Main Edition
US
FR
Mad or bad? Credit: Stefan Rousseau/Pool/AFP/Getty
Britain hates its MPs and loves a moral crusade; outrage at their behaviour is a feature of political life. Yet while the hue and cry is often well-directed, popular ire tends to obscure the reality: that few of our politicians are truly bent — far more of them are just bad.
This distortion dates back to 2009 and the expenses scandal, when the perception of the political class shifted overnight. No longer were MPs insincere spinners who occasionally slipped into outright dishonesty, but a parasitic body only out for themselves. The presumption became that they were venal until proved otherwise. But the scandal itself swiftly became a melange of accusations which obscured the reality of the situation.
Lines were blurred between those who made generous claims within both the spirit and letter of the law, those who ruthlessly exploited every loophole, and those who committed wholescale fraud. MPs such as Denis MacShane, jailed for falsifying documents, were spoken of in the same breath as those who had put in entirely lawful applications for fripperies that fell within the rules. It’s unclear whether the most infamous claim of the period, Sir Peter Viggers’s duck house, was even ever paid out.
In the wake of the scandal, MPs’ expenses became the go-to for cheap, anti-political point scoring. Social media accounts regularly pop up criticising MPs for their claims without digging into the detail. Large headline figures are quoted, without recognising this usually includes the MP’s parliamentary staff and constituency offices. Compared with the previous system, parliamentarians find it very hard to pack their pay cheque from official coffers.
At the same time, a second front has opened up against MPs — around second jobs, donations and lobbying. This was renewed this week with the Westminster Accounts, a visually spectacular representation of the funding MPs have received, both for their work for outside interests and as donations to their campaigns and offices. There were headline-catching figures and a strong implication that either MPs were lining their pockets when they should have been tending to the public, or were selling their influence to the highest bidder — or both.
Behind the figures, however, the reality of the scandal seems pretty banal. First, the scale of the money involved was pretty small. The reports confirmed that around £180 million had been paid to MPs and their campaigns in the lifecycle of this parliament. If this is democracy for sale, it is going pretty cheaply. In the US midterms, political funding hit $16.7 billion for federal races alone, with about half of that again spent on local races. Indeed, buying our entire legislature seems to be cheaper than assembling a Premier League-winning side.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeThere’s a lot of truth in what the author says here. Many politicians are not venal, or entirely self-interested, or highly corrupt. A good number are genuinely publicly minded, and want to do the best they can for their constituents and country. However, the vast majority also have very large, fragile egos, and an ambition for power that makes them prioritise loyalty (to their parties, and to factions within their parties, and to their broader political class) over truth and justice. If you wanted to design a political system designed to reinforce groupthink, and which is susceptible to manipulation by well-funded, wel-organised, commercial and external political interests, you’d be hard pressed to come up with a better one than what we have now.
This article aptly demonstrates this in action. John Oxley – a loyal member of the broader political class – suggests that Andrew Brigden has had his whip suspended for exhibiting “chaotic” behaviour in his “strange embrace of Covid vaccination conspiracy theories”. Brigden, who has a scientific background, has taken the time and effort to take a detailed look into the effects of the pharmaceutical interventions and, taking into account anecdotal evidence from his work as a constituency MP, has now come to the reasonable conclusion that they have done more harm than good. He’s found the humility and courage to change his mind, in public. He’s trying to raise the alarm, in order to prevent more harm being done to his constituents and more widely. As far as I can see, whether or not his analysis entirely right, he is doing his job and acting in a publicly-spirited way even if his recent choice of language was ill-advised. So give the guy a break. He clearly knows and understands some important things than most other MPs don’t, but instead of trying to learn from or debate him on the substance of the issue, with open minds in a shared pursuit of a better understanding of the truth, his own party and the broader political class cast him out, denigrate, or just simply ignore him.
Why? Not because of any corruption – they could forgive that – but because he is disloyal. His “chaos” threatens the cosy illusion of order that they inhabit, intellectually and politically. Brigden isn’t the only one with a queue of pharma-harmed constituents waiting to knock on their constituency surgery door. The Westminster bubble isn’t impenetrable. Most MPs know – even if they dare not speak it, even in private – that something is very, very wrong indeed. Most of them are not stupid, far from it. But they also know that a toxic mixture of their egoism, fear, ambition, party loyalty, right-mindedness, laziness, credulity and (in some cases) personal financial interest allowed pharma to lead them down the garden path, in to the house, and all the way up to the bedroom. It now has them by their dangly bits, and it is not letting go.
I should have read your comment before I posted mine 🙂 glad I’m not the only one that picked up on bridgen.
It is corruption to take money directly or indirectly (party funding or election financing including for positions within the party) and then silence criticism of policies that transferred huge sums of taxpayer money to Big Pharma and Big Tech. The situation may not be as bad as in the US and Canada. The politicians, however, enforced lockdowns and using the products of Big Tech tried to enforce compulsory injection of undertested vaccines in order to maximise the payments to Big Pharma.
Note that that that the writer is a corporate strategist: hence the behaviour you criticise is normal for him, it is therefore not in the article…. The corporate sector is very good at producing the content as in the article because it hides nicely the real corruption they are engaging in : clever lobbying making it look that all the industries only have our health in the back of their minds when they bring out their products and invest in ‘health’. Financial interests do not play any role in their investment decisions… just the wellbeing of people….
Note that that that the writer is a corporate strategist: hence the behaviour you criticise is normal for him, it is therefore not in the article…. The corporate sector is very good at producing the content as in the article because it hides nicely the real corruption they are engaging in : clever lobbying making it look that all the industries only have our health in the back of their minds when they bring out their products and invest in ‘health’. Financial interests do not play any role in their investment decisions… just the wellbeing of people….
“Brigden, who has a scientific background…”
So he was always doomed.
It wasn’t his analysis that got him ‘whipped’ but his exploiting an opportunity to compare it to the Holocaust.
There is no comparison – having just watched 6 hours of yet another documentary detailing the murderous intent behind the Holocaust.
As I said I think his words were ill-advised. But I would implore you to apply the principle of charity: do you really think he intended to comment, or cast any doubt on, the severity of the unique evil of the Holocaust; or do you think his intent was to draw attention to – in his view – an extremely serious problem that he believes could be harming millions of people?
If you concede it’s the latter, then consider why he might say what he did. He could be badly mistaken and misled by people out to – for reasons best known to themselves – spread malicious lies about pharma harms, or could even actually be one of them. He could be out of his mind. He might be some kind of puppet controlled, knowingly or not, by pharma or whoever, whose purpose for him is to provide a example of what happens to anyone of any public prominence who might dare to summon the courage to question the Vaccine Narrative. He could be just seeking attention, or perhaps trying to deflect attention from his other alleged misdemeanours. Or maybe he’s got some interesting and valid points to make even if he might not be right about everything (who is?) and so rather than punishing him it might be worth listening to what he has to say and he is acting, at least in part, out of conscientiousness.
I would urge you to listen to him speaking in his own words – he’s done a number of podcasts – before making a judgment on which of those (or other) things you believe is more likely to be true.
Did he or did he merely say that it was the worst crime since the holocaust? Big difference.
Exactly – and the fact that he was attacked for that, entirely spuriously, and not for what he has been saying about the vaccines, says a lot.
Exactly – and the fact that he was attacked for that, entirely spuriously, and not for what he has been saying about the vaccines, says a lot.
As I said I think his words were ill-advised. But I would implore you to apply the principle of charity: do you really think he intended to comment, or cast any doubt on, the severity of the unique evil of the Holocaust; or do you think his intent was to draw attention to – in his view – an extremely serious problem that he believes could be harming millions of people?
If you concede it’s the latter, then consider why he might say what he did. He could be badly mistaken and misled by people out to – for reasons best known to themselves – spread malicious lies about pharma harms, or could even actually be one of them. He could be out of his mind. He might be some kind of puppet controlled, knowingly or not, by pharma or whoever, whose purpose for him is to provide a example of what happens to anyone of any public prominence who might dare to summon the courage to question the Vaccine Narrative. He could be just seeking attention, or perhaps trying to deflect attention from his other alleged misdemeanours. Or maybe he’s got some interesting and valid points to make even if he might not be right about everything (who is?) and so rather than punishing him it might be worth listening to what he has to say and he is acting, at least in part, out of conscientiousness.
I would urge you to listen to him speaking in his own words – he’s done a number of podcasts – before making a judgment on which of those (or other) things you believe is more likely to be true.
Did he or did he merely say that it was the worst crime since the holocaust? Big difference.
Yes, I saw Bridgen address Parliament over the growing health concerns of Mrna vaccines. I also saw one other Conservative and similar on the Labour side. That is the outrage, politicians who have no care or concern for their constituents. That is the conspiracy theory…. lining the pockets of these American corporate Pharmas who didn’t even test their latest vaccines. Sunak not Bridgen should made to account for this appalling behaviour.
Gunna stick this in up here, Dr John Campbell on excess deaths in all age groups. Released a couple of days ago.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=B3_bqcvDxvI
Gunna stick this in up here, Dr John Campbell on excess deaths in all age groups. Released a couple of days ago.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=B3_bqcvDxvI
Westminster is completely corrupt.
When the expenses scandal was on, I FOI requested the security at Westminster if you could get in without a pass or temporary pass being recorded. Answer, no, do you think we are stupid?
Next FOI, how many sitting days [days for which you can claim expenses] has each peer used their pass?
Answer one – here are their expenses
Answer two – peers can get in without their passes or temporary passes being recorded via the peers entrance.
Copy in the head of security and Michael Pownall. He was Clerk of the Parliaments, the Lord’s speaker, and one of his responsibility is paying expenses. He’s also one of two people the other being the speaker who can sign off state secrecy certificates.
I get a state secrecy certificate back.
The simple reason they worked out what I was going to do. Compare expenses against attendance, and they knew most were corrupt.
I should have read your comment before I posted mine 🙂 glad I’m not the only one that picked up on bridgen.
It is corruption to take money directly or indirectly (party funding or election financing including for positions within the party) and then silence criticism of policies that transferred huge sums of taxpayer money to Big Pharma and Big Tech. The situation may not be as bad as in the US and Canada. The politicians, however, enforced lockdowns and using the products of Big Tech tried to enforce compulsory injection of undertested vaccines in order to maximise the payments to Big Pharma.
“Brigden, who has a scientific background…”
So he was always doomed.
It wasn’t his analysis that got him ‘whipped’ but his exploiting an opportunity to compare it to the Holocaust.
There is no comparison – having just watched 6 hours of yet another documentary detailing the murderous intent behind the Holocaust.
Yes, I saw Bridgen address Parliament over the growing health concerns of Mrna vaccines. I also saw one other Conservative and similar on the Labour side. That is the outrage, politicians who have no care or concern for their constituents. That is the conspiracy theory…. lining the pockets of these American corporate Pharmas who didn’t even test their latest vaccines. Sunak not Bridgen should made to account for this appalling behaviour.
Westminster is completely corrupt.
When the expenses scandal was on, I FOI requested the security at Westminster if you could get in without a pass or temporary pass being recorded. Answer, no, do you think we are stupid?
Next FOI, how many sitting days [days for which you can claim expenses] has each peer used their pass?
Answer one – here are their expenses
Answer two – peers can get in without their passes or temporary passes being recorded via the peers entrance.
Copy in the head of security and Michael Pownall. He was Clerk of the Parliaments, the Lord’s speaker, and one of his responsibility is paying expenses. He’s also one of two people the other being the speaker who can sign off state secrecy certificates.
I get a state secrecy certificate back.
The simple reason they worked out what I was going to do. Compare expenses against attendance, and they knew most were corrupt.
There’s a lot of truth in what the author says here. Many politicians are not venal, or entirely self-interested, or highly corrupt. A good number are genuinely publicly minded, and want to do the best they can for their constituents and country. However, the vast majority also have very large, fragile egos, and an ambition for power that makes them prioritise loyalty (to their parties, and to factions within their parties, and to their broader political class) over truth and justice. If you wanted to design a political system designed to reinforce groupthink, and which is susceptible to manipulation by well-funded, wel-organised, commercial and external political interests, you’d be hard pressed to come up with a better one than what we have now.
This article aptly demonstrates this in action. John Oxley – a loyal member of the broader political class – suggests that Andrew Brigden has had his whip suspended for exhibiting “chaotic” behaviour in his “strange embrace of Covid vaccination conspiracy theories”. Brigden, who has a scientific background, has taken the time and effort to take a detailed look into the effects of the pharmaceutical interventions and, taking into account anecdotal evidence from his work as a constituency MP, has now come to the reasonable conclusion that they have done more harm than good. He’s found the humility and courage to change his mind, in public. He’s trying to raise the alarm, in order to prevent more harm being done to his constituents and more widely. As far as I can see, whether or not his analysis entirely right, he is doing his job and acting in a publicly-spirited way even if his recent choice of language was ill-advised. So give the guy a break. He clearly knows and understands some important things than most other MPs don’t, but instead of trying to learn from or debate him on the substance of the issue, with open minds in a shared pursuit of a better understanding of the truth, his own party and the broader political class cast him out, denigrate, or just simply ignore him.
Why? Not because of any corruption – they could forgive that – but because he is disloyal. His “chaos” threatens the cosy illusion of order that they inhabit, intellectually and politically. Brigden isn’t the only one with a queue of pharma-harmed constituents waiting to knock on their constituency surgery door. The Westminster bubble isn’t impenetrable. Most MPs know – even if they dare not speak it, even in private – that something is very, very wrong indeed. Most of them are not stupid, far from it. But they also know that a toxic mixture of their egoism, fear, ambition, party loyalty, right-mindedness, laziness, credulity and (in some cases) personal financial interest allowed pharma to lead them down the garden path, in to the house, and all the way up to the bedroom. It now has them by their dangly bits, and it is not letting go.
Slight digression from the central theme of the article I know but then so did the author in a claim about Andrew Bridgen. He did not court vaccine conspiracies. He has used official data in an appallingly attended parliamentary debate to highlight vaccine injury.
And then compared it to the mass murder of Jews. Way to go with Jew baiting if you want to enhance your credibility!
That is a gross exaggeration, and you very well know it!
Gorbals syndrome again I suppose?
It’s not an exaggeration though is it, as Bridgen himself referenced the holocaust
Referring to the Holocaust is NOT Jew baiting per se. Mr Martiano (below) has the correct account.
I am rather surprised BB that you are so easily deceived.
Referring to the Holocaust is NOT Jew baiting per se. Mr Martiano (below) has the correct account.
I am rather surprised BB that you are so easily deceived.
It’s not an exaggeration though is it, as Bridgen himself referenced the holocaust
Actually he didn’t. He said it was the “biggest crime against humanity since the holocaust”. But why let the facts get in the way of hysterical knee-jerk reactions.
Precisely, well said Sir.
Precisely, well said Sir.
That is a gross exaggeration, and you very well know it!
Gorbals syndrome again I suppose?
Actually he didn’t. He said it was the “biggest crime against humanity since the holocaust”. But why let the facts get in the way of hysterical knee-jerk reactions.
And then compared it to the mass murder of Jews. Way to go with Jew baiting if you want to enhance your credibility!
Slight digression from the central theme of the article I know but then so did the author in a claim about Andrew Bridgen. He did not court vaccine conspiracies. He has used official data in an appallingly attended parliamentary debate to highlight vaccine injury.
The expenses episode, milked for all it was worth by the Daily Telegraph who drip-fed the stories over months, is the archetype of the media-confected “scandal” which we are treated to almost every day now: compare (even more trivially) the hyperventilating over whether Rishi Sunak uses private healthcare. At the same time real scandals, such as the allocation and management of government contracts during COVID, remains largely unexamined.
Indeed, this is a very good point. One can and should have a debate over how MP expenses are paid, but what the Telegraph, and others, did was make that a sort of catch-all ‘gotcha’. It might have sold a lot of newspapers and undoubtedly did raise reasonable questions. But in the longer term it’s had a very reductive and personalising effect that’s not been healthy.
I agree with the article’s point that, ‘Our parliamentarians sign up to plenty of bad laws or myopic campaigns because they look politically appealing.’ What seems to have happened is that our MPs have become a rather grisly mix of a surrogate CAB, with a bit of reputation manager and social media personality thrown in. And of course because they are short-sighted the MPs get caught short. Think the Liberal Democrats’ rather ill-advised and gaudy pledge on fees.
If we want MPs who are very good at presenting expense claim spreadsheets and saying the right thing on social media then we get what we deserve. MPs should not be a glorified CAB or a route to media coverage and access for well-funded pressure groups. The bad laws and short-sighted campaigns that the author talks about are symptoms of a chaotic parliament. I suspect however that chaos is because the space (for want of a better term) for MPs to act as hard thinkers on the big issues has been squeezed out of our politics. And the chaos is exactly what creates the environment where hyperventilating and myopia gets attention rather than thought.
You are right to point to the reaction to Sunak and private medicine. Another example that comes to my mind is the reaction when Theresa May talked about funding for social care. That is probably the biggest issue of the day yet the reaction to May raising it was not far from, ‘how dare you tackle this.’ The Prime Minister absolutely should be thinking big on social care rather than presenting expense claims.
What is needed is something of a reset from all sides. The MPs perhaps need to get used to the idea that they can’t please everyone and they are not there to legislate for the whims and prejudices of everyone that writes to them. The public and the media need to recognise that MPs aren’t a service business or performing seals.
And here’s one thought from me that I think would help: strict term limits for all MPs, councillors and Lords.
Term limits? Irrelevant.
Add article zero to the HRA, that we have the right of explicit informed consent.
Term limits? Irrelevant.
Add article zero to the HRA, that we have the right of explicit informed consent.
Indeed, this is a very good point. One can and should have a debate over how MP expenses are paid, but what the Telegraph, and others, did was make that a sort of catch-all ‘gotcha’. It might have sold a lot of newspapers and undoubtedly did raise reasonable questions. But in the longer term it’s had a very reductive and personalising effect that’s not been healthy.
I agree with the article’s point that, ‘Our parliamentarians sign up to plenty of bad laws or myopic campaigns because they look politically appealing.’ What seems to have happened is that our MPs have become a rather grisly mix of a surrogate CAB, with a bit of reputation manager and social media personality thrown in. And of course because they are short-sighted the MPs get caught short. Think the Liberal Democrats’ rather ill-advised and gaudy pledge on fees.
If we want MPs who are very good at presenting expense claim spreadsheets and saying the right thing on social media then we get what we deserve. MPs should not be a glorified CAB or a route to media coverage and access for well-funded pressure groups. The bad laws and short-sighted campaigns that the author talks about are symptoms of a chaotic parliament. I suspect however that chaos is because the space (for want of a better term) for MPs to act as hard thinkers on the big issues has been squeezed out of our politics. And the chaos is exactly what creates the environment where hyperventilating and myopia gets attention rather than thought.
You are right to point to the reaction to Sunak and private medicine. Another example that comes to my mind is the reaction when Theresa May talked about funding for social care. That is probably the biggest issue of the day yet the reaction to May raising it was not far from, ‘how dare you tackle this.’ The Prime Minister absolutely should be thinking big on social care rather than presenting expense claims.
What is needed is something of a reset from all sides. The MPs perhaps need to get used to the idea that they can’t please everyone and they are not there to legislate for the whims and prejudices of everyone that writes to them. The public and the media need to recognise that MPs aren’t a service business or performing seals.
And here’s one thought from me that I think would help: strict term limits for all MPs, councillors and Lords.
The expenses episode, milked for all it was worth by the Daily Telegraph who drip-fed the stories over months, is the archetype of the media-confected “scandal” which we are treated to almost every day now: compare (even more trivially) the hyperventilating over whether Rishi Sunak uses private healthcare. At the same time real scandals, such as the allocation and management of government contracts during COVID, remains largely unexamined.
It is reported that Johnson has ‘earned’, i.e. been given, £1m since he was sacked 6 months ago. He is not getting that money for nothing. My guess is that this money has come from two sources: the City and the arms industry. He has served both well, in particular the latter as a cheerleader for a war which others fight with weapons paid for by taxpayers.
Not discussed in the article is party as opposed to individual financing. The Tories depend heavily on the banks and builders. As a result house building is suppressed so that house prices have risen to levels which most people cannot afford to purchase their home. As far as I know, no Conservative politician has called for an end to this policy of impoverishing the younger middle class and enriching the already affluent. Tory MPs therefore are all complicit as are the majority of other MPs.
Many Labour MPs would not earn anything close to their parliamentary salary, if they weren’t MPs. If they need to condone crimes just to become an MP, picking up their MP’s salary is a form of corruption. Labour MPs with a few honourable exceptions turned a blind eye to the rape of thousands of girls and women. Their fear was that they would lose the vote of many Muslims if they supported police action against the rapists. This is a more disgusting form of corruption that accepting a stuffed envelope.
Finally, 7 Labour MPs have received prison sentences including suspended ones in the last decade. A quite astonishing level of criminality.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1517721/andrew-marr-keir-starmer-claudia-webb-seven-labour-mps-jail-sentence-tory-sleaze-vn
It is reported that Johnson has ‘earned’, i.e. been given, £1m since he was sacked 6 months ago. He is not getting that money for nothing. My guess is that this money has come from two sources: the City and the arms industry. He has served both well, in particular the latter as a cheerleader for a war which others fight with weapons paid for by taxpayers.
Not discussed in the article is party as opposed to individual financing. The Tories depend heavily on the banks and builders. As a result house building is suppressed so that house prices have risen to levels which most people cannot afford to purchase their home. As far as I know, no Conservative politician has called for an end to this policy of impoverishing the younger middle class and enriching the already affluent. Tory MPs therefore are all complicit as are the majority of other MPs.
Many Labour MPs would not earn anything close to their parliamentary salary, if they weren’t MPs. If they need to condone crimes just to become an MP, picking up their MP’s salary is a form of corruption. Labour MPs with a few honourable exceptions turned a blind eye to the rape of thousands of girls and women. Their fear was that they would lose the vote of many Muslims if they supported police action against the rapists. This is a more disgusting form of corruption that accepting a stuffed envelope.
Finally, 7 Labour MPs have received prison sentences including suspended ones in the last decade. A quite astonishing level of criminality.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1517721/andrew-marr-keir-starmer-claudia-webb-seven-labour-mps-jail-sentence-tory-sleaze-vn
I didn’t finish it. I read this part:
Andrew Bridgen, who lost the Tory whip yesterday after comparing the Covid vaccine to the Holocaust, was also suspended from the House this week for breaches around lobbying regulations after he wrote to ministers on behalf of a local company which gave him donations of cash.
I shared an article here a few weeks ago where bridgen spoke in the commons, he said the British heart foundation had put non disclosure agreements on data to do with the covid vaccine. He highlighted the increase in cardiac arrests in Israel and quoted a former editor of the bmj who said British medicine was rotten to the core.
Funny enough when I tried to share the article again it didn’t make it through moderation.
Now he’s been suspended? That stinks to high heaven.
Zero hedge is a good place to start.
Safety of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine in a Nationwide Setting Noam Barda,
M.D., Noa Dagan, M.D., Yatir Ben-Shlomo, B.Sc., Eldad Kepten, Ph.D., Jacob
Waxman, M.D., Reut Ohana, M.Sc., Miguel A. Hernán, M.D., Marc Lipsitch, D.Phil.,
Isaac Kohane, M.D., Doron Netzer, M.D., Ben Y. Reis, Ph.D., and Ran D. Balicer,
M.D.
Thanks, I’ll check it out. You on zh?
Thanks, I’ll check it out. You on zh?
Zero hedge is a good place to start.
Safety of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine in a Nationwide Setting Noam Barda,
M.D., Noa Dagan, M.D., Yatir Ben-Shlomo, B.Sc., Eldad Kepten, Ph.D., Jacob
Waxman, M.D., Reut Ohana, M.Sc., Miguel A. Hernán, M.D., Marc Lipsitch, D.Phil.,
Isaac Kohane, M.D., Doron Netzer, M.D., Ben Y. Reis, Ph.D., and Ran D. Balicer,
M.D.
I didn’t finish it. I read this part:
Andrew Bridgen, who lost the Tory whip yesterday after comparing the Covid vaccine to the Holocaust, was also suspended from the House this week for breaches around lobbying regulations after he wrote to ministers on behalf of a local company which gave him donations of cash.
I shared an article here a few weeks ago where bridgen spoke in the commons, he said the British heart foundation had put non disclosure agreements on data to do with the covid vaccine. He highlighted the increase in cardiac arrests in Israel and quoted a former editor of the bmj who said British medicine was rotten to the core.
Funny enough when I tried to share the article again it didn’t make it through moderation.
Now he’s been suspended? That stinks to high heaven.
“MPs aren’t corrupt, they’re just incompetent and crazy”
“Most MPs could make more money outside politics”
Seems to me you can only have one of those two.
Disagree. Being incompetent or crazy is no bar to becoming stinking rich; in fact a guileless tendency towards the psychopathic might positively help one to get ahead in many corporate environments.
Guileless psychopath is a contradiction in terms.
Guileless psychopath is a contradiction in terms.
Being born wealthy is much stronger precursor to earning a good salary than talent or work ethic in my opinion, so I think it’s entirely possible to have both
Disagree. Being incompetent or crazy is no bar to becoming stinking rich; in fact a guileless tendency towards the psychopathic might positively help one to get ahead in many corporate environments.
Being born wealthy is much stronger precursor to earning a good salary than talent or work ethic in my opinion, so I think it’s entirely possible to have both
“MPs aren’t corrupt, they’re just incompetent and crazy”
“Most MPs could make more money outside politics”
Seems to me you can only have one of those two.
The majority of MPs aren’t significantly corrupt because they simply don’t have worthwhile opportunities. Graft over local planning consents is much more profitable than the opportunities available to the average back-bencher.
They mostly ARENT that good, because the selection system doesn’t attract or select good people. The parties want compliant careerists who will vote the “party line” in the hope of some patronage.
The REALLY dangerous ones are the placemen at, or about Cabinet level who have sold themselves to outside interests ranging from the CCP to the Central Banking cartels. The ideologically motivated ones are the worst of the lot.
The majority of MPs aren’t significantly corrupt because they simply don’t have worthwhile opportunities. Graft over local planning consents is much more profitable than the opportunities available to the average back-bencher.
They mostly ARENT that good, because the selection system doesn’t attract or select good people. The parties want compliant careerists who will vote the “party line” in the hope of some patronage.
The REALLY dangerous ones are the placemen at, or about Cabinet level who have sold themselves to outside interests ranging from the CCP to the Central Banking cartels. The ideologically motivated ones are the worst of the lot.
I recommend Why we get the wrong politicians by Isabel Hardman.
It really is an unappealing, unrewarding job. You spend a fortune to get selected. You work long hours away from home, at great risk to your marriage. You attract continuous abuse. As a backbencher you have very little power. The chance of reaching the top is slim.
You’d have to be mad.
And every 5 years you run the risk of losing your seat, often for events outside your control
When you lose your seat, it’s usually the peccadilloes of your party leader that sealed your fate.
When you lose your seat (which isn’t that likely in our largely safe seats system), you do get a very large “loss of office” payment. Plus you’ve got 5 or more years of one of the best pensions you can get.
When you lose your seat (which isn’t that likely in our largely safe seats system), you do get a very large “loss of office” payment. Plus you’ve got 5 or more years of one of the best pensions you can get.
When you lose your seat, it’s usually the peccadilloes of your party leader that sealed your fate.
And every 5 years you run the risk of losing your seat, often for events outside your control
I recommend Why we get the wrong politicians by Isabel Hardman.
It really is an unappealing, unrewarding job. You spend a fortune to get selected. You work long hours away from home, at great risk to your marriage. You attract continuous abuse. As a backbencher you have very little power. The chance of reaching the top is slim.
You’d have to be mad.
Interesting how long it took for the blatant corruption of Ernest Marples closing down railways and gaining government contracts for his Marples Ridgeway business to build roads, to come to light? ” lobbyists” giving MPs ” incentives” to favour/ assist/ defend paying companies commercial interests is wholesale, and wholesale corruption- here is one example in which I was involved as an advisor: After the Lehman crash, HM Treasury and the government were approached by advisory investment banks, with a proposal ( post to Bank of Irelands financial problems) to not only bolster the UK Post Office Bank’s coffers, but follow many other countries in selling gilts, via post office bank, to retail investors, in small amounts and in small fund/ packages.
This, it was displayed, would greatly increase HM Treasuries domestic gilt market ( as in Italy where the vast majority of Italian BTPs are held retail/ domestically) and ability to stabilise gilts/ sterling, so securing and strengthening the UK government debt market.
HM Treasury declined to even consider the proposal, as I later found out from another of my clients, a big UK bank CEO, as the uk banks had leant on the government fearful of losing theit much abused depositors…. using MP influence and bank lobbyists.
Interesting how long it took for the blatant corruption of Ernest Marples closing down railways and gaining government contracts for his Marples Ridgeway business to build roads, to come to light? ” lobbyists” giving MPs ” incentives” to favour/ assist/ defend paying companies commercial interests is wholesale, and wholesale corruption- here is one example in which I was involved as an advisor: After the Lehman crash, HM Treasury and the government were approached by advisory investment banks, with a proposal ( post to Bank of Irelands financial problems) to not only bolster the UK Post Office Bank’s coffers, but follow many other countries in selling gilts, via post office bank, to retail investors, in small amounts and in small fund/ packages.
This, it was displayed, would greatly increase HM Treasuries domestic gilt market ( as in Italy where the vast majority of Italian BTPs are held retail/ domestically) and ability to stabilise gilts/ sterling, so securing and strengthening the UK government debt market.
HM Treasury declined to even consider the proposal, as I later found out from another of my clients, a big UK bank CEO, as the uk banks had leant on the government fearful of losing theit much abused depositors…. using MP influence and bank lobbyists.
I agree with the Author’s general contention that the vast majority of our representatives are highly committed, work hard and entered the arena for v positive reasons. Furthermore the fact we know about many of these incidents of ‘corruption’ and also have some visibility on donations (with a push for more) is reflection of a generally good approach to Governance IMO.
However two thoughts:
Isn’t much of the issue what we pay our representatives? We want high calibre so what would help get the v best? There has always been a reticence to pay a higher basic salary hence generating the ‘expenses and 2nd job culture’.
Secondly House of Lords needs sorting. 800+ with significant expenses and non attendance? Too linked to Party Donors getting ermine as well. Let’s get rid of this patronage-driven gravy train and think through how we can have better approach to a 2nd chamber.
I’d agree that the House of Lords is a significant part of the problem with the reputation of politics. Personally I’ve often thought that term limits would help. So Lords are there for a period of X years and then that’s that.
I’d also agree that we need to be careful with donations. I’d be very, very wary of any sort of reform that would start to open up (further) state funding of political parties. When it comes to party funding I’ve long-thought that some need to be careful what they wish for.
Actually, if you bother to look at the role of hereditary peers in politics in the late 19th Century, as both Prime Ministers and ministers, you will discover that not only your conclusion misplaced, but their sense of loyalty and duty to this country throws a light of shame on the veritable gnomes who now fill the Lords as fake ” life” peers, and their stamp licker, jobs worth lower middle management co horts in what should be renamed ” The heome of common” filled with people who the great 19c peers would not even employ below stairs.
They are all corrupt and disreputable.
I’ve some state secrecy certificates saying exactly that.
They are all corrupt and disreputable.
I’ve some state secrecy certificates saying exactly that.
Actually, if you bother to look at the role of hereditary peers in politics in the late 19th Century, as both Prime Ministers and ministers, you will discover that not only your conclusion misplaced, but their sense of loyalty and duty to this country throws a light of shame on the veritable gnomes who now fill the Lords as fake ” life” peers, and their stamp licker, jobs worth lower middle management co horts in what should be renamed ” The heome of common” filled with people who the great 19c peers would not even employ below stairs.
Just do away with the second chamber completely. It adds nothing to democracy
I’d agree that the House of Lords is a significant part of the problem with the reputation of politics. Personally I’ve often thought that term limits would help. So Lords are there for a period of X years and then that’s that.
I’d also agree that we need to be careful with donations. I’d be very, very wary of any sort of reform that would start to open up (further) state funding of political parties. When it comes to party funding I’ve long-thought that some need to be careful what they wish for.
Just do away with the second chamber completely. It adds nothing to democracy
I agree with the Author’s general contention that the vast majority of our representatives are highly committed, work hard and entered the arena for v positive reasons. Furthermore the fact we know about many of these incidents of ‘corruption’ and also have some visibility on donations (with a push for more) is reflection of a generally good approach to Governance IMO.
However two thoughts:
Isn’t much of the issue what we pay our representatives? We want high calibre so what would help get the v best? There has always been a reticence to pay a higher basic salary hence generating the ‘expenses and 2nd job culture’.
Secondly House of Lords needs sorting. 800+ with significant expenses and non attendance? Too linked to Party Donors getting ermine as well. Let’s get rid of this patronage-driven gravy train and think through how we can have better approach to a 2nd chamber.
Seems to me that MPs must be corrupt. They may start with certain beliefs but they soon learn that they have to do deals. A lot of back-scratching follows. Soon, their original beliefs have been pushed aside and then they have been corrupted.
The other side is that the holding of office leads the incumbent to feel the little perks are due – a certain amount of security, travelling first class on trains, an expense account -I would suggest that most MPs can’t be seen in MacDonald’s. This is a small start towards corruption.
The only MP I can think of who didn’t succumb to this (little) corruption was Tony Benn. And he became a figure of fun, probably leading to a sitcom. This small-scale corruption seems unimportant but it grows with the job.
Then there is a bigger corruption. Someone is catapulted to great heights and comes to believe that his/her views are very, very important. So, time to do something for those down below – like a support for women against men, men who want to be women, all religions from afar and ideas that everybody else in the past must have been just as corrupt. Woke, in fact.
Seems to me that MPs must be corrupt. They may start with certain beliefs but they soon learn that they have to do deals. A lot of back-scratching follows. Soon, their original beliefs have been pushed aside and then they have been corrupted.
The other side is that the holding of office leads the incumbent to feel the little perks are due – a certain amount of security, travelling first class on trains, an expense account -I would suggest that most MPs can’t be seen in MacDonald’s. This is a small start towards corruption.
The only MP I can think of who didn’t succumb to this (little) corruption was Tony Benn. And he became a figure of fun, probably leading to a sitcom. This small-scale corruption seems unimportant but it grows with the job.
Then there is a bigger corruption. Someone is catapulted to great heights and comes to believe that his/her views are very, very important. So, time to do something for those down below – like a support for women against men, men who want to be women, all religions from afar and ideas that everybody else in the past must have been just as corrupt. Woke, in fact.
If we were able to look into the details i expect there’s a Brit equivalent of Gurtel in Spain. Deep corruption in public contracts across all main parties and the civil service. Private Eye’s “In The Back” has detailed the obvious UK examples in the last 20 years and in their general news section in 1977 when i started to read it. Its always the same constructors, banks, accountants and “consultancies” and a very settled caste of MPs and Civil Servants, some obviously “back room” deals, others based on the revolving door mechanism. I always wondered why the Spanish press used a German word for their scandal when it was exposed. If the UKs one is ever brought to light i suggest we call in Cinturon (gurtel in spanish). Whistleblowers brought the Gurtel to a close and the Policia Nacional were relentless in pursuit of the villains. How things change eh – in the Franco era whistleblowers often died in a “burglary” or “suicide” and the cops stayed home. I think its fear of criminal reprisal that stops most Brits who have the dirt from exposing it and The Eye often pulls punches in favour of association and innuendo probably to preserve their own income and sources.
If we were able to look into the details i expect there’s a Brit equivalent of Gurtel in Spain. Deep corruption in public contracts across all main parties and the civil service. Private Eye’s “In The Back” has detailed the obvious UK examples in the last 20 years and in their general news section in 1977 when i started to read it. Its always the same constructors, banks, accountants and “consultancies” and a very settled caste of MPs and Civil Servants, some obviously “back room” deals, others based on the revolving door mechanism. I always wondered why the Spanish press used a German word for their scandal when it was exposed. If the UKs one is ever brought to light i suggest we call in Cinturon (gurtel in spanish). Whistleblowers brought the Gurtel to a close and the Policia Nacional were relentless in pursuit of the villains. How things change eh – in the Franco era whistleblowers often died in a “burglary” or “suicide” and the cops stayed home. I think its fear of criminal reprisal that stops most Brits who have the dirt from exposing it and The Eye often pulls punches in favour of association and innuendo probably to preserve their own income and sources.
Essentially, we get the politicians we deserve. Do we all research the candidates carefully before election day, satisfying ourselves on their intellect, experience, character and even potential suitability for ministerial office? Or do we just put our cross against the party logo?
Essentially, we get the politicians we deserve. Do we all research the candidates carefully before election day, satisfying ourselves on their intellect, experience, character and even potential suitability for ministerial office? Or do we just put our cross against the party logo?
We just kicked out a Prime Minister for eating some cake or for not punishing someone for being a groper (take your pick) who was effectively directly elected, since the voters were really voting for Johnson not the Tories. Wouldn’t have happened in any other democracy.
Though the real reason he was kicked out was because other Tories despised his popularity with the electorate. So much for democracy.
Come off it!
He was a spineless, fat blob and deserved everything he got and more.
self obsessed self deluded dishonest liar and charlatan
That may be the case, but as Ian said he was democratically elected in a landslide
Indeed, along with the Resurrection one the greatest deceptions in history sadly.
He is a disgrace to Eton, Oxford and the Nation.
Indeed, along with the Resurrection one the greatest deceptions in history sadly.
He is a disgrace to Eton, Oxford and the Nation.
But he was my spineless fat blob! Now we’ve got bigger numpties in charge.
That remains to be seen.
That remains to be seen.
self obsessed self deluded dishonest liar and charlatan
That may be the case, but as Ian said he was democratically elected in a landslide
But he was my spineless fat blob! Now we’ve got bigger numpties in charge.
Come off it!
He was a spineless, fat blob and deserved everything he got and more.
We just kicked out a Prime Minister for eating some cake or for not punishing someone for being a groper (take your pick) who was effectively directly elected, since the voters were really voting for Johnson not the Tories. Wouldn’t have happened in any other democracy.
Though the real reason he was kicked out was because other Tories despised his popularity with the electorate. So much for democracy.
The system is set for them to be failures. It starts with voters expecting these “here today gone tomorrow” amateurs to fix all our problems and keep us risk free. Of course they are incapable of doing that ( as anyone would be) but neither they nor we voters are strong enough to admit it. Nor are we prepared to accept that personal responsibility for ourselves and our dependents must come first and not be a last resort, after all other avenues ( funded by strangers ) have been explored and found wanting. So, instead of asking our representatives to focus on the few essentials for good Government, we demand they experiment with ever deeper, more intrusive and inevitably failing State interventions in every part of our lives. In Government, as with tax, less is more.
The system is set for them to be failures. It starts with voters expecting these “here today gone tomorrow” amateurs to fix all our problems and keep us risk free. Of course they are incapable of doing that ( as anyone would be) but neither they nor we voters are strong enough to admit it. Nor are we prepared to accept that personal responsibility for ourselves and our dependents must come first and not be a last resort, after all other avenues ( funded by strangers ) have been explored and found wanting. So, instead of asking our representatives to focus on the few essentials for good Government, we demand they experiment with ever deeper, more intrusive and inevitably failing State interventions in every part of our lives. In Government, as with tax, less is more.
The last paragraph is the fundamental truth about democracy. We are ruled by inadequates. For what clear headed, perceptive, decisive and far thinking leader would ever take on the thankless and underpaid job of a politician? very very few.
The last paragraph is the fundamental truth about democracy. We are ruled by inadequates. For what clear headed, perceptive, decisive and far thinking leader would ever take on the thankless and underpaid job of a politician? very very few.
In order to find MP’s made of the ‘right stuff’ it should be obligatory that they serve for three years with the Armed Forces (preferably the Army.)
To use that dreadful expression, it would ensure that they were “fit for purpose “, although quite a few would also be irreparably broken.
This was system used by Ancient Rome and it served them well for centuries.
current qualifications:
Draylon suit
Polyester tie with windsor knot
acetate drip dry shirt
pointy lace up plastic shoes
wedding ring on inside left hand finger
estuary accent
Plus HKLP!
Plus HKLP!
Or at least have held down a proper non political job for a few years
Yes, but then you have the problem “what is a PROPER’ job’?
Yes, but then you have the problem “what is a PROPER’ job’?
current qualifications:
Draylon suit
Polyester tie with windsor knot
acetate drip dry shirt
pointy lace up plastic shoes
wedding ring on inside left hand finger
estuary accent
Or at least have held down a proper non political job for a few years
In order to find MP’s made of the ‘right stuff’ it should be obligatory that they serve for three years with the Armed Forces (preferably the Army.)
To use that dreadful expression, it would ensure that they were “fit for purpose “, although quite a few would also be irreparably broken.
This was system used by Ancient Rome and it served them well for centuries.
I could not read it – the title says it all, unless it is Ironic, then I should have read it…..
”Westminster isn’t that corrupt’‘ it said..Ha – it is Totally Corrupt. They have sold themselves to the dark side.
Sunak just pulled the Whip from Andrew Bridgen MP for daring to criticize the Vax! He had the courage to say the truth – that is is much more harmful than good. https://rumble.com/v1zydhy-tory-mp-andrew-bridgen-told-pm-rishi-sunak-that-the-covid-shots-have-caused.html
Listen to these criminals who run Parliament jeering – listen to Sunik pussing the lies – get more searches to hear the full scene – it is wild.
So these almost 100% corrupt MPs took their silver to shill and mandate this toxic vax – then they locked down the nation to get people to take it – close4d NHS, Schools, Universities, Offices – and paid people to sit home, creating this Inflation (intentionally). Masks – testing – track and trace, vax ID…Crimes against Humanity. Corrupt!
The same rats got the war in Ukraine to turn Global when it was a regional conflict – and have stopped the world’s fertilizer production (half the fertilizer is stopped – it is made from Gas, and then Russian/Ukrainian minerals – Europe’s 26 fertilizer plants all shut. The global poor are having to plant this year without fertilizer! The famine will kill many millions, Billions poor reduced to Abject Poverty. No grain and oil from Ukraine….can’t afford fuel for their tractors, nor fuel to cook even.
They did this! They sold out to the agenda to destroy the world economy. How is your energy bill? Well they are printing money like mad – debt your children will pay by reduced living standards – with their reduced education – never getting a house or pension with this destroyed economy.
These MP’s are the most destructive Government by a power of 100, than any ever before! They sold the nation to the agenda – to the Global Corporatocracy Oligarchs – they sold your future and health for silver, and for votes….One speaks against the agenda? Like Xi would do – PURGED! Gone, Thrown out of the Party. That was a signal – shut the F up or you are next.
If you couldn’t read it why are you commenting? Do you want debate or simply an echo chamber that relays your opinions back to you?
Indeed – I suspect this is just a “copy and paste” response to everything the commenter reads.
Shhh! He thinks we haven’t noticed – he might draft a new piece now.
It doesn’t change much between articles does it. We just need the other pleb to turn up now telling us America won’t be a western country by 2040 and we’ve got the whole set
I’d do a clapping emoji if I knew how to do it Billy Bob!
I’d do a clapping emoji if I knew how to do it Billy Bob!
Shhh! He thinks we haven’t noticed – he might draft a new piece now.
It doesn’t change much between articles does it. We just need the other pleb to turn up now telling us America won’t be a western country by 2040 and we’ve got the whole set
Indeed – I suspect this is just a “copy and paste” response to everything the commenter reads.
Get a grip man !
The responsibility for the war in Ukraine and any consequent impact in poorer countries lies in one place and one place alone. Moscow.
You missed off teh biggy. £16 trillion in socialist pension debts with no asset to pay for it. Hence austerity, low take home pay, high taxes, social care disaster, lack of investment, pensioner poverty, …
Why would they hide that debt off the books?
If you couldn’t read it why are you commenting? Do you want debate or simply an echo chamber that relays your opinions back to you?
Get a grip man !
The responsibility for the war in Ukraine and any consequent impact in poorer countries lies in one place and one place alone. Moscow.
You missed off teh biggy. £16 trillion in socialist pension debts with no asset to pay for it. Hence austerity, low take home pay, high taxes, social care disaster, lack of investment, pensioner poverty, …
Why would they hide that debt off the books?
I could not read it – the title says it all, unless it is Ironic, then I should have read it…..
”Westminster isn’t that corrupt’‘ it said..Ha – it is Totally Corrupt. They have sold themselves to the dark side.
Sunak just pulled the Whip from Andrew Bridgen MP for daring to criticize the Vax! He had the courage to say the truth – that is is much more harmful than good. https://rumble.com/v1zydhy-tory-mp-andrew-bridgen-told-pm-rishi-sunak-that-the-covid-shots-have-caused.html
Listen to these criminals who run Parliament jeering – listen to Sunik pussing the lies – get more searches to hear the full scene – it is wild.
So these almost 100% corrupt MPs took their silver to shill and mandate this toxic vax – then they locked down the nation to get people to take it – close4d NHS, Schools, Universities, Offices – and paid people to sit home, creating this Inflation (intentionally). Masks – testing – track and trace, vax ID…Crimes against Humanity. Corrupt!
The same rats got the war in Ukraine to turn Global when it was a regional conflict – and have stopped the world’s fertilizer production (half the fertilizer is stopped – it is made from Gas, and then Russian/Ukrainian minerals – Europe’s 26 fertilizer plants all shut. The global poor are having to plant this year without fertilizer! The famine will kill many millions, Billions poor reduced to Abject Poverty. No grain and oil from Ukraine….can’t afford fuel for their tractors, nor fuel to cook even.
They did this! They sold out to the agenda to destroy the world economy. How is your energy bill? Well they are printing money like mad – debt your children will pay by reduced living standards – with their reduced education – never getting a house or pension with this destroyed economy.
These MP’s are the most destructive Government by a power of 100, than any ever before! They sold the nation to the agenda – to the Global Corporatocracy Oligarchs – they sold your future and health for silver, and for votes….One speaks against the agenda? Like Xi would do – PURGED! Gone, Thrown out of the Party. That was a signal – shut the F up or you are next.