Liam Fox and his "advisor"

[Corsair7]

Security Clearance....????


Um, should not Dr Fox have his security clearances suspended until this situation is clearly explained?


I'm pretty sure I would have mine suspended if I took non cleared or auhorised people into my place of work.


Just because he's the 'boss' doesn't mean he can break the rules.

[DS3R]

Skywalker said:

Day 8, in the Big Brother house. And Liam is wondering what new manner of corruption / being in the apparent influence of foreign powers will be revealed in this week's Sunday papers.

Day 8 outside the Big Brother house and the general public are still left wondering how the UK's Minister for Defence has been allowed to invite a non-security cleared, non-vetted individual to have open access to his diary and travel plans, be introduced to world leaders and senior military staff at the heart of current operations, while operating defence related companies and earning money from backers who seek to influence Government policy,

yet still there is no evidence (or admission) or wrong-doing,

and the shower of st who were in for the previous 13 years cannot get enough of a handle on this for Fox to have uncerimoniously be booted out already.

Not withstanding the words inside the Ministerial Code (eg in the f**king foreword, "After the scandals of recent years, people have lost faith in politics and politicians. It is our duty to restore their trust. It is not enough simply to make a difference. We must [u]be[/u] different."), any breach is irrelevant, the excrutiating absence of judgement and monumental arrogance of a man who seems this as appropriate, and that sacking him "shows weakness" means he really, really should have gone. How he does not see this I do not know.

[johnxjsc1985]

Well so far we have a minister not charged with anything other than perhaps not trusting his own staff and another member thorwing litter into a bin.Hardly stuff worthy of someone like Mandy.
Intersting how this anti Gov stuff is on the go all the time and eagerly reported by the BBC with relish.
Maybe the press will wake up soon and realise that actually we are in a perilous state in this country and in Europe and focus on what is going on to save us.A big thanks to Mr Blair or Mr Brown for that .

[Sticks.]

fathomfive said:

Well yes, you can. Especially if you want people to believe you are different to the last lot and are committed to getting the country out of the mess they left it in.

Exactly what a lot of people thought in 1997.

[shed driver]

Is Letwin disposing of Trade waste? And what about this government's recycling targets? All that paper going to waste!

Seriously, if I was one of his constituents and I had written to him could I be sure my identity was safe? Who would be liable for identity theft in this case?

SD

[maxxy5]

Fox is doomed - http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/ - which fits with the rumors that Werritty was being funded by foreign intelligence interests

[Corsair7]

johnxjsc1985 said:

Well so far we have a minister not charged with anything other than perhaps not trusting his own staff and another member thorwing litter into a bin.Hardly stuff worthy of someone like Mandy.
Intersting how this anti Gov stuff is on the go all the time and eagerly reported by the BBC with relish.
Maybe the press will wake up soon and realise that actually we are in a perilous state in this country and in Europe and focus on what is going on to save us.A big thanks to Mr Blair or Mr Brown for that .

Litter? Litter does not exist in this sense. When working in governemnt departments, all staff are required to dispose of documentation in the correct fashion and in accordance with security measures and policies.

I would suspect at very least that these documents carried the personal details of those sending the mail - Positions/ranks, names, addresses, telephone numbers, email addresses etc.... never mind the actual content. This data could easily be construed as sensitive when gatherered together on one document.

Clearly, there will be policies governing the retention and destruction of such correspondence, and all employees (YES - employees) will have to know these policies and adhere to them.

[turbobloke]

maxxy5 said:

Fox is doomed - http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/ - which fits with the rumors that Werritty was being funded by foreign intelligence interests

Or, Werritty is off the hook for abusing the public purse to fund his trips, as they were privately funded, and by implication Fox is off the hook in terms of (not) paying for him from gov't i.e. public funds. Spin works both ways and either way at least as yet, Fox hasn't resigned over it. It's not certain that he'll go, then again it never was.

As to Letwin, is it August I thought it was October.

[Sticks.]

Corsair7 said:

Litter? Litter does not exist in this sense. When working in governemnt departments, all staff are required to dispose of documentation in the correct fashion and in accordance with security measures and policies.

I would suspect at very least that these documents carried the personal details of those sending the mail - Positions/ranks, names, addresses, telephone numbers, email addresses etc.... never mind the actual content. This data could easily be construed as sensitive when gatherered together on one document.

Clearly, there will be policies governing the retention and destruction of such correspondence, and all employees (YES - employees) will have to know these policies and adhere to them.

Quite how he failed to appreciate these basic principles is beyond me. And even then, ignoring the possibility that someone might see him or find them.

[Corsair7]

If this was the 1960's /70's he'd have been locked up as a soviet spy by now.

[turbobloke]

coyft said:

turbobloke said:

maxxy5 said:

Fox is doomed - http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/ - which fits with the rumors that Werritty was being funded by foreign intelligence interests

Or, Werritty is off the hook for abusing the public purse to fund his trips, as they were privately funded, and by implication Fox is off the hook in terms of (not) paying for him from gov't i.e. public funds. Spin works both ways and either way at least as yet, Fox hasn't resigned over it. It's not certain that he'll go, then again it never was.

As to Letwin, is it August I thought it was October.

The only way he'll survive is if Werritty's backers have been publicly declared. You can't have someone accompanying a Minister in official meetings, if they are paid to be there by private non disclosed backers.

There's a register of MP's interests, is there really a register of hangers' on interests?!

The distance from Fox is what matters, and it's not yet clear how much space there really is. Not in terms of friendship. He may yet go, or he may not.

[Jasandjules]

johnxjsc1985 said:

Well so far we have a minister not charged with anything other than perhaps not trusting his own staff and another member thorwing litter into a bin.Hardly stuff worthy of someone like Mandy.

I agree. However, given that he has squirmed and perhaps even lied about matters, he needs to go. It is exactly because it's not as bad as Mandy that he needs to go. The LibCons need to be harsher on even a hit of impropriety if they are to be better than the Liebour scum and their gravy train antics.

[Mermaid]

turbobloke said:

. He may yet go, or he may not.

His credibility is gone.

[MX7]

Now the funding has become clear, I'd kick Fox out of the party.

As for Letwin, what the hell were you thinking?

[turbobloke]

coyft said:

turbobloke said:

coyft said:

turbobloke said:

maxxy5 said:

Fox is doomed - http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/ - which fits with the rumors that Werritty was being funded by foreign intelligence interests

Or, Werritty is off the hook for abusing the public purse to fund his trips, as they were privately funded, and by implication Fox is off the hook in terms of (not) paying for him from gov't i.e. public funds. Spin works both ways and either way at least as yet, Fox hasn't resigned over it. It's not certain that he'll go, then again it never was.

As to Letwin, is it August I thought it was October.

The only way he'll survive is if Werritty's backers have been publicly declared. You can't have someone accompanying a Minister in official meetings, if they are paid to be there by private non disclosed backers.

There's a register of MP's interests, is there really a register of hangers' on interests?!

The distance from Fox is what matters, and it's not yet clear how much space there really is. Not in terms of friendship. He may yet go, or he may not.

Hanger on? This isn't some bloke who is waiting outside buildings, he has attended official meetings at the request of Liam Fox. He is being paid to be there by private undisclosed interests, how can Liam Fox possibly spin that? His only way out is to say that Werritty's interests were in the public domain. Well, that's the way I see it, unless you can think of something else?

Werritty is still not an MP though and there is no register of other people's interests no matter what they are. Whether there ought to be is another point.

If that bit about 'at the request of Fox' is multiply correct for all 18 meetings or however many there were, and I'm not doubting it without evidence (I hadn't read it anywhere until the above post, but then I could have missed it) then the situation is more serious for Fox.

[Justayellowbadge]

turbobloke said:

If that bit about 'at the request of Fox' is correct and I'm not doubting it without evidence (I hadn't read it anywhere until the above post, but then I could have missed it) then the situation is more serious for Fox.

He's unlikely to have attended any against Fox's wishes!

[turbobloke]

Justayellowbadge said:

turbobloke said:

If that bit about 'at the request of Fox' is correct and I'm not doubting it without evidence (I hadn't read it anywhere until the above post, but then I could have missed it) then the situation is more serious for Fox.

He's unlikely to have attended any against Fox's wishes!

No but that wasn't my point. If Werritty was on the give rather than on the take. If he added to the meeting(s) in some useful way, as opposed to benefitting financially as the only outcome of being there.

[Mermaid]

turbobloke said:

... If Werritty was on the give rather than on the take. If he added to the meeting(s) in some useful way, as opposed to benefitting financially as the only outcome of being there.

That would be mighty charitable, perhaps he should be awarded an OBE or something like that

[Justayellowbadge]

Ah, so we reach the crux of the matter.

Was Werrity a giver or a taker?

[turbobloke]

Wurls said:

Justayellowbadge said:

Ah, so we reach the crux of the matter.

Was Werrity a giver or a taker?

Didn't it say on his business card?

The thing is, if I'm told Fox is as guilty as hell I'll be sceptical of that, and if I'm told he's innocent I'll be sceptical of that too.

I'm not defending either of these two characters, but at this stage he hasn't moved an inch and it's the devil in the detail that will lead to Fox's resignation, or what gets him kicked out of government.