I see idiot Miliband has gone rushing in again from the safety of his glass-house.
(Original post by creak)
So the news last night was that Tory co-Treasurer and member of the party's ruling board, Peter Cruddas, was forced to resign after being caught attempting to sell influence with the Prime Minister to undercover journalists.
Of course the Tories have worked quickly to distance and downplay the incident, and Cruddas himself has issued a statement with his resignation purporting to be nothing more than a blustering idiot acting outside his brief. At best then, attempting to procure funds in return for promises he was unable to keep. To be fair though, it's not like the ability to pay was ever hidden by the Tories as the method by which to gain access to the PM- The Leader's Group
is openly advertised. Just £50,000 a year ensures you're "invited to join David Cameron and other senior figures from the Conservative Party at dinners, post-PMQ lunches, drinks receptions, election result events and important campaign launches."
Obviously New Labour's response to this scandal will be muted, given their own record in power. Bernie Ecclestone's £1mil tobacco advertising bribe, the cash-for-honours scandal, 2010 cash for influence and the numerous skeletons hanging in the closet after thirteen years worth of PFI and government contracting don't really leave them with a leg to stand on.
Cameron himself said a couple of years ago that the state of today's political lobbying is "the next big scandal waiting to happen". So when is the tipping point going to come? Is this sort of thing really acceptable in British politics? And how can we change the system to ensure that politicians respond to the needs of citizens, rather than hawking influence to rich backers for financial gain? Clegg's probably going to use this as an excuse to bang on about state funding of political parties again, but is this the only, and best option?
This the man who owes his very leadership to unions armed with chequebooks walking all over party democracy.
Banker bashing when it was he who signed off all the bankers' wage deals, in the first place.
Then going on the offensive over Cameron’s links with Murdoch, even though it's plain to see that the only reason Cameron and Osborne couldn't get all the way up Murdoch's backside was because Brown and the Milibands were already there blocking the way.
But, best of all, has to be his pointing at all the Tory front bench accusing them of being out of touch toffs all benefiting from the 50p rate cut.
Let’s face it, he could have equally pointed at his own front bench full of millionaires.
Besides, yes, the Tories, being toffs, will never quite get ordinary working people but they'll get them a darn sight more than a Labour party dominated by middle class health and education public sector unions, with their PC diversity badges on their tits.
Last edited by marcusfox; 25-03-2012 at 21:23.
Why shouldn't the rest of the Tories distance themselves from the actions of Cruddas?
(Original post by starkey)
I find it all very amusing to be honest, especially due to the fact that the Tories are trying to rebound all of the controversy by distancing themselves from the event, although donation tiers are clearly listed on their website.
Unless you are suggesting that it wasn't only Peter Cruddas who was offering access to Cameron for whatever price...
What is amusing is what Labour will have to say on the matter, hardly being whiter than white themselves when it comes to keeping their own house in order.
Last edited by marcusfox; 26-03-2012 at 01:01.