NO CHARGES IN CASH FOR HONOURS

lastword Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 10:25:34 PM GMT Print-friendly version Facebook

The BBC is reporting that no charges will be brought in the 'Cash for Honours' investigation.



This investigation was a total disgrace.  I hope Ruth Turner and Lord Levy can now get on with rebuilding their lives and the whole Labour party gets behind two people who have given our party years of loyal and brilliant service.  They can rebuild their lives without a stain on their characters.  Sir Ian Blair should order an emergency internal enquiry into the Met's predujiced, politically motivated and malicious investigation.  A total disgrace.

 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6907594.stm



tags: , , (all tags)

Display: Sort:
NO CHARGES IN CASH FOR HONOURS | 16 comments (16 topical)

Re: NO CHARGES IN CASH FOR HONOURS (#1)

by JM on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 10:28:17 PM GMT

Ha! Came here to post this exact story with this exact headline. Beaten by a minute!

Happy that people can get on with their lives.

I'm sure we'll have to endure people telling us it's a 'whitewash' - the rage has already started over at Guido's blog. 


Re: NO CHARGES IN CASH FOR HONOURS (#2)

by lastword on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 10:30:47 PM GMT

Guido is an evil bastard.  No one should have had to have gone through the hell Ruth Turner has.  Tony Blair can be proud of standing by her when everyone else wanted to throw mud.  That's true leadership and he showed it.


[ Parent ]

Re: NO CHARGES IN CASH FOR HONOURS (#11)

by SocialistAC on Fri Jul 20, 2007 at 10:13:38 PM GMT

An ultra-right Toff he is, and enemy of every one on this planet who works for a living.


[ Parent ]

Re: NO CHARGES IN CASH FOR HONOURS (#3)

by NorthernMonkey on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 10:37:12 PM GMT

Thank goodness for that.


Still, the best way to make sure this never happens again is the make sure everyone in the upper house of Parliament is elected and not appointed. Hopefully Brown will learn from this.


Re: NO CHARGES IN CASH FOR HONOURS (#5)

by MM on Fri Jul 20, 2007 at 01:09:01 AM GMT

I think Jack Straw made it much clear that Lords reform would be put off until after the next election, clearly Brown feels he needs a proper mandate to push it through.  I car'nt see any real changes in party funding happening either as the parties are way apart.


It's rather ironic that messers Brown/Cameron voted for a elected House of Lords yet use the 2nd Chamber to appoint Lords so they can have a 'Government of all the talents'.


Reform delayed for a few more years yet.  Or it will probably be put out to 'consultation', I swear the death of New Labour will be 'consultations' and 'reviews'.


[ Parent ]

Re: NO CHARGES IN CASH FOR HONOURS (#7)

by NorthernMonkey on Fri Jul 20, 2007 at 03:30:03 AM GMT

Yes, I agree - I wish we'd just get on with it.

However, given tonight's results and the recent polls we may well see a general election come early next year, so Lords reform may come sooner than we think.


[ Parent ]

Re: NO CHARGES IN CASH FOR HONOURS (#4)

by bigpapi on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 10:51:53 PM GMT

I hope that one of Levy, Turner or Sir Christopher Evans make a formal complaint to the IPCC about Assistant Commissioner Yates who has been on a politically-motivated fishing expedition from the start.


Re: NO CHARGES IN CASH FOR HONOURS (#9)

by swatantra on Fri Jul 20, 2007 at 09:28:04 AM GMT

I hope none of them do. We don't want this hanging around us with another on going enquiry into the conduct of the Police and the CPS at great expense. distracting us from more important matters. Let it drop.
Levy should be thanking his lucky stars that no charges were laid and leave it at that. The whole business of raising funds for political parties is very murky and we need a more transparent system, agreed by all parties.


[ Parent ]

Re: NO CHARGES IN CASH FOR HONOURS (#10)

by Peter Kenyon on Fri Jul 20, 2007 at 11:46:29 AM GMT

Hear, hear. The answer lies in encouraging political party membership and small donations as suggested by the Electoral Commission in its report on the funding of political parties 2004. Plus strict limits on both national and local election spending.


[ Parent ]

Re: NO CHARGES IN CASH FOR HONOURS (#12)

by rwendland on Sat Jul 21, 2007 at 11:37:05 AM GMT

"we need a more transparent system": I am puzzled how our attempt as recently as 2000 to do so with the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act failed so badly by leaving the undisclosed rolled-up-interest loan from a private-individual, yet still a "commercial terms loan", loophole in it? Should we trust that the next attempt will leave no loopholes?

I think we need to restrict spending, in large part by banning paid advertising by politcal parties - though that has the loophole that NGOs could do the proxy-advertising. Bah.


[ Parent ]

Re: NO CHARGES IN CASH FOR HONOURS (#6)

by MM on Fri Jul 20, 2007 at 01:14:28 AM GMT

Totally concur with all the comments so far, the conduct of the Police inquiry has been nothing short of a disgrace.


I doubt we will see a investigation into the Police's conduct in terms of how much information was leaked into the public domain about the inquiry.


Re: NO CHARGES IN CASH FOR HONOURS (#8)

by Peter Kenyon on Fri Jul 20, 2007 at 09:11:29 AM GMT

I have no comment to make about the allegations, police inquiry, conclusions of the Crown Prosecution Service or the endless speculation that has surrounded this affair.

The central issue is how we pay for our politics.

The Political Parties, Elections and Referendum Act 2000 failed to deal with the issue of election campaign spending. It is time to deal with it now in this Parliament. It should be capped very tightly.


[ Parent ]

Guido and m'learned friends (#13)

by rwendland on Sun Jul 22, 2007 at 12:25:30 PM GMT

Guido and friends are looking into the possibility of a private prosecution, so this may not be entirely put to bed yet.

They're looking at the "commercial terms" aspect under the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act, which always struck me as perhaps the weakest point, and the CPS seem to acknowledge that: "we cannot exclude the possibility that any loans made ... can properly be characterised as commercial", which seems to amount to they probably (ie. the inverse of "possibility") were non-commercial.  It's a lesser charge that does not need evidence of a conspiracy, it seems mainly about a jury's opinion about what exactly "any money lent to the party otherwise than on commercial terms" means.


Re: Guido and m'learned friends (#14)

by swatantra on Sun Jul 22, 2007 at 06:03:58 PM GMT

Perhaps they should bear in mind that if they foolishly decide to go ahead, they''ll scupper the Tories as well.
Dave is not going to be pleased in the slightest.


[ Parent ]

Re: Guido and m'learned friends (#15)

by lastword on Sun Jul 22, 2007 at 10:13:25 PM GMT

This guy's such an idiot!   I hope he goes ahead and  makes yet another prat of himself!


[ Parent ]

Re: NO CHARGES IN CASH FOR HONOURS (#16)

by RM on Tue Jul 31, 2007 at 09:30:35 PM GMT

So, all you have to do, as a newspaper or a political party, is accuse someone of corruption, and then:

-  Their lives are disrupted for months, if not years;

-  If evidence is found, they are imprisoned;

-  If evidence is not found, it´s a "whitewash" and your reputation is stained forever.


Nice.  I´m so pleased to live in a democracy.




NO CHARGES IN CASH FOR HONOURS | 16 comments (16 topical)