Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh
It's not the funding, it's the hiding of where the funding is coming from.
We know that the Unions fund Labour - it's documented, so can be commented upon. We know that businesses contribute to the Tories - it's documented, so it can be queried.
If any politicians is hiding where their funds are coming from, it means they can be influenced without the knowledge of the Electorate - that is the whole point of the Members Interest Register and the Ministers Code of Conduct; transparency, openness, and the ability for other to say "hold on a minute, that group just gave you £nnnn, and now you've passed a bill/spoken in Parliament/had a meeting with Ministers about them".
Also, it can be used as leverage if it's below the radar - "hey, remember that £nnnn I gave you just before you supported a Bill that benefited my cause/business/Union? It would be a shame if that was leaked to the media...".
We know a lot of politicians are lying, cheating, dishonest poltroons - that's why we have processes and procedures to try and limit the more egregious exceptions.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf
More like you don't like Boris and are desperate for some mud to stick, reality is most people just don't care. there are bigger things to worry about.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul
This.
In fact, its never ending, and got tiresome long long ago.
There is always someone slinging mud to try and scrore points.
All that changes over the years is the names of the slinger and target.
|
This is a massive part of the problem, imo we should never get tired of rooting out corruption and dishonest practice, it should never be about liking someone as to excuse their malpractice, they need to be shamed everytime dodgy practice is uncovered whilst in and after they leave office and if the public find it tiresome, tough, it's to important to ignore and they need to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law to and if the law isn't robust enough then change it