The banker loving, baby-eating Tory party thread (regenerated)

[MakemineVanilla]

On 22/09/2024 at 10:35, ml1dch said:

 

Although, I had to put my glasses on, so as not to read that pledge incorrectly.

Surely that wording can't be be accidental?

Edited 3 hours ago by MakemineVanilla

[sidcow]

We should get these guys back.  They never used to take back handers and freebies.  

[Genie]

8 minutes ago, sidcow said:

We should get these guys back.  They never used to take back handers and freebies.  

Plus they weren’t afraid to tell us how great everything was.

[bickster]

3 minutes ago, Genie said:

Plus they weren’t afraid to tell us how great everything was.

To be fair to the working class hero, she's been saying that gig tickets are all fine  

[bickster]

This goes across the discussion in the Labour topic but it is about the Tories and specifically the leadership election.

The 4 candidates that have reached this stage of the contest, each has to pay £50K to CCHQ

When the field is down to 2, the remaining 2 candidates have to each pay £150k to CCHQ

Win or lose, regardless of any other expenses with regards to campaigning, the first two in the race will have each paid £200k to CCHQ where the ultimate prize for the next 4 years+ is to lead the party and receive A £50K Salary Bump on top of normal MPs wages but given that 3 of the candidates are Shadow ministers, its even less

That there is the very definition of a political system set to attract grifters and normalise the giving of donations and gifts

Just remember the person coming second has paid £200k to gain very little if anything

 

[Davkaus]

29 minutes ago, bickster said:

This goes across the discussion in the Labour topic but it is about the Tories and specifically the leadership election.

The 4 candidates that have reached this stage of the contest, each has to pay £50K to CCHQ

When the field is down to 2, the remaining 2 candidates have to each pay £150k to CCHQ

 

A slight distinction here, they're expected to have raised these amounts in order to qualify rather than pay it out of their own pocket - indeed I suspect this would be frowned upon if not explicitly banned, as the idea is presumably to ensure that they've got someone who can shake money out of the donors.

The recent gift of clothes and Taylor Swift tickets does look somewhat small-fry compared to, for example, Charles Keymer donating £40,000 to Kemi Badenoch's campaign. Or Tom Tugenhat's £41,000 from a company incorporated less than a year ago that appears to have no online presence whatsoever, but which is run by a former tory Spad.

[bickster]

1 minute ago, Davkaus said:

A slight distinction here, they're expected to have raised these amounts in order to qualify rather than pay it out of their own pocket - indeed I suspect this would be frowned upon if not explicitly banned, as the idea is presumably to ensure that they've got someone who can shake money out of the donors.

The recent gift of clothes and Taylor Swift tickets does look somewhat small-fry compared to, for example, Charles Keymer donating £40,000 to Kemi Badenoch's campaign. Or Tom Tugenhat's £41,000 from a company incorporated less than a year ago that appears to have no online presence whatsoever, but which is run by a former tory Spad.

Wait until you find out about the £75k Jenrick got from a company registered in the British Virgin Islands that absolutely no one knows who owns it and has never seemingly done any business

[bickster]

Quote

The Conservative leadership contender Robert Jenrick has accepted £75,000 in donations from an indebted company, which received an undisclosed lump sum from an untraceable BVI-listed entity.

The Spott Fitness has no employees, has never made a profit, and its most recent accounts show it owes £332,000, raising questions about the ultimate source of the funds.

In February this year the company accepted a loan from Centrovalli, a firm based in Tortola in the British Virgin Islands. The amount borrowed has not been declared, but typically these corporate loans are made against assets. In this case, it is unclear what assets the company has.

Tortoise

But yeah, Taylor Swift Tickets from the FA/PL and a few items of clothing are where the focus is at.

[Davkaus]

 

2 minutes ago, bickster said:

Wait until you find out about the £75k Jenrick got from a company registered in the British Virgin Islands that absolutely no one knows who owns it and has never seemingly done any business

I was just getting to that one. The Spott Fitness. Sounds like he's just got some support from the local gym rather than a mysterious company with no public presence whatsoever.  I can't see where the BVI links come from though

But it's all declared, above board, and all rules were followed.

Life is so much more convenient when the process for bribery is fully codified within parliamentary rules.

[Davkaus]

In fairness to The Spott Fitness, you'd struggle to get much done in the way of business with constraints like this: "The average number of employees during the year was NIL"

 

[chrisp65]

4 minutes ago, bickster said:

Tortoise

But yeah, Taylor Swift Tickets from the FA/PL and a few items of clothing are where the focus is at.

 

I completely get the point, the numbers involved and the types of things going on are a different quite minuscule scale over the last few weeks, to what we saw over a decade from the tories, seemingly rocket boosted from covid onward.

But the tories as a political force have been punished, and hopefully individuals are being pursued for criminality.

The focus needs to be on a government that has a very powerful majority that got that majority at least in part because people wanted change. They campaigned on that change. What some are now learning, is that change includes accepting freebies worth more than some people earn in a year, and these freebies come in droves. £20,000 of free accommodation to allow GCSE revision in peace and quiet? Clothes for the wife? A trip here, a holiday let there, a couple of harmless tickets.

If all this is legit, innocent, constructive and for our benefit, then the party in power for the next 5 years with a massive majority have the perfect opportunity to educate the electorate on why such gifts are acceptable. They can spell it out, they have the time, the resources, the goodwill.

If however, what they do is rule things out as and when they get uncovered (no more accepting designer clothes for the spouse), that has a bad look and a bad smell. 

A perfect opportunity, right here and now, to fix something with public support, or educate the voters. Even if that is simply spelling out the difference between a ticket to the arsenal, and £200 million of fake ppe.

[bickster]

4 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

 

I completely get the point, the numbers involved and the types of things going on are a different quite minuscule scale over the last few weeks, to what we saw over a decade from the tories, seemingly rocket boosted from covid onward.

But the tories as a political force have been punished, and hopefully individuals are being pursued for criminality.

The focus needs to be on a government that has a very powerful majority that got that majority at least in part because people wanted change. They campaigned on that change. What some are now learning, is that change includes accepting freebies worth more than some people earn in a year, and these freebies come in droves. £20,000 of free accommodation to allow GCSE revision in peace and quiet? Clothes for the wife? A trip here, a holiday let there, a couple of harmless tickets.

If all this is legit, innocent, constructive and for our benefit, then the party in power for the next 5 years with a massive majority have the perfect opportunity to educate the electorate on why such gifts are acceptable. They can spell it out, they have the time, the resources, the goodwill.

If however, what they do is rule things out as and when they get uncovered (no more accepting designer clothes for the spouse), that has a bad look and a bad smell. 

A perfect opportunity, right here and now, to fix something with public support, or educate the voters. Even if that is simply spelling out the difference between a ticket to the arsenal, and £200 million of fake ppe.

That's not the point though. The point is that the entire system is set up this way. It needs changing... drastically. It's hard coded into British politics, it is the system.

It shouldn't be

But as ever turkeys and the imaginary deity's non-Birthday