I wonder if the Westminster Barnch of B&Q has any white wash left in stock these days ?
November 8, 2006 at 11:10 AM
Anonymous
said...
No surprises then
The slimy toads will spin and lie there way out of this again
November 8, 2006 at 11:13 AM
Anonymous
said...
One wonders if any of this present administration have any concept of Ethics. They've lied their way through the last 9 years of government, that the reality has been overtaken by the propaganda and spin. These people have created a parallel universe which they inhabit and are not in touch with reality. They make Hitler in his fuhrerbunker seem positively sane and connected.
If this were a local council this would be a Standards Board issue.
No double standards at all then?
November 8, 2006 at 11:20 AM
Anonymous
said...
They make Hitler in his fuhrerbunker seem positively sane and connected. leaving aside he tricky issue of mass murder Hitler actually achieved far more positive things than Blair has, the VW beetle, the autobahns, rocketry crystal meth, all created under his direction. All blair has done is fuck up this country and help to fuck up Iraq, he is worse than Hitler. Hitler also had better taste in women and better dress sense.
November 8, 2006 at 11:26 AM
Anonymous
said...
The BBC are reporting that Millburn is being questioned as well.
November 8, 2006 at 11:28 AM
Anonymous
said...
References in the Goldsmith letter to the case being 'difficult & sensitive'. Any here finding the case difficult or feeling sensitive about it? Thought not.
November 8, 2006 at 11:29 AM
Anonymous
said...
Disgraceful. If the cash for peerages scandal doesn't do for Blair, the merest hint of whitewash will kill him stone dead. Are these guys connected with reality? Do they know how bad this all looks. A wholly unnaceptable weaselly response from Goldsmith.
It is beyond a joke. I think at this stage the only option left is to leave. What a thrilling, chilling testament to NuLab standards of governance. Perhaps they can provide the Iraqi courts with an "out" for Saddam by offering him Beckett's post. It makes as much sense as Goldsmith's decision.
November 8, 2006 at 11:34 AM
Anonymous
said...
If coppers love anything more than nicking someone its nicking someone who is wealthy and powerful. They are not all new labour arselickers like Ian Blair , and no doubt many of them would love to look through a cell door spyhole and see that twat Blair crying himself to sleep on his steel cot. I know I would.
November 8, 2006 at 11:39 AM
Anonymous
said...
Goldsmith's Office 'will appoint an independent senior counsel to review all the relevant material and advise on any prosecutions'?
Fantastic! At least a dozen get-out clauses all rolled into one sentence, e.g.:
Who appoints and what are the terms?
What are the criteria for 'selection'?
Definition of 'independent'?
Definition of 'relevant'?
Definition of 'review'?
Definition of 'advise'?
Definition of 'any prosecutions'?
And so on.
What a masterpiece of drafting. That's why he was appointed in the first place. Maybe that Booth woman from Matrix would be an ideal fit for the 'person profile'...
I wonder if a whitewash story with a constant dribble of leaks over the next couple of years would be better for the Tories than a sudden death wrist slapping for Tony and the boys in the next couple of months...the electorate have short memories
November 8, 2006 at 11:52 AM
Anonymous
said...
It really is abolutely unbelieveable. We truly do appear to be living in a parallel universe. What makes it worse is the sanctimonious **** the Tories had to put up with from Labour when in opposition Labour constantly preached righteously about standards. That said the electorate that voted for Labour only has itself to blame. The only people with sense seem to be those leaving the country or those in receipt of Labour's tax payer finded largesse.
leaving aside he tricky issue of mass murder Hitler actually achieved far more positive things than Blair has, the VW beetle, the autobahns, rocketry crystal meth, all created under his direction. All blair has done is fuck up this country and help to fuck up Iraq, he is worse than Hitler. Hitler also had better taste in women and better dress sense.
My God Peter Hitchens - a German you actually like! ;-)
November 8, 2006 at 12:24 PM
Anonymous
said...
So Goldilox wants to have the final say?
Do I hear GUILTY.
November 8, 2006 at 12:27 PM
Anonymous
said...
Sorry to be boring, but Goldsmith does actually have a point - some of the Corruption Acts state that prosecution requires the prior consent of the Law Officers. If Goldsmith recuses himself, the responsibility bounces on to the Solicitor General (currently Mike O'Brien - the chap who did for Mandelson the 2nd time around). If O'Brien recuses himself then there can't be a prosecution under that particular legislation.
I don't think the 1925 Act falls within this category, though - so the really interesting thing about Goldsmith's announcement (apart from seeing him squirm whilst he's actually right for once) is that it means that at least for the moment the 1889 and 1906 Corruption Acts are in still play - these cover offences which are much wider than merely selling honours.
"Due to the statutory roles my position entails, I should never have been given the job due to the numerous independence conflicts I have. I should resign from post, but instead, I will dig my heels in and make a mockery of the judicial system"
November 8, 2006 at 12:53 PM
Anonymous
said...
Had a look at letter.....rank toiet paper....
November 8, 2006 at 1:05 PM
Anonymous
said...
What is interesting is that the Westminster hothouse is so far removed from the rest of us that Dominic Grieve seems quite content to accept "assurances", when the rest of us don't believe a word that comes out of the gasworks.
November 8, 2006 at 1:09 PM
Anonymous
said...
So if the charges require his specific consent, or that of second lickspittle O'Brien, it's covered. If charges do not require specific Attorney General or second lickspittle consent, the public interest requires that all matters relating to those charges are considered by Goldsmith and he decides action; he argues that this last is a public and legal duty laid on him by the constitution and, no doubt, various laws and their interpretation in action over time etc. The compexity of the case can also attract his unwelcome attention. The holder of this surprisingly ancient office is the man who the American government lawyers 'brought onside' in days of discussion before the invasion of Iraq and who then gave advice, only summarised to Parliament, that met Bush and Blair's requirements. We know about 'independent counsel' (and high-ranking members of the judiciary conducting thorough inquiries into unexpected deaths). So he can forbid certain charges and call in all the papers on all others, against any person, involved in this affair. That must be how those involved are being kept in line; say nothing or we'll throw you from the lifeboat. Can it still be done? It needs a cast-iron case with irrefutable evidence; heroic levels of dermination and fearlessness in the face of the highest levels of interference and threats about the legality of every aspect of continuing with the case; or someone talks because there is a more attractive option than the lifeboat.
November 8, 2006 at 1:13 PM
Anonymous
said...
Gentlemen and heroes of the party,
We have now reached a point on the road to true socialism that requires us to put greater controls on the press, this incidentally should have done when we purged the BBC.
We should now give thought to purging our great party of these infamous greedy debauched wreckers and scoundrels.
I do not think a court trial would be necessary for the guilty, only the innocent.
The whole thing stinks to high heaven, I think Mr Grieve should not be played for a sucker on this one. Blair thumbed his nose at Parliament over an Inquiry into Iraq, and then the Court of Appeal cleared the way for two families of limited means to commence an action to have an Inquiry into Iraq, which may or may not have been illegal (depends what day you asked Goldsmith) If Blair/Goldsmith kick this into touch, what is left but a private prosecution. Blair should cut a deal and go. He and his administration are a disgrace.
There is an amazingly simple solution to the problem of Goldsmiths position.
IF charges are brought, he should resign. He's already changed his mind on the basis for going to war in Iraq so he's clearly not up to the job anyway. This would be a win-win situation for us all.
November 8, 2006 at 1:51 PM
Anonymous
said...
The Attorney General is consistent and correct. He is required by law to have superintendence of this issue. Nice as it would be for him to walk away, that would presumably leave the decision/case open to legal challenge.
November 8, 2006 at 1:56 PM
Anonymous
said...
Is this the reason there are no PMQs today? Right up until yesterday it was unclear, according to "The Daily Politics", whether Parliament would be sitting today.
November 8, 2006 at 2:12 PM
Anonymous
said...
' He is required by law to have superintendence of this issue.' If that's a correct interpretation of the law (and his interpretations of legality are infamous), then as he's deeply compromised by being a donor to the party, then a blair-appointed peer, and has longstanding personal blair-links,why doesn't he just resign ?
November 8, 2006 at 2:18 PM
Anonymous
said...
Macles said:- My God Peter Hitchens - a German you actually like! ;-)
He is welcome to make the rules up - but the rules only permit three options (1) resign because he can't rule on his own interests or (2) step resign because he can avoid it (3) be sacked by a vote in the commons for bringing the office into disrepute.
November 8, 2006 at 2:48 PM
Anonymous
said...
As posted in 'Lord Chancellor's April evidence... ' yesterday:
Prosecution of Offences Act 1985, setting up the CPS, states in relation to the DPP:
3 Functions of the Director (1) The Director shall discharge his functions under this or any other enactment under the superintendence of the Attorney General.
In the words of the CPS:"The superintendence of the Attorney General over the independent CPS, the details of whose decision-making usually cannot be discussed publicly, is an important constitutional safeguard for the public. In practice, the Director consults the Law Officers or keeps them informed about the conduct of appropriate cases; consults them in the development of aspects of CPS policy and practice; and may discuss with them the whole range of casework and organisational issues."
Bhall Pà rlamaid nan Eilean Siar, Aonghas MacNèill Abair duine gasta! = he da man!
I hope this man has a major footnote in history, I say my prayers everynight. Oh how wonderful it would be.
November 8, 2006 at 5:24 PM
Anonymous
said...
Perhaps Mr Yates should call the authorities in Brussels. Surely there must be a mechanism in Europe to remove regimes that have become criminally corrupt.
35 comments:
I wonder if the Westminster Barnch of B&Q has any white wash left in stock these days ?
No surprises then
The slimy toads will spin and lie there way out of this again
One wonders if any of this present administration have any concept of Ethics.
They've lied their way through the last 9 years of government, that the reality has been overtaken by the propaganda and spin.
These people have created a parallel universe which they inhabit and are not in touch with reality.
They make Hitler in his fuhrerbunker seem positively sane and connected.
If this were a local council this would be a Standards Board issue.
No double standards at all then?
They make Hitler in his fuhrerbunker seem positively sane and connected.
leaving aside he tricky issue of mass murder Hitler actually achieved far more positive things than Blair has, the VW beetle, the autobahns, rocketry crystal meth, all created under his direction.
All blair has done is fuck up this country and help to fuck up Iraq, he is worse than Hitler.
Hitler also had better taste in women and better dress sense.
The BBC are reporting that Millburn is being questioned as well.
References in the Goldsmith letter to the case being 'difficult & sensitive'.
Any here finding the case difficult or feeling sensitive about it?
Thought not.
Disgraceful. If the cash for peerages scandal doesn't do for Blair, the merest hint of whitewash will kill him stone dead. Are these guys connected with reality? Do they know how bad this all looks. A wholly unnaceptable weaselly response from Goldsmith.
Also in The Times today, Prezza and Gordo are due to have little chats with Yates.
I am convinced the Rozzers think they will get a case now; but Goldsmith still seems keen on kyboshing the whole thing when it gets in front of him.
What a country to live in where the Attorney General could be accused of being bent!
It is beyond a joke. I think at this stage the only option left is to leave. What a thrilling, chilling testament to NuLab standards of governance. Perhaps they can provide the Iraqi courts with an "out" for Saddam by offering him Beckett's post. It makes as much sense as Goldsmith's decision.
If coppers love anything more than nicking someone its nicking someone who is wealthy and powerful.
They are not all new labour arselickers like Ian Blair , and no doubt many of them would love to look through a cell door spyhole and see that twat Blair crying himself to sleep on his steel cot.
I know I would.
Goldsmith's Office 'will appoint an independent senior counsel to review all the relevant material and advise on any prosecutions'?
Fantastic! At least a dozen get-out clauses all rolled into one sentence, e.g.:
Who appoints and what are the terms?
What are the criteria for 'selection'?
Definition of 'independent'?
Definition of 'relevant'?
Definition of 'review'?
Definition of 'advise'?
Definition of 'any prosecutions'?
And so on.
What a masterpiece of drafting. That's why he was appointed in the first place. Maybe that Booth woman from Matrix would be an ideal fit for the 'person profile'...
Credibility? Zero.
I wonder if a whitewash story with a constant dribble of leaks over the next couple of years would be better for the Tories than a sudden death wrist slapping for Tony and the boys in the next couple of months...the electorate have short memories
It really is abolutely unbelieveable. We truly do appear to be living in a parallel universe. What makes it worse is the sanctimonious **** the Tories had to put up with from Labour when in opposition Labour constantly preached righteously about standards. That said the electorate that voted for Labour only has itself to blame. The only people with sense seem to be those leaving the country or those in receipt of Labour's tax payer finded largesse.
leaving aside he tricky issue of mass murder Hitler actually achieved far more positive things than Blair has, the VW beetle, the autobahns, rocketry crystal meth, all created under his direction.
All blair has done is fuck up this country and help to fuck up Iraq, he is worse than Hitler.
Hitler also had better taste in women and better dress sense.
My God Peter Hitchens - a German you actually like! ;-)
So Goldilox wants to have the final say?
Do I hear GUILTY.
Sorry to be boring, but Goldsmith does actually have a point - some of the Corruption Acts state that prosecution requires the prior consent of the Law Officers. If Goldsmith recuses himself, the responsibility bounces on to the Solicitor General (currently Mike O'Brien - the chap who did for Mandelson the 2nd time around). If O'Brien recuses himself then there can't be a prosecution under that particular legislation.
I don't think the 1925 Act falls within this category, though - so the really interesting thing about Goldsmith's announcement (apart from seeing him squirm whilst he's actually right for once) is that it means that at least for the moment the 1889 and 1906 Corruption Acts are in still play - these cover offences which are much wider than merely selling honours.
What he is saying in that letter is as follows
"Due to the statutory roles my position entails, I should never have been given the job due to the numerous independence conflicts I have. I should resign from post, but instead, I will dig my heels in and make a mockery of the judicial system"
Had a look at letter.....rank toiet paper....
What is interesting is that the Westminster hothouse is so far removed from the rest of us that Dominic Grieve seems quite content to accept "assurances", when the rest of us don't believe a word that comes out of the gasworks.
So if the charges require his specific consent, or that of second lickspittle O'Brien, it's covered. If charges do not require specific Attorney General or second lickspittle consent, the public interest requires that all matters relating to those charges are considered by Goldsmith and he decides action; he argues that this last is a public and legal duty laid on him by the constitution and, no doubt, various laws and their interpretation in action over time etc. The compexity of the case can also attract his unwelcome attention. The holder of this surprisingly ancient office is the man who the American government lawyers 'brought onside' in days of discussion before the invasion of Iraq and who then gave advice, only summarised to Parliament, that met Bush and Blair's requirements.
We know about 'independent counsel' (and high-ranking members of the judiciary conducting thorough inquiries into unexpected deaths).
So he can forbid certain charges and call in all the papers on all others, against any person, involved in this affair. That must be how those involved are being kept in line; say nothing or we'll throw you from the lifeboat.
Can it still be done? It needs a cast-iron case with irrefutable evidence; heroic levels of dermination and fearlessness in the face of the highest levels of interference and threats about the legality of every aspect of continuing with the case; or someone talks because there is a more attractive option than the lifeboat.
Gentlemen and heroes of the party,
We have now reached a point on the road to true socialism that requires us to put greater controls on the press, this incidentally should have done when we purged the BBC.
We should now give thought to purging our great party of these infamous greedy debauched wreckers and scoundrels.
I do not think a court trial would be necessary for the guilty, only the innocent.
The whole thing stinks to high heaven, I think Mr Grieve should not be played for a sucker on this one. Blair thumbed his nose at Parliament over an Inquiry into Iraq, and then the Court of Appeal cleared the way for two families of limited means to commence an action to have an Inquiry into Iraq, which may or may not have been illegal (depends what day you asked Goldsmith) If Blair/Goldsmith kick this into touch, what is left but a private prosecution. Blair should cut a deal and go. He and his administration are a disgrace.
There is an amazingly simple solution to the problem of Goldsmiths position.
IF charges are brought, he should resign. He's already changed his mind on the basis for going to war in Iraq so he's clearly not up to the job anyway. This would be a win-win situation for us all.
The Attorney General is consistent and correct. He is required by law to have superintendence of this issue. Nice as it would be for him to walk away, that would presumably leave the decision/case open to legal challenge.
Is this the reason there are no PMQs today? Right up until yesterday it was unclear, according to "The Daily Politics", whether Parliament would be sitting today.
' He is required by law to have superintendence of this issue.' If that's a correct interpretation of the law (and his interpretations of legality are infamous), then
as he's deeply compromised by being a donor to the party, then a blair-appointed peer, and has longstanding personal blair-links,why doesn't he just resign ?
Macles said:- My God Peter Hitchens - a German you actually like! ;-)
Austrian I think you will find \:=)
Oh bugger!
He is welcome to make the rules up - but the rules only permit three options (1) resign because he can't rule on his own interests or (2) step resign because he can avoid it (3) be sacked by a vote in the commons for bringing the office into disrepute.
As posted in 'Lord Chancellor's April evidence... ' yesterday:
Prosecution of Offences Act 1985, setting up the CPS, states in relation to the DPP:
3 Functions of the Director
(1) The Director shall discharge his functions under this or any other enactment under the superintendence of the Attorney General.
In the words of the CPS:"The superintendence of the Attorney General over the independent CPS, the details of whose decision-making usually cannot be discussed publicly, is an important constitutional safeguard for the public. In practice, the Director consults the Law Officers or keeps them informed about the conduct of appropriate cases; consults them in the development of aspects of CPS policy and practice; and may discuss with them the whole range of casework and organisational issues."
This is not ironic!
Just a quick wikipedia link for convenience "Cash for Peerages".
Bhall Pà rlamaid nan Eilean Siar, Aonghas MacNèill
Abair duine gasta! = he da man!
I hope this man has a major footnote in history, I say my prayers everynight. Oh how wonderful it would be.
Perhaps Mr Yates should call the authorities in Brussels.
Surely there must be a mechanism in Europe to remove regimes that have become criminally corrupt.