Forum menu
Are these available on the NHS in Leicestershire?
Naughty Keith....!
What a great track record that guy has. He's on my list with Piers Morgan, estate agents and track suit wearers.
Oh, I say, well played CFH
you get to set the next clue
[url= https://c8.staticflickr.com/9/8480/28821477743_c7209ee872_z.jp g" target="_blank">https://c8.staticflickr.com/9/8480/28821477743_c7209ee872_z.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/KURBd4 ]stw cryptic cw[/url] by [url= https://www.flickr.com/photos/23823661@N05/ ]scaredypants[/url], on Flickr
No Tugby or Belvoir for 2 weeks.
nice thread title.
Can't understand how he can even stay on a committee that requires a level of trust let alone just resign as chairman.
Probably claimed it on expenses as 'research'
clearly covert participant observation
Not his first scandal won't be his last. Good of Diane Abbott to remind everyone this must be a dreadful time for him..
Corrupt liar, cannot be trusted shocker.
His poor kids.
I'm no fan of the guy, and I've not read the paper for the juicy details but can someone just clarify what laws were broken in this latest scandal?
Moral law..
..and being a bit shit at texting.
Difficult one this. Classic newspaper string/entrapment, what he does in his private life is up to him matched against the fact he's conducting an inquiry into Prostitution.
No laws broken @MoreCash but a conflict of interest due to the inquiry.
what he does in his private life is up to him
I know in binary terms this may be right, but surely is it that much to ask that in return for having political power, perks of being a MP and all that other stuff, you refrain from coke and hookers? Is it that hard....like really?
^Again, what laws were broken?
At least Jamba has a point...
surprisingly yes I agree with Jamby - possible conflict of interest but he is entitled to a private life and he can be as seedy as he likes in it.
TBH i feel sorry for folk who dont do things in private, especially sexy fun time, that they dont want splashed across the papers as a headline.
Vaz is not that likable though and we have to remember he has a wife and kids and now they get to face the shit storm with him when a less "political" father would just have got away with it
Many lifes ruined for basically a scoop- clearly he is not blameless but is it really "public interest"?
I don't buy this conflict of interest justification bollox. Surely if you are setting up committee into looking at legislation of prostitution it might help to have someone with first had experience?
Ok - the guy might be a massive slimeball, and come across a bit of a dick most of the time. But he doesn't deserve 'this'.
Many lifes ruined for basically a scoop- clearly he is not blameless but is it really "public interest"?
Agree.
I accept the conflict of interest issue, but just suppose that Mr & Mrs Vaz have a happy marriage based on certain discreet understandings about each others foibles, and now suddenly their marriage, and their kids lives, are at the centre of a media shit storm. I'm struggling to see a public interest in destroying their family life.
Even if they didn't have an understanding and this is a shock to her, it shouldn't be dealt with in a public arena.
I really dislike that phrase, used by the gutter press to justify stories like this. What's in the public interest, and what the public are interested in are very different things, in many cases.is it really "public interest"?
However, I think this JUST scrapes past the bar due to his member and chairmanship of may public accountability committees. Stinks for his family though.
However, I think this JUST scrapes past the bar due to his member and chairmanship of may public accountability committees.
What in particular about his member ???
Stuff happens in private and in public, this stuff should be left in the private file, its nothing to do with us the public.
Unless he/anyone is a member of a different political party!! 😉
Unless he/anyone is a member of a different political party!!
Well quite. Baseless accusations against a former PM and his porcine pal were also about acts which didn't break any laws. Furthermore, there was no video evidence of that.
The issue here isn't necessarily the law, but the morality and hypocrisy elements.
Given his association with the Janner cade, it also raises more questions. Ones which Jive is teasingly hinting at elsewhere. Valid questions about his suitability for some of the positions he holds. Also, I wonder how it'll go down in his constituency.
There is plenty more to come apparently, which will show he is a complete wrong 'un. If this is the case, it is difficult to argue that it is not in the public interest.
Given his association with the Janner cade, it also raises more questions.
Don't see the logic in that particular link. What he's done is not illegal. Stunningly hypocritical, I grant you...
Sounds like your playing cheap party politics Flashy, and I'm a bit disappointed you'd stoop to that.
He doesn't seem to think he's done anything wrong, though. It's 'the papers' being exploitative.
If his judgment on his private life is so flawed, how can he be expected to be objective on his professional life?
And it's a bit rich how he and Abbott are so concerned on the effect it has on him. Neither gives a crap about his wife and kids.
On Saturday night, when the story first broke, Vaz gave a statement to the Mail on Sunday saying that he was “genuinely sorry for the hurt and distress that has been caused by my actions in particular to my wife and children”......Diane Abbott, the shadow health secretary, told the same programme that she did not want to comment on Vaz’s future but that “this must be a dreadful time for him, and his family – his wife and his two children.”
Dont let the facts get in the way of your opinion/hate eh 🙄
If his judgment on his private life is so flawed,
How is it flawed?
Accepting the possible conflict of interest, he's not broken any laws and this kind of behaviour may help his private life. Dragging it through the gutter press and public spotlight won't do that.
You may not approve of what he does, but it is only your opinion that says it is flawed.
And we have enough problems from having politicians with no real world experience of what they are legislating for.
@mefty interesting let's wait and see then.
For those who think the press have behaved badly you might like to look at the Hacked Off website and maybe sign up ? [url= http://www.hackinginquiry.org ]link[/url]
I'm not sure I'd mourn the death of Vaz's political career, however it bit the dust.
Nice to see the Labour Party's internal self-destruction actually scoring a deserved hit though.
Perhaps the Hindujas could help him out with a bob or two if he has to step down? Shame his great mate Greville isn't around to issue a supportive statement in his time of need.
There is plenty more to come apparently, which will show he is a complete wrong 'un.
Coz he's bisexual/gay? or is JHJ going to be proved right again? if so Vaz needs to get Leon Britain/ Ted Heath levesl of establishment protection
Deceiving his family is pretty low, but it's not hurt the careers of Johnson, Livingston etc
Nor have accusations of closet homosexually , Look at Liam Fox or Guido Fawkes desperately trying to out William Hague (tho in Fox's case the trying to cover up is what hurt him)
I expect Vaz will keep a low profile for a bit while Labour is busy trying to figure out what it is and pop back up when it's finally decided to become a party again
pop back up
STW humour is so subtle that I bet it gets lost on many.
Bravo kimbers for that one - your efforts at Swinley stimulated the mind too!!
I'm amazed that so many people are forgiving of this.
He is the Chair of the Home Affairs Select Committee, who are currently reporting on prostitution, proceeds of crime and immigration. This is a seriously important function. They have previously reported on drugs policies and, in particular, legal status of poppers. By law, every member of that committee has to declare competing interests.
I checked the committee papers, and, unsurprisingly, he did not declare that he enjoys the company of eastern European male escorts and encourages them to take poppers and bring cocaine along to future parties.
The issue here is perhaps not breaking of laws, even morality. It is the fact that he has lied to parliament about conflict of interests.
(Caveat is perhaps this was his first time and he intended to declare it at the next committee meeting but I think this is unlikely!)
I checked the committee papers, and, unsurprisingly, he did not declare that he enjoys the company of eastern European male escorts and encourages them to take poppers and bring cocaine along to future parties.
To be fair, you don't tend to see many declarations of this type in the register of members' interests.
but it is only your opinion that says it is flawed.
Of course it is.
He wife and kids will be completely relaxed about paying men for sex.
Men who, it is claimed, receive money from a charity he is closely linked with.
Men who he offered to pay for their drugs.
Yes, it must be just me thinks that's all kinds of wrong. You obviously don't.
Which is nice.
Vaz should sling his hook as an MP, but not just for this. As others have said, what he chooses to do in his private life is his own business but where the line gets blurred is the peripheral part of the latest allegations - indirect payments.
He's excelled in sailing close to the wind for decades whilst manoeuvring himself into a position where he can judge the conduct of others in his Chairing roles.
Just in case anyone's forgotten his previous form includes:
- Stoking the flames of the "The Satantic Verses" controversy and giving tacit support to the first "extremist" protests in Britain. Those protests included the burning of our national flag, and repeated public calls for the murder of Salman Rushdie.
- £500K stashed in personal bank accounts and income that was undeclared on his Parliamentary returns. Scotland Yard investigated and was unable to confirm the source of those funds.
- Taking money through his wife's company from the Hinduja brothers - although he was later cleared of trying to exert any influence on their passport applications.
- Suggesting that an IRA bomb in Leicester was planted by the British Army
- Reportedly employing an illegal migrant as a nanny and also not paying the associated tax / NI
- Making false claims against a policewoman (he was suspended for a month for that)
- "interesting" Commercial deals via family businesses
- Receiving undeclared payments from a solicitor and then lying about it
- Claiming for MPs expenses without even having receipts.
The consistent pattern in some of the above issues has been indirect payments and payments for which the source cannot be traced.
So it's therefore very relevant that the latest allegations centre on indirect payments reportedly made to male escorts via a Charity that Vaz controls. The payments were reportedly listed as "painting" although the reporting makes it clear this does not reflect the service received. There's no inference the people making the payments on behalf of the charity had any knowledge of what was reportedly going on.
Any of the events above are unacceptable for an MP let alone repeated issues. For that reason he should stand down immediately. We must have MPs who not only set the law but uphold it in actions AND spirit.
If the reports are correct, I feel very sorry for his wife and family for the hurt this will cause. Having seen something similar when a friend found out her husband was doing something similar the effect of this sort of thing can be profound and life changing.
if so Vaz needs to get Leon Britain/ Ted Heath levesl of establishment protection
Leon Brittain was totally vindicated. "Not a shred of evidence": said the Met Police. Health likewise. The whole Westminster peodophile ring nonsense was a fabrication, all of it. One of abused individuals made it quite clear the journalist and ex-convict fraudster had coerced him into making statements and lead him to name "fanous people". There was a clear political agenda to spread lies and inuendo.
JHJ lost interest in the Rotheram child abuse case as soon as it was clear it didn't involve "the establishment"
Yes, it must be just me thinks that's all kinds of wrong
No, not just you.
"Morning judo" is not a euphamism then? (although i think jive has missed that one so far)
just5minutes +1.
His original "Satanic Verses" actions should of meant he was kicked out of the Labour party and never got selected as a Labour candidate again.
The conflict of interest is fun though; because he's in favour of decriminalising prostitution and moving the legal burden from the worker to the punter, ie him. If it was the other way round it'd be a bit stickier.
[i]I've[/i] got a conflict of interest, I think he's a fud.
a bit stickier.
stop it..... 😀
Like the rest of the Labour party, he was just in a race to the bottom.