I find it fascinating that:

Company directors and politicians ‘mislead’ Parliament /shareholders as if its all an accident – even when its clearly not.
Working and middle class are simply ‘liars’ if caught out.

Company directors and politicians ‘offer to resign’ if caught out
(& hounded enough by the papers). Such offer is often refused and they are praised.
Working and middle class are ‘sacked’ or ‘dismissed’. Being lesser people, I guess they don’t know how to write a resignation letter… shame as they may have been able to retain their job and be told how much the boss loves them!

🙂

fair play levenson

said its not his job to judge whether mps have broken the ministerial code

hunt gone by wednesday i reckon

is it spelt bullyingdon?

http://politicalscrapbook.net/2012/04/boris-johnson-news-international-sponsorship-bbc-****-bollocks-video/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17900567

cameron showing his true colours and borris getting sucked into phone hacking now?

Ouch – that was poor. However provoked, a PM should be able to rise above that. It wasn’t even said with any humour.

He is rattled and Skinner got it right.

I hope he goes. Murdoch has too much power and influence as it is without getting our government to suck on it.
http://www.avaaz.org/en/fire_jeremy_hunt_2/?rc=fb&pv=17

he is rumoured to have a temper and we know he is arrogant.

what I dont understand is why he is doing this it will just drag the whole thing out and it will end up with Hunt being referred so why not just get on with it?
Like coulson it shows poor judgement and that may be more damaging than the actual issue in the long run

Junkyard – the idea is to protect himself. So dragging out the hunt sacking, delaying things by say leveson has to deal with it etc

he is hoping people lose interest before they get to him

Rebekka Brooks has all the texts he sent her stored ready to release.

He is not just rumoured to have a temper – its well known he has and he has shown it before when people get under his skin

yes but he would be better burning Hunt now and getting it over and done with- even after Levesson he would still need to be referred.

makes no sense tbh ..perhaps someone has a smoking gun and DC has no choice?

Labour have to keep pressing his buttons. But I suspect they won’t.

actually i think camerons plan may work
2 week recess now for the local electons in that time im sure the torys could manage another fuel fudge-up or another random clusterfuc, to distract from hunt

well the select comittee says that murdochs not fit to run his company

apart from the four tories on the panel?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17898029

well the select comittee says that murdochs not fit to run his company

apart from the four tories on the panel?

Surely that’s just an ideological thing from the tories, not a vote of confidence in the Murcochs? That the government shouldn’t interfere with the running of companies, so it’s fair to criticise the company/board but not to interfere with them (let the shareholders* do that).

*Ok that’s Murdoch, but the general point still stands.

so it’s fair to criticise the company/board but not to interfere with them (let the shareholders* do that).

or is it that they are protecting cameron,

its painfully obvious that a control freak like rupert must have been aware that the literally thousands of stories involved were from phone hacking
and james’ defence of ‘i didnt read to the bottom of the email’ is even less credible

louise mensch angling for culture secretary?

Oh Dear.

Doesn’t sound very Impartial and quasi-judicial to me.

So Jeremy lobbies Call-me-Dave on Murdoch’s behalf, Dave sacks Vince and appoints a known cheerleader for the evil empire.

Bets against Mr CHunt becoming the fall guy before the end of the day, to detract attention from Dave? Which will work for about 34 seconds.

Close the door on your way out Jeremy

All a bit of a dog’s dinner this one. Among the main players – one clear anti-Murdoch, one clearly pro. While we all bring our own biases, to these things, it seems unlikely that either of these two would be in an ideal position to remain neutral on the business case. Hunts letter is hardly unequivocal!!

Ok, in theory, he may have acted within the rules but in practice hard to see how this was neutral. Poor judgement all round. Still even odds on Hunt surviving (“It would be totally wrong for the government to get involved in a competition issue which has to be decided at arm’s length” as evidence of his propriety.) but with a bias to not surviving – not such a straight talker after all!

But makes you think, that in any of these circumstances no one is going to be truly impartial. Hence the importance of the rules, I guess