Hang on: We're paying for an MP to have his MOAT CLEANED ?

[frogwoman]

Then we're going to have to disagree because none of this is close to what I believe is the reality.



Fwiw, my general point is to be a cautious because one organisation holds an awful lot of power at the moment, is manipulating the entire national agenda and it's as well to bear that in mind. I'm not saying they shouldn't be doing it, just that these are exceptional circs.

what organisation?

 

[London_Calling]

The Barclay brothers/The Telegraph.

 

[agricola]

Then we're going to have to disagree because none of this is close to what I believe is the reality.

Fwiw, my general point is to be a cautious because one organisation holds an awful lot of power at the moment, is manipulating the entire national agenda and it's as well to bear that in mind. I'm not saying they should or shouldn't be doing it, just that these are exceptional circs.

Then we will have to disagree - IMHO people are not being manipulated here because of the media, they are being righfully angry because of a situation that is outrageous. Its not as if the Telegraph is going "These MPs are a disgrace, lets punish them by giving Sark to the Barclay Brothers".

 

[butchersapron]

The Barclay brothers/The Telegraph.

The tory teeters at the brink - eeek!

Over, onwards, upwards, (kill people, stabilise) onwards!

 

[London_Calling]

Why three days on NL and one on the Tories?

Why the past it Tory Grandees and younger NL ?

Has, for example, the favoured William Hague done no wrong?


The emphasis and degree is entirely at the whim of the Telegraph.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I'll willingly donate money to the Tories for swimming pools ...as long as they follow the example of Michael Barrymore

What, and allegedly allow people to be drugged and arse-raped to death in their pools?

 

[DotCommunist]

What, and allow people to be drugged an arse-raped to death in their pools?

I already did that joke with slightly less added libel

 

[London_Calling]

To continue with my theme about the influence of the Telegraph, I see they've gone after one of the old suspects in Claire Short - you have to think there are far more Tories to unearth who have done far worse, especially as the paper only had one day on the Tories.

 

[London_Calling]

So:

4 days on NL
1 on Sinn Fein
1 on the Tories
1 on LibDems


. . and, would you believe it, NL are at an historic low in the polls crows the Telegraph.

A YouGov survey for The Sun newspaper, puts Labour on just 22 per cent, with the Conservatives on 41 per cent and the Lib Dems a close third with 19 per cent.

If the result were repeated at a general election, Tory leader David Cameron would be returned to Downing Street with a majority of 152.

Just as well so few Tories have been on the take then, because more than one day of moats and manure would have hit them hard as well.

The Telegraph have bought the election, haven't they?

 

[danny la rouge]

To continue with my theme about the influence of the Telegraph, I see they've gone after one of the old suspects in Claire Short - you have to think there are far more Tories to unearth who have done far worse, especially as the paper only had one day on the Tories.

You seem a bit hung up on this. I think what you're missing is this: you're assuming there is a difference between Labour and Tory; there isn't, they are just two factions of the ruling elite. There only practical difference is one is the party of government, and the other is the subs' bench. The Telegraph is a traditional supporter of the current subs' bench. However, even they have had to admit that they're all up to their necks in this.

You want "balance"? Well, Labour is the party of government. 12 years in power prior to this news breaking.

What we're seeing, though, is what happens when you allow power structures to ossify. Yes, we fully expect the moat and chandelier brigade to rob us blind, but look at Michael Martin; he isn't from that background, but, by Louis XIV, has he joined it with alacrity. That's what happens. That's what happened to the Labour party over its history; it may have been about working class representation in parliament to begin with, but very soon it became about parliament's representation to the working class. Now it's just another ruling elite faction.

Which paper would you prefer this story to come from? The Guardian? What difference would that make?

 

[London_Calling]

You seem a bit hung up on this. I think what you're missing is this: you're assuming there is a difference between Labour and Tory; there isn't, they are just two factions of the ruling elite. There only practical difference is one is the party of government, and the other is the subs' bench. The Telegraph is a traditional supporter of the current subs' bench. However, even they have had to admit that they're all up to their necks in this.

You want "balance"? Well, Labour is the party of government. 12 years in power prior to this news breaking.

What we're seeing, though, is what happens when you allow power structures to ossify. Yes, we fully expect the moat and chandelier brigade to rob us blind, but look at Michael Martin; he isn't from that background, but, by Louis XIV, has he joined it with alacrity. That's what happens. That's what happened to the Labour party over its history; it may have been about working class representation in parliament to begin with, but very soon it became about parliament's representation to the working class. Now it's just another ruling elite faction.

Which paper would you prefer this story to come from? The Guardian? What difference would that make?

Yep, yep, yep, I'm frightening "hung up" on the difference between pepsi and coke as well. I’m so dizzy.

My point is manipulation; the Telegraph clearly believe there is a difference because they've manipulated the public into abandoning NL - according to today’s YouGov poll - and not the Etonian’s. When we can reasonably assume the Etonian’s have been at it at least as much as NL and very likely more so: Question: Why do that if it didn't matter?

Possibly because the Telegraph sees things with a little more nuance than the one “ruling elite” argument or the coke/pepsi analogy.

Frankly, I’m amazed that so many on here are entirely comfortable with the Daily fucking Telegraph telling the public which specific politicians they should be annoyed at of which political party and for how long. This is outrageous political manipulation by a strongly vested interest and the public should be deeply concerned – as the new YouGov poll makes very clear.

 

[butchersapron]

So:

4 days on NL
1 on Sinn Fein
1 on the Tories
1 on LibDems


. . and, would you believe it, NL are at an historic low in the polls crows the Telegraph.

Because Labour were doing so well in the polls before these revelations weren't they? You also miss that the crucial fact that tories support dropped in almost the exact same proportion as labours (4/5%)- which leads us to the point that you're missing here. The anger is across the board, it's at all MPs. No sitting MP is going to be safe from fierce scrutiny one the full figures are released.

Frankly, those being manipulated are those who seem to have been swayed by labour's recent bleating that the Telegraph have an agenda and view the ongoing anger as simply coming from people happy to be directed here and there by the Telegraph - it's an approach that's much in common with this piss taking MPs view of the public. As idiots, as useful idiots.

And yes, the Telegraph has an agenda -so what? Labour has an agenda, i've got an agenda. Are papers not allowed agendas now? For politicans, and labour politicians in particular, to be crying about a paper having an agenda when they themselves have systematically and cyncially reduced public politics in this country to managing and courting those media agendas over the last 15 years is a bit of sick joke.

 

[tbaldwin]

But my reaction is a product of being manipulated by the Telegraph; they don't just have the party leaders jumping when they want, MP's on puppet strings, they also control the public’s rage-ometer.

We publish this > this politician say that > the public will react like this - all day, every day. The paper is deciding specifically who we should be angry at, exactly why and also, by its rate of revelations, how much we should be angry and for how long.

All very Sandie Shaw. Uncomfortable after a week.

Agree 100%. Yes there is a news story of sorts here. But who really is suprised that MPs have been making the most out of a totally lax expenses system?
Any of the people on here who have been saying for ages that they think all the political parties are crooked? Are they suprised now? The general population who in poll after poll have said they have little trust for MPs? Are they suprised?
The journalists who earn far more and fiddle far more on their expenses are they suprised?

 

[kyser_soze]

Leaving aside that yougov polls have been shown to deliver results biased toward the Tories, you think the Telegraph has bought an election? Do you seriously think that in 12 months time when there actually is an election that any of this bollocks will matter? None of the main parties has anything to gain by bringing this up again, and in 12 months it'll be a non-issue.

 

[Streathamite]

The journalists who earn far more and fiddle far more on their expenses are they suprised?

for the record; only a tiny handful of 'star' journalists earn 'far more' than MPs, and NONE of that comes out of our taxes

 

[tbaldwin]

for the record; only a tiny handful of 'star' journalists earn 'far more' than MPs, and NONE of that comes out of our taxes

That has to be bollocks.
A fgew days ago i think it was George Foulkes MP when being quizzed by some BBC journalist nobody has ever heard of asked how she earnt.....£90,000.......For somebody who could never be described as a Star journalist.

 

[London_Calling]

Leaving aside that yougov polls have been shown to deliver results biased toward the Tories, you think the Telegraph has bought an election? Do you seriously think that in 12 months time when there actually is an election that any of this bollocks will matter? None of the main parties has anything to gain by bringing this up again, and in 12 months it'll be a non-issue.

Today the Telegraph are smearing Claire Short after she paid back an oversight 3 years ago - three years ago.

After just one day of moats and manure you don't think the Tories might have something slightly more topical and substantial in their closet than that?

Fwiw, I think the Telegraph has cost NL election points in double figures.

 

[treelover]

Shahid Malik resigns as Justice Minister, anyone care to update his wikipedia page?

 

[treelover]

I'm beginning to agree with LC, the Telegraph exposures/campaign is finely calibrated to damage NL the most.

 

[kyser_soze]

Today the Telegraph are smearing Claire Short after she paid back an oversight 3 years ago - three years ago.

After just one day of moats and manure you don't think the Tories might have something slightly more topical and substantial in their closet than that?

Fwiw, I think the Telegraph has cost NL election points in double figures.

So? They're a tory paper, of course they're going to have a go - plus Short is an old bete noir for a paper like the Telegraph.

No one will give a shit about this issue in 12 months, and none of the parties will want it bought up.

 

[gosub]

 

[Streathamite]

That has to be bollocks.
A fgew days ago i think it was George Foulkes MP when being quizzed by some BBC journalist nobody has ever heard of asked how she earnt.....£90,000.......For somebody who could never be described as a Star journalist.

if her mug's regularly on TV, she IS in that category, as a proportion of the total number of journoes in this country.e2a: and you're STILL missing the point. they're not paid out of our taxes!

 

[weltweit]

Apparently Douglas Hogg has said that he never claimed to have his MOAT cleaned, it was just that something he did claim for was on the same invoice so there is an invoice in the fees office which includes moat cleaning but he did not claim for moat cleaning.

Just thought you should know. Can you change the title of the thread now?

 

[Zachor]

Shahid Malik resigns as Justice Minister, anyone care to update his wikipedia page?

Good.

 

[frogwoman]

 

[gosub]

Apparently Douglas Hogg has said that he never claimed to have his MOAT cleaned, it was just that something he did claim for was on the same invoice so there is an invoice in the fees office which includes moat cleaning but he did not claim for moat cleaning.

Just thought you should know. Can you change the title of the thread now?

What was the something then? coz he's just paid back two grand that he didn't recieve for having his moat cleaned

 

[treelover]

has anyone done a 'were getting closer' downloadable poster yet?

 

[London_Calling]

It's trousered o'clock at The Commons . . .


The Etonians have had as much attention from the Telegraph as Sinn Fein, FFS.

And the Tory clown who resigned from his party post yesterday (he and his wife have had away up to £250,000) put his hands up because of the new Tory internal audit, nothing to do with the Telegraph campaign.

Yet the Telegraph continue to dress themselves in this bogus ‘Public Interest’ superhero cloak. It's a wrong 'un.

 

[Streathamite]

I don't doubt the toygraph did it to further an agenda - just about EVERY political story EVERY paper runs is done to further an agenda - but it's still excellent that they did. It's been overwhelmingly to the public good that this has got out, and there was no way they could control the story after the beginning (it's viral, and has run everywhere), so the net effect has not been what they wanted.
Plus, c.80-90% of their readers are staunch tories, so they've gained little other than shifted afew more copies (which wasd also their aim, of course).

 

[danny la rouge]

Frankly, I’m amazed that so many on here are entirely comfortable with the Daily fucking Telegraph telling the public which specific politicians they should be annoyed at of which political party and for how long.

I think you'll find that most people (here and the public in general) are angry with all of them.

I'd be suspicious of analysis of polls which claims this scandal has an effect favouring any major party. Politicians were already pretty low on the trust stakes (with journalists and estate agents), and I'm almost certain all this does is confirm most people's already pretty firm conceptions. Some might be sickened out of voting, and some minor parties might gain a few votes, but I doubt very much whether people are abandoning Labour for the Tories because of this.