When an MP’s lying is lauded and reeled out as a rebuttal of corruption, you know we are in deep doo-doo.
We have fallen down a deep rabbit hole overnight, and at the bottom is Labour’s spin machine growing like topsy.
Stephen Byers, former trade and transport secretary, was secretly recorded offering himself “like a sort of cab for hire” for up £5,000 a day. He also suggested bringing Tony Blair to meet clients.
You might expect the Labour whips to be horrified at this evidence of the corruption at the heart of Nu-Labour, no chance!
After conferring with the whips, his ‘friends’ came out with this statement.
“he had effectively lied throughout his meeting.”
A Labour source said last night: There is no suggestion that they have broken the rules in any way, and they would rebut any such suggestion.
“There is no suggestion that they have broken the rules in any way……” if lying in order to earn extra money from your position as an ex-Minister is not against the rules, then it should be.
Even Tescos have pitched in. It said Byers had told them his claims to the TV crew were ‘complete fiction’.
The fact that the whips calmly accept an MP was lying, I find even more soul destroying than the idea of one or two MPs being bent. (Or six or seven)
There is worse to come though.
Margaret Moran was another MP caught offering influence for cash – and the excuse this time can be paraphrased as ‘Margaret is as mad as a box of frogs’.
‘Moran has been very unwell with stress, and so should not be given any credibility.
‘Should not be given any credibility’ – but you haven’t suspended her, haven’t sent her home unpaid as ‘unfit for purpose’, haven’t warned her constituents that she ‘shouldn’t be given any credibility’, haven’t relieved the tax payer of the onerous duty of paying for her every whim – how many other MPs are we paying for that ‘shouldn’t be given any credibility’? (Don’t bother answering that, rhetorical question)
Part of the problem is that Michael Martin granted the freedom of the venerable House of Corruption to every bent MP to roam the corridors, offering their lying and non credible words and influence for sale to any chancer with a couple of grand in their pocket. Jim Devine, Eliot Morley, David Chaytor, are still holding forth in the tea rooms, still referred to as ‘The Honourable’ by the House of Commons staff. The Labour Party’s official solicitor Gerald Shame Shamash is telling the magistrates that they should not be held in the dock as common criminals.
What price the ‘character witnesses’ that will inevitably be called from amongst the illuminati of New Labour now that we officially know that being ‘a liar’ or ‘not credible’ is acceptable behaviour for a Nu-Labour MP.
I was going to write today of the simpering outrage from the leftie Dave Semple at the news in yesterday’s Telegraph that £18 million in state funds has gone to UNITE.
I was outraged; unions are not there to be funded by the State, and taking such funding compromises unions.
No Dave, and the state is not there to be funded by the unions – taking such funding compromises democracy, but that doesn’t seem to concern you.
Dave’s objection is that: ‘Their bureaucracies could thence rely on State aid as insulation from having to fight for and fight to keep members’ dues.’
Did it occur to you Dave, that the state bureaucracy could thence rely on Union aid as insulation from having to fight for and keep their voters?
No, of course not, for you don’t really believe that the precise same pound notes were handed from taxpayer to Union to Government, do you?
You think that because the Tax Payers money was channeled into Partnership at Work, the Union Modernisation Fund and the Union Learning Fund, and the law says it must be ringfenced, that there is no connection with political donations.
So the Tax Payers pound goes into fund ‘a’, and the Union is relieved of the liability to fund training projects…
Even you admit that ‘Union Learning Fund projects, for example, seem open only to union members.’
Which leaves the Union in a good financial position to use its own (b) funds to bribe the Labour party to keep on channeling money to it.
But because the money is not going directly from one fund to another (so you say, but we have not yet seen the audit have we?) then it is not acceptable for Iain Dale to engage in ‘high pitched screaming’ before any facts are known…but it is acceptable for you to dismiss ‘the near hysterical comments in the Right-blogosphere’ before any facts are known?
The trouble with the non-credible lying Labour Party and all its members is that the really cannot see what they have done to our political system.