor Zahawi had access to tax law policy makers and investigators and could easily have sought out off the record advice on his tax affairs. He has no excuses. This was not “careless” it was arrogant and “deliberate”. | |||
"There is no way on Earth you or I would have been able to get away with a 30% penalty, ie “carelessness”." My understanding is that an offshore account was involved. If that's the case HMRC levy a minimum of 100% penalty if the person contacts them, or 150% if HMRC make first contact. The only time that level of penalty is not applied is if HMRC already had all the necessary information. If Zahawi did pay a 30% penalty, that fits in with the 'careless' and 'unprompted' category. A lot of people are saying that more than 30% would have been deliberate. The only band that applies to is the 'careless' and 'unprompted' category, which would mean that HMRC already had all the information, and that he contacted them first. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/compliance-checks-penalties-for-income-tax-and-capital-gains-tax-for-offshore-matters-ccfs17/compliance-checks-penalties-for-offshore-non-compliance-ccfs17 | |||
"I strongly suspect there is more to this and a good chance that he has done more than being careless. If that's the case then prosecute to the full extent available. That said, one of the complaints is that ordinary people would be treated differently which I fully agree with. I also agree that politicians should face the same process and repercussions as everyone else. With that in mind should everyone who has had issues with HMRC be classed as guilty without the full facts being known Sorry Leroy but that is false equivalence! 1. As a multi-millionaire businessman Zahawi has regular access to top flight accountants and tax experts. 2. As the Chancellor Zahawi had access to tax law policy makers and investigators and could easily have sought out off the record advice on his tax affairs. He has no excuses. This was not “careless” it was arrogant and “deliberate”." TBF with 2, he'd already fucked up his accounts. 3. As CX he had a huge conflict of interest of there was an investigation that should have even declared. The man in the street doesn't have this. | |||
"I strongly suspect there is more to this and a good chance that he has done more than being careless. If that's the case then prosecute to the full extent available. That said, one of the complaints is that ordinary people would be treated differently which I fully agree with. I also agree that politicians should face the same process and repercussions as everyone else. With that in mind should everyone who has had issues with HMRC be classed as guilty without the full facts being known Sorry Leroy but that is false equivalence! 1. As a multi-millionaire businessman Zahawi has regular access to top flight accountants and tax experts. 2. As the Chancellor Zahawi had access to tax law policy makers and investigators and could easily have sought out off the record advice on his tax affairs. He has no excuses. This was not “careless” it was arrogant and “deliberate”." What you say is similar to what I said at the beginning of my post. I said I had suspicions that it is more than careless and if true he should face full consequences. However you mention equivalence and all I'm saying is to have equivalence then all should face the same process and relevant penalties. Treat others as you would have them treat you. | |||
"I strongly suspect there is more to this and a good chance that he has done more than being careless. If that's the case then prosecute to the full extent available. That said, one of the complaints is that ordinary people would be treated differently which I fully agree with. I also agree that politicians should face the same process and repercussions as everyone else. With that in mind should everyone who has had issues with HMRC be classed as guilty without the full facts being known Sorry Leroy but that is false equivalence! 1. As a multi-millionaire businessman Zahawi has regular access to top flight accountants and tax experts. 2. As the Chancellor Zahawi had access to tax law policy makers and investigators and could easily have sought out off the record advice on his tax affairs. He has no excuses. This was not “careless” it was arrogant and “deliberate”. What you say is similar to what I said at the beginning of my post. I said I had suspicions that it is more than careless and if true he should face full consequences. However you mention equivalence and all I'm saying is to have equivalence then all should face the same process and relevant penalties. Treat others as you would have them treat you. " I disagree. In the same way people are more outraged by a police officer committing sexual assault then a person with unparalleled access to advice, not only from top level accountants but from HMRC itself, Zahawi’s “mistakes” are worse than other people. | |||
"I strongly suspect there is more to this and a good chance that he has done more than being careless. If that's the case then prosecute to the full extent available. That said, one of the complaints is that ordinary people would be treated differently which I fully agree with. I also agree that politicians should face the same process and repercussions as everyone else. With that in mind should everyone who has had issues with HMRC be classed as guilty without the full facts being known Sorry Leroy but that is false equivalence! 1. As a multi-millionaire businessman Zahawi has regular access to top flight accountants and tax experts. 2. As the Chancellor Zahawi had access to tax law policy makers and investigators and could easily have sought out off the record advice on his tax affairs. He has no excuses. This was not “careless” it was arrogant and “deliberate”. What you say is similar to what I said at the beginning of my post. I said I had suspicions that it is more than careless and if true he should face full consequences. However you mention equivalence and all I'm saying is to have equivalence then all should face the same process and relevant penalties. Treat others as you would have them treat you. I disagree. In the same way people are more outraged by a police officer committing sexual assault then a person with unparalleled access to advice, not only from top level accountants but from HMRC itself, Zahawi’s “mistakes” are worse than other people." I'm not saying his is not worse. I am not saying he didn't have the best accountants and I have said if it proves to be more than careless (which I have said I think it is) then he should be punished. I me saying the process should be the same as if it were you or me | |||
| |||
"No, I don't feel sorry for Zahawi, not do I think that we need to "wait and see". '"Careless" has a specific definition to HMRC. “Careless” means a failure to take reasonable care in relation to your tax affairs. Carelessness can be likened to the longstanding concept in general law of “negligence”. In the 1856 case of Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks Co, Baron Alderson said Negligence is the omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided upon those considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs, would do, or doing something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do. The defendants might be liable for negligence, if, unintentionally, they omitted to do that which a prudent and reasonable person would have done, or did that which a person taking reasonable care would not have done. This is not a question of whether or not the person knew about an inaccuracy in a return or document or their failure to comply with an obligation. If they did that would be deliberate, see CH53700. It is simply a question of examining what the person did or failed to do and asking whether a prudent and reasonable person taking reasonable care would have done that or failed to do that in those circumstances.' As a consequence, he should not be a Cabinet Minister now. He shouldn't have been a Minister of state, late alone the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Add to that the denials of any issues and the legal threats against reporting and there is little recoverable from this. If the Conservative party feels that he represents them well as Party Chairman, that's up to them." You really ought to make it clear which parts of your post are your opinion, and which are direct quotes from the HMRC compliance handbook. In any case, the handbook is internal HMRC guidance, and does not have a solid founding in law. 'Carelessness' and 'negligence' are almost diametrically opposed concepts. Carelessness is performing an action without due care and attention, where negligence is failing to perform an action which a reasonably diligent person would have. You'll notice that the judge's excellent summation of what 'negligence' means was part of his summary dismissing Blyth's claim without trial, as the claim was not based on fact. | |||
"No, I don't feel sorry for Zahawi, not do I think that we need to "wait and see". '"Careless" has a specific definition to HMRC. “Careless” means a failure to take reasonable care in relation to your tax affairs. Carelessness can be likened to the longstanding concept in general law of “negligence”. In the 1856 case of Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks Co, Baron Alderson said Negligence is the omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided upon those considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs, would do, or doing something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do. The defendants might be liable for negligence, if, unintentionally, they omitted to do that which a prudent and reasonable person would have done, or did that which a person taking reasonable care would not have done. This is not a question of whether or not the person knew about an inaccuracy in a return or document or their failure to comply with an obligation. If they did that would be deliberate, see CH53700. It is simply a question of examining what the person did or failed to do and asking whether a prudent and reasonable person taking reasonable care would have done that or failed to do that in those circumstances.' As a consequence, he should not be a Cabinet Minister now. He shouldn't have been a Minister of state, late alone the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Add to that the denials of any issues and the legal threats against reporting and there is little recoverable from this. If the Conservative party feels that he represents them well as Party Chairman, that's up to them." Aw come on, don’t you feel even a tad sorry for the lad? He had probably made plans for that few £million that he now needs to shelve! And the whatsapp messages from his mate Dave were all innocent and just waffled on about some thing called Greensill! His memory is obviously starting to fail him and he is knocking on a bit. Not a good look to vilify old people! | |||
| |||
"No, I don't feel sorry for Zahawi, not do I think that we need to "wait and see". '"Careless" has a specific definition to HMRC. “Careless” means a failure to take reasonable care in relation to your tax affairs. Carelessness can be likened to the longstanding concept in general law of “negligence”. In the 1856 case of Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks Co, Baron Alderson said Negligence is the omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided upon those considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs, would do, or doing something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do. The defendants might be liable for negligence, if, unintentionally, they omitted to do that which a prudent and reasonable person would have done, or did that which a person taking reasonable care would not have done. This is not a question of whether or not the person knew about an inaccuracy in a return or document or their failure to comply with an obligation. If they did that would be deliberate, see CH53700. It is simply a question of examining what the person did or failed to do and asking whether a prudent and reasonable person taking reasonable care would have done that or failed to do that in those circumstances.' As a consequence, he should not be a Cabinet Minister now. He shouldn't have been a Minister of state, late alone the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Add to that the denials of any issues and the legal threats against reporting and there is little recoverable from this. If the Conservative party feels that he represents them well as Party Chairman, that's up to them. You really ought to make it clear which parts of your post are your opinion, and which are direct quotes from the HMRC compliance handbook. In any case, the handbook is internal HMRC guidance, and does not have a solid founding in law. 'Carelessness' and 'negligence' are almost diametrically opposed concepts. Carelessness is performing an action without due care and attention, where negligence is failing to perform an action which a reasonably diligent person would have. You'll notice that the judge's excellent summation of what 'negligence' means was part of his summary dismissing Blyth's claim without trial, as the claim was not based on fact." No, I really don't "have" to do anything nor do I have to take note of your unqualified legal opinion. However, the quote from the HMRC is in 'quotation marks' so easy to distinguish from what I have written. HMRC have stated what they mean when they use the word "careless". They like it to negligence. Your interpretation, which is all opinion, is inconsequential. | |||
"No, I don't feel sorry for Zahawi, not do I think that we need to "wait and see". '"Careless" has a specific definition to HMRC. “Careless” means a failure to take reasonable care in relation to your tax affairs. Carelessness can be likened to the longstanding concept in general law of “negligence”. In the 1856 case of Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks Co, Baron Alderson said Negligence is the omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided upon those considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs, would do, or doing something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do. The defendants might be liable for negligence, if, unintentionally, they omitted to do that which a prudent and reasonable person would have done, or did that which a person taking reasonable care would not have done. This is not a question of whether or not the person knew about an inaccuracy in a return or document or their failure to comply with an obligation. If they did that would be deliberate, see CH53700. It is simply a question of examining what the person did or failed to do and asking whether a prudent and reasonable person taking reasonable care would have done that or failed to do that in those circumstances.' As a consequence, he should not be a Cabinet Minister now. He shouldn't have been a Minister of state, late alone the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Add to that the denials of any issues and the legal threats against reporting and there is little recoverable from this. If the Conservative party feels that he represents them well as Party Chairman, that's up to them. Aw come on, don’t you feel even a tad sorry for the lad? He had probably made plans for that few £million that he now needs to shelve! And the whatsapp messages from his mate Dave were all innocent and just waffled on about some thing called Greensill! His memory is obviously starting to fail him and he is knocking on a bit. Not a good look to vilify old people! " The money did not benefit hom or his family and his taxes were all up to date anyway. So, even paying the tax was no loss for him in any way. Apparently. Which makes you wonder why he was so keen not to pay more tax as nobody benefitted from the money. It also makes you wonder why he sold the company for so much. Anyway, no need to feel sorry for him as he hasn't missed out on any benefit of any kind  | |||
| |||
| |||
"HMRC say they don’t issue fines for errors so it was deliberate. Interestingly Sunak refused to answer if he had ever been issued with a similar fine.. Maybe we have a reason for Sunak not wanting to be throwing Zahawi under a bus as the next bus may be coming for him!! " I tjoygh sunak had. It's just his spokesperson didn't give an answer to start with. | |||
"HMRC say they don’t issue fines for errors so it was deliberate. Interestingly Sunak refused to answer if he had ever been issued with a similar fine.. Maybe we have a reason for Sunak not wanting to be throwing Zahawi under a bus as the next bus may be coming for him!! I tjoygh sunak had. It's just his spokesperson didn't give an answer to start with. " I heard on the radio he will publish his tax return for this year but will not disclose any historic information over and above that and his spokesman refused to answer the question on fines. He didn’t deny it surprisingly as that would be very simone and clean surely? | |||
| |||
"HMRC say they don’t issue fines for errors so it was deliberate. Interestingly Sunak refused to answer if he had ever been issued with a similar fine.. Maybe we have a reason for Sunak not wanting to be throwing Zahawi under a bus as the next bus may be coming for him!! " Oh there’s definitely going to be another one along in a minute….there may not be enough buses in the country for the current crop of Tory politicians | |||
| |||
| |||
"Apparently there is another growing story on this man. He took out 30 million in unsecured loans, from whoknkows? Why reporters are finding this strange is that he has over 100 million in properties, which he could have took out 30 million in a cheaper secured loan. But a secured loan lets others know whom he had 'lent" from and why. Thats not to mention a secured loan on properties are investigated due to money laundering and other crimes which housing was once used to cover criminal activities and hiding money. So maybe that's why he was sacked on a Sunday morning, as his bosses feared that the story would come out in mainstream media sometime this week, but as his now gone maybe the story will as well. I saw it on YouTube " I would not be surprised if hid properties are owned by the trust. | |||
"Apparently there is another growing story on this man. He took out 30 million in unsecured loans, from whoknkows? Why reporters are finding this strange is that he has over 100 million in properties, which he could have took out 30 million in a cheaper secured loan. But a secured loan lets others know whom he had 'lent" from and why. Thats not to mention a secured loan on properties are investigated due to money laundering and other crimes which housing was once used to cover criminal activities and hiding money. So maybe that's why he was sacked on a Sunday morning, as his bosses feared that the story would come out in mainstream media sometime this week, but as his now gone maybe the story will as well. I saw it on YouTube I would not be surprised if hid properties are owned by the trust. " He put the properties in his wife's name, but the loan still came to him. it just gets worst the more one looks into him. Also the PM has lied to parliament as he stated in pmqs that he wasn't informed of Zahawi tax investigation, but the observer states he knew. ho dear. | |||
"...and Zahawi has now been sacked. Interested to know if those who supported him think that should not have happened or what facts have changed that mean this is now the correct thing to do." Those who supported him are the same people who supported Boris , Truss etc etc . They have been made to look like fools , again. | |||
| |||
"...and Zahawi has now been sacked. Interested to know if those who supported him think that should not have happened or what facts have changed that mean this is now the correct thing to do. Those who supported him are the same people who supported Boris , Truss etc etc . They have been made to look like fools , again. "The only fools are those who support a good old biased social media storm and a 'guilty til proven guilty' approach to errors. Zahawi actually remains unencumbered by criminal proceedings, but rightly went due to breaking the ministerial code 7 times. Lefties on here were calling for this even before Sir Laurie's inquiry, with some calling for his deportation back to Baghdad! They still speak of 'crimes' when none appear to have been committed. Quite why they race to judgement is bewildering. Boris Becker deserved to get the (tennis) elbow
Nadhim Zahawi does not. | |||
"...and Zahawi has now been sacked. Interested to know if those who supported him think that should not have happened or what facts have changed that mean this is now the correct thing to do. Those who supported him are the same people who supported Boris , Truss etc etc . They have been made to look like fools , again.
The only fools are those who support a good old biased social media storm and a 'guilty til proven guilty' approach to errors. Zahawi actually remains unencumbered by criminal proceedings, but rightly went due to breaking the ministerial code 7 times. Lefties on here were calling for this even before Sir Laurie's inquiry, with some calling for his deportation back to Baghdad! They still speak of 'crimes' when none appear to have been committed. Quite why they race to judgement is bewildering.
Boris Becker deserved to get the (tennis) elbow
Nadhim Zahawi does not. "Zahawi was rightly (although belated) sacked , he broke the ministerial code | |||
"...and Zahawi has now been sacked. Interested to know if those who supported him think that should not have happened or what facts have changed that mean this is now the correct thing to do. Those who supported him are the same people who supported Boris , Truss etc etc . They have been made to look like fools , again.
The only fools are those who support a good old biased social media storm and a 'guilty til proven guilty' approach to errors. Zahawi actually remains unencumbered by criminal proceedings, but rightly went due to breaking the ministerial code 7 times. Lefties on here were calling for this even before Sir Laurie's inquiry, with some calling for his deportation back to Baghdad! They still speak of 'crimes' when none appear to have been committed. Quite why they race to judgement is bewildering.
Boris Becker deserved to get the (tennis) elbow
Nadhim Zahawi does not. "No! Zahawi should rightly be held to higher standards as an MP. Even far higher standards as a Minister. And even higher standards as a former Chancellor (and the actual Chancellor when investigations started). He clearly thought he could abuse his position for personal gain. He isn’t just Joe Bloggs who was “careless” on his tax return. Stop implying some form of defence for the indefendable  | |||
"...and Zahawi has now been sacked. Interested to know if those who supported him think that should not have happened or what facts have changed that mean this is now the correct thing to do. Those who supported him are the same people who supported Boris , Truss etc etc . They have been made to look like fools , again.
The only fools are those who support a good old biased social media storm and a 'guilty til proven guilty' approach to errors. Zahawi actually remains unencumbered by criminal proceedings, but rightly went due to breaking the ministerial code 7 times. Lefties on here were calling for this even before Sir Laurie's inquiry, with some calling for his deportation back to Baghdad! They still speak of 'crimes' when none appear to have been committed. Quite why they race to judgement is bewildering.
Boris Becker deserved to get the (tennis) elbow
Nadhim Zahawi does not. "People who are not "lefties" here and elsewhere were calling for Zahawi to resign or be removed because the information was the same both before and after the inquiry. This included current and former Tory politicians. So, the media storm was evidently not biased as the Daily Mail, The Times and The Telegraph all wanted him removed. Breaking the law and paying a fine is still breaking the law with or without a conviction. | |||
"...and Zahawi has now been sacked. Interested to know if those who supported him think that should not have happened or what facts have changed that mean this is now the correct thing to do. Those who supported him are the same people who supported Boris , Truss etc etc . They have been made to look like fools , again.
The only fools are those who support a good old biased social media storm and a 'guilty til proven guilty' approach to errors. Zahawi actually remains unencumbered by criminal proceedings, but rightly went due to breaking the ministerial code 7 times. Lefties on here were calling for this even before Sir Laurie's inquiry, with some calling for his deportation back to Baghdad! They still speak of 'crimes' when none appear to have been committed. Quite why they race to judgement is bewildering.
Boris Becker deserved to get the (tennis) elbow
Nadhim Zahawi does not.
People who are not "lefties" here and elsewhere were calling for Zahawi to resign or be removed because the information was the same both before and after the inquiry.
This included current and former Tory politicians.
So, the media storm was evidently not biased as the Daily Mail, The Times and The Telegraph all wanted him removed.
Breaking the law and paying a fine is still breaking the law with or without a conviction."I find it bizarre how many people on here claim that only lefties are concerned about corruption and sleaze in parliament. I don't think that's the case at all. | |||
"...and Zahawi has now been sacked. Interested to know if those who supported him think that should not have happened or what facts have changed that mean this is now the correct thing to do. Those who supported him are the same people who supported Boris , Truss etc etc . They have been made to look like fools , again.
The only fools are those who support a good old biased social media storm and a 'guilty til proven guilty' approach to errors. Zahawi actually remains unencumbered by criminal proceedings, but rightly went due to breaking the ministerial code 7 times. Lefties on here were calling for this even before Sir Laurie's inquiry, with some calling for his deportation back to Baghdad! They still speak of 'crimes' when none appear to have been committed. Quite why they race to judgement is bewildering.
Boris Becker deserved to get the (tennis) elbow
Nadhim Zahawi does not.
People who are not "lefties" here and elsewhere were calling for Zahawi to resign or be removed because the information was the same both before and after the inquiry.
This included current and former Tory politicians.
So, the media storm was evidently not biased as the Daily Mail, The Times and The Telegraph all wanted him removed.
Breaking the law and paying a fine is still breaking the law with or without a conviction.
I find it bizarre how many people on here claim that only lefties are concerned about corruption and sleaze in parliament. I don't think that's the case at all. "It is hugely insulting for ‘righties’ | |||
| |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. " Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. | |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. " Genuinely don't believe you | |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. Genuinely don't believe you " For sure. It's definitely my opinion. I'm comfortable with you thinking that I am lying about my opinion.  | |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. Genuinely don't believe you For sure. It's definitely my opinion. I'm comfortable with you thinking that I am lying about my opinion. " | |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. " maybe it's the power that corrupts .. but I'm struggling to get as much non Tory corruption and bad behaviour as Tory. And an unwillingness to address it too. There have been incidences for sure. But the current Tory lot seem to not take a breath. It's pure consistency that's mind blowing. | |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. maybe it's the power that corrupts .. but I'm struggling to get as much non Tory corruption and bad behaviour as Tory. And an unwillingness to address it too. There have been incidences for sure. But the current Tory lot seem to not take a breath. It's pure consistency that's mind blowing. " They do seem to be busy little bees on the corruption front. | |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. " If not more so. Mandelson mortgage mess? Passports for the Hinduja Bros? Cash for access? Tony's cronies.... | |||
"...and Zahawi has now been sacked. Interested to know if those who supported him think that should not have happened or what facts have changed that mean this is now the correct thing to do. Those who supported him are the same people who supported Boris , Truss etc etc . They have been made to look like fools , again.
The only fools are those who support a good old biased social media storm and a 'guilty til proven guilty' approach to errors. Zahawi actually remains unencumbered by criminal proceedings, but rightly went due to breaking the ministerial code 7 times. Lefties on here were calling for this even before Sir Laurie's inquiry, with some calling for his deportation back to Baghdad! They still speak of 'crimes' when none appear to have been committed. Quite why they race to judgement is bewildering.
Boris Becker deserved to get the (tennis) elbow
Nadhim Zahawi does not.
No! Zahawi should rightly be held to higher standards as an MP. Even far higher standards as a Minister. And even higher standards as a former Chancellor (and the actual Chancellor when investigations started). He clearly thought he could abuse his position for personal gain. He isn’t just Joe Bloggs who was “careless” on his tax return. Stop implying some form of defence for the indefendable "Stop?! Who do you think you are? I'll voice my opinion just as you can. I believe in equality before the law. What basis does your hierarchical scale of standards have in this arena? He's human and to err is human. HMRC said it was careless, no more. No Becker or Pigott outcome. Stop emboldening racists calling for him to be imprisoned and then deported! For someone constantly posturing as left leaning, liberal and committed to equality, your approach is surprising to say the least! | |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. " You were only 20 or so when Labour came to power. You can be forgiven for not noticing their sleaze! Ask your dad about Mandelson's mortgages, David Blunkett and Nanny Gate, Bernie Ecclestone's £1m Donation, Loans for Lordships, John Prescott's Cocktail Sausage, Lord Irvine's Wallpaper, Margaret Beckett's Air Miles, Cherie Blair's Freebie Holidays, Tessa Jowell's Mortgages, The Dodgy Dossier on Iraq, Burying Bad News, Derek Draper and Lobbygate, Cherie Blair signing the Hutton Report, Gordon Brown and the Smith Institute, Cherie Blair's 'lecture' tours, repeat to fade | |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. maybe it's the power that corrupts .. but I'm struggling to get as much non Tory corruption and bad behaviour as Tory. And an unwillingness to address it too. There have been incidences for sure. But the current Tory lot seem to not take a breath. It's pure consistency that's mind blowing. They do seem to be busy little bees on the corruption front." New Labour turned out to be a hive of activity on this front | |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. maybe it's the power that corrupts .. but I'm struggling to get as much non Tory corruption and bad behaviour as Tory. And an unwillingness to address it too. There have been incidences for sure. But the current Tory lot seem to not take a breath. It's pure consistency that's mind blowing. " Do you not remember the 'incidences' of New Labour sleaze? You might mean 'incidents' Incident means an event, an occurrence, or a moment that may or may not be expected . Incidence means the frequency or the time intervals at which an event occurs, in other words, the rate of an occurrence. | |||
"...and Zahawi has now been sacked. Interested to know if those who supported him think that should not have happened or what facts have changed that mean this is now the correct thing to do. Those who supported him are the same people who supported Boris , Truss etc etc . They have been made to look like fools , again.
The only fools are those who support a good old biased social media storm and a 'guilty til proven guilty' approach to errors. Zahawi actually remains unencumbered by criminal proceedings, but rightly went due to breaking the ministerial code 7 times. Lefties on here were calling for this even before Sir Laurie's inquiry, with some calling for his deportation back to Baghdad! They still speak of 'crimes' when none appear to have been committed. Quite why they race to judgement is bewildering.
Boris Becker deserved to get the (tennis) elbow
Nadhim Zahawi does not.
No! Zahawi should rightly be held to higher standards as an MP. Even far higher standards as a Minister. And even higher standards as a former Chancellor (and the actual Chancellor when investigations started). He clearly thought he could abuse his position for personal gain. He isn’t just Joe Bloggs who was “careless” on his tax return. Stop implying some form of defence for the indefendable
Stop?! Who do you think you are? I'll voice my opinion just as you can. I believe in equality before the law. What basis does your hierarchical scale of standards have in this arena? He's human and to err is human. HMRC said it was careless, no more. No Becker or Pigott outcome. Stop emboldening racists calling for him to be imprisoned and then deported!
For someone constantly posturing as left leaning, liberal and committed to equality, your approach is surprising to say the least! "You need to look up how HMRC defines " "careless", Pat. This is from their compliance handbook. 'Carelessness can be likened to the longstanding concept in general law of “negligence”.' That doesn't make you non-culpable. Zahawi was not prosecuted because he didn't contest the ruling in Court. He, eventually, paid his tax and fine running into millions. By definition he did something seriously wrong. He was also sacked as Conservative Party Chairman and a Cabinet Minister for breaking the Ministerial code. So, once again, he did something seriously wrong. He has demonstrated a lack of integrity multiple times. A criminal conviction is not required to make him unfit for public office. | |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. You were only 20 or so when Labour came to power. You can be forgiven for not noticing their sleaze! Ask your dad about Mandelson's mortgages, David Blunkett and Nanny Gate, Bernie Ecclestone's £1m Donation, Loans for Lordships, John Prescott's Cocktail Sausage, Lord Irvine's Wallpaper, Margaret Beckett's Air Miles, Cherie Blair's Freebie Holidays, Tessa Jowell's Mortgages, The Dodgy Dossier on Iraq, Burying Bad News, Derek Draper and Lobbygate, Cherie Blair signing the Hutton Report, Gordon Brown and the Smith Institute, Cherie Blair's 'lecture' tours, repeat to fade "Lol Are you really trying to compare? That's adorable. | |||
"...and Zahawi has now been sacked. Interested to know if those who supported him think that should not have happened or what facts have changed that mean this is now the correct thing to do. Those who supported him are the same people who supported Boris , Truss etc etc . They have been made to look like fools , again.
The only fools are those who support a good old biased social media storm and a 'guilty til proven guilty' approach to errors. Zahawi actually remains unencumbered by criminal proceedings, but rightly went due to breaking the ministerial code 7 times. Lefties on here were calling for this even before Sir Laurie's inquiry, with some calling for his deportation back to Baghdad! They still speak of 'crimes' when none appear to have been committed. Quite why they race to judgement is bewildering.
Boris Becker deserved to get the (tennis) elbow
Nadhim Zahawi does not.
No! Zahawi should rightly be held to higher standards as an MP. Even far higher standards as a Minister. And even higher standards as a former Chancellor (and the actual Chancellor when investigations started). He clearly thought he could abuse his position for personal gain. He isn’t just Joe Bloggs who was “careless” on his tax return. Stop implying some form of defence for the indefendable
Stop?! Who do you think you are? I'll voice my opinion just as you can. I believe in equality before the law. What basis does your hierarchical scale of standards have in this arena? He's human and to err is human. HMRC said it was careless, no more. No Becker or Pigott outcome. Stop emboldening racists calling for him to be imprisoned and then deported!
For someone constantly posturing as left leaning, liberal and committed to equality, your approach is surprising to say the least! "Yeah stop! You honestly do not think our public servants should be held to higher standards than the average Joe? Zahawi is only human! What kind of lame excuse is that? Not only is he a multi-millionaire business man with access to the best accountants and tax exoerts money can buy, but at the time he was also Chancellor with access to Civil Servant tax officials who could advise (and cut a deal with). | |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. You were only 20 or so when Labour came to power. You can be forgiven for not noticing their sleaze! Ask your dad about Mandelson's mortgages, David Blunkett and Nanny Gate, Bernie Ecclestone's £1m Donation, Loans for Lordships, John Prescott's Cocktail Sausage, Lord Irvine's Wallpaper, Margaret Beckett's Air Miles, Cherie Blair's Freebie Holidays, Tessa Jowell's Mortgages, The Dodgy Dossier on Iraq, Burying Bad News, Derek Draper and Lobbygate, Cherie Blair signing the Hutton Report, Gordon Brown and the Smith Institute, Cherie Blair's 'lecture' tours, repeat to fade
Lol
Are you really trying to compare?
That's adorable. "it is interesting the symmetry. Although what strikes me, is that often the recent Tory part trump these... And also these are the ones you almost pass over because there is so much more. Eg wallpapers. Lord chancellor v PM. Tax payers money v obscurity of who paid for it... Which links to Mortgages and loans. Dodgy loan by mandelson which may have bought policial gain v iffy g'tee by PM which has a more clear (but not proven) link to an appointment. And we've stopped even caring about Boris' free holidays or use of power to help along his women. To be clear on my position, I'm not Tory v labour. But this iteration of Tories (since 2016, although more like since Boris) v other generations. In four years they have matched and surpassed labours 12 years. And the Cameron generation. And I imagine some of those you quote above took time to come out. ... | |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. maybe it's the power that corrupts .. but I'm struggling to get as much non Tory corruption and bad behaviour as Tory. And an unwillingness to address it too. There have been incidences for sure. But the current Tory lot seem to not take a breath. It's pure consistency that's mind blowing. Do you not remember the 'incidences' of New Labour sleaze? You might mean 'incidents' Incident means an event, an occurrence, or a moment that may or may not be expected . Incidence means the frequency or the time intervals at which an event occurs, in other words, the rate of an occurrence." Zahawi was sacked Raab will get sacked, | |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. maybe it's the power that corrupts .. but I'm struggling to get as much non Tory corruption and bad behaviour as Tory. And an unwillingness to address it too. There have been incidences for sure. But the current Tory lot seem to not take a breath. It's pure consistency that's mind blowing. Do you not remember the 'incidences' of New Labour sleaze? You might mean 'incidents' Incident means an event, an occurrence, or a moment that may or may not be expected . Incidence means the frequency or the time intervals at which an event occurs, in other words, the rate of an occurrence. Zahawi was sacked Raab will get sacked, "Just to be replaced by some other self serving corrupt Tories. The system itself is broken. | |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. maybe it's the power that corrupts .. but I'm struggling to get as much non Tory corruption and bad behaviour as Tory. And an unwillingness to address it too. There have been incidences for sure. But the current Tory lot seem to not take a breath. It's pure consistency that's mind blowing. Do you not remember the 'incidences' of New Labour sleaze? You might mean 'incidents' Incident means an event, an occurrence, or a moment that may or may not be expected . Incidence means the frequency or the time intervals at which an event occurs, in other words, the rate of an occurrence. Zahawi was sacked Raab will get sacked,
Just to be replaced by some other self serving corrupt Tories.
The system itself is broken."Is it the "system"? Any system requires the people within to act in good faith. Unfortunately it's the people who are "broken". Personal responsibility is no longer a thing, it seems. | |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. maybe it's the power that corrupts .. but I'm struggling to get as much non Tory corruption and bad behaviour as Tory. And an unwillingness to address it too. There have been incidences for sure. But the current Tory lot seem to not take a breath. It's pure consistency that's mind blowing. Do you not remember the 'incidences' of New Labour sleaze? You might mean 'incidents' Incident means an event, an occurrence, or a moment that may or may not be expected . Incidence means the frequency or the time intervals at which an event occurs, in other words, the rate of an occurrence. Zahawi was sacked Raab will get sacked,
Just to be replaced by some other self serving corrupt Tories.
The system itself is broken.
Is it the "system"?
Any system requires the people within to act in good faith.
Unfortunately it's the people who are "broken". Personal responsibility is no longer a thing, it seems."They have built it to sustain and remain unchanged. It's funded by and working for the £££, not us. Look what happened when the EU wanted to close tax avoidance loopholes. | |||
"...and Zahawi has now been sacked. Interested to know if those who supported him think that should not have happened or what facts have changed that mean this is now the correct thing to do. Those who supported him are the same people who supported Boris , Truss etc etc . They have been made to look like fools , again.
The only fools are those who support a good old biased social media storm and a 'guilty til proven guilty' approach to errors. Zahawi actually remains unencumbered by criminal proceedings, but rightly went due to breaking the ministerial code 7 times. Lefties on here were calling for this even before Sir Laurie's inquiry, with some calling for his deportation back to Baghdad! They still speak of 'crimes' when none appear to have been committed. Quite why they race to judgement is bewildering.
Boris Becker deserved to get the (tennis) elbow
Nadhim Zahawi does not.
No! Zahawi should rightly be held to higher standards as an MP. Even far higher standards as a Minister. And even higher standards as a former Chancellor (and the actual Chancellor when investigations started). He clearly thought he could abuse his position for personal gain. He isn’t just Joe Bloggs who was “careless” on his tax return. Stop implying some form of defence for the indefendable
Stop?! Who do you think you are? I'll voice my opinion just as you can. I believe in equality before the law. What basis does your hierarchical scale of standards have in this arena? He's human and to err is human. HMRC said it was careless, no more. No Becker or Pigott outcome. Stop emboldening racists calling for him to be imprisoned and then deported!
For someone constantly posturing as left leaning, liberal and committed to equality, your approach is surprising to say the least!
You need to look up how HMRC defines " "careless", Pat.
This is from their compliance handbook.
'Carelessness can be likened to the longstanding concept in general law of “negligence”.'
That doesn't make you non-culpable. Zahawi was not prosecuted because he didn't contest the ruling in Court. He, eventually, paid his tax and fine running into millions.
By definition he did something seriously wrong.
He was also sacked as Conservative Party Chairman and a Cabinet Minister for breaking the Ministerial code.
So, once again, he did something seriously wrong.
He has demonstrated a lack of integrity multiple times.
A criminal conviction is not required to make him unfit for public office."Lester Piggott didn't contest the charges in Court. A number of people on here have already decided Zahawi is a criminal and should be jailed, then deported, no trial and no questions asked. Are you in agreement with them? Yes or no. Boris Becker was found guilty of various offences relating to his bankruptcy under the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986). Lester Piggott was sentenced to 3 years jail in 1987 for False Accounting (section 17 Theft Act 1968). You obviously appear to have more information than the rest of us, so please tell us what law Nadim Zahawi has broken and should be jailed, then deported, for? I have no qualms with him being sacked as Tory Party chairman after an Inquiry found he broke the ministerial code 7 times. But that is not criminal either. Straightforward question. Do you believe Nadhim Zahawi is a criminal? Under what law? Can you set it out for us all, as I have done above for Boris Becker and Lester Piggott with legislative dates? | |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. You were only 20 or so when Labour came to power. You can be forgiven for not noticing their sleaze! Ask your dad about Mandelson's mortgages, David Blunkett and Nanny Gate, Bernie Ecclestone's £1m Donation, Loans for Lordships, John Prescott's Cocktail Sausage, Lord Irvine's Wallpaper, Margaret Beckett's Air Miles, Cherie Blair's Freebie Holidays, Tessa Jowell's Mortgages, The Dodgy Dossier on Iraq, Burying Bad News, Derek Draper and Lobbygate, Cherie Blair signing the Hutton Report, Gordon Brown and the Smith Institute, Cherie Blair's 'lecture' tours, repeat to fade
Lol
Are you really trying to compare?
That's adorable. it is interesting the symmetry. Although what strikes me, is that often the recent Tory part trump these... And also these are the ones you almost pass over because there is so much more.
Eg wallpapers. Lord chancellor v PM. Tax payers money v obscurity of who paid for it... Which links to
Mortgages and loans. Dodgy loan by mandelson which may have bought policial gain v iffy g'tee by PM which has a more clear (but not proven) link to an appointment.
And we've stopped even caring about Boris' free holidays or use of power to help along his women.
To be clear on my position, I'm not Tory v labour. But this iteration of Tories (since 2016, although more like since Boris) v other generations. In four years they have matched and surpassed labours 12 years. And the Cameron generation.
And I imagine some of those you quote above took time to come out. ..."Not Tory or Labour? So Labour were in for 13 years (not 12) and the last General Election was slightly over 3 years ago (not 4). Still, sounds worse for the Tories if your dates error is in Labour's favour, eh? And strange you don't mention Blair's free holidays? Apparently, Cliff Richard lent his house in Barbados to Tony Blair and his family after he saw the prime minister looking "dwindled and haggard" during the war in Iraq. Aww bless | |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. You were only 20 or so when Labour came to power. You can be forgiven for not noticing their sleaze! Ask your dad about Mandelson's mortgages, David Blunkett and Nanny Gate, Bernie Ecclestone's £1m Donation, Loans for Lordships, John Prescott's Cocktail Sausage, Lord Irvine's Wallpaper, Margaret Beckett's Air Miles, Cherie Blair's Freebie Holidays, Tessa Jowell's Mortgages, The Dodgy Dossier on Iraq, Burying Bad News, Derek Draper and Lobbygate, Cherie Blair signing the Hutton Report, Gordon Brown and the Smith Institute, Cherie Blair's 'lecture' tours, repeat to fade
Lol
Are you really trying to compare?
That's adorable. it is interesting the symmetry. Although what strikes me, is that often the recent Tory part trump these... And also these are the ones you almost pass over because there is so much more.
Eg wallpapers. Lord chancellor v PM. Tax payers money v obscurity of who paid for it... Which links to
Mortgages and loans. Dodgy loan by mandelson which may have bought policial gain v iffy g'tee by PM which has a more clear (but not proven) link to an appointment.
And we've stopped even caring about Boris' free holidays or use of power to help along his women.
To be clear on my position, I'm not Tory v labour. But this iteration of Tories (since 2016, although more like since Boris) v other generations. In four years they have matched and surpassed labours 12 years. And the Cameron generation.
And I imagine some of those you quote above took time to come out. ...
Not Tory or Labour? So Labour were in for 13 years (not 12) and the last General Election was slightly over 3 years ago (not 4). Still, sounds worse for the Tories if your dates error is in Labour's favour, eh?
And strange you don't mention Blair's free holidays? Apparently, Cliff Richard lent his house in Barbados to Tony Blair and his family after he saw the prime minister looking "dwindled and haggard" during the war in Iraq. Aww bless "Yes! Don't worry about all the corruption in the government. Don't worry about the billions handed to their pals for dodgy PPE. Don't worry about any of it. Finally someone is talking about what matters, something Labour did 20 years ago. Thank you. | |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. You were only 20 or so when Labour came to power. You can be forgiven for not noticing their sleaze! Ask your dad about Mandelson's mortgages, David Blunkett and Nanny Gate, Bernie Ecclestone's £1m Donation, Loans for Lordships, John Prescott's Cocktail Sausage, Lord Irvine's Wallpaper, Margaret Beckett's Air Miles, Cherie Blair's Freebie Holidays, Tessa Jowell's Mortgages, The Dodgy Dossier on Iraq, Burying Bad News, Derek Draper and Lobbygate, Cherie Blair signing the Hutton Report, Gordon Brown and the Smith Institute, Cherie Blair's 'lecture' tours, repeat to fade
Lol
Are you really trying to compare?
That's adorable. it is interesting the symmetry. Although what strikes me, is that often the recent Tory part trump these... And also these are the ones you almost pass over because there is so much more.
Eg wallpapers. Lord chancellor v PM. Tax payers money v obscurity of who paid for it... Which links to
Mortgages and loans. Dodgy loan by mandelson which may have bought policial gain v iffy g'tee by PM which has a more clear (but not proven) link to an appointment.
And we've stopped even caring about Boris' free holidays or use of power to help along his women.
To be clear on my position, I'm not Tory v labour. But this iteration of Tories (since 2016, although more like since Boris) v other generations. In four years they have matched and surpassed labours 12 years. And the Cameron generation.
And I imagine some of those you quote above took time to come out. ...
Not Tory or Labour? So Labour were in for 13 years (not 12) and the last General Election was slightly over 3 years ago (not 4). Still, sounds worse for the Tories if your dates error is in Labour's favour, eh?
And strange you don't mention Blair's free holidays? Apparently, Cliff Richard lent his house in Barbados to Tony Blair and his family after he saw the prime minister looking "dwindled and haggard" during the war in Iraq. Aww bless
Yes! Don't worry about all the corruption in the government. Don't worry about the billions handed to their pals for dodgy PPE. Don't worry about any of it.
Finally someone is talking about what matters, something Labour did 20 years ago. Thank you. "You're welcome. I'm a bit older than you. Always glad to fill in knowledge gaps for those a little wet behind the ears
| |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. You were only 20 or so when Labour came to power. You can be forgiven for not noticing their sleaze! Ask your dad about Mandelson's mortgages, David Blunkett and Nanny Gate, Bernie Ecclestone's £1m Donation, Loans for Lordships, John Prescott's Cocktail Sausage, Lord Irvine's Wallpaper, Margaret Beckett's Air Miles, Cherie Blair's Freebie Holidays, Tessa Jowell's Mortgages, The Dodgy Dossier on Iraq, Burying Bad News, Derek Draper and Lobbygate, Cherie Blair signing the Hutton Report, Gordon Brown and the Smith Institute, Cherie Blair's 'lecture' tours, repeat to fade
Lol
Are you really trying to compare?
That's adorable. it is interesting the symmetry. Although what strikes me, is that often the recent Tory part trump these... And also these are the ones you almost pass over because there is so much more.
Eg wallpapers. Lord chancellor v PM. Tax payers money v obscurity of who paid for it... Which links to
Mortgages and loans. Dodgy loan by mandelson which may have bought policial gain v iffy g'tee by PM which has a more clear (but not proven) link to an appointment.
And we've stopped even caring about Boris' free holidays or use of power to help along his women.
To be clear on my position, I'm not Tory v labour. But this iteration of Tories (since 2016, although more like since Boris) v other generations. In four years they have matched and surpassed labours 12 years. And the Cameron generation.
And I imagine some of those you quote above took time to come out. ...
Not Tory or Labour? So Labour were in for 13 years (not 12) and the last General Election was slightly over 3 years ago (not 4). Still, sounds worse for the Tories if your dates error is in Labour's favour, eh?
And strange you don't mention Blair's free holidays? Apparently, Cliff Richard lent his house in Barbados to Tony Blair and his family after he saw the prime minister looking "dwindled and haggard" during the war in Iraq. Aww bless "I stand corrected. And yeah, that's reinforced my point. The incidences of incidents is an even higher rate than I was thinking. Blimey.
Tbh, I'm less bothered about "free holidays" provided they are declared appropriatly. No idea if the Blair's were or not. But it's the covert nature of many of these affairs plus denial plus cover up that irks me most. | |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. You were only 20 or so when Labour came to power. You can be forgiven for not noticing their sleaze! Ask your dad about Mandelson's mortgages, David Blunkett and Nanny Gate, Bernie Ecclestone's £1m Donation, Loans for Lordships, John Prescott's Cocktail Sausage, Lord Irvine's Wallpaper, Margaret Beckett's Air Miles, Cherie Blair's Freebie Holidays, Tessa Jowell's Mortgages, The Dodgy Dossier on Iraq, Burying Bad News, Derek Draper and Lobbygate, Cherie Blair signing the Hutton Report, Gordon Brown and the Smith Institute, Cherie Blair's 'lecture' tours, repeat to fade
Lol
Are you really trying to compare?
That's adorable. it is interesting the symmetry. Although what strikes me, is that often the recent Tory part trump these... And also these are the ones you almost pass over because there is so much more.
Eg wallpapers. Lord chancellor v PM. Tax payers money v obscurity of who paid for it... Which links to
Mortgages and loans. Dodgy loan by mandelson which may have bought policial gain v iffy g'tee by PM which has a more clear (but not proven) link to an appointment.
And we've stopped even caring about Boris' free holidays or use of power to help along his women.
To be clear on my position, I'm not Tory v labour. But this iteration of Tories (since 2016, although more like since Boris) v other generations. In four years they have matched and surpassed labours 12 years. And the Cameron generation.
And I imagine some of those you quote above took time to come out. ...
Not Tory or Labour? So Labour were in for 13 years (not 12) and the last General Election was slightly over 3 years ago (not 4). Still, sounds worse for the Tories if your dates error is in Labour's favour, eh?
And strange you don't mention Blair's free holidays? Apparently, Cliff Richard lent his house in Barbados to Tony Blair and his family after he saw the prime minister looking "dwindled and haggard" during the war in Iraq. Aww bless
Yes! Don't worry about all the corruption in the government. Don't worry about the billions handed to their pals for dodgy PPE. Don't worry about any of it.
Finally someone is talking about what matters, something Labour did 20 years ago. Thank you.
You're welcome. I'm a bit older than you. Always glad to fill in knowledge gaps for those a little wet behind the ears
"I'm glad someone is here to distract people from the non-news of current government corruption, nepotism and tax dodging. | |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. You were only 20 or so when Labour came to power. You can be forgiven for not noticing their sleaze! Ask your dad about Mandelson's mortgages, David Blunkett and Nanny Gate, Bernie Ecclestone's £1m Donation, Loans for Lordships, John Prescott's Cocktail Sausage, Lord Irvine's Wallpaper, Margaret Beckett's Air Miles, Cherie Blair's Freebie Holidays, Tessa Jowell's Mortgages, The Dodgy Dossier on Iraq, Burying Bad News, Derek Draper and Lobbygate, Cherie Blair signing the Hutton Report, Gordon Brown and the Smith Institute, Cherie Blair's 'lecture' tours, repeat to fade
Lol
Are you really trying to compare?
That's adorable. it is interesting the symmetry. Although what strikes me, is that often the recent Tory part trump these... And also these are the ones you almost pass over because there is so much more.
Eg wallpapers. Lord chancellor v PM. Tax payers money v obscurity of who paid for it... Which links to
Mortgages and loans. Dodgy loan by mandelson which may have bought policial gain v iffy g'tee by PM which has a more clear (but not proven) link to an appointment.
And we've stopped even caring about Boris' free holidays or use of power to help along his women.
To be clear on my position, I'm not Tory v labour. But this iteration of Tories (since 2016, although more like since Boris) v other generations. In four years they have matched and surpassed labours 12 years. And the Cameron generation.
And I imagine some of those you quote above took time to come out. ...
Not Tory or Labour? So Labour were in for 13 years (not 12) and the last General Election was slightly over 3 years ago (not 4). Still, sounds worse for the Tories if your dates error is in Labour's favour, eh?
And strange you don't mention Blair's free holidays? Apparently, Cliff Richard lent his house in Barbados to Tony Blair and his family after he saw the prime minister looking "dwindled and haggard" during the war in Iraq. Aww bless I stand corrected. And yeah, that's reinforced my point. The incidences of incidents is an even higher rate than I was thinking. Blimey.
Tbh, I'm less bothered about "free holidays" provided they are declared appropriatly. No idea if the Blair's were or not. But it's the covert nature of many of these affairs plus denial plus cover up that irks me most. "No, they weren't! No 10 had insisted that the destination be withheld from the public for 'security reasons' It eventually emerged. Blair stayed 3 times at the Barbados retreat. Cliff seemingly 'wanted nothing' in return. But many newspapers then revealed Cliff had reportedly persuaded Blair to consider changing music copyright laws in his favour. As our Birmingham correspondent might say 'nothing to see here, move along everybody'
Anyway, Even Newer Labour set to return to a place near you in or before January 2025 | |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. You were only 20 or so when Labour came to power. You can be forgiven for not noticing their sleaze! Ask your dad about Mandelson's mortgages, David Blunkett and Nanny Gate, Bernie Ecclestone's £1m Donation, Loans for Lordships, John Prescott's Cocktail Sausage, Lord Irvine's Wallpaper, Margaret Beckett's Air Miles, Cherie Blair's Freebie Holidays, Tessa Jowell's Mortgages, The Dodgy Dossier on Iraq, Burying Bad News, Derek Draper and Lobbygate, Cherie Blair signing the Hutton Report, Gordon Brown and the Smith Institute, Cherie Blair's 'lecture' tours, repeat to fade
Lol
Are you really trying to compare?
That's adorable. it is interesting the symmetry. Although what strikes me, is that often the recent Tory part trump these... And also these are the ones you almost pass over because there is so much more.
Eg wallpapers. Lord chancellor v PM. Tax payers money v obscurity of who paid for it... Which links to
Mortgages and loans. Dodgy loan by mandelson which may have bought policial gain v iffy g'tee by PM which has a more clear (but not proven) link to an appointment.
And we've stopped even caring about Boris' free holidays or use of power to help along his women.
To be clear on my position, I'm not Tory v labour. But this iteration of Tories (since 2016, although more like since Boris) v other generations. In four years they have matched and surpassed labours 12 years. And the Cameron generation.
And I imagine some of those you quote above took time to come out. ...
Not Tory or Labour? So Labour were in for 13 years (not 12) and the last General Election was slightly over 3 years ago (not 4). Still, sounds worse for the Tories if your dates error is in Labour's favour, eh?
And strange you don't mention Blair's free holidays? Apparently, Cliff Richard lent his house in Barbados to Tony Blair and his family after he saw the prime minister looking "dwindled and haggard" during the war in Iraq. Aww bless
Yes! Don't worry about all the corruption in the government. Don't worry about the billions handed to their pals for dodgy PPE. Don't worry about any of it.
Finally someone is talking about what matters, something Labour did 20 years ago. Thank you.
You're welcome. I'm a bit older than you. Always glad to fill in knowledge gaps for those a little wet behind the ears
I'm glad someone is here to distract people from the non-news of current government corruption, nepotism and tax dodging. "You're too kind | |||
"...and Zahawi has now been sacked. Interested to know if those who supported him think that should not have happened or what facts have changed that mean this is now the correct thing to do. Those who supported him are the same people who supported Boris , Truss etc etc . They have been made to look like fools , again.
The only fools are those who support a good old biased social media storm and a 'guilty til proven guilty' approach to errors. Zahawi actually remains unencumbered by criminal proceedings, but rightly went due to breaking the ministerial code 7 times. Lefties on here were calling for this even before Sir Laurie's inquiry, with some calling for his deportation back to Baghdad! They still speak of 'crimes' when none appear to have been committed. Quite why they race to judgement is bewildering.
Boris Becker deserved to get the (tennis) elbow
Nadhim Zahawi does not.
No! Zahawi should rightly be held to higher standards as an MP. Even far higher standards as a Minister. And even higher standards as a former Chancellor (and the actual Chancellor when investigations started). He clearly thought he could abuse his position for personal gain. He isn’t just Joe Bloggs who was “careless” on his tax return. Stop implying some form of defence for the indefendable
Stop?! Who do you think you are? I'll voice my opinion just as you can. I believe in equality before the law. What basis does your hierarchical scale of standards have in this arena? He's human and to err is human. HMRC said it was careless, no more. No Becker or Pigott outcome. Stop emboldening racists calling for him to be imprisoned and then deported!
For someone constantly posturing as left leaning, liberal and committed to equality, your approach is surprising to say the least!
You need to look up how HMRC defines " "careless", Pat.
This is from their compliance handbook.
'Carelessness can be likened to the longstanding concept in general law of “negligence”.'
That doesn't make you non-culpable. Zahawi was not prosecuted because he didn't contest the ruling in Court. He, eventually, paid his tax and fine running into millions.
By definition he did something seriously wrong.
He was also sacked as Conservative Party Chairman and a Cabinet Minister for breaking the Ministerial code.
So, once again, he did something seriously wrong.
He has demonstrated a lack of integrity multiple times.
A criminal conviction is not required to make him unfit for public office.
Lester Piggott didn't contest the charges in Court. A number of people on here have already decided Zahawi is a criminal and should be jailed, then deported, no trial and no questions asked. Are you in agreement with them? Yes or no.
Boris Becker was found guilty of various offences relating to his bankruptcy under the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986). Lester Piggott was sentenced to 3 years jail in 1987 for False Accounting (section 17 Theft Act 1968).
You obviously appear to have more information than the rest of us, so please tell us what law Nadim Zahawi has broken and should be jailed, then deported, for?
I have no qualms with him being sacked as Tory Party chairman after an Inquiry found he broke the ministerial code 7 times. But that is not criminal either.
Straightforward question. Do you believe Nadhim Zahawi is a criminal? Under what law? Can you set it out for us all, as I have done above for Boris Becker and Lester Piggott with legislative dates?
"Credit to you for continuing to try to defend someone who has been sacked for a serious breach of the Ministerial code
What Pigott and Becker did are irrelevant. You know that, of course, in your desperate attempt to draw a false equivalence.
You can witter on about if Zahawi is a criminal or not all you want. Nobody has said that he is nor that he should be jailed or deported so it is a strange thing to try to "win" a point over. You are being a little melodramatic aren't you?
However, do point out where I, or someone else, has stated these things on this thread.
He broke the law and tried to conceal that he was being investigated for dodgy tax. That's ignoring his attempts to legally intimidate journalists and private individuals.
To be clear it doesn't matter if he is a criminal under the law. He broke the rules and was dishonest. He was a Minister of State throughout this period the Chancellor at the point when it was finally settled.
You're "arguments" are getting progressively more desperate, Pat and you're all alone. | |||
"...and Zahawi has now been sacked. Interested to know if those who supported him think that should not have happened or what facts have changed that mean this is now the correct thing to do. Those who supported him are the same people who supported Boris , Truss etc etc . They have been made to look like fools , again.
The only fools are those who support a good old biased social media storm and a 'guilty til proven guilty' approach to errors. Zahawi actually remains unencumbered by criminal proceedings, but rightly went due to breaking the ministerial code 7 times. Lefties on here were calling for this even before Sir Laurie's inquiry, with some calling for his deportation back to Baghdad! They still speak of 'crimes' when none appear to have been committed. Quite why they race to judgement is bewildering.
Boris Becker deserved to get the (tennis) elbow
Nadhim Zahawi does not.
No! Zahawi should rightly be held to higher standards as an MP. Even far higher standards as a Minister. And even higher standards as a former Chancellor (and the actual Chancellor when investigations started). He clearly thought he could abuse his position for personal gain. He isn’t just Joe Bloggs who was “careless” on his tax return. Stop implying some form of defence for the indefendable
Stop?! Who do you think you are? I'll voice my opinion just as you can. I believe in equality before the law. What basis does your hierarchical scale of standards have in this arena? He's human and to err is human. HMRC said it was careless, no more. No Becker or Pigott outcome. Stop emboldening racists calling for him to be imprisoned and then deported!
For someone constantly posturing as left leaning, liberal and committed to equality, your approach is surprising to say the least!
You need to look up how HMRC defines " "careless", Pat.
This is from their compliance handbook.
'Carelessness can be likened to the longstanding concept in general law of “negligence”.'
That doesn't make you non-culpable. Zahawi was not prosecuted because he didn't contest the ruling in Court. He, eventually, paid his tax and fine running into millions.
By definition he did something seriously wrong.
He was also sacked as Conservative Party Chairman and a Cabinet Minister for breaking the Ministerial code.
So, once again, he did something seriously wrong.
He has demonstrated a lack of integrity multiple times.
A criminal conviction is not required to make him unfit for public office.
Lester Piggott didn't contest the charges in Court. A number of people on here have already decided Zahawi is a criminal and should be jailed, then deported, no trial and no questions asked. Are you in agreement with them? Yes or no.
Boris Becker was found guilty of various offences relating to his bankruptcy under the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986). Lester Piggott was sentenced to 3 years jail in 1987 for False Accounting (section 17 Theft Act 1968).
You obviously appear to have more information than the rest of us, so please tell us what law Nadim Zahawi has broken and should be jailed, then deported, for?
I have no qualms with him being sacked as Tory Party chairman after an Inquiry found he broke the ministerial code 7 times. But that is not criminal either.
Straightforward question. Do you believe Nadhim Zahawi is a criminal? Under what law? Can you set it out for us all, as I have done above for Boris Becker and Lester Piggott with legislative dates?
"Are you really trying to compare a jockey and a tennis player with the former Chancellor and Tory Party Chairman? Seriously! | |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. You were only 20 or so when Labour came to power. You can be forgiven for not noticing their sleaze! Ask your dad about Mandelson's mortgages, David Blunkett and Nanny Gate, Bernie Ecclestone's £1m Donation, Loans for Lordships, John Prescott's Cocktail Sausage, Lord Irvine's Wallpaper, Margaret Beckett's Air Miles, Cherie Blair's Freebie Holidays, Tessa Jowell's Mortgages, The Dodgy Dossier on Iraq, Burying Bad News, Derek Draper and Lobbygate, Cherie Blair signing the Hutton Report, Gordon Brown and the Smith Institute, Cherie Blair's 'lecture' tours, repeat to fade
Lol
Are you really trying to compare?
That's adorable. it is interesting the symmetry. Although what strikes me, is that often the recent Tory part trump these... And also these are the ones you almost pass over because there is so much more.
Eg wallpapers. Lord chancellor v PM. Tax payers money v obscurity of who paid for it... Which links to
Mortgages and loans. Dodgy loan by mandelson which may have bought policial gain v iffy g'tee by PM which has a more clear (but not proven) link to an appointment.
And we've stopped even caring about Boris' free holidays or use of power to help along his women.
To be clear on my position, I'm not Tory v labour. But this iteration of Tories (since 2016, although more like since Boris) v other generations. In four years they have matched and surpassed labours 12 years. And the Cameron generation.
And I imagine some of those you quote above took time to come out. ...
Not Tory or Labour? So Labour were in for 13 years (not 12) and the last General Election was slightly over 3 years ago (not 4). Still, sounds worse for the Tories if your dates error is in Labour's favour, eh?
And strange you don't mention Blair's free holidays? Apparently, Cliff Richard lent his house in Barbados to Tony Blair and his family after he saw the prime minister looking "dwindled and haggard" during the war in Iraq. Aww bless I stand corrected. And yeah, that's reinforced my point. The incidences of incidents is an even higher rate than I was thinking. Blimey.
Tbh, I'm less bothered about "free holidays" provided they are declared appropriatly. No idea if the Blair's were or not. But it's the covert nature of many of these affairs plus denial plus cover up that irks me most.
No, they weren't! No 10 had insisted that the destination be withheld from the public for 'security reasons'
It eventually emerged. Blair stayed 3 times at the Barbados retreat.
Cliff seemingly 'wanted nothing' in return.
But many newspapers then revealed Cliff had reportedly persuaded Blair to consider changing music copyright laws in his favour.
As our Birmingham correspondent might say 'nothing to see here, move along everybody'
Anyway, Even Newer Labour set to return to a place near you in or before January 2025 "Shock horror politicians 20(ish) years ago did something wrong so that justifies and excuses politicians today doing something wrong! | |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. You were only 20 or so when Labour came to power. You can be forgiven for not noticing their sleaze! Ask your dad about Mandelson's mortgages, David Blunkett and Nanny Gate, Bernie Ecclestone's £1m Donation, Loans for Lordships, John Prescott's Cocktail Sausage, Lord Irvine's Wallpaper, Margaret Beckett's Air Miles, Cherie Blair's Freebie Holidays, Tessa Jowell's Mortgages, The Dodgy Dossier on Iraq, Burying Bad News, Derek Draper and Lobbygate, Cherie Blair signing the Hutton Report, Gordon Brown and the Smith Institute, Cherie Blair's 'lecture' tours, repeat to fade
Lol
Are you really trying to compare?
That's adorable. it is interesting the symmetry. Although what strikes me, is that often the recent Tory part trump these... And also these are the ones you almost pass over because there is so much more.
Eg wallpapers. Lord chancellor v PM. Tax payers money v obscurity of who paid for it... Which links to
Mortgages and loans. Dodgy loan by mandelson which may have bought policial gain v iffy g'tee by PM which has a more clear (but not proven) link to an appointment.
And we've stopped even caring about Boris' free holidays or use of power to help along his women.
To be clear on my position, I'm not Tory v labour. But this iteration of Tories (since 2016, although more like since Boris) v other generations. In four years they have matched and surpassed labours 12 years. And the Cameron generation.
And I imagine some of those you quote above took time to come out. ...
Not Tory or Labour? So Labour were in for 13 years (not 12) and the last General Election was slightly over 3 years ago (not 4). Still, sounds worse for the Tories if your dates error is in Labour's favour, eh?
And strange you don't mention Blair's free holidays? Apparently, Cliff Richard lent his house in Barbados to Tony Blair and his family after he saw the prime minister looking "dwindled and haggard" during the war in Iraq. Aww bless I stand corrected. And yeah, that's reinforced my point. The incidences of incidents is an even higher rate than I was thinking. Blimey.
Tbh, I'm less bothered about "free holidays" provided they are declared appropriatly. No idea if the Blair's were or not. But it's the covert nature of many of these affairs plus denial plus cover up that irks me most.
No, they weren't! No 10 had insisted that the destination be withheld from the public for 'security reasons'
It eventually emerged. Blair stayed 3 times at the Barbados retreat.
Cliff seemingly 'wanted nothing' in return.
But many newspapers then revealed Cliff had reportedly persuaded Blair to consider changing music copyright laws in his favour.
As our Birmingham correspondent might say 'nothing to see here, move along everybody'
Anyway, Even Newer Labour set to return to a place near you in or before January 2025
Shock horror politicians 20(ish) years ago did something wrong so that justifies and excuses politicians today doing something wrong! "Very weak for you. At no point have I said the above. Just reminding people of the past so the future under Labour won't come as a proper shock horror | |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. You were only 20 or so when Labour came to power. You can be forgiven for not noticing their sleaze! Ask your dad about Mandelson's mortgages, David Blunkett and Nanny Gate, Bernie Ecclestone's £1m Donation, Loans for Lordships, John Prescott's Cocktail Sausage, Lord Irvine's Wallpaper, Margaret Beckett's Air Miles, Cherie Blair's Freebie Holidays, Tessa Jowell's Mortgages, The Dodgy Dossier on Iraq, Burying Bad News, Derek Draper and Lobbygate, Cherie Blair signing the Hutton Report, Gordon Brown and the Smith Institute, Cherie Blair's 'lecture' tours, repeat to fade
Lol
Are you really trying to compare?
That's adorable. it is interesting the symmetry. Although what strikes me, is that often the recent Tory part trump these... And also these are the ones you almost pass over because there is so much more.
Eg wallpapers. Lord chancellor v PM. Tax payers money v obscurity of who paid for it... Which links to
Mortgages and loans. Dodgy loan by mandelson which may have bought policial gain v iffy g'tee by PM which has a more clear (but not proven) link to an appointment.
And we've stopped even caring about Boris' free holidays or use of power to help along his women.
To be clear on my position, I'm not Tory v labour. But this iteration of Tories (since 2016, although more like since Boris) v other generations. In four years they have matched and surpassed labours 12 years. And the Cameron generation.
And I imagine some of those you quote above took time to come out. ...
Not Tory or Labour? So Labour were in for 13 years (not 12) and the last General Election was slightly over 3 years ago (not 4). Still, sounds worse for the Tories if your dates error is in Labour's favour, eh?
And strange you don't mention Blair's free holidays? Apparently, Cliff Richard lent his house in Barbados to Tony Blair and his family after he saw the prime minister looking "dwindled and haggard" during the war in Iraq. Aww bless I stand corrected. And yeah, that's reinforced my point. The incidences of incidents is an even higher rate than I was thinking. Blimey.
Tbh, I'm less bothered about "free holidays" provided they are declared appropriatly. No idea if the Blair's were or not. But it's the covert nature of many of these affairs plus denial plus cover up that irks me most.
No, they weren't! No 10 had insisted that the destination be withheld from the public for 'security reasons'
It eventually emerged. Blair stayed 3 times at the Barbados retreat.
Cliff seemingly 'wanted nothing' in return.
But many newspapers then revealed Cliff had reportedly persuaded Blair to consider changing music copyright laws in his favour.
As our Birmingham correspondent might say 'nothing to see here, move along everybody'
Anyway, Even Newer Labour set to return to a place near you in or before January 2025
Shock horror politicians 20(ish) years ago did something wrong so that justifies and excuses politicians today doing something wrong!
Very weak for you. At no point have I said the above.
Just reminding people of the past so the future under Labour won't come as a proper shock horror "You seem unable to address the incompetence and corruption of the last decade of Conservative government on its own terms. It's pretty interesting that your only defence is in contradiction to things that happened decades ago. | |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. You were only 20 or so when Labour came to power. You can be forgiven for not noticing their sleaze! Ask your dad about Mandelson's mortgages, David Blunkett and Nanny Gate, Bernie Ecclestone's £1m Donation, Loans for Lordships, John Prescott's Cocktail Sausage, Lord Irvine's Wallpaper, Margaret Beckett's Air Miles, Cherie Blair's Freebie Holidays, Tessa Jowell's Mortgages, The Dodgy Dossier on Iraq, Burying Bad News, Derek Draper and Lobbygate, Cherie Blair signing the Hutton Report, Gordon Brown and the Smith Institute, Cherie Blair's 'lecture' tours, repeat to fade
Lol
Are you really trying to compare?
That's adorable. it is interesting the symmetry. Although what strikes me, is that often the recent Tory part trump these... And also these are the ones you almost pass over because there is so much more.
Eg wallpapers. Lord chancellor v PM. Tax payers money v obscurity of who paid for it... Which links to
Mortgages and loans. Dodgy loan by mandelson which may have bought policial gain v iffy g'tee by PM which has a more clear (but not proven) link to an appointment.
And we've stopped even caring about Boris' free holidays or use of power to help along his women.
To be clear on my position, I'm not Tory v labour. But this iteration of Tories (since 2016, although more like since Boris) v other generations. In four years they have matched and surpassed labours 12 years. And the Cameron generation.
And I imagine some of those you quote above took time to come out. ...
Not Tory or Labour? So Labour were in for 13 years (not 12) and the last General Election was slightly over 3 years ago (not 4). Still, sounds worse for the Tories if your dates error is in Labour's favour, eh?
And strange you don't mention Blair's free holidays? Apparently, Cliff Richard lent his house in Barbados to Tony Blair and his family after he saw the prime minister looking "dwindled and haggard" during the war in Iraq. Aww bless I stand corrected. And yeah, that's reinforced my point. The incidences of incidents is an even higher rate than I was thinking. Blimey.
Tbh, I'm less bothered about "free holidays" provided they are declared appropriatly. No idea if the Blair's were or not. But it's the covert nature of many of these affairs plus denial plus cover up that irks me most.
No, they weren't! No 10 had insisted that the destination be withheld from the public for 'security reasons'
It eventually emerged. Blair stayed 3 times at the Barbados retreat.
Cliff seemingly 'wanted nothing' in return.
But many newspapers then revealed Cliff had reportedly persuaded Blair to consider changing music copyright laws in his favour.
As our Birmingham correspondent might say 'nothing to see here, move along everybody'
Anyway, Even Newer Labour set to return to a place near you in or before January 2025
Shock horror politicians 20(ish) years ago did something wrong so that justifies and excuses politicians today doing something wrong!
Very weak for you. At no point have I said the above.
Just reminding people of the past so the future under Labour won't come as a proper shock horror "Of course you were | |||
| |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. You were only 20 or so when Labour came to power. You can be forgiven for not noticing their sleaze! Ask your dad about Mandelson's mortgages, David Blunkett and Nanny Gate, Bernie Ecclestone's £1m Donation, Loans for Lordships, John Prescott's Cocktail Sausage, Lord Irvine's Wallpaper, Margaret Beckett's Air Miles, Cherie Blair's Freebie Holidays, Tessa Jowell's Mortgages, The Dodgy Dossier on Iraq, Burying Bad News, Derek Draper and Lobbygate, Cherie Blair signing the Hutton Report, Gordon Brown and the Smith Institute, Cherie Blair's 'lecture' tours, repeat to fade
Lol
Are you really trying to compare?
That's adorable. it is interesting the symmetry. Although what strikes me, is that often the recent Tory part trump these... And also these are the ones you almost pass over because there is so much more.
Eg wallpapers. Lord chancellor v PM. Tax payers money v obscurity of who paid for it... Which links to
Mortgages and loans. Dodgy loan by mandelson which may have bought policial gain v iffy g'tee by PM which has a more clear (but not proven) link to an appointment.
And we've stopped even caring about Boris' free holidays or use of power to help along his women.
To be clear on my position, I'm not Tory v labour. But this iteration of Tories (since 2016, although more like since Boris) v other generations. In four years they have matched and surpassed labours 12 years. And the Cameron generation.
And I imagine some of those you quote above took time to come out. ...
Not Tory or Labour? So Labour were in for 13 years (not 12) and the last General Election was slightly over 3 years ago (not 4). Still, sounds worse for the Tories if your dates error is in Labour's favour, eh?
And strange you don't mention Blair's free holidays? Apparently, Cliff Richard lent his house in Barbados to Tony Blair and his family after he saw the prime minister looking "dwindled and haggard" during the war in Iraq. Aww bless I stand corrected. And yeah, that's reinforced my point. The incidences of incidents is an even higher rate than I was thinking. Blimey.
Tbh, I'm less bothered about "free holidays" provided they are declared appropriatly. No idea if the Blair's were or not. But it's the covert nature of many of these affairs plus denial plus cover up that irks me most.
No, they weren't! No 10 had insisted that the destination be withheld from the public for 'security reasons'
It eventually emerged. Blair stayed 3 times at the Barbados retreat.
Cliff seemingly 'wanted nothing' in return.
But many newspapers then revealed Cliff had reportedly persuaded Blair to consider changing music copyright laws in his favour.
As our Birmingham correspondent might say 'nothing to see here, move along everybody'
Anyway, Even Newer Labour set to return to a place near you in or before January 2025
Shock horror politicians 20(ish) years ago did something wrong so that justifies and excuses politicians today doing something wrong!
Very weak for you. At no point have I said the above.
Just reminding people of the past so the future under Labour won't come as a proper shock horror "Yes. It's definitely more important to speculate about what might happen in a hypothetical future, than to think about what's actually happening in reality right now. | |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. You were only 20 or so when Labour came to power. You can be forgiven for not noticing their sleaze! Ask your dad about Mandelson's mortgages, David Blunkett and Nanny Gate, Bernie Ecclestone's £1m Donation, Loans for Lordships, John Prescott's Cocktail Sausage, Lord Irvine's Wallpaper, Margaret Beckett's Air Miles, Cherie Blair's Freebie Holidays, Tessa Jowell's Mortgages, The Dodgy Dossier on Iraq, Burying Bad News, Derek Draper and Lobbygate, Cherie Blair signing the Hutton Report, Gordon Brown and the Smith Institute, Cherie Blair's 'lecture' tours, repeat to fade
Lol
Are you really trying to compare?
That's adorable. it is interesting the symmetry. Although what strikes me, is that often the recent Tory part trump these... And also these are the ones you almost pass over because there is so much more.
Eg wallpapers. Lord chancellor v PM. Tax payers money v obscurity of who paid for it... Which links to
Mortgages and loans. Dodgy loan by mandelson which may have bought policial gain v iffy g'tee by PM which has a more clear (but not proven) link to an appointment.
And we've stopped even caring about Boris' free holidays or use of power to help along his women.
To be clear on my position, I'm not Tory v labour. But this iteration of Tories (since 2016, although more like since Boris) v other generations. In four years they have matched and surpassed labours 12 years. And the Cameron generation.
And I imagine some of those you quote above took time to come out. ...
Not Tory or Labour? So Labour were in for 13 years (not 12) and the last General Election was slightly over 3 years ago (not 4). Still, sounds worse for the Tories if your dates error is in Labour's favour, eh?
And strange you don't mention Blair's free holidays? Apparently, Cliff Richard lent his house in Barbados to Tony Blair and his family after he saw the prime minister looking "dwindled and haggard" during the war in Iraq. Aww bless I stand corrected. And yeah, that's reinforced my point. The incidences of incidents is an even higher rate than I was thinking. Blimey.
Tbh, I'm less bothered about "free holidays" provided they are declared appropriatly. No idea if the Blair's were or not. But it's the covert nature of many of these affairs plus denial plus cover up that irks me most.
No, they weren't! No 10 had insisted that the destination be withheld from the public for 'security reasons'
It eventually emerged. Blair stayed 3 times at the Barbados retreat.
Cliff seemingly 'wanted nothing' in return.
But many newspapers then revealed Cliff had reportedly persuaded Blair to consider changing music copyright laws in his favour.
As our Birmingham correspondent might say 'nothing to see here, move along everybody'
Anyway, Even Newer Labour set to return to a place near you in or before January 2025
Shock horror politicians 20(ish) years ago did something wrong so that justifies and excuses politicians today doing something wrong!
Very weak for you. At no point have I said the above.
Just reminding people of the past so the future under Labour won't come as a proper shock horror
You seem unable to address the incompetence and corruption of the last decade of Conservative government on its own terms.
It's pretty interesting that your only defence is in contradiction to things that happened decades ago."There's so little English in the last paragraph above that the SNP would approve. What on earth are you trying to say? | |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. You were only 20 or so when Labour came to power. You can be forgiven for not noticing their sleaze! Ask your dad about Mandelson's mortgages, David Blunkett and Nanny Gate, Bernie Ecclestone's £1m Donation, Loans for Lordships, John Prescott's Cocktail Sausage, Lord Irvine's Wallpaper, Margaret Beckett's Air Miles, Cherie Blair's Freebie Holidays, Tessa Jowell's Mortgages, The Dodgy Dossier on Iraq, Burying Bad News, Derek Draper and Lobbygate, Cherie Blair signing the Hutton Report, Gordon Brown and the Smith Institute, Cherie Blair's 'lecture' tours, repeat to fade
Lol
Are you really trying to compare?
That's adorable. it is interesting the symmetry. Although what strikes me, is that often the recent Tory part trump these... And also these are the ones you almost pass over because there is so much more.
Eg wallpapers. Lord chancellor v PM. Tax payers money v obscurity of who paid for it... Which links to
Mortgages and loans. Dodgy loan by mandelson which may have bought policial gain v iffy g'tee by PM which has a more clear (but not proven) link to an appointment.
And we've stopped even caring about Boris' free holidays or use of power to help along his women.
To be clear on my position, I'm not Tory v labour. But this iteration of Tories (since 2016, although more like since Boris) v other generations. In four years they have matched and surpassed labours 12 years. And the Cameron generation.
And I imagine some of those you quote above took time to come out. ...
Not Tory or Labour? So Labour were in for 13 years (not 12) and the last General Election was slightly over 3 years ago (not 4). Still, sounds worse for the Tories if your dates error is in Labour's favour, eh?
And strange you don't mention Blair's free holidays? Apparently, Cliff Richard lent his house in Barbados to Tony Blair and his family after he saw the prime minister looking "dwindled and haggard" during the war in Iraq. Aww bless I stand corrected. And yeah, that's reinforced my point. The incidences of incidents is an even higher rate than I was thinking. Blimey.
Tbh, I'm less bothered about "free holidays" provided they are declared appropriatly. No idea if the Blair's were or not. But it's the covert nature of many of these affairs plus denial plus cover up that irks me most.
No, they weren't! No 10 had insisted that the destination be withheld from the public for 'security reasons'
It eventually emerged. Blair stayed 3 times at the Barbados retreat.
Cliff seemingly 'wanted nothing' in return.
But many newspapers then revealed Cliff had reportedly persuaded Blair to consider changing music copyright laws in his favour.
As our Birmingham correspondent might say 'nothing to see here, move along everybody'
Anyway, Even Newer Labour set to return to a place near you in or before January 2025
Shock horror politicians 20(ish) years ago did something wrong so that justifies and excuses politicians today doing something wrong!
Very weak for you. At no point have I said the above.
Just reminding people of the past so the future under Labour won't come as a proper shock horror
You seem unable to address the incompetence and corruption of the last decade of Conservative government on its own terms.
It's pretty interesting that your only defence is in contradiction to things that happened decades ago.
There's so little English in the last paragraph above that the SNP would approve. What on earth are you trying to say? "You are easily confused aren't you? Good effort at trying to distract, but even previous versions of Pat could work this out without too much trouble. Concentrate harder. Use a dictionary and consider the order of the words. Then contemplate if you have addressed the Conservative Government and its activities directly or in some other way. If you don't think for yourself, you will never learn. If you don't want to then that's your choice. | |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. You were only 20 or so when Labour came to power. You can be forgiven for not noticing their sleaze! Ask your dad about Mandelson's mortgages, David Blunkett and Nanny Gate, Bernie Ecclestone's £1m Donation, Loans for Lordships, John Prescott's Cocktail Sausage, Lord Irvine's Wallpaper, Margaret Beckett's Air Miles, Cherie Blair's Freebie Holidays, Tessa Jowell's Mortgages, The Dodgy Dossier on Iraq, Burying Bad News, Derek Draper and Lobbygate, Cherie Blair signing the Hutton Report, Gordon Brown and the Smith Institute, Cherie Blair's 'lecture' tours, repeat to fade
Lol
Are you really trying to compare?
That's adorable. it is interesting the symmetry. Although what strikes me, is that often the recent Tory part trump these... And also these are the ones you almost pass over because there is so much more.
Eg wallpapers. Lord chancellor v PM. Tax payers money v obscurity of who paid for it... Which links to
Mortgages and loans. Dodgy loan by mandelson which may have bought policial gain v iffy g'tee by PM which has a more clear (but not proven) link to an appointment.
And we've stopped even caring about Boris' free holidays or use of power to help along his women.
To be clear on my position, I'm not Tory v labour. But this iteration of Tories (since 2016, although more like since Boris) v other generations. In four years they have matched and surpassed labours 12 years. And the Cameron generation.
And I imagine some of those you quote above took time to come out. ...
Not Tory or Labour? So Labour were in for 13 years (not 12) and the last General Election was slightly over 3 years ago (not 4). Still, sounds worse for the Tories if your dates error is in Labour's favour, eh?
And strange you don't mention Blair's free holidays? Apparently, Cliff Richard lent his house in Barbados to Tony Blair and his family after he saw the prime minister looking "dwindled and haggard" during the war in Iraq. Aww bless I stand corrected. And yeah, that's reinforced my point. The incidences of incidents is an even higher rate than I was thinking. Blimey.
Tbh, I'm less bothered about "free holidays" provided they are declared appropriatly. No idea if the Blair's were or not. But it's the covert nature of many of these affairs plus denial plus cover up that irks me most.
No, they weren't! No 10 had insisted that the destination be withheld from the public for 'security reasons'
It eventually emerged. Blair stayed 3 times at the Barbados retreat.
Cliff seemingly 'wanted nothing' in return.
But many newspapers then revealed Cliff had reportedly persuaded Blair to consider changing music copyright laws in his favour.
As our Birmingham correspondent might say 'nothing to see here, move along everybody'
Anyway, Even Newer Labour set to return to a place near you in or before January 2025
Shock horror politicians 20(ish) years ago did something wrong so that justifies and excuses politicians today doing something wrong!
Very weak for you. At no point have I said the above.
Just reminding people of the past so the future under Labour won't come as a proper shock horror
Yes. It's definitely more important to speculate about what might happen in a hypothetical future, than to think about what's actually happening in reality right now.
"'Reminding' does not mean stating x is more important than y. You keep speculating about the Tories snatching the next election, due to sheep mentality of their voters and the allegedly huge resources and media effort that will be thrown at it. It's about 18 months to 2 years away in the future. So why do you 'speculate about what might happen in a hypothetical future, than think about what's actually happening in reality right now'? Pot, kettle, ebony? | |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. You were only 20 or so when Labour came to power. You can be forgiven for not noticing their sleaze! Ask your dad about Mandelson's mortgages, David Blunkett and Nanny Gate, Bernie Ecclestone's £1m Donation, Loans for Lordships, John Prescott's Cocktail Sausage, Lord Irvine's Wallpaper, Margaret Beckett's Air Miles, Cherie Blair's Freebie Holidays, Tessa Jowell's Mortgages, The Dodgy Dossier on Iraq, Burying Bad News, Derek Draper and Lobbygate, Cherie Blair signing the Hutton Report, Gordon Brown and the Smith Institute, Cherie Blair's 'lecture' tours, repeat to fade
Lol
Are you really trying to compare?
That's adorable. it is interesting the symmetry. Although what strikes me, is that often the recent Tory part trump these... And also these are the ones you almost pass over because there is so much more.
Eg wallpapers. Lord chancellor v PM. Tax payers money v obscurity of who paid for it... Which links to
Mortgages and loans. Dodgy loan by mandelson which may have bought policial gain v iffy g'tee by PM which has a more clear (but not proven) link to an appointment.
And we've stopped even caring about Boris' free holidays or use of power to help along his women.
To be clear on my position, I'm not Tory v labour. But this iteration of Tories (since 2016, although more like since Boris) v other generations. In four years they have matched and surpassed labours 12 years. And the Cameron generation.
And I imagine some of those you quote above took time to come out. ...
Not Tory or Labour? So Labour were in for 13 years (not 12) and the last General Election was slightly over 3 years ago (not 4). Still, sounds worse for the Tories if your dates error is in Labour's favour, eh?
And strange you don't mention Blair's free holidays? Apparently, Cliff Richard lent his house in Barbados to Tony Blair and his family after he saw the prime minister looking "dwindled and haggard" during the war in Iraq. Aww bless I stand corrected. And yeah, that's reinforced my point. The incidences of incidents is an even higher rate than I was thinking. Blimey.
Tbh, I'm less bothered about "free holidays" provided they are declared appropriatly. No idea if the Blair's were or not. But it's the covert nature of many of these affairs plus denial plus cover up that irks me most.
No, they weren't! No 10 had insisted that the destination be withheld from the public for 'security reasons'
It eventually emerged. Blair stayed 3 times at the Barbados retreat.
Cliff seemingly 'wanted nothing' in return.
But many newspapers then revealed Cliff had reportedly persuaded Blair to consider changing music copyright laws in his favour.
As our Birmingham correspondent might say 'nothing to see here, move along everybody'
Anyway, Even Newer Labour set to return to a place near you in or before January 2025
Shock horror politicians 20(ish) years ago did something wrong so that justifies and excuses politicians today doing something wrong!
Very weak for you. At no point have I said the above.
Just reminding people of the past so the future under Labour won't come as a proper shock horror
You seem unable to address the incompetence and corruption of the last decade of Conservative government on its own terms.
It's pretty interesting that your only defence is in contradiction to things that happened decades ago.
There's so little English in the last paragraph above that the SNP would approve. What on earth are you trying to say?
You are easily confused aren't you?
Good effort at trying to distract, but even previous versions of Pat could work this out without too much trouble.
Concentrate harder. Use a dictionary and consider the order of the words.
Then contemplate if you have addressed the Conservative Government and its activities directly or in some other way.
If you don't think for yourself, you will never learn. If you don't want to then that's your choice."Not at all. 'your only defence is in contradiction to things that happened decades ago' is incomprehensible. | |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. You were only 20 or so when Labour came to power. You can be forgiven for not noticing their sleaze! Ask your dad about Mandelson's mortgages, David Blunkett and Nanny Gate, Bernie Ecclestone's £1m Donation, Loans for Lordships, John Prescott's Cocktail Sausage, Lord Irvine's Wallpaper, Margaret Beckett's Air Miles, Cherie Blair's Freebie Holidays, Tessa Jowell's Mortgages, The Dodgy Dossier on Iraq, Burying Bad News, Derek Draper and Lobbygate, Cherie Blair signing the Hutton Report, Gordon Brown and the Smith Institute, Cherie Blair's 'lecture' tours, repeat to fade
Lol
Are you really trying to compare?
That's adorable. it is interesting the symmetry. Although what strikes me, is that often the recent Tory part trump these... And also these are the ones you almost pass over because there is so much more.
Eg wallpapers. Lord chancellor v PM. Tax payers money v obscurity of who paid for it... Which links to
Mortgages and loans. Dodgy loan by mandelson which may have bought policial gain v iffy g'tee by PM which has a more clear (but not proven) link to an appointment.
And we've stopped even caring about Boris' free holidays or use of power to help along his women.
To be clear on my position, I'm not Tory v labour. But this iteration of Tories (since 2016, although more like since Boris) v other generations. In four years they have matched and surpassed labours 12 years. And the Cameron generation.
And I imagine some of those you quote above took time to come out. ...
Not Tory or Labour? So Labour were in for 13 years (not 12) and the last General Election was slightly over 3 years ago (not 4). Still, sounds worse for the Tories if your dates error is in Labour's favour, eh?
And strange you don't mention Blair's free holidays? Apparently, Cliff Richard lent his house in Barbados to Tony Blair and his family after he saw the prime minister looking "dwindled and haggard" during the war in Iraq. Aww bless I stand corrected. And yeah, that's reinforced my point. The incidences of incidents is an even higher rate than I was thinking. Blimey.
Tbh, I'm less bothered about "free holidays" provided they are declared appropriatly. No idea if the Blair's were or not. But it's the covert nature of many of these affairs plus denial plus cover up that irks me most.
No, they weren't! No 10 had insisted that the destination be withheld from the public for 'security reasons'
It eventually emerged. Blair stayed 3 times at the Barbados retreat.
Cliff seemingly 'wanted nothing' in return.
But many newspapers then revealed Cliff had reportedly persuaded Blair to consider changing music copyright laws in his favour.
As our Birmingham correspondent might say 'nothing to see here, move along everybody'
Anyway, Even Newer Labour set to return to a place near you in or before January 2025
Shock horror politicians 20(ish) years ago did something wrong so that justifies and excuses politicians today doing something wrong!
Very weak for you. At no point have I said the above.
Just reminding people of the past so the future under Labour won't come as a proper shock horror
Yes. It's definitely more important to speculate about what might happen in a hypothetical future, than to think about what's actually happening in reality right now.
'Reminding' does not mean stating x is more important than y.
You keep speculating about the Tories snatching the next election, due to sheep mentality of their voters and the allegedly huge resources and media effort that will be thrown at it.
It's about 18 months to 2 years away in the future. So why do you 'speculate about what might happen in a hypothetical future, than think about what's actually happening in reality right now'? Pot, kettle, ebony? "Lol. Come on, you know you're being a silly sausage! You're doing everything you can to distract and deflect from what the Tory party are doing right now with the "what about what Labour did 20 years ago" argument. It's beyond any form of reasoned response, hence why I'm just poking fun. Now you're trying to draw an equivalence to separate conversations about opinion on who might win the next GE. I suppose, what we can learn here is that the Tory PR machine really has a easier job than I thought. | |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. You were only 20 or so when Labour came to power. You can be forgiven for not noticing their sleaze! Ask your dad about Mandelson's mortgages, David Blunkett and Nanny Gate, Bernie Ecclestone's £1m Donation, Loans for Lordships, John Prescott's Cocktail Sausage, Lord Irvine's Wallpaper, Margaret Beckett's Air Miles, Cherie Blair's Freebie Holidays, Tessa Jowell's Mortgages, The Dodgy Dossier on Iraq, Burying Bad News, Derek Draper and Lobbygate, Cherie Blair signing the Hutton Report, Gordon Brown and the Smith Institute, Cherie Blair's 'lecture' tours, repeat to fade
Lol
Are you really trying to compare?
That's adorable. it is interesting the symmetry. Although what strikes me, is that often the recent Tory part trump these... And also these are the ones you almost pass over because there is so much more.
Eg wallpapers. Lord chancellor v PM. Tax payers money v obscurity of who paid for it... Which links to
Mortgages and loans. Dodgy loan by mandelson which may have bought policial gain v iffy g'tee by PM which has a more clear (but not proven) link to an appointment.
And we've stopped even caring about Boris' free holidays or use of power to help along his women.
To be clear on my position, I'm not Tory v labour. But this iteration of Tories (since 2016, although more like since Boris) v other generations. In four years they have matched and surpassed labours 12 years. And the Cameron generation.
And I imagine some of those you quote above took time to come out. ...
Not Tory or Labour? So Labour were in for 13 years (not 12) and the last General Election was slightly over 3 years ago (not 4). Still, sounds worse for the Tories if your dates error is in Labour's favour, eh?
And strange you don't mention Blair's free holidays? Apparently, Cliff Richard lent his house in Barbados to Tony Blair and his family after he saw the prime minister looking "dwindled and haggard" during the war in Iraq. Aww bless I stand corrected. And yeah, that's reinforced my point. The incidences of incidents is an even higher rate than I was thinking. Blimey.
Tbh, I'm less bothered about "free holidays" provided they are declared appropriatly. No idea if the Blair's were or not. But it's the covert nature of many of these affairs plus denial plus cover up that irks me most.
No, they weren't! No 10 had insisted that the destination be withheld from the public for 'security reasons'
It eventually emerged. Blair stayed 3 times at the Barbados retreat.
Cliff seemingly 'wanted nothing' in return.
But many newspapers then revealed Cliff had reportedly persuaded Blair to consider changing music copyright laws in his favour.
As our Birmingham correspondent might say 'nothing to see here, move along everybody'
Anyway, Even Newer Labour set to return to a place near you in or before January 2025
Shock horror politicians 20(ish) years ago did something wrong so that justifies and excuses politicians today doing something wrong!
Very weak for you. At no point have I said the above.
Just reminding people of the past so the future under Labour won't come as a proper shock horror
You seem unable to address the incompetence and corruption of the last decade of Conservative government on its own terms.
It's pretty interesting that your only defence is in contradiction to things that happened decades ago.
There's so little English in the last paragraph above that the SNP would approve. What on earth are you trying to say?
You are easily confused aren't you?
Good effort at trying to distract, but even previous versions of Pat could work this out without too much trouble.
Concentrate harder. Use a dictionary and consider the order of the words.
Then contemplate if you have addressed the Conservative Government and its activities directly or in some other way.
If you don't think for yourself, you will never learn. If you don't want to then that's your choice.
Not at all. 'your only defence is in contradiction to things that happened decades ago' is incomprehensible. "Wow. You really do struggle. The Conservative party have a problem. You do not defend the Conservative party by talking about that problem. Instead you talk about how bad something the Labour party did many years ago. Your difficulty in understanding something so simple explains a great deal. | |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. You were only 20 or so when Labour came to power. You can be forgiven for not noticing their sleaze! Ask your dad about Mandelson's mortgages, David Blunkett and Nanny Gate, Bernie Ecclestone's £1m Donation, Loans for Lordships, John Prescott's Cocktail Sausage, Lord Irvine's Wallpaper, Margaret Beckett's Air Miles, Cherie Blair's Freebie Holidays, Tessa Jowell's Mortgages, The Dodgy Dossier on Iraq, Burying Bad News, Derek Draper and Lobbygate, Cherie Blair signing the Hutton Report, Gordon Brown and the Smith Institute, Cherie Blair's 'lecture' tours, repeat to fade
Lol
Are you really trying to compare?
That's adorable. it is interesting the symmetry. Although what strikes me, is that often the recent Tory part trump these... And also these are the ones you almost pass over because there is so much more.
Eg wallpapers. Lord chancellor v PM. Tax payers money v obscurity of who paid for it... Which links to
Mortgages and loans. Dodgy loan by mandelson which may have bought policial gain v iffy g'tee by PM which has a more clear (but not proven) link to an appointment.
And we've stopped even caring about Boris' free holidays or use of power to help along his women.
To be clear on my position, I'm not Tory v labour. But this iteration of Tories (since 2016, although more like since Boris) v other generations. In four years they have matched and surpassed labours 12 years. And the Cameron generation.
And I imagine some of those you quote above took time to come out. ...
Not Tory or Labour? So Labour were in for 13 years (not 12) and the last General Election was slightly over 3 years ago (not 4). Still, sounds worse for the Tories if your dates error is in Labour's favour, eh?
And strange you don't mention Blair's free holidays? Apparently, Cliff Richard lent his house in Barbados to Tony Blair and his family after he saw the prime minister looking "dwindled and haggard" during the war in Iraq. Aww bless I stand corrected. And yeah, that's reinforced my point. The incidences of incidents is an even higher rate than I was thinking. Blimey.
Tbh, I'm less bothered about "free holidays" provided they are declared appropriatly. No idea if the Blair's were or not. But it's the covert nature of many of these affairs plus denial plus cover up that irks me most.
No, they weren't! No 10 had insisted that the destination be withheld from the public for 'security reasons'
It eventually emerged. Blair stayed 3 times at the Barbados retreat.
Cliff seemingly 'wanted nothing' in return.
But many newspapers then revealed Cliff had reportedly persuaded Blair to consider changing music copyright laws in his favour.
As our Birmingham correspondent might say 'nothing to see here, move along everybody'
Anyway, Even Newer Labour set to return to a place near you in or before January 2025
Shock horror politicians 20(ish) years ago did something wrong so that justifies and excuses politicians today doing something wrong!
Very weak for you. At no point have I said the above.
Just reminding people of the past so the future under Labour won't come as a proper shock horror
You seem unable to address the incompetence and corruption of the last decade of Conservative government on its own terms.
It's pretty interesting that your only defence is in contradiction to things that happened decades ago.
There's so little English in the last paragraph above that the SNP would approve. What on earth are you trying to say?
You are easily confused aren't you?
Good effort at trying to distract, but even previous versions of Pat could work this out without too much trouble.
Concentrate harder. Use a dictionary and consider the order of the words.
Then contemplate if you have addressed the Conservative Government and its activities directly or in some other way.
If you don't think for yourself, you will never learn. If you don't want to then that's your choice.
Not at all. 'your only defence is in contradiction to things that happened decades ago' is incomprehensible.
Wow. You really do struggle.
The Conservative party have a problem.
You do not defend the Conservative party by talking about that problem.
Instead you talk about how bad something the Labour party did many years ago.
Your difficulty in understanding something so simple explains a great deal."Patronising. I'm sure you didn't mean to come over all smug? | |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. You were only 20 or so when Labour came to power. You can be forgiven for not noticing their sleaze! Ask your dad about Mandelson's mortgages, David Blunkett and Nanny Gate, Bernie Ecclestone's £1m Donation, Loans for Lordships, John Prescott's Cocktail Sausage, Lord Irvine's Wallpaper, Margaret Beckett's Air Miles, Cherie Blair's Freebie Holidays, Tessa Jowell's Mortgages, The Dodgy Dossier on Iraq, Burying Bad News, Derek Draper and Lobbygate, Cherie Blair signing the Hutton Report, Gordon Brown and the Smith Institute, Cherie Blair's 'lecture' tours, repeat to fade
Lol
Are you really trying to compare?
That's adorable. it is interesting the symmetry. Although what strikes me, is that often the recent Tory part trump these... And also these are the ones you almost pass over because there is so much more.
Eg wallpapers. Lord chancellor v PM. Tax payers money v obscurity of who paid for it... Which links to
Mortgages and loans. Dodgy loan by mandelson which may have bought policial gain v iffy g'tee by PM which has a more clear (but not proven) link to an appointment.
And we've stopped even caring about Boris' free holidays or use of power to help along his women.
To be clear on my position, I'm not Tory v labour. But this iteration of Tories (since 2016, although more like since Boris) v other generations. In four years they have matched and surpassed labours 12 years. And the Cameron generation.
And I imagine some of those you quote above took time to come out. ...
Not Tory or Labour? So Labour were in for 13 years (not 12) and the last General Election was slightly over 3 years ago (not 4). Still, sounds worse for the Tories if your dates error is in Labour's favour, eh?
And strange you don't mention Blair's free holidays? Apparently, Cliff Richard lent his house in Barbados to Tony Blair and his family after he saw the prime minister looking "dwindled and haggard" during the war in Iraq. Aww bless I stand corrected. And yeah, that's reinforced my point. The incidences of incidents is an even higher rate than I was thinking. Blimey.
Tbh, I'm less bothered about "free holidays" provided they are declared appropriatly. No idea if the Blair's were or not. But it's the covert nature of many of these affairs plus denial plus cover up that irks me most.
No, they weren't! No 10 had insisted that the destination be withheld from the public for 'security reasons'
It eventually emerged. Blair stayed 3 times at the Barbados retreat.
Cliff seemingly 'wanted nothing' in return.
But many newspapers then revealed Cliff had reportedly persuaded Blair to consider changing music copyright laws in his favour.
As our Birmingham correspondent might say 'nothing to see here, move along everybody'
Anyway, Even Newer Labour set to return to a place near you in or before January 2025
Shock horror politicians 20(ish) years ago did something wrong so that justifies and excuses politicians today doing something wrong!
Very weak for you. At no point have I said the above.
Just reminding people of the past so the future under Labour won't come as a proper shock horror
You seem unable to address the incompetence and corruption of the last decade of Conservative government on its own terms.
It's pretty interesting that your only defence is in contradiction to things that happened decades ago.
There's so little English in the last paragraph above that the SNP would approve. What on earth are you trying to say?
You are easily confused aren't you?
Good effort at trying to distract, but even previous versions of Pat could work this out without too much trouble.
Concentrate harder. Use a dictionary and consider the order of the words.
Then contemplate if you have addressed the Conservative Government and its activities directly or in some other way.
If you don't think for yourself, you will never learn. If you don't want to then that's your choice.
Not at all. 'your only defence is in contradiction to things that happened decades ago' is incomprehensible.
Wow. You really do struggle.
The Conservative party have a problem.
You do not defend the Conservative party by talking about that problem.
Instead you talk about how bad something the Labour party did many years ago.
Your difficulty in understanding something so simple explains a great deal.
Patronising. I'm sure you didn't mean to come over all smug? "I was absolutely intending to patronise you. Just responding in kind  | |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. You were only 20 or so when Labour came to power. You can be forgiven for not noticing their sleaze! Ask your dad about Mandelson's mortgages, David Blunkett and Nanny Gate, Bernie Ecclestone's £1m Donation, Loans for Lordships, John Prescott's Cocktail Sausage, Lord Irvine's Wallpaper, Margaret Beckett's Air Miles, Cherie Blair's Freebie Holidays, Tessa Jowell's Mortgages, The Dodgy Dossier on Iraq, Burying Bad News, Derek Draper and Lobbygate, Cherie Blair signing the Hutton Report, Gordon Brown and the Smith Institute, Cherie Blair's 'lecture' tours, repeat to fade
Lol
Are you really trying to compare?
That's adorable. it is interesting the symmetry. Although what strikes me, is that often the recent Tory part trump these... And also these are the ones you almost pass over because there is so much more.
Eg wallpapers. Lord chancellor v PM. Tax payers money v obscurity of who paid for it... Which links to
Mortgages and loans. Dodgy loan by mandelson which may have bought policial gain v iffy g'tee by PM which has a more clear (but not proven) link to an appointment.
And we've stopped even caring about Boris' free holidays or use of power to help along his women.
To be clear on my position, I'm not Tory v labour. But this iteration of Tories (since 2016, although more like since Boris) v other generations. In four years they have matched and surpassed labours 12 years. And the Cameron generation.
And I imagine some of those you quote above took time to come out. ...
Not Tory or Labour? So Labour were in for 13 years (not 12) and the last General Election was slightly over 3 years ago (not 4). Still, sounds worse for the Tories if your dates error is in Labour's favour, eh?
And strange you don't mention Blair's free holidays? Apparently, Cliff Richard lent his house in Barbados to Tony Blair and his family after he saw the prime minister looking "dwindled and haggard" during the war in Iraq. Aww bless I stand corrected. And yeah, that's reinforced my point. The incidences of incidents is an even higher rate than I was thinking. Blimey.
Tbh, I'm less bothered about "free holidays" provided they are declared appropriatly. No idea if the Blair's were or not. But it's the covert nature of many of these affairs plus denial plus cover up that irks me most.
No, they weren't! No 10 had insisted that the destination be withheld from the public for 'security reasons'
It eventually emerged. Blair stayed 3 times at the Barbados retreat.
Cliff seemingly 'wanted nothing' in return.
But many newspapers then revealed Cliff had reportedly persuaded Blair to consider changing music copyright laws in his favour.
As our Birmingham correspondent might say 'nothing to see here, move along everybody'
Anyway, Even Newer Labour set to return to a place near you in or before January 2025
Shock horror politicians 20(ish) years ago did something wrong so that justifies and excuses politicians today doing something wrong!
Very weak for you. At no point have I said the above.
Just reminding people of the past so the future under Labour won't come as a proper shock horror
You seem unable to address the incompetence and corruption of the last decade of Conservative government on its own terms.
It's pretty interesting that your only defence is in contradiction to things that happened decades ago.
There's so little English in the last paragraph above that the SNP would approve. What on earth are you trying to say?
You are easily confused aren't you?
Good effort at trying to distract, but even previous versions of Pat could work this out without too much trouble.
Concentrate harder. Use a dictionary and consider the order of the words.
Then contemplate if you have addressed the Conservative Government and its activities directly or in some other way.
If you don't think for yourself, you will never learn. If you don't want to then that's your choice.
Not at all. 'your only defence is in contradiction to things that happened decades ago' is incomprehensible.
Wow. You really do struggle.
The Conservative party have a problem.
You do not defend the Conservative party by talking about that problem.
Instead you talk about how bad something the Labour party did many years ago.
Your difficulty in understanding something so simple explains a great deal.
Patronising. I'm sure you didn't mean to come over all smug?
I was absolutely intending to patronise you.
Just responding in kind "But I'm just trying to provide useful feedback for continuous improvement of your grammar and spelling, let me be clear on that . It does need it
Spelling and grammar. It's the difference between knowing your shit and knowing..... you're shit. | |||
| |||
"Too many dots for an ellipsis. I guess it's hard to count the number of dots, up on that v high grammar horse as you are." It was a horizontal quincunx. For some reason, cunx always comes to mind when thinking of the loony left | |||
"Too many dots for an ellipsis. I guess it's hard to count the number of dots, up on that v high grammar horse as you are. It was a horizontal quincunx. For some reason, cunx always comes to mind when thinking of the loony left "Why would that be? And who is this loony left you speak of? | |||
"Too many dots for an ellipsis. I guess it's hard to count the number of dots, up on that v high grammar horse as you are. It was a horizontal quincunx. For some reason, cunx always comes to mind when thinking of the loony left "if you change the pattern or a quincunx, does it cease to be a quincunx? | |||
"Too many dots for an ellipsis. I guess it's hard to count the number of dots, up on that v high grammar horse as you are. It was a horizontal quincunx. For some reason, cunx always comes to mind when thinking of the loony left if you change the pattern or a quincunx, does it cease to be a quincunx? "Yes | |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. You were only 20 or so when Labour came to power. You can be forgiven for not noticing their sleaze! Ask your dad about Mandelson's mortgages, David Blunkett and Nanny Gate, Bernie Ecclestone's £1m Donation, Loans for Lordships, John Prescott's Cocktail Sausage, Lord Irvine's Wallpaper, Margaret Beckett's Air Miles, Cherie Blair's Freebie Holidays, Tessa Jowell's Mortgages, The Dodgy Dossier on Iraq, Burying Bad News, Derek Draper and Lobbygate, Cherie Blair signing the Hutton Report, Gordon Brown and the Smith Institute, Cherie Blair's 'lecture' tours, repeat to fade
Lol
Are you really trying to compare?
That's adorable. it is interesting the symmetry. Although what strikes me, is that often the recent Tory part trump these... And also these are the ones you almost pass over because there is so much more.
Eg wallpapers. Lord chancellor v PM. Tax payers money v obscurity of who paid for it... Which links to
Mortgages and loans. Dodgy loan by mandelson which may have bought policial gain v iffy g'tee by PM which has a more clear (but not proven) link to an appointment.
And we've stopped even caring about Boris' free holidays or use of power to help along his women.
To be clear on my position, I'm not Tory v labour. But this iteration of Tories (since 2016, although more like since Boris) v other generations. In four years they have matched and surpassed labours 12 years. And the Cameron generation.
And I imagine some of those you quote above took time to come out. ...
Not Tory or Labour? So Labour were in for 13 years (not 12) and the last General Election was slightly over 3 years ago (not 4). Still, sounds worse for the Tories if your dates error is in Labour's favour, eh?
And strange you don't mention Blair's free holidays? Apparently, Cliff Richard lent his house in Barbados to Tony Blair and his family after he saw the prime minister looking "dwindled and haggard" during the war in Iraq. Aww bless I stand corrected. And yeah, that's reinforced my point. The incidences of incidents is an even higher rate than I was thinking. Blimey.
Tbh, I'm less bothered about "free holidays" provided they are declared appropriatly. No idea if the Blair's were or not. But it's the covert nature of many of these affairs plus denial plus cover up that irks me most.
No, they weren't! No 10 had insisted that the destination be withheld from the public for 'security reasons'
It eventually emerged. Blair stayed 3 times at the Barbados retreat.
Cliff seemingly 'wanted nothing' in return.
But many newspapers then revealed Cliff had reportedly persuaded Blair to consider changing music copyright laws in his favour.
As our Birmingham correspondent might say 'nothing to see here, move along everybody'
Anyway, Even Newer Labour set to return to a place near you in or before January 2025
Shock horror politicians 20(ish) years ago did something wrong so that justifies and excuses politicians today doing something wrong!
Very weak for you. At no point have I said the above.
Just reminding people of the past so the future under Labour won't come as a proper shock horror
You seem unable to address the incompetence and corruption of the last decade of Conservative government on its own terms.
It's pretty interesting that your only defence is in contradiction to things that happened decades ago.
There's so little English in the last paragraph above that the SNP would approve. What on earth are you trying to say?
You are easily confused aren't you?
Good effort at trying to distract, but even previous versions of Pat could work this out without too much trouble.
Concentrate harder. Use a dictionary and consider the order of the words.
Then contemplate if you have addressed the Conservative Government and its activities directly or in some other way.
If you don't think for yourself, you will never learn. If you don't want to then that's your choice.
Not at all. 'your only defence is in contradiction to things that happened decades ago' is incomprehensible.
Wow. You really do struggle.
The Conservative party have a problem.
You do not defend the Conservative party by talking about that problem.
Instead you talk about how bad something the Labour party did many years ago.
Your difficulty in understanding something so simple explains a great deal.
Patronising. I'm sure you didn't mean to come over all smug?
I was absolutely intending to patronise you.
Just responding in kind
But I'm just trying to provide useful feedback for continuous improvement of your grammar and spelling, let me be clear on that . It does need it
Spelling and grammar. It's the difference between knowing your shit and knowing..... you're shit. "Hoisted very high on your own petard. Live and don't learn, eh? | |||
"Too many dots for an ellipsis. I guess it's hard to count the number of dots, up on that v high grammar horse as you are. It was a horizontal quincunx. For some reason, cunx always comes to mind when thinking of the loony left
Why would that be? And who is this loony left you speak of?"Anyone who doesn't blame Labour for all things bad in the UKm | |||
"Too many dots for an ellipsis. I guess it's hard to count the number of dots, up on that v high grammar horse as you are. It was a horizontal quincunx. For some reason, cunx always comes to mind when thinking of the loony left
Why would that be? And who is this loony left you speak of?
Anyone who doesn't blame Labour for all things bad in the UKm"We have been dragged so far right in politics that these days some people would call Genghis Khan a loony leftie! | |||
"Too many dots for an ellipsis. I guess it's hard to count the number of dots, up on that v high grammar horse as you are. It was a horizontal quincunx. For some reason, cunx always comes to mind when thinking of the loony left
Why would that be? And who is this loony left you speak of?
Anyone who doesn't blame Labour for all things bad in the UKm
We have been dragged so far right in politics that these days some people would call Genghis Khan a loony leftie!"Nurse! | |||
"Too many dots for an ellipsis. I guess it's hard to count the number of dots, up on that v high grammar horse as you are. It was a horizontal quincunx. For some reason, cunx always comes to mind when thinking of the loony left if you change the pattern or a quincunx, does it cease to be a quincunx? "The question makes no sense | |||
"Too many dots for an ellipsis. I guess it's hard to count the number of dots, up on that v high grammar horse as you are. It was a horizontal quincunx. For some reason, cunx always comes to mind when thinking of the loony left if you change the pattern or a quincunx, does it cease to be a quincunx?
Yes"Yes, to what? The question makes no sense | |||
"I have no sympathy. However, when the labour party wins the next election, as is surely will, the spotlight will be on their MPs...and they are all as corrupt as each other. Genuinely don't think politicians from any other party are as corrupt as this lot. You were only 20 or so when Labour came to power. You can be forgiven for not noticing their sleaze! Ask your dad about Mandelson's mortgages, David Blunkett and Nanny Gate, Bernie Ecclestone's £1m Donation, Loans for Lordships, John Prescott's Cocktail Sausage, Lord Irvine's Wallpaper, Margaret Beckett's Air Miles, Cherie Blair's Freebie Holidays, Tessa Jowell's Mortgages, The Dodgy Dossier on Iraq, Burying Bad News, Derek Draper and Lobbygate, Cherie Blair signing the Hutton Report, Gordon Brown and the Smith Institute, Cherie Blair's 'lecture' tours, repeat to fade
Lol
Are you really trying to compare?
That's adorable. it is interesting the symmetry. Although what strikes me, is that often the recent Tory part trump these... And also these are the ones you almost pass over because there is so much more.
Eg wallpapers. Lord chancellor v PM. Tax payers money v obscurity of who paid for it... Which links to
Mortgages and loans. Dodgy loan by mandelson which may have bought policial gain v iffy g'tee by PM which has a more clear (but not proven) link to an appointment.
And we've stopped even caring about Boris' free holidays or use of power to help along his women.
To be clear on my position, I'm not Tory v labour. But this iteration of Tories (since 2016, although more like since Boris) v other generations. In four years they have matched and surpassed labours 12 years. And the Cameron generation.
And I imagine some of those you quote above took time to come out. ...
Not Tory or Labour? So Labour were in for 13 years (not 12) and the last General Election was slightly over 3 years ago (not 4). Still, sounds worse for the Tories if your dates error is in Labour's favour, eh?
And strange you don't mention Blair's free holidays? Apparently, Cliff Richard lent his house in Barbados to Tony Blair and his family after he saw the prime minister looking "dwindled and haggard" during the war in Iraq. Aww bless I stand corrected. And yeah, that's reinforced my point. The incidences of incidents is an even higher rate than I was thinking. Blimey.
Tbh, I'm less bothered about "free holidays" provided they are declared appropriatly. No idea if the Blair's were or not. But it's the covert nature of many of these affairs plus denial plus cover up that irks me most.
No, they weren't! No 10 had insisted that the destination be withheld from the public for 'security reasons'
It eventually emerged. Blair stayed 3 times at the Barbados retreat.
Cliff seemingly 'wanted nothing' in return.
But many newspapers then revealed Cliff had reportedly persuaded Blair to consider changing music copyright laws in his favour.
As our Birmingham correspondent might say 'nothing to see here, move along everybody'
Anyway, Even Newer Labour set to return to a place near you in or before January 2025
Shock horror politicians 20(ish) years ago did something wrong so that justifies and excuses politicians today doing something wrong!
Very weak for you. At no point have I said the above.
Just reminding people of the past so the future under Labour won't come as a proper shock horror
You seem unable to address the incompetence and corruption of the last decade of Conservative government on its own terms.
It's pretty interesting that your only defence is in contradiction to things that happened decades ago.
There's so little English in the last paragraph above that the SNP would approve. What on earth are you trying to say?
You are easily confused aren't you?
Good effort at trying to distract, but even previous versions of Pat could work this out without too much trouble.
Concentrate harder. Use a dictionary and consider the order of the words.
Then contemplate if you have addressed the Conservative Government and its activities directly or in some other way.
If you don't think for yourself, you will never learn. If you don't want to then that's your choice.
Not at all. 'your only defence is in contradiction to things that happened decades ago' is incomprehensible.
Wow. You really do struggle.
The Conservative party have a problem.
You do not defend the Conservative party by talking about that problem.
Instead you talk about how bad something the Labour party did many years ago.
Your difficulty in understanding something so simple explains a great deal.
Patronising. I'm sure you didn't mean to come over all smug?
I was absolutely intending to patronise you.
Just responding in kind
But I'm just trying to provide useful feedback for continuous improvement of your grammar and spelling, let me be clear on that . It does need it
Spelling and grammar. It's the difference between knowing your shit and knowing..... you're shit.
Hoisted very high on your own petard.
Live and don't learn, eh?"If that's the progress you think you've 'made' | |||
"Too many dots for an ellipsis. I guess it's hard to count the number of dots, up on that v high grammar horse as you are. It was a horizontal quincunx. For some reason, cunx always comes to mind when thinking of the loony left if you change the pattern or a quincunx, does it cease to be a quincunx?
Yes
Yes, to what? The question makes no sense "try again If you change the pattern of a quincunx, does it cease to be a quincunx? Also, should you have used a comma? Reads odd imo. | |||
"Too many dots for an ellipsis. I guess it's hard to count the number of dots, up on that v high grammar horse as you are. It was a horizontal quincunx. For some reason, cunx always comes to mind when thinking of the loony left
Why would that be? And who is this loony left you speak of?
Anyone who doesn't blame Labour for all things bad in the UKm"UKm? | |||
"Too many dots for an ellipsis. I guess it's hard to count the number of dots, up on that v high grammar horse as you are. It was a horizontal quincunx. For some reason, cunx always comes to mind when thinking of the loony left if you change the pattern or a quincunx, does it cease to be a quincunx?
Yes
Yes, to what? The question makes no sense try again
If you change the pattern of a quincunx, does it cease to be a quincunx?
Also, should you have used a comma? Reads odd imo. "How were you able to understand and respond then? | |||
"Too many dots for an ellipsis. I guess it's hard to count the number of dots, up on that v high grammar horse as you are. It was a horizontal quincunx. For some reason, cunx always comes to mind when thinking of the loony left if you change the pattern or a quincunx, does it cease to be a quincunx?
Yes
Yes, to what? The question makes no sense try again
If you change the pattern of a quincunx, does it cease to be a quincunx?
Also, should you have used a comma? Reads odd imo.
How were you able to understand and respond then? "The same way others have managed to work around typos and the like. We look at what doesn't make sense and make a judgement call as to what the person may have intended. Communication is two way. One side can make up for the shortfalls of the other side. | |||
"Too many dots for an ellipsis. I guess it's hard to count the number of dots, up on that v high grammar horse as you are. It was a horizontal quincunx. For some reason, cunx always comes to mind when thinking of the loony left if you change the pattern or a quincunx, does it cease to be a quincunx?
Yes
Yes, to what? The question makes no sense try again
If you change the pattern of a quincunx, does it cease to be a quincunx?
Also, should you have used a comma? Reads odd imo.
How were you able to understand and respond then? "Sunaki? | |||
| |||
"Too many dots for an ellipsis. I guess it's hard to count the number of dots, up on that v high grammar horse as you are. It was a horizontal quincunx. For some reason, cunx always comes to mind when thinking of the loony left
Why would that be? And who is this loony left you speak of?
Anyone who doesn't blame Labour for all things bad in the UKm
UKm? "Yes! Well done. I see you took up my challenge to say something other than "what about Labour". Fair play to you. | |||
"Too many dots for an ellipsis. I guess it's hard to count the number of dots, up on that v high grammar horse as you are. It was a horizontal quincunx. For some reason, cunx always comes to mind when thinking of the loony left
Why would that be? And who is this loony left you speak of?
Anyone who doesn't blame Labour for all things bad in the UKm
UKm?
Yes! Well done. I see you took up my challenge to say something other than "what about Labour". Fair play to you.
" | |||
"Zahawi was dismissed from office for a serious breach of the Ministerial Code. As a bonus he also threatened legal action against individuals and the press for publishing factually correct information and was fined for non-payment of significant sums of tax. Who does feel sorry for him?" It's too simplistic a question. On one level, yes. Sir Laurie may not have given him a fair trial. But then again considering there were 7 breaches of the Ministerial Code, no. Considering his back story, coming here at 11 as an Iraqi refugee, bullied at school, being a hugely successful businessman, it's hard not to feel a bit sorry to see the fall from grace. His resignation letter lacked grace, but did reflect the media storm and toll on his family. | |||
"Zahawi was dismissed from office for a serious breach of the Ministerial Code. As a bonus he also threatened legal action against individuals and the press for publishing factually correct information and was fined for non-payment of significant sums of tax. Who does feel sorry for him? It's too simplistic a question. On one level, yes. Sir Laurie may not have given him a fair trial. But then again considering there were 7 breaches of the Ministerial Code, no. Considering his back story, coming here at 11 as an Iraqi refugee, bullied at school, being a hugely successful businessman, it's hard not to feel a bit sorry to see the fall from grace. His resignation letter lacked grace, but did reflect the media storm and toll on his family. " What has been raised to bring that brings the results of the enquiry into question? That of "a serious failure to meet the standards set out in the Ministerial Code". Did he not do the things that he was dismissed for? I feel sorry for his family in having a son who tried to avoid paying tax, although his father appeared to be complicit in this venture. I feel sorry for all the honest, hard working immigrants who may well be tarred with this same reputation. Should people not take responsibility for their actions, regardless of their background. He chose his own course. It is a shame, but I cannot say that I feel sorry for a wealthy and powerful man being caught in wrong-doing. | |||
