TUC given £2.4m from the government's foreign aid fund

[Asterix]

Why on earth is this so far down the politics sction of The Times?

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/art...

This is completely scandalous!

[Mondeohdear]

Asterix said:

Why on earth is this so far down the politics sction of The Times?

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/art...

This is completely scandalous!

So DfID give £2.4m to TUC who then pay £2.4m into Gordon's Full Term Fund. Sounds about right.

[the_smalls]

It seems like we're not the only ones who think this should be much bigger news - read the comments. Perhaps the Times will take notice. You do wonder, though, why the other political parties aren't picking up on this?

[Asterix]

No idea either - no different from MP's employing their wife or kids so that taxpayer's money ends up back in their pocket I suppose.

[Zod]

Looks to me as if a criminal offence should be ascertainable from this. Compare this with Labour's bleats about Goldsmith giving a few tens of thousands through a company.

[Blib]

Zod said:

Looks to me as if a criminal offence should be ascertainable from this. Compare this with Labour's bleats about Goldsmith giving a few tens of thousands through a company.

Shirley, it amounts to exactly the same thing?

Finding ways to get around regulations.

They are as bad as eachother.

ETA: In fact, Goldsmith's contribution seems to be affecting Tory policy in a more damaging way.

Bless his little 'green' socks.

Edited by Blib on Monday 11th January 18:55

[Zod]

nothing of the sort:

Tory alleged naughtiness = private donation that may not have come from an eligible person;

Labour alleged naughtiness = public money from the international aid budget given to umbrella organisation for major donors to Labour.

[bonsai]

It's a well known fact the Labour Party is seriously short of cash, nice to see they've found a resolution to that problem. Shame it won't help them.

Edited by bonsai on Monday 11th January 19:07

[rich1231]

Make a complaint to the Police.

[Blib]

Zod said:

nothing of the sort:

Tory alleged naughtiness = private donation that may not have come from an eligible person;

Labour alleged naughtiness = public money from the international aid budget given to umbrella organisation for major donors to Labour.

It is of the sort.

They are both dodging regulations.

[s2art]

Blib said:

Zod said:

nothing of the sort:

Tory alleged naughtiness = private donation that may not have come from an eligible person;

Labour alleged naughtiness = public money from the international aid budget given to umbrella organisation for major donors to Labour.

It is of the sort.

They are both dodging regulations.

Different order of corruption I would have thought. Tory one = minor, NuLab = string them up.

[AndrewW-G]

Blib said:

Zod said:

nothing of the sort:

Tory alleged naughtiness = private donation that may not have come from an eligible person;

Labour alleged naughtiness = public money from the international aid budget given to umbrella organisation for major donors to Labour.

It is of the sort.

They are both dodging regulations.

You are right, in the simplest of terms they are both dodging regulations.
I think the big difference is that whilst they are both trying to accept money that they shouldn’t, Labour are also misappropriating public funds to support their election campaign funds / pay off their overdraught. Money that’s been paid by the public in taxation, to be used by the government in running the country and not to be spent by a political party on its election campaigns.

I don’t know about you, but I wouldn’t be happy if when signing my government blackmail cheques, I knew that it wasn’t going to be used for “legitimate” government purposes

Or Tory donation = kid stealing mars bar from post office sweetie counter, labour donation = Ronnie Biggs & great train robbery, both simply thefts from the post office

[Blib]

You can't be only a bit pregnant.

The only reason the Tories aren't doing what Labour are trying to do is that they're not in government. If you think that they woouldn't push 'favour' the way of their own buddies then you're being either very young, blinkered or naive.

[andymadmak]

Blib said:

You can't be only a bit pregnant.

The only reason the Tories aren't doing what Labour are trying to do is that they're not in government. If you think that they woouldn't push 'favour' the way of their own buddies then you're being either very young, blinkered or naive.

Oh please stop it.
Is this what new labours defenders have got down to now? Deliberately obfuscating the missapropriation of PUBLIC money? followed by a somewhat lame "well they would do the same if they could"
Have you no sense of shame, decency or honesty?

[Blib]

andymadmak said:

Blib said:

You can't be only a bit pregnant.

The only reason the Tories aren't doing what Labour are trying to do is that they're not in government. If you think that they woouldn't push 'favour' the way of their own buddies then you're being either very young, blinkered or naive.

Oh please stop it.
Is this what new labours defenders have got down to now? Deliberately obfuscating the missapropriation of PUBLIC money? followed by a somewhat lame "well they would do the same if they could"
Have you no sense of shame, decency or honesty?

Thank you for deciding that I'm a Nu Labour defender.

I've never voted Labour in my life. Not Lib Dem for that matter.

It's folk such as yourself who see the errors in everyone but yourself and the little band who you meekly traipse behind who should take a little time to smell the coffee.

I've ben around long enough to see first hand the financial sleaze of all of the major political parties in this country.

Go ahead and be a blind little lamb who sees no wrong in the particuler bunch of thieves and liars who've conned you if you wish.

"shame, decency & honesty"....what do you who run around defending any of these charlatans know of such things.

Jeez.

[AndrewW-G]

Blib said:

You can't be only a bit pregnant.

The only reason the Tories aren't doing what Labour are trying to do is that they're not in government. If you think that they woouldn't push 'favour' the way of their own buddies then you're being either very young, blinkered or naive.

I agree, if the conservatives were in power, then they would be in a position to do the same thing, as it is the conservatives aren’t in power and therefore that argument is effectively redundant................. It’s very similar to the "what do the Tories say we should be doing" deflective statements that winky is so fond of releasing

[Blib]

AndrewW-G said:

Blib said:

You can't be only a bit pregnant.

The only reason the Tories aren't doing what Labour are trying to do is that they're not in government. If you think that they woouldn't push 'favour' the way of their own buddies then you're being either very young, blinkered or naive.

I agree, if the conservatives were in power, then they would be in a position to do the same thing, as it is the conservatives aren’t in power and therefore that argument is effectively redundant................. It’s very similar to the "what do the Tories say we should be doing" deflective statements that winky is so fond of releasing

History tells us than when the Tories were in power they did do the same thing.

I can't be bothered any more with this blinkered bks.

"The Tories are wonderful and will not misappropriate any money from government funds to help their friends and supporterts when they win the next General Election".

Happy now?

It's impossible to have a conversation with your guys.

It's like talking to Ludo & NigelFR. It really is.

[eharding]

Blib said:

It's impossible to have a conversation with your guys.

You might find conversation easier if you take off your "La La La I Can't Hear You" hat - the one with the flexible fingers that fit nicely into your ears - and don the "Beer Bonnet" - the one with a couple of tinnies attached and appropriate plumbing. A "Lager Mitt" - if you remember those - might help with the relaxation process.

The worst excesses of the miscreants in the last Conservative administration appear like the combined efforts of Billy Bunter and Frank Spencer at a bit of bungled apple scrumping compared to the genuinely evil, corrupt, malign, self-serving, destructive entity that this Labour administration has become. Get your head out of your backside for thirty seconds, and you'd appreciate this.

[Blib]

eharding said:

Blib said:

It's impossible to have a conversation with your guys.

You might find conversation easier if you take off your "La La La I Can't Hear You" hat - the one with the flexible fingers that fit nicely into your ears - and don the "Beer Bonnet" - the one with a couple of tinnies attached and appropriate plumbing. A "Lager Mitt" - if you remember those - might help with the relaxation process.

The worst excesses of the miscreants in the last Conservative administration appear like the combined efforts of Billy Bunter and Frank Spencer at a bit of bungled apple scrumping compared to the genuinely evil, corrupt, malign, self-serving, destructive entity that this Labour administration has become. Get your head out of your backside for thirty seconds, and you'd appreciate this.

Thank you for your reasoned opinion. Just because you say it is, doersn't make it so you know.

They have been, are and will be just as bad as eachother. If yo genuinely believe that not to be true, then wait awhile and Cameron and his cronies will prove it to you.

[eharding]

Blib said:

Thank you for your reasoned opinion. Just because you say it is, doersn't make it so you know.

I love a challenge.

You come up with your list of top Tory mischief, and we'll compare them with the sins of the current administration.