| Trust in politicians on 13:52 - Nov 4 with 909 views | Professor |
| Trust in politicians on 12:57 - Nov 4 by Lohengrin |
It’s fundamentally wrong that MPs get to decide their own codes of conduct in the first place, Prof. Any half-way sensible system would see any codification formulated and supervised by a completely independent legal body.
It’s worth noting too that The Senedd has no register of lobbyists, there is absolutely no oversight in Cardiff Bay. |
Impossible to disagree.
We even have a register of interests for University committees with any governance issue or external obligations.
Politicians have far less scrutiny |  | |  |
| Trust in politicians on 14:22 - Nov 4 with 884 views | jackrabbit |
Sorry to interject a few facts into this onslaught.
He took paid work from two businesses — Randox and Lynn’s Country Foods — as MPs are entitled to do, so long as they declare this. Paid advocacy for such interests is forbidden, however, and it is this of which Mr Paterson is accused. His defence is that his advocacy was justified, under the rules, because he was dealing with emergencies, not selling a product.
He learnt through the companies involved that there was, in one case, a dangerous amount of antibiotics in milk being widely sold; in the other, that carcinogenic ham was being marketed to young people under false colours. Following his interventions, both problems were addressed. Is anyone arguing that, because he worked for the companies, he should not have raised these urgent risks with ministers?
What a fuss about very little. |  | | |
| Trust in politicians on 16:11 - Nov 4 with 844 views | jackrabbit |
Well he’s resigned now. A very good man wasted. Following on from the suicide of his wife last year (as a result of the investigation) he has paid a dear price indeed for his technical transgression. Sorry to disappoint Tory haters, but this was no cash-for-questions type of scandal. | | | |
| Trust in politicians on 16:25 - Nov 4 with 833 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Trust in politicians on 14:22 - Nov 4 by jackrabbit |
Sorry to interject a few facts into this onslaught.
He took paid work from two businesses — Randox and Lynn’s Country Foods — as MPs are entitled to do, so long as they declare this. Paid advocacy for such interests is forbidden, however, and it is this of which Mr Paterson is accused. His defence is that his advocacy was justified, under the rules, because he was dealing with emergencies, not selling a product.
He learnt through the companies involved that there was, in one case, a dangerous amount of antibiotics in milk being widely sold; in the other, that carcinogenic ham was being marketed to young people under false colours. Following his interventions, both problems were addressed. Is anyone arguing that, because he worked for the companies, he should not have raised these urgent risks with ministers?
What a fuss about very little. |
"He was last week found to have committed an 'egregious' breach of standards rules by directly advocating for two companies from which he pocketed some £500,000. He continues to deny any wrongdoing." | | | |
| Trust in politicians on 16:30 - Nov 4 with 829 views | Gwyn737 |
| Trust in politicians on 14:22 - Nov 4 by jackrabbit |
Sorry to interject a few facts into this onslaught.
He took paid work from two businesses — Randox and Lynn’s Country Foods — as MPs are entitled to do, so long as they declare this. Paid advocacy for such interests is forbidden, however, and it is this of which Mr Paterson is accused. His defence is that his advocacy was justified, under the rules, because he was dealing with emergencies, not selling a product.
He learnt through the companies involved that there was, in one case, a dangerous amount of antibiotics in milk being widely sold; in the other, that carcinogenic ham was being marketed to young people under false colours. Following his interventions, both problems were addressed. Is anyone arguing that, because he worked for the companies, he should not have raised these urgent risks with ministers?
What a fuss about very little. |
This is the independent watchdog response:
"While this excuse would have been permissible for an initial approach, Patterson’s investigators said it did not cover his follow-up letters and meetings. “What might have been permissible in a single exceptional case, became Paterson’s standard practice,” said the standards commissioner, Kathryn Stone, adding that it “stretches credulity to suggest that 14 approaches to ministers and public officials were all attempts to avert a serious wrong rather than to favour Randox and Lynn’s, however much Paterson may have persuaded himself he is in the right.”
The committee agreed. It said Paterson’s follow-up approaches “sought to promote Randox products” by praising their “superior technology” and that he promoted other unrelated products from the company. “These were all attempts to confer a benefit on Randox, to whom he was a paid consultant,” it found. “At best, Paterson was relying on an exemption he thought probably existed but of whose terms he was unsure. At worst, Paterson was knowingly in breach of the lobbying rules.”
The committee also agreed that Paterson’s attempts to get one of Lynn’s Country Foods’ competitors to relabel their product so as not to compete with Lynn’s own nitrite-free goods, as well his asking for this to be promoted in the press, was not incidental.
Paterson was paid more than £100,000 for his work for Randox and Lynn’s, and the committee was clear. “The paid advocacy rule does not distinguish between lobbying for good causes and lobbying for bad causes. It only applies to lobbying for reward or consideration.” It added that Paterson “went beyond presenting evidence of a serious wrong” in his follow-up approaches to the Food Standards Agency about milk testing."
The best part of 100 Conservative MPs defied the whip, such was the seriousness of the situation. | | | |
| Trust in politicians on 17:40 - Nov 4 with 811 views | Flashberryjack |
Just when you thought politicians couldn't get any lower, they still manage to find depths of corrupt and moral integrity to wallow in.
The houses of parliament is a cess pit, of thieves and incompetent chancers, which knows no political party boundaries. |  |
| |
| Trust in politicians on 17:49 - Nov 4 with 805 views | Catullus |
There's a generous part of me that says well done to Bojo for doing a U turn, for seeing sense. Unfortuantely (for the UK) if he hadn't misjudged the whole thing so badly, made such a monumentally stupid decision then he wouldn't have had to climb down.
I totally agree about an independent watchdog, it needs to happen, we cannot have the Lunatics making the rules the asylum lives by.
The standards in Westminster cannot get any lower, surely?
That Labour are stil not making any headway is just as much of a disgrace. What the heck is Starmer up to? Any decent competition and Bojo would be hsitory, surely? | |
| |
| Trust in politicians on 20:41 - Nov 4 with 760 views | majorraglan |
| Trust in politicians on 12:57 - Nov 4 by Lohengrin |
It’s fundamentally wrong that MPs get to decide their own codes of conduct in the first place, Prof. Any half-way sensible system would see any codification formulated and supervised by a completely independent legal body.
It’s worth noting too that The Senedd has no register of lobbyists, there is absolutely no oversight in Cardiff Bay. |
Totally agree with your comments, there has to be completely independent oversight with the ability to report and sanction. Most other professions have regulatory bodies or are overseen by others.
In terms of The Senedd, wasn’t aware of that but it’s something that needs addressing | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Trust in politicians on 20:46 - Nov 4 with 754 views | majorraglan |
| Trust in politicians on 13:52 - Nov 4 by Professor |
Impossible to disagree.
We even have a register of interests for University committees with any governance issue or external obligations.
Politicians have far less scrutiny |
Place I used to work scrutines staff behaviour and had really strict rules and a Code of Conduct. If you accepted a packet of biscuits you were expected to report it and any business interests had to be approved. Any breaches would result in disciplinary action. [Post edited 4 Nov 2021 20:46]
| | | |
| Trust in politicians on 21:04 - Nov 4 with 739 views | Gwyn737 |
| Trust in politicians on 20:46 - Nov 4 by majorraglan |
Place I used to work scrutines staff behaviour and had really strict rules and a Code of Conduct. If you accepted a packet of biscuits you were expected to report it and any business interests had to be approved. Any breaches would result in disciplinary action. [Post edited 4 Nov 2021 20:46]
|
I’ve just got in from Tesco where I bought some bits for work.
I had to pay for those items separately from my own shop as I’m not allowed to benefit from my club card for work related purchases. I’d have made myself 5p. | | | |
| Trust in politicians on 22:02 - Nov 4 with 712 views | Catullus |
| Trust in politicians on 21:04 - Nov 4 by Gwyn737 |
I’ve just got in from Tesco where I bought some bits for work.
I had to pay for those items separately from my own shop as I’m not allowed to benefit from my club card for work related purchases. I’d have made myself 5p. |
5p, hardly worth worrying about anyway when these politicians are getting away with tens of thousands!
Or from another point of view, definitely not worth losing your job for! | |
| |
| Trust in politicians on 22:20 - Nov 4 with 700 views | Kilkennyjack |
| Trust in politicians on 17:49 - Nov 4 by Catullus |
There's a generous part of me that says well done to Bojo for doing a U turn, for seeing sense. Unfortuantely (for the UK) if he hadn't misjudged the whole thing so badly, made such a monumentally stupid decision then he wouldn't have had to climb down.
I totally agree about an independent watchdog, it needs to happen, we cannot have the Lunatics making the rules the asylum lives by.
The standards in Westminster cannot get any lower, surely?
That Labour are stil not making any headway is just as much of a disgrace. What the heck is Starmer up to? Any decent competition and Bojo would be hsitory, surely? |
Exactly. |  |
| Beware of the Risen People
|
| |
| Trust in politicians on 10:41 - Nov 5 with 666 views | felixstowe_jack |
| Trust in politicians on 22:20 - Nov 4 by Kilkennyjack |
Exactly. |
Meanwhile a former Labour MPs is given a suspended prison sentence yesterday. I wonder if she will do the honourable thing and resign her seat or force her constituents to get a recall petition to get rid of her. | |
| |
| Trust in politicians on 11:08 - Nov 5 with 660 views | Gwyn737 |
| Trust in politicians on 10:41 - Nov 5 by felixstowe_jack |
Meanwhile a former Labour MPs is given a suspended prison sentence yesterday. I wonder if she will do the honourable thing and resign her seat or force her constituents to get a recall petition to get rid of her. |
Not comparable really, is it?
She was suspended from the party and is sitting as an independent. If she doesn't resign that's just more evidence of what an awful person she is - doesn't point to systematic skullduggary.
It would have been comparable if the Labour Party stopped the trial, changed the law then appointed a jury of her mates to adjudicate. | | | |
| Trust in politicians on 11:55 - Nov 5 with 644 views | Professor |
| Trust in politicians on 16:30 - Nov 4 by Gwyn737 |
This is the independent watchdog response:
"While this excuse would have been permissible for an initial approach, Patterson’s investigators said it did not cover his follow-up letters and meetings. “What might have been permissible in a single exceptional case, became Paterson’s standard practice,” said the standards commissioner, Kathryn Stone, adding that it “stretches credulity to suggest that 14 approaches to ministers and public officials were all attempts to avert a serious wrong rather than to favour Randox and Lynn’s, however much Paterson may have persuaded himself he is in the right.”
The committee agreed. It said Paterson’s follow-up approaches “sought to promote Randox products” by praising their “superior technology” and that he promoted other unrelated products from the company. “These were all attempts to confer a benefit on Randox, to whom he was a paid consultant,” it found. “At best, Paterson was relying on an exemption he thought probably existed but of whose terms he was unsure. At worst, Paterson was knowingly in breach of the lobbying rules.”
The committee also agreed that Paterson’s attempts to get one of Lynn’s Country Foods’ competitors to relabel their product so as not to compete with Lynn’s own nitrite-free goods, as well his asking for this to be promoted in the press, was not incidental.
Paterson was paid more than £100,000 for his work for Randox and Lynn’s, and the committee was clear. “The paid advocacy rule does not distinguish between lobbying for good causes and lobbying for bad causes. It only applies to lobbying for reward or consideration.” It added that Paterson “went beyond presenting evidence of a serious wrong” in his follow-up approaches to the Food Standards Agency about milk testing."
The best part of 100 Conservative MPs defied the whip, such was the seriousness of the situation. |
If you dig deeper, it is pretty damning. Of course it makes sense to promote the idea that nitrites in cured pork products have a association with cancer if you are under the pay of a company (Lynn's Foods) whose major brand (Finnebrogue) is a nitrite-free bacon or antibiotic residues in milk where you are under the pay of a company (Randox) hoping to get government take-up of their technology for monitoring of these residues. Neither is 'whistleblowing' as the role of nitrites in bacon, ham and sausagement as a cancer risk factor is well-established (the nitrites help the 'pinkness'-traditionally saltpetre) as are risks of antimicrobial residues in milk, meat and eggs. There are well-defined withdrawal periods to try to avoid this (especially around mastitis therapy).
In both cases these are good products, but clearly there has been paid advocacy to promote these via governmental routes. | | | |
| Trust in politicians on 14:09 - Nov 5 with 629 views | majorraglan |
| Trust in politicians on 10:41 - Nov 5 by felixstowe_jack |
Meanwhile a former Labour MPs is given a suspended prison sentence yesterday. I wonder if she will do the honourable thing and resign her seat or force her constituents to get a recall petition to get rid of her. |
You’re losing your objectivity and your attempts to deflect from Boris do you no favours and detract from the good stuff you post here. There is no comparison between what’s happened with this Labour MP (who in my opinion should be booted out of parliament) and what the Conservatives attempted to do on Wednesday. Boris has tried to get a mate off and completely undermine the scrutiny and standards applied to MPs. It’s no surprise mind given the Boris has been investigated on more occasions than any other individual in the last few years and there may be another investigation in the offing. Is he trying to hide something?
Boris also reinstated the Conservative MP who was suspended for sexual harassment. Another great example of morality- not.
Gwyn has summarised what Boris tried to go quite succinctly. It’s outrageous and nothing but out and out sleaze, even the guy who used to head up MI5 (who’s probably as establishment as they come) had called Boris out.
If we allow standards to slide and reduce accountability we will end up like Russia or Zimbabwe. [Post edited 5 Nov 2021 14:12]
| | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.