Corruption in Government

Please treat other members in a constructive manner and abide by our Forum Rules at all times.
  • But again, that's not really the issue in this case. I just happen to think that sending Botham to be a diplomat with the Australians over the trade deal is like sending Bernard Manning to strike a deal with the Taliban to get Pen Farthing and his people out of Afghanistan.

    He is one of 10 unpaid envoys, Jenny, and he's not involved in negotiating a trade deal!! His role is to boost British business overseas, and if he has the qualities to assist in that mission, then why not?


    Of course, being one of many who will help Brexit to be a success, he's bound to be a bogeyman in your eyes.


    The Australians seem to like him, so he's off to a flying start.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • There is a law prohibiting a person riding an electric scooter on public land. There should be no exception. EXCEPT if you are a nasty, self seeking, dictator who the police are not allowed to arrest.


    “It’s unfortunate that officers have had to spend a significant amount of time dealing with her silly stunt and hopefully she will have learned a lesson from it."

    The announcement that Ms Sturgeon will not face any action has triggered a formal complaint to be made.

    A member of the public lodged a complaint about May's incident directly to Chief Constable Iain Livingstone.

    The email sent to the police chief, sent earlier this month, said: "The only reason I can think of is your officers are prepared to allow criminality by the First Minister."

    A Police Scotland spokesperson said: "We would remind people that the private use of e-scooters in a public place is not legal in Scotland.


    Corruption at the highest level


    Lock Her Up


    sturgeon

  • The Good Law Project has condemned the inadequate performance of the government appointed "Anti-Corruption Czar (their phrase) thus:


    "Unimaginable resources" were thrown at Test and Trace, yet it "cannot point to a measureable difference in the progress of the pandemic"


    That's what the Conservative majority Public Accounts Committee found. There was a measurable difference, though, for the owners of the biggest of the pandemic contract winners, Innova, The LA times reported that they flashed "an Innova bank statement with a $175 million balance as proof of funds". They (Innova) went on "a corporate and personal luxury buying spree", including several Gulfstream jets and luxury houses.


    Things are no better when one turns to PPE procurement. The Government's own Counter Fraud Function "assessed a high risk of fraud in the procurement of PPE".


    You might think this is cause for the Government's Anti-Corruption Czar, John Penrose MP, to take a look. His role, after all, is to "Scrutinise and challenge the performance of departments and agencies". The sums involved are no laughing matter. Together, the Test and Trace and PPE programmes cost a staggering £50 billion - about the size of the entire annual defence budget.


    But rather than chasing corruption, Penrose seems to spend his time besmirching those who do. A follower of the Good Law Project has shared with us an extraordinary letter he received from John Penrose, which contains a number of out-and-out falsehoods.


    The letter says:

    "Since the start of the pandemic (Good Law Project) have brought scores of legal cases against the Government and so far they've failed to make almost all of them stand up in court."


    That's just not true. At the time of writing, we have had only two substantive court decisions and have won both of them. And of the 14 cases we have issued since the start of 2020, the Court has granted permission in 11 at the first time of asking. Official statistics (beginning in 2010) show that this happens in only 17% of all judicial reviews and yet Good Law Project's success rate is 78%.


    Penrose also said:

    "in both cases, the judge said that their broader allegations of dishonesty or actual corruption (ie: anything more than failing to follow the bureaucratic process precisely enough) weren't proven".


    That is also false. in none of the decided cases did we allege dishonesty or corruption. So, his statement that judges dismissed our allegations of dishonesty or actual corruption is a pure and false figment of his imagination.


    Is Penrose indifferent to the truth of what he says? Or is our notional anti-corruption champion telling out-and-out lies to try and smear those doing the job HE should be doing?


    Penrose goes on to say:

    "I should probably add that a couple of their cases are against appointments at NHS Test & Trace, where my wife worked as a senior volunteer."


    That's not entirely frank either. The truth is that the person in charge of the programme that delivered unimaginable wealth to Innova's owners but made no measureable difference to the progress of the pandemic is Baroness Dido Harding. And John Penrose is her husband.


    Yep. You read that right. He is charged with scrutinising where there was corruption in the programme headed up by his own wife.


    Good Law Project is bringing a judicial review - for which a court has granted permission - of the decision to put Harding to lead the £37 billion Test and Trace fiasco.


    So, what does all this add up to.


    We wouldn't normally respond to baseless slurs from a Parliamentarian. But what makes Penrose's letter significant is that the anti-corruption champion has a responsibility to "engage with external stakeholders, including civil society organisations" *


    There is likely to be - the Government itself has acknowledged- fraud in pandemic procurement. And despite being a small, not-for-profit organisation without the powers of a law enforcement agency, Good Law Project has uncovered two highly suspicious cases involving contracts worth hundreds of millions of taxpayers pounds: One involving Priti Patel and another involving vast contracts to a jeweller based in Florida.


    Penrose's letter tells the truth about his wife's role. He is not an anti-corruption champion. He is a man speaking lies to try to stop those working to uncover it.


    Thank you.

    Jo Maugham, Good Law Project.





    * The Good Law Project is an example of a 'Civil Society Organisation' and as such, should be co-operated with.



    If you actually give a damn about opposing government corruption, donate to:


    Good Law Project

    3 East Point High Street

    Sevenoaks, Kent

    TN15 0EG

    Nobody likes the British anymore. We don't even like ourselves.

  • With regard to my message above, one of the telling points made, is that the Government appointed 'Anti-Corruption Czar' is none other than the husband of the woman (Dido Harding) who he is supposed to be investigating.


    There is a massive conflict of interest there, and the evidence that has emerged to date, is that Penrose has not only failed to do his job with anything like the robustness, diligence and impartiality that we should expect, but rather he has dismissed out of hand all the findings, including those that have been proven in court, and has attacked the Good Law Project for doing the work HE is supposed to be doing..!!


    The law often works slowly, but its wheels do turn.


    The evidence - hard evidence - of corruption on an unimaginable scale, is slowly but surely starting to emerge and be pieced together.


    The Good Law Project would like to bring prosecutions more quickly, but instead is being patient, diligent and thorough.


    Slowly but surely, the net will tighten around this nest of thieves.

    Nobody likes the British anymore. We don't even like ourselves.

  • IIRC Harding or is it a family member of hers also has shares in Astra Zenica. £50 billion is a shocking amount but you do realise the gov are going to get away with because they are the government. It's a bit like the Queen not able to be held accountable for any laws broken. This is all a waste of time and money. When has anyone on government ever been out on prison for their political actions while in government. Geez if Blair can get away with war crimes then this is like a pinch of salt by comparison.

  • This government waste tonnes of money on their dodgy deals and funny handshakes with mates and now they expect the public to accept a rise in Tax and NI contributions. Scum the government are. Oh well, I guess the crime rate will rise to cover peoples living expenses then.

  • As a Scot, I'm concerned with the corruption and dodgy dealings within the Scottish Assembly. The levels of dodgy dealings and waste of taxpayer's money make what happens in Westminster pale into insignificance.

    I won't list them as I would be here all day and nobody likes reading paragraph after paragraph of corruption.

    The sooner Sturgeon and her little gang are kicked out of the SNP the better. She has besmirched the reputation of the good people of Scotland and the once decent SNP..

    Scotland Versus Sturgeon. Will be the latest political battle.

  • Serial Offender Priti Patel Holds Secret Meetings With Tory Doners and British Airways - Breaks Ministerial Code AGAIN


    Snip


    Home Secretary Priti Patel was branded a serial offender last night over a secret “lobbying” meeting she brokered between a billionaire Tory donor and British Airways.


    In an alleged breach of the ministerial code Ms Patel arranged high level talks at Heathrow Airport’s Hilton Garden Inn without a Home Office official present – as rules dictate.


    The hotel is part of a chain owned by Ms Patel’s friend Surinder Arora.




    To her credit, Teresa May had the strength of character, and enough respect for the Ministerial Code to sack Patel for her secret and improper meetings with Israeli officials in 2017,


    It's unlikely that the spineless jellyfish currently occupying 10 Downing Street will have the same gumption.


    One can only wonder what was said behind closed doors, but it is known that the meeting was held at the request of Mr Arora, who was present and is known to be a major supporter of a third Heathrow runway. He is also the owner of 16 hotels, most of which are at airport sites including Heathrow.


    Also at the meeting were Lord Hammond, who is chariman of the Arora Advisory Board. Also at the lunch were Surinder Arora's son and Arora Strategy Director, Sanjay Arora, Chief Financial Officer Carlton Brown and the Chief Executive of Dubai Airports.


    One wonders what possible reason any of these would have for wanting to cosy up to the Home Secretary... who just happens to be the minister who would have a major say in whether or not a third runway would go ahead.......... and why the meeting had to be held in secret, with no official present to record what was discussed.

    Nobody likes the British anymore. We don't even like ourselves.

  • Politics is a dirty business , politicians of every party resort to underhand tactics to get their points across. I has always been so in every country in the world.

    The rules under which politicians behave are ambiguous and open to interpretation and politicians exploit the situation. That's the name of the game.

  • Politics is a dirty business , politicians of every party resort to underhand tactics to get their points across. I has always been so in every country in the world.

    The rules under which politicians behave are ambiguous and open to interpretation and politicians exploit the situation. That's the name of the game.

    So......... it's alright then for Jeremy Corbyn allow anti-semitism to flourish in the Labour Party..? After all, politics is a dirty business.


    It's alright for Joe Biden to pull out of Afghanistan leaving a horrible mess behind. After all, politics is a dirty business.


    It's alright for the French to allow refugees to depart from their shoreline to come to Britain. After all, politics is a dirty business.


    It's alright for rejoiners to campaign to overthrow Brexit. After all, politics is a dirty business.



    No, the rules of the Ministerial Code pertaining to unauthorised meetings with lobbyists ARE NOT ambiguous. They are quite clear: Any minister attending such a meeting MUST be accompanied by an appropriate member of the Civil Service who is required to minute the meeting to ensure that a record exists of the matters discussed. This is not optional, it is MANDATORY.


    The reason for it is quite clear too. It is to ensure transparency. But then again, when did this Tory government ever want a light shone on their actions..?


    The Ministerial Code embodies the seven core principles of public life:


    • Selflessness: ministers should act entirely in the public interest.
    • Integrity: no financial obligations should be accepted if they could undermine the minister's position.
    • Objectivity: when making appointments, decisions should be based on merit.
    • Accountability: all public office-holders are accountable, and should co-operate with all scrutiny procedures.
    • Openness: all decisions should be justified, and information should be restricted only when necessary for the public interest.
    • Honesty: public office-holders are required, by duty, to be honest in all their dealings and business.
    • Leadership: the principles should be supported and upheld by leadership and example.


    None of these principles are upheld by this government. They have repeatedly and consistently failed to measure up to all of them.




    Incidentally, two Labour ministers, David Blunkett and Tessa Jowell both resigned due to the Ministerial Code.


    Blunkett resigned because of an issue of "Conflict of Interest" over share dealings, although a later investigation showed that actually, he had NOT broken the Ministerial Code.


    Jowell resigned over something she wasn't personally involved with..!! She resigned because her husband was implicated in dodgy financial dealings and she felt this made her position untenable.


    These politicians took the Ministerial Code seriously enough to resign even though at the point of resigning, there was no requirement for them to do so. They did it because it was the honourable thing to do. In the end, neither of them was found to have broken the MC.

    Nobody likes the British anymore. We don't even like ourselves.

    Edited 3 times, last by Jennyanydots ().

  • He is one of 10 unpaid envoys, Jenny, and he's not involved in negotiating a trade deal!! His role is to boost British business overseas, and if he has the qualities to assist in that mission, then why not?


    Of course, being one of many who will help Brexit to be a success, he's bound to be a bogeyman in your eyes.


    The Australians seem to like him, so he's off to a flying start.

    Of course the Australians like him. He'll give them anything they want. In return, they'll allow him to expand his wine interests in Australia.


    This is what is known as a "Conflict of interest". In other words, corruption.


    Botham didn't seem to think much of himself as a trade envoy when he was promoted to the Lords............. But that was before he learned about the Australia deal and how much he stood to make out of it.



    botham.jpg


    So....... when he first joined the House of Lords, he had no interest in trade deals, but now he's well up for it. And of course, the Australians like him. Well, they would, wouldn't they....?


    I'm quite sure the Australians will like Ian Botham a great deal, and reward him appropriately when his Australian wine enterprises benefit very nicely from favourable decisions on his applications for expansion.


    Especially if he facilitates favourable arrangements for their access to British markets, generous quotas (or better still, no quotas at all), removal of regulations over food safety and farming practices, product labelling, etc, etc, etc


    You scratch my back..............

    Nobody likes the British anymore. We don't even like ourselves.

    • Selflessness: ministers should act entirely in the public interest.
    • Integrity: no financial obligations should be accepted if they could undermine the minister's position.
    • Objectivity: when making appointments, decisions should be based on merit.
    • Accountability: all public office-holders are accountable, and should co-operate with all scrutiny procedures.
    • Openness: all decisions should be justified, and information should be restricted only when necessary for the public interest.
    • Honesty: public office-holders are required, by duty, to be honest in all their dealings and business.
    • Leadership: the principles should be supported and upheld by leadership and example.


    OMG, If that's the rules for Ministers, ----- Why is Nasty Nic still in the post of First Minister. ?? ?(?(

Participate now!

Don’t have an account yet? Register yourself now and be a part of our community!