So, if everything is above board, why has it taken little fairy-steps to gradually get to the point where Cameron is forced to [url=http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-cameron-to-publish-dinner-guest-lists-7585740.htmlrelease details of No. 10 dinner guests[/url?

Dennis Skinner: "Why hasn't the Prime Minister turned up? Is it because they wouldn't pay him enough?"

If only Milliband had the gumption, wherewithal and wit to have come out with that. Classic.

[url=http://sturdyblog.wordpress.com/2012/03/26/camerons-statement-video-and-some-questions/When is dinner not dinner and what constitutes "significant donors"?[/url

This is another that won't go away in a hurry. For someone who campaigned on cleaning up politics, Cameron appears to be making a pretty poor fist of the job

Coddy's like a dog wi' two cocks when stories like this break.



Unless it's anyone who's not a Tory.
*cough* cash for honours* *cough* 2006-7 *cough*

Want me to go back further? Ooooooooooh, where shall we start?

John Profumo
Jonathan Aitken
Jeffrey Archer
Neil Hamilton & Tim Smith
Westland
Arms to Iraq
Jeremy Thorpe

And don't get me started on the bunch of sleazy fookers who masqueraded as Labour:

Blair
Mandelson
Keith Vaz
Tessa Jowell
Jack Dromey

That's better. Let it aaaaaaall out.

Contrary to what Robinson believes, I am not a blind defender of everything Labour, especially when it comes to Nooooooo Labour. Blair learned well at the feet of his fairy godmother, Thatcher and certainly didn't endear himself to many socialists, even if we thought he was the lesser of two evils

It would appear Nick Robinson has had similar ideas to me www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17510020 Still which is worse for the Tory PR machine. Billionaires buying policy or the Granny tax, as Harry Hill would say....

It would appear Nick Robinson has had similar ideas to me www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17510020 Still which is worse for the Tory PR machine. Billionaires buying policy or the Granny tax, as Harry Hill would say....

I think most MP's get seduced into the murky shennanigans when they get into power. There are a few like Denis Skinner who don't succumb but by and large they're all as bad as each other. The opportunity to feather one's nest is all too tempting hence the cross party criminal charges filed against the expense fiddlers.

What Cruddas did was plain dumb and I would guess too that he was seduced by the sultry hack with a past record for doing things like this. Bravado and cock-strutting has cost him his job.

I believe there's a lot more about Cruddas that has yet to be aired, same goes for the likes of David Rowland and Andrew Feldman. One thing Cameron has shown so far is, he's probably not the best picker of men we've seen in politics.

I bet he doesn't pick them personally.

The more this Tory+poodles government goes on the more I'm convinced that Cameron is a coconut sitting on a fairground shy, he's not got the political nounce to keep inventing these bizarre and blatantly obvious "get them through in one term" policies and he's not stupid enough to force them through a single parliament term in the way he is doing without the knowledge that if just one of them fails to deliver then he is parliamentary dead meat.

Cruddas is just a salesman working to targets, pure and simple, and he's one of those salesmen that isn't even subtle about wanting the sale.

Yep.
What about meetings/engagements etc other than "dinner" and at places other than the flat? What about representatives of companies who've donated to the party so they themselves don't class as donors?
Like you say, there's a long way to go in this.

Somewhere down the line i can see party fund raising being outlawed and guess who will get left with the bill then? We'll all end up paying but at least we won't have to sit at Cameron's dinner table.

Good job really as I can imagine Coddy turning up to that social event with his Satake sashimi knife along with his Mino-sharp plus 3 ceramic sharpener.

[url=http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-cameron-wanted-to-wave-through-donors-policy-to-destroy-rights-of-workers-7593585.html'I say, old bean, while Sam's checking whether the galley slaves have got the dessert ready yet, shall we discuss your plan to create a real hire-and-fire culture?'[/url

At least it's all given Sarah Southern the chance for a career change. Perhaps she can find something socially useful to do instead of being a parasite?

Could possibly explain why there's been little appetite to reign in the payday loans companies too?

Not to be outdone - [url=http://politicalscrapbook.net/2012/03/boris-johnson-club-305-2/Come dine with me[/url says Boris

Certainly raises that question.

What do you mean suddenly? Given their policies they are and always have been scumbags. They don't need to be suspected of implementing those polices for cash for that to be true.



Of course it would. I am sure you would have been one of the first to post it.

I wrote to my local MP recently. All I received in return was a bog-standard reply from one of her staff, which addressed none of the concerns I had raised.

How times change, once upon a time the big political donors would have made do with beer and sandwiches when lobbying the PM. [iPlus ça change[/i.

You are referring to Wilson and the Union leaders, I presume.
Not the same situation at all ... Wilson was trying to get the unions "round the table" to do things that he wanted, not pimping for business.
Also, it was no secret, it was actually announced that it would be taking place, unlike this current sleazy issue.

Nice try though.

There's no real difference, other than justifying to yourself why it only counts as a [ibad thing[/i when it's done by the ones you don't like, and it's a contructive or necessary thing when done by the ones you don't mind. Beer and sandwiches gave major political donors access to the highest level of policy and decision making, it wasn't a strange coincidence they were major political donors and therefore major political actors. Just like Labour's "cash for honours" thing wasn't a new thing, people have always paid out in various ways to access politicians/political power, be it lobbyists, donors, campaign groups, pseudo-charity pressure groups etc. It's always happened, the only strange thing is people being surprised by it, or even stranger in your case making some subjective value judgement about when it doesn't count because it's [inecessary[/i and [ilegitimate[/i for those particular interests to get the attention they are paying for. Besides just because people pay doesn't mean they actually get anything never mind everything they want.

Ed Millibands list released today amongst all the Labour bad news. Half of his dinners were with Union leaders. Eight of those with Unite Leader Len McCluskey.

More cheese grommit?

How much did Len McCluskey donate to Labour? How much, other than the voluntary donation by individual Union members, did the Unions donate to Labour?
We're these dinners sold for donations? Were there any promises made when arranging these dinners that the donor would have input to policy making?

And that'll be donations to political parties, from a trades union, that members have to opt into paying.

You do not get any say in whether any money you spend at a business goes to a political party or not.

Did the previous government rescind all the anti-union legislation introduced by the governments before that? Has Miliband offered to do this in the future - or offered even conditional support for any industrial action that has taken place or been mentioned since he became leader?

Mind, it's always amusing seeing the people who actually approve of the majority of their fellow citizens being shafted and who believe all the propaganda that has being flying around for years.