Greg Bobkin
Silver Seagull
- May 22, 2012
- 15,039
Ugh. Twats, the lot of them.
[Misc] Owen Patterson M.P.
- Thread starter lawros left foot
- Start date
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Wow, does she have any self respect?
Last edited:
I was going to write to my MP, then heard the news of the u-turn. But sod it, I've written anyway:
Dear David,
I noted that you were one of the 250 Conservative MPs who voted against the advice of the Chair of the Parliamentary Standards Committee yesterday, and supported Andrea Leadsom’s amendment. As you know, the effect of this vote was to ignore the repeated breaches of the lobbying rules by Owen Paterson, and seek to retrospectively re-write those rules.
A Conservative MP was clearly and repeatedly lobbying for the interests of two companies who paid him a combined £100k per annum. The Parliamentary Standards Committee found him guilty of an egregious breach of lobbying rules. The committee found that "No previous case of paid advocacy has seen so many breaches or such a clear pattern of behaviour in failing to separate private and public interests.”
Instead off agreeing to his 30 day suspension (which is a ridiculously mild sanction, given the acts committed), the reaction of the Government - supported by yourself and others - was to attempt to rewrite the rules, and apply them retrospectively.
I have to question what level of corruption you would find unacceptable. I struggle to see how Owen Paterson’s actions could be defensible. He was clearly abusing his status for his own private gain. As many have observed, this is corruption.
The rest of us “ordinary people” don’t have the opportunity to earn hundreds of thousands of pounds a year for access to the corridors of power. And, worse, we end up funding this corruption (for example, in the Owen Paterson case, Randox has recently been awarded massive government contracts (totalling nearly £0.5bn), without any tender process). I see that Owen Paterson has been paid more than £500k over the past 6 years for his services to Randox. No wonder they are so pleased with his work!
Obviously the Government has now decided on a U-turn. This is plainly down to the level of public outrage, not because of some new-found morality within the Conservative party. It comes just a couple of weeks after Conservative MPs voted to continue to allow water companies to pump raw sewage into our rivers and seas (before, again, changing their mind when faced with a public backlash).
It is about time Conservative MPs realise that the public cares about corruption, and cares about the environment. I hope that this letter conveys the level of anger I feel about the former issue (I also wrote to you on 26th October in relation to the latter issue, which I feel equally angry about!).
The state of our democracy is in ruins, and I despair that anything will get better under this wretched government, led by a Prime Minister who appears to have no moral compass.
Best regards,
Dear David,
I noted that you were one of the 250 Conservative MPs who voted against the advice of the Chair of the Parliamentary Standards Committee yesterday, and supported Andrea Leadsom’s amendment. As you know, the effect of this vote was to ignore the repeated breaches of the lobbying rules by Owen Paterson, and seek to retrospectively re-write those rules.
A Conservative MP was clearly and repeatedly lobbying for the interests of two companies who paid him a combined £100k per annum. The Parliamentary Standards Committee found him guilty of an egregious breach of lobbying rules. The committee found that "No previous case of paid advocacy has seen so many breaches or such a clear pattern of behaviour in failing to separate private and public interests.”
Instead off agreeing to his 30 day suspension (which is a ridiculously mild sanction, given the acts committed), the reaction of the Government - supported by yourself and others - was to attempt to rewrite the rules, and apply them retrospectively.
I have to question what level of corruption you would find unacceptable. I struggle to see how Owen Paterson’s actions could be defensible. He was clearly abusing his status for his own private gain. As many have observed, this is corruption.
The rest of us “ordinary people” don’t have the opportunity to earn hundreds of thousands of pounds a year for access to the corridors of power. And, worse, we end up funding this corruption (for example, in the Owen Paterson case, Randox has recently been awarded massive government contracts (totalling nearly £0.5bn), without any tender process). I see that Owen Paterson has been paid more than £500k over the past 6 years for his services to Randox. No wonder they are so pleased with his work!
Obviously the Government has now decided on a U-turn. This is plainly down to the level of public outrage, not because of some new-found morality within the Conservative party. It comes just a couple of weeks after Conservative MPs voted to continue to allow water companies to pump raw sewage into our rivers and seas (before, again, changing their mind when faced with a public backlash).
It is about time Conservative MPs realise that the public cares about corruption, and cares about the environment. I hope that this letter conveys the level of anger I feel about the former issue (I also wrote to you on 26th October in relation to the latter issue, which I feel equally angry about!).
The state of our democracy is in ruins, and I despair that anything will get better under this wretched government, led by a Prime Minister who appears to have no moral compass.
Best regards,
Randy McNob
Now go home and get your f#cking Shinebox
- Jun 13, 2020
- 4,524
It's Nov 5 tomorrow
Just sayin'
Just sayin'
And he has never been any different.
Rude, arrogant, lazy and self-serving.
(But then I could be describing a significant majority of Tory MPs)
who has held ELECTED parliamentary office continuously since 26 June 1975.
And also I believe doesn't even live in Sussex ?
This is what I think is happening. She (and possibly others) have been told that to hang out Owen to dry, now, will damage the revovery from Covid and the readjustments after Brexit. "We will get Owen out in a less damaging way, perhaps by encouraging him to select to spend more time with his family in the New Year. In the meantime we will tighten up the arrangements on this with new legislation. We would be happy for you to resume your PPS position if you agree to recant."
What right thinking person wouldn't agree to go along with that?
Yes. But you know full well that in his constituency you could pin a blue rosette on a dog or donkey and it would top the polls.
He never does anything because he knows he doesn't have to. At the last GE he had a majority of 15K polling twice as many votes as the Labour Party candidate. Just how safe do you want a seat to be?
Of course but there always comes a point, in all of this nonsense, of saying 'you get who you vote for'.
No prospective Tory candidate is currently thinking:-
'I want to serve with my Conservative principles on an anti sleaze mandate'.
No they're currently thinking
'So if I screw this up right, I could still walk away with a few million in my back pocket and a job in The City'
In much the same way all prospective Labour candidate is currently thinking:-
'I don't really agree with my parties current leadership or previous leadership but I'll stand anyway and will loudly change the party from within'.
We have an entire system built on sleaze, in fighting and backstabbing.
We can't then be surprised when only the sleaziest stabby people apply!
Without trawling through this whole thread, have any of the embarrassing Tory apologists come on here to tell us that this u-turn is another good example of the Tories "listening" to the public?
Although to be fair, I suspect our "go-to Tory boy" JCFG is too clever to attempt to defend the indefensible so that leaves the other Tory boy as he is certainly thick enough to try. So anyway, has anyone seen Mouldy Boots?
Although to be fair, I suspect our "go-to Tory boy" JCFG is too clever to attempt to defend the indefensible so that leaves the other Tory boy as he is certainly thick enough to try. So anyway, has anyone seen Mouldy Boots?
Tom Hark Preston Park
Will Post For Cash
- Jul 6, 2003
- 70,622
Image been posted more than once before but can't be posted enough really. You know you've lost the dressing room when the Daily Mail has THIS as its headline
Now it's big enough to read.
The first mention of "Tory" comes in after 67 words, in the second paragraph after the strap line and headline.
We ought to give the boys in blue some credit though.
I don't imagine anyone reading the first 66 words will be aghast when the 67 word drops.
The first mention of "Tory" comes in after 67 words, in the second paragraph after the strap line and headline.
We ought to give the boys in blue some credit though.
I don't imagine anyone reading the first 66 words will be aghast when the 67 word drops.
Breaking news: Patterson RESIGNS his seat.
