[Closed] David Cameron on the rocks......

Politicians and sleaze? Amazing coincidence.

is this murdochs revenge?

Well that was certainly my first thought.

£250,000 for a meal with cameroooon,i knew it was expensive in london town , but not that much. 😯

"this is not how the conservative party raises funds..."

Err, yes it is, that's what the fuss is about...

from the Conservatives website

The Leader's Group

Annual membership: £50,000 Chairman: Howard Leigh

The Leader’s Group is the premier supporter Group of the Conservative Party. Members are invited to join David Cameron and other senior figures from the Conservative Party at dinners, post-PMQ lunches, drinks receptions, election result events and important campaign launches.

Would seem quite appropriate for £250,000 to buy quite a bit more. The I'm shocked and outraged approach from Cameroon is a bit much. Who does he think these strange people are he has to have lunch with and what do they want from him ?

and not forgeting the prompt payment methods

We encourage all members to pay by direct debit. This allows the Party to collect regular income that we can rely on when we plan our campaigns.

surprise surprise the unexpected hits you between the eyes. 🙄

Unexpected ? Certainly. That's why it's the top news story at the moment.

The story clearly suggests that if a businessman/woman is prepared to pay a quarter of a million pounds in return for access to David Cameron, then they can expect to financially benefit sufficiently for the quarter of a million pounds to be more than reimbursed. Otherwise it's hard to imagine why anyone would do it.

The whole thing stinks of corrupt third world dictatorship type dodgy dealings. Certainly not what I expect from elected politicians. And not least from one who said the following :

[i]"there is another big issue that we can no longer ignore. It is the next big scandal waiting to happen. It’s an issue that crosses party lines and has tainted our politics for too long, an issue that exposes [b]the far-too-cosy relationship between politics, government, business and money[/b]. I’m talking about lobbying – and we all know how it works. [b]The lunches, the hospitality, the quiet word in your ear[/b], the ex-ministers and ex-advisors for hire, helping big business find the right way to get its way. In this party, we believe in competition, not cronyism. [b]We believe in market economics, not crony capitalism[/b]. So we must be the party that sorts all this out."[/i]

What the Tories influenced by money? Is anyone actually surprised by this? What next for bleeding obvious headlines - "Tony Blair believed in God and thought the war in Iraq was a good thing"?

Some people on here have either got remarkably short memories or are still in their formative years if they think corruption was invented and flourished under this or the previous government. I'm wincing at this latest example of the greasing of political palms just as much as I may have been laughing when it was exposed in the previous government but neither of them invented it and if you were to definitively research the last fifty years, you would come up with a fairly extensive list of the supposedly great and good of every political persuasion who could be pursuaded to nod and wink in the right places for a modest or even a very generous donation to the party coffers. From banks to pharma industry to unions and lords and on to the people who run certain sports.

It's blatantly wrong but sadly proven to be timelessly endemic and unless someone introduces clear guidlines that have penalties attached to them that deter people from doing it, say by introducing large fines on party funds and possible prison sentences for those involved, it will continue to crop up now and again.

The only place where those rules/legislation can happen is in Parliament with the support of the government of the day so plainly, it isn't going to happen anytime soon if ever.

To be honest, I am the first to criticise the press for so much in this country that I think they try to influence but in this instance, they did a good job of exposing this corruption, as with the expenses, and they could do a further good service to us all by running a public campaign and getting the public behind them to force politicians to finally after all these years act decisively to stop this kind of corruption by introducing the kind of penalties that are deserved - which they failed to do after the expenses scandal, where the majority of those responsible simply carried on, or decided not to stand next time, whereas in any other profession they would have been drummed out the gates within hours, just as any employee who drunkenly attacked and headbutted a fellow employee would have lost his job.

Z-11, although we do differ on certain issues, I'm in full agreement with you on this one. Good call.

i think i mostly agree with z11, mostly

Some people on here have either got remarkably short memories or are still in their formative years if they think corruption was invented and flourished under this or the previous government.

Well British politics is not corrupt. Any British politician who is caught engaged in corrupt practices can expect to be punished. This isn't a case of "corruption", as far as I'm aware no laws have been broken, despite this being the sort of behavior which you might well expect from a corrupt third world dictatorship.

This is "lobbying", and I think we can safely assume that people were fully aware of the existence of lobbying by businesses and the influence this can have on government policy, hence Cameron's remark two years ago:

[i]"there is another big issue that we can no longer ignore. It is the next big scandal waiting to happen. It’s an issue that crosses party lines and has tainted our politics for too long, an issue that exposes the far-too-cosy relationship between politics, government, business and money. I’m talking about lobbying – and we all know how it works. The lunches, the hospitality, the quiet word in your ear, the ex-ministers and ex-advisors for hire, helping big business find the right way to get its way. In this party, we believe in competition, not cronyism. We believe in market economics, not crony capitalism. So we must be the party that sorts all this out."[/i]

[i]"Has tainted our politics for too long"[/i] clearly reveals that it was a known established problem. The shocking thing is that it now exists to such a staggering degree under a government committed to stamping it out. I certainly didn't expect it - not to that degree.

And the problem is far from people having short memories, but people have rather good memories, and that what Cameron said two years ago has come back to haunt him.

The other particularly shocking aspect of this story is the staggering amounts involved - "bung us a quarter of a million quid and the PM will do you a quarter of a million quid's worth of favours, just whisper in his ear what they are".

No one objects to above board party donations, but this is clearly not what this is.

I'm a bit baffled, I was under the impression that this is pretty much what ALL politics is in the west (and I rarely get involved in thoughts of politics) regardless of [i]country[/i] and [b]party. [/b]Anyone who thought otherwise must be one deluded idealist or completely blinded by their own bullshine.

[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17508271 ]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17508271[/url]

Dave sees nowt wrong with the old boy's network - they pay him money, he helps them to make more.

Human nature, or do we expect polititians to be above all this?

Cameron was happy to spout the bullshine when in opposition

and yes id like to think government policy wasn't determined by those who pay toward keeping the Tory party pantry stocked with bollinger and quails eggs

its particularly worrying when our current government is selling off every national asset they can

I'm a bit baffled.......

So it would seem.

And I'm a bit baffled why some people are commenting that this is all just perfectly normal human behavour which is to be expected unless you are a one deluded idealist or completely blinded by your own bullshine...... It isn't.

The only conclusion I can come up with is that they are playing down the significance of this scandal in an attempt to minimise the damage to the Tory Party it's having - something which even the leader of the Tory Party isn't prepared to attempt.

I really can't think of any other explanation except possibly they are just blindly following like sheep the latest fashion of saying [i]"all politicians are completely corrupt, they'd sell their own grannies, blah, blah"[/i]

Which would make you wonder what all the fuss over Rupert Murdoch is about eh ?

You've got to give that guy some credit - he certainly knows how to manipulate public opinion. And those who like to leave their thinking to others certainly seem happy to get suckered, it saves them having to bother.

Murdoch is taking his revenge.

Murdoch may well be taking his revenge, but he wouldn't be able to were not the whole political machines so corrupt.

To be honest, I'm quite disappointed by the glaring lack of ambition.

Given the company they keep, £250,000 doesn't seem like an awful lot of money to influence government policy. Most present cabinet members could find that with a quick root around down the back of the sofa. Along with some Gold-plated Faberge eggs and a couple of Rolex

And proportionally it'll be a drop in the ocean next to the salaries they'll be picking as non-exec directors of the various private healthcare companies, private education providers, and all the other beneficiaries of the latest privatisation frenzy. That's how it works isn't it?

The worst thing about this whole thing situation is that this presents Ed Milliband with an open goal. I look forward to watching him, once again, spoon it into row Z 😥

Tis true binners, to a bunch of millionaires like Osbourne and Cameron, £250k is just pocked change.....

Again I'm surprised that anyone is surprised.

And of course Labour policies are completely unaffected by the money they get from the trade unions, and the million quid Bernie Ecclestone gave them in no way caused F1 to be exempted from the laws about tobacco sponsorship.

I'm no supporter of any political party, but I think Labour need to be very careful about getting too "outraged" about this.

I don't think labour take a blind bit of notice of the unions any more, they are just as dependant as the Tories on private money.

But just because they have been tainted by the same brush, doesn't mean they shouldn't push to put it right while in opposition.

Cameron on the rocks? No, we are. He'll brazen it out knowing that his tame liberal pets will stay schtum and labour are about as threatening as a loofah.

The Bernie Ecclestone was in sone ways glaringly transparent. He gave the Labour party a million quid. They changed the law for him. The simplest transaction ever.

The unions (recent) relationship with the labour party I think of as like the Lib-dems in the coalition. Its ridiculously one-sided. They give them loads of cash and get absolutely eff all back. Witness the labour leaderships rush to distance themselves from them at the mere mention of the 'S' word.

But like the Lib Dems: where the **** else are they going to go?

Proof of Clegg's incompetence in agreeing to a coalition. If the Lib-dems wern'tt in a coalition at the moment they'd be able to turn the screw and extract more policy concessions from Cameron, but they are in too close an embrace and having the life squeezed out of them.

They give them loads of cash and get absolutely eff all back

Thats unfair - via the block vote in the leadership election they got their candidate of choice into power.

D'oh! 😀

A fair point Z-11. Given the result of that, thank Christ they don't have more influence. It'd be like letting a 6 year old drive your car 😀

If they think corruption was invented and flourished under this or the previous government. I'm wincing at this latest example of the greasing of political palms just as much as I may have been laughing when it was exposed in the previous government but neither of them invented it and if you were to definitively research the last fifty years, you would come up with a fairly extensive list of the supposedly great and good of every political persuasion who could be pursuaded to nod and wink in the right places for a modest or even a very generous donation to the party coffers. From banks to pharma industry to unions and lords and on to the people who run certain sports.

Thats unfair - via the block vote in the leadership election they got their candidate of choice into power.

OH my god is this next 😯

[img] [/img]

I'm rather disappointed in this thread.

Given TJ's stance that most STWers are loaded, we could easily raise £250k and then meet with CMD and get some radical new countryside access laws passed - mtbs to get priority on all countryside trails/paths, All tax funding for NHS pensions to be diverted to building and maintaining new trails, that sort of thing - you know, the kind of stuff that's only reasonable 🙂

Lack of ambition and clear thinking that's STWs problem

Clubber has a point.

I'll stick a quid in the pot, who else is in?

Not really a surprise that this has come out or indeed that the press are making hay with it. I suspect that the truth is somewhat less salacious and that what was going on was someone trying to big up what you get for a "sizable" donation. Listening to the clip it is both hlarious and utterly cringeworthy at the same time. Sounds like a wide boy salesman trying to tie up a sale and promising whatever comes into his head that makes it sound like a good deal you are getting. Embarrassing for all involved? Too right. Indicative of widespread and damaging corruption? No, I don't think so.

In for a fiver as long as we introduce him to the concept of [s] the breakfast pie [/s] bombers anbd wee

Can we have Surfmat back to help us with the PR angle of this?

Bikingcatastrophe - I reckon you're bang on.

I'm sure everyone who's worked for a big company has experienced some sales gimp, desperate to hit his bonus, has promised a client that [i]you[/i] (not them, obviously) can deliver the moon on a stick. By tomorrow morning.

Same fing innit?

Do I think you should be able to buy your way into influencing government policy? No and generally speaking I think most people agree; but I'm not surprised, it how I understand it works, indeed Call-me-Dave flagged up the issue himself a couple of years ago. So what's the big furore? The fact he hasn't done anything about it? But we know that. If he had fixed it we would have been told all about the tories cleaning up politics. Not sure what the 'fix' is though. If we accept that political parties serve a useful function, and that parties cost money to run then those parties have to be funded somehow. Are the british public keen to subsidise them with tax payers money? I wouldn't have thought so.

Agree with bikingcatastrophe.

Businessmen with the ability to influence policy are more likely to be promising to deliver something- jobs, infrastructure, regeneration, in return for profitable breaks- planning, taxation, contracts. That's the kind of influence that sways decisions.

we could easily raise £250k and then meet with CMD and get some radical new countryside access laws passed - mtbs to get priority on all countryside trails/paths, All tax funding for NHS pensions to be diverted to building and maintaining new trails, that sort of thing - you know, the kind of stuff that's only reasonable

I'm in for £25. (although i also want to add on some minor tax amendments)

Only minor ones? You see, once again, thinking too small 🙄

I pitch in a tenner if he scraps hereditary peers and the Conservative Party. Just thinking big for a mo 😉

floundering now, forced to publish a list.

whats the difference between 1 bloke stumping up 250k for lunch and 250 blokes stumping up a quid each and thier representative going round for beer and sandwiches?

the day the unions decide that thier money can go to the party that offers what they want rather than the one chosen because of historical reasons is the day the unions will actually have some power..

It was ridiculously arrogant of dave to assume he could get away with not publishing a list

can anyone trust the list of donors now that hes had time to redact any damaging names

ultimately it MIGHT lead to a cap on donation sizes, personally id like to see an end to them entirely that way the shady investment funds/private interest companies/unions/ecclestones of this world would just get a vote like the rest of us..............i know im a dreamer

whats the difference between 1 bloke stumping up 250k for lunch and 250 blokes stumping up a quid each and thier representative going round for beer and sandwiches?

Well, the maths don't work for a start.

whats the difference between 1 bloke stumping up 250k for lunch and 250 blokes stumping up a quid each and thier representative going round for beer and sandwiches?

The second example would be representing the interests of 250 times the people. Or if its a quid each, then 250,000. Are you familiar with the concept of democracy?

Are you familiar with the concept of democracy?