comment by Ghod#18 (U9390)
posted 8 seconds ago
comment by lexballielegend (U22335)
posted 23 minutes ago

Stats, refs, cheating etc.. who gives a fook far more worrying is the Tories all but putting 2 fingers up to democracy yesterday and they actually got away with it.


very worrying
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yup. Retrospective law making is one of the most worrying things that can happen in any civilisation and this is a small step towards it.

Should have dealt with him under current processes and changed it going forward if necessary.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well I 100% agree.

Sorry if I couldn't work out that's what you meant from your comment about Celtic having a lot of crosses and 'pesky refs'.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I thought the 81 crosses stat was genuinely interesting.

The second part was a very throwaway attempt at emphasising that there is not always a significant deeper meaning to a superficially interesting stand alone stat.

The crosses stat was so clearly unrelated to refs performances that it was kind of exaggeration to make a point type thing.

It is meaningless to conclude anything about refs from the crosses stat - as it is from some of the other ones - even the ones that may seem more related.

comment by Gersmid (U22273)
posted 24 seconds ago
I think the one thing the last 18 months has shown is that the British public will accept/tolerate far more than possibly could ever have been imagined.

That for me is more of the worry than the behaviour of those within politics where there will always be corruption and individuals who push their greed as far as they can get away with.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

The British public in the main are subservient rseholes who want “their” government to decide every aspect of their lives, don’t want any risk and want someone to blame and look after them if it goes wrong.

comment by Magnum( proper bears seem to get on OK with me... (U22391)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Ghod#18 (U9390)
posted 8 seconds ago
comment by lexballielegend (U22335)
posted 23 minutes ago

Stats, refs, cheating etc.. who gives a fook far more worrying is the Tories all but putting 2 fingers up to democracy yesterday and they actually got away with it.


very worrying
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yup. Retrospective law making is one of the most worrying things that can happen in any civilisation and this is a small step towards it.

Should have dealt with him under current processes and changed it going forward if necessary.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Why should they deal with a change to something that is inherently wrong after someone has been found guilty without a fair hearing?

comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 8 seconds ago
comment by Magnum( proper bears seem to get on OK with me... (U22391)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Ghod#18 (U9390)
posted 8 seconds ago
comment by lexballielegend (U22335)
posted 23 minutes ago

Stats, refs, cheating etc.. who gives a fook far more worrying is the Tories all but putting 2 fingers up to democracy yesterday and they actually got away with it.


very worrying
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yup. Retrospective law making is one of the most worrying things that can happen in any civilisation and this is a small step towards it.

Should have dealt with him under current processes and changed it going forward if necessary.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Why should they deal with a change to something that is inherently wrong after someone has been found guilty without a fair hearing?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What's this about not having a fair hearing.

He was given several opportunities to submit written evidence and/or appear personally.

comment by Magnum( proper bears seem to get on OK with me... (U22391)
posted 32 seconds ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 8 seconds ago
comment by Magnum( proper bears seem to get on OK with me... (U22391)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Ghod#18 (U9390)
posted 8 seconds ago
comment by lexballielegend (U22335)
posted 23 minutes ago

Stats, refs, cheating etc.. who gives a fook far more worrying is the Tories all but putting 2 fingers up to democracy yesterday and they actually got away with it.


very worrying
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yup. Retrospective law making is one of the most worrying things that can happen in any civilisation and this is a small step towards it.

Should have dealt with him under current processes and changed it going forward if necessary.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Why should they deal with a change to something that is inherently wrong after someone has been found guilty without a fair hearing?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What's this about not having a fair hearing.

He was given several opportunities to submit written evidence and/or appear personally.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

There were 14 witnesses who would have argued on a “defence”. Not one was interviewed. They were studiously and deliberately ignored.

It’s not that this man is likely (allegedly) a sleazy git using his position to try and influence government for payments. It’s the process that flawed which should change.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

comment by lexballielegend (U22335)
posted 1 minute ago
It's a shocker and Boris plans to have a committee chaired by a Tory MP made up of a majority of Tory MPs to address the issue. This is the start of having a pro Tory committee investigating post COVID fraud claims, PPE contracts, etc...
----------------------------------------------------------------------

As I said; the very idea of MP’s investigating other MP’s is a farce.

And your notion that all this will happen is pure assumption. You may well be right although the notion that people will be held liable over any action as a result of Covid is laughable regardless of which party would have been in government. And for every mistake made within Westminster the same were made in Holyrood and Cardiff.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

he was paid by Randox who then secured covid contracts worth millions and also went on to sponsor the GN at Aintree where his wife was the chair of the racecourse

she was also good friends with Jockey club board member Dido Harding who is/was in charge of the governments multi billion pound test and trace operation

the only reason these people get away with things like is, is because the rest of them are doing it

And you do of course know that the previous committee was made up of a number of very hard line Conservatives who also voted him suspended?

Kind of puts paid to the notion that they all just “protect their own”.

There are decent people on all sides of the political spectrum and to maintain a stance that one side is full of greedy self serving, cruel bastirts is equally as stupid as saying the other is a side of left wing, disruptive vv@nkers intent on destroying private industry but want everything for free.

comment by lexballielegend (U22335)
posted 2 minutes ago
Its not the mistakes that was always going to happen during a Pandemic, when to wear masks, close airports etc..I am talking the awarding of Billion pound contracts to Tory friendly companies some of whom had no qualification to deserve the contract, the initial track and trace springs to mind.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

If you want to select aspects that were inherently wrong, you’ll find plenty. What I’m saying is that the idea that anyone will be found culpable is laughable and would be regardless of any party in power.

comment by Ghod#18 (U9390)
posted 2 minutes ago
he was paid by Randox who then secured covid contracts worth millions and also went on to sponsor the GN at Aintree where his wife was the chair of the racecourse

she was also good friends with Jockey club board member Dido Harding who is/was in charge of the governments multi billion pound test and trace operation

the only reason these people get away with things like is, is because the rest of them are doing it
----------------------------------------------------------------------

All of which I’m sorry to say has nothing to do with a system that refuses to listen to any defence witnesses.

I wonder who would be happy sat in front of any “jury” and be tried without the right to having a defence?

Or being asked to defend yourself in the House yesterday two weeks after losing your wife as disgusting creatures posing as MP’s whinny at them in mirth?

who had to do that?

if you're referring to Owen Paterson his wife died in June 2020?

comment by Ghod#18 (U9390)
posted 20 seconds ago
who had to do that?

if you're referring to Owen Paterson his wife died in June 2020?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I’m referring to the antics in the House yesterday. My apologies on the timing of his wife’s demise. I got that wrong or misinterpreted the report in todays papers.

Yesterday a significant number of members of the Labour and SNP parties displayed atrocious levels of behaviour to a person (yes you can choose to hate all he stands for or likely did) who lost his wife allegedly as a result of actions he is accused of.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

this guy is paid 80k a year by us

however works for businesses paying him £110k a year

he failed to declare interest in these companies and used his office for 16 meetings and sent out letters noting business interests on taxpayer funded commons headed note paper

he then went to the low depths of blaming the investigation on his wife's suicide

not a great day yesterday for British politics

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

comment by lexballielegend (U22335)
posted 9 seconds ago
Its not the political views I am disgusted at, its Boris's cabal regardless of their party politics being rescued by shifting the goal post as it suits. FFS even Douglas Ross abstained from the vote as he thought it wrong, Douglas Ross ffs. Considering the majority they have the whip could only get it through by 80 votes, thats telling in itself.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I tend to be in agreement with you on the continual shifting of goals posts. That and the self interest and self protection (but that can be levied at most parties to be honest).

In an ideal world the system should never be in the hands of MP’s to investigate each other. Tribalism will always be evident. But as it is; it should at least allow a defence as well as a prosecution and that include talking to witnesses.

It should have been changed long before now and we’re it not for the personal circumstances in his case I suspect not a lot would have been said. Which doesn’t make it right either.

abstaining from a vote is just as bad as voting Aye

he was also given a sympathy bereavement pass last year so he didn't miss deadlines for extensions etc

comment by Ghod#18 (U9390)
posted 1 minute ago
this guy is paid 80k a year by us

however works for businesses paying him £110k a year

he failed to declare interest in these companies and used his office for 16 meetings and sent out letters noting business interests on taxpayer funded commons headed note paper

he then went to the low depths of blaming the investigation on his wife's suicide

not a great day yesterday for British politics
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I completely agree. In fact quite a despicable day for our politics. On all sides.

And he never hid the payments. He stood accused of excessive lobbying on their behalf. MP’s are permitted to lobby.

the guy stated after his wife's death that there absolutely no signs or reasons or changes in attitude that would've made her do that

now he's saying it was because she was worried about the trial and was asking him about it every weekend

I'm sorry if I can't get on board with that
the guys absolutely at it

comment by Ghod#18 (U9390)
posted 1 minute ago
he was also given a sympathy bereavement pass last year so he didn't miss deadlines for extensions etc
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I’m not sure anyone suggested that Ghod.

I think maybe I’m being misinterpreted. My point is simply that the process is wrong and inherently flawed in its workings is all. As to the individual, if he’s guilty then he should be punished. I’ve no qualms with that whatsoever.

Interestingly there are 8 other MP’s awaiting “judgement”. Should they also have no right to defence witnesses?

the witnesses wanted to talk about their perception of Patersons motivations

how would that change any facts about him breaking rules?