Conservatives sell 'Access to the Prime Minister' and 'Influence on Government Policy' for £250k

The Tory party co-treasurer Peter Cruddas has had to resign after being caught offering access to the prime minister and chancellor for £250,000.

He was forced to resign after footage from a Sunday Times sting operation showed him making the offer to undercover reporters.

In his resignation statement last night the senior Conservative responsible for collecting donations for the party said he deeply regretted the repercussions of his "bluster" during the recorded conversations. 

In the footage, he is heard to say: "£200-250k is premier league … what you would get is, when we talk about your donations the first thing we want to do is get you at the Cameron/Osborne dinners" ...

"You do really pick up a lot of information and when you see the prime minister, you're seeing David Cameron, not the prime minister. But within that room everything is confidential – you can ask him practically any question you want" ...
 

"If you're unhappy about something, we will listen to you and put it into the policy committee at No 10 – we feed all feedback to the policy committee."

The newspaper claims the offer was made even though Cruddas knew the money would come from a fund in Liechtenstein that was not eligible to make donations under electoral law. Options said to have been discussed included creating a British subsidiary or using UK employees as conduits. The overseas clients were, in fact, reporters posing as wealth fund executives who had made clear they wished to develop contacts with the prime minister and other senior ministers to further their business.

The revelations will be a considerable embarrassment for the government, especially in the wake of claims in the budget of a supposed crackdown on wealth in offshore havens. Cameron has also made political mileage out of his intention to run a sleaze-free government.

 

The disclosures appear to contradict previous claims by the Conservatives that their high-value donor groups, such as the "leader's group", are for genuine supporters who do not seek to influence policy in return for their cash.

They also raise questions about the role of the prime minister. Months before taking office, Cameron warned that this type of "secret corporate lobbying" was the "next big scandal waiting to happen". Yet the Sunday Times claims the meetings, at which Cruddas claimed "premier league" donors could lobby the prime minister directly, have not been declared to the public.

Cameron clearly knew about such problems, as his own warnings prior to entering office suggest ... however on entering office he chose to ignore his own warnings and carried on regardless ... yet another mistake from an increasingly arrogant and out of touch 'leader' ...

Given this type of behaviour it's no surprise that the damaging NHS reforms were forced through regardless (with Lansley and the Conservative party also heavily backed by Private Healthcare providers) ...

No wonder the Conversatives are also not keen on the electoral commissions recommendations to limit any donations to £10,000 ...

What immoral and corrupt people these people really are ...

More arrests and resignations ... as 'leaders' continue to be exposed

As the scandal continues to escalate, and 'terriers' such as Tom Watson and Chris Bryant gain the upper hand in exposing the truth and bringing those involved to justice, the 'leaders' in this murky 'underworld' are clearly starting to panic (as they are no longer in control).

Over the course of the weekend, Rebekah Brooks (CEO News International) resigned (despite Rupert Murdoch flying in to look after her) and has been arrested on charges of corruption and phone hacking.

Likewise, Sir Mark Stephenson, the top police officer in the country has now resigned because of the hiring of Neil Wallis (Andy Coulson's deputy editor at the News of the World) as a communications adviser to the Metropolitan Police at a time when phone hacking allegations were being reviewed. Following his arrival, the police downplayed claims of phone hacking and refused to reopen the case (e.g. despite the evidence they had clearly saying the opposite)! Wallis, like Andy Coulson himself, has now been arrested on suspicion of conspiring to intercept communications.

Some are speculating that the arrest of Rebekah Brooks this Sunday was deliberately brought forward to stop any further (and more damaging) revelations being made public (e.g. about the relationships/collusion between the media, police and politicians), as Brooks is due to face tough questions from a cross-party Committee of MP's on Tuesday.

This is not something that Cameron, the Murdoch's or the police officers likely to be implicated want to see, but the net is closing in on all of them.


James and Rupert Murdoch have been summoned to attend the Committee of MP's and their future roles in BSkyB and News Corporation are now also being questioned (by fellow directors and shareholders) ... and with Brooks no longer acting as a 'firebreak' they both look increasingly at risk!

More resignations are likely from the Metropolitan Police too (e.g. John Yates) and David Cameron also looks increasingly vulnerable too ... as he, unlike Sir Mark Stephenson, has steadfastly refused to take responsibility or apologise for his poor judgement in bringing Coulson into Number 10 (despite all the warnings he received). 

Cameron is desperately trying to steer the scandal away from him and towards the issues associated with the media and police, to distract attention away from the relationship between himself and News International ... but the evidence is growing by the day. Cameron's diary shows he met News International executives on a regular basis (c.f. executives from all other media groups - including the BBC) and in his resignation speech the Metropolitan Police Commissioner alluded to the difficulties in raising issues with regard to News of the World with the Prime Minister when Andy Coulson was in the position he was!

Cameron has consistently failed to explain in detail the precise circumstances in which he took on Coulson, as well as any discussions held around the time of his subsequent resignation. Cameron, like the Murdoch's, has no 'firebreak' either and he has stated the decision to recruit Coulson was 'his and his alone' ... hence his position is starting to look increasingly vulnerable too.

Will Cameron survive ... IMHO it's too early to say at the moment ... but we do know this scandal is not going to go away and has got a long way to go ... and those who have abused their power/trust are struggling to keep a lid on it!

Yvette Cooper, the shadow home secretary, said: “It is striking that Sir Paul has taken responsibility and answered questions about the appointment of the deputy editor of the News of the World whereas the Prime Minister still refuses to recognise his misjudgment and answer questions on the appointment of the editor of the News of the World at the time of the initial phone hacking investigation. People will wonder at why different rules apply for the Prime Minister and the Met, especially when as Sir Paul said himself, unlike Andy Coulson, Neil Wallis had not been forced to resign from the News of the World.”

Cameron - representing the People ... or doing Murdoch's bidding?

Despite coming out 'fighting' ... Cameron is struggling to shrug off his close ties/relationship with the scandals associated Coulson, the Murdoch Empire and phone hacking at the 'News of the World' ... 

His decision, despite concerns/advice raised by many people, to employ Coulson at the heart of Government creates serious question marks around his personal judgement ... and it looks like it could be sufficient to see him fall (and he knows it) ...! 

Coulson, the News of the World Editor during the scandals, was yesterday arrested by police ... and Cameron is being deliberately vague about detailed questions/checks he made prior to employing him ... and/or any specific concerns/advice he received from others. He is instead preferring to deflect questions away by saying "he had decided to give Coulson a 'second chance', that it was his decision, and his decision alone ... and that people will judge him on his decisions"! 

Given his concern about the situation ... he is clearly sheltering others from the decision to employ Coulson, to avoid other colleagues also being brought into the fray (n.b. George Osborne has been implicated too) and to avoid the crisis engulfing the whole Government and his entire Party. Unlike Rebekah Brooks, he is clearly prepared to fall on his sword ... but is waiting to see how the whole scandal develops!

Well it does not look good for him at the moment ... as it becomes clear that Cameron, in a speech only 10 days ago, was clearly doing Murdoch's bidding! With Murdoch's ruthless desire to takeover BSkyB at risk of being blocked by Ofcom*, Cameron decided to go on the offensive with a public and unexpected attack on Ofcom ... making clear his desire to get rid of the quango (i.e. he threatened them)! 

Cameron has been helping Murdoch in his takeover bid prior to doing this too. For instance Cameron took the opportunity to place a well-known ally/backer of Murdoch (Jeremy Hunt) in charge of deciding whether or not to refer Murdoch's proposed takeover to the Competition Commission (taking the decision away from the Business Secretary, who normally takes such decisions) ... and not surprisingly, after many 'discussions/ assurances' from Murdoch, Hunt said he was 'minded to pass the bid'! 

However, given recent events it's clear that there is 'politically' no way that Cameron/Hunt will get away with this right now (or at least anytime soon), so they have decided to park it in the long grass (on the grounds of having to go through 100,000's submissions they have received about the takeover)!

* Ofcom can block the takeover if they believe News International is not a 'fit and proper' organisation* to own a UK broadcaster ... and with News International now accused of deleting millions of emails, rather than co-operating fully with the Police (as they have repeated stated in public), they clearly fail this 'test'. 

** News International executives could also be facing charges of corruption in the US too, where such offences are dealt with extremely seriously (e.g. executives, whether they were knowing or not, can be completely stripped of all their assets). The Murdoch's are really panicking now ... hence Rupert Murdoch's decision to come over to the UK to try to 'take control' ... and to see who else they need to bribe/threaten!

People: Do politicians represent them, police protect them and the press inform them ...?

This morning David Cameron has tried to come out fighting ... but 'boxed in' ... he has had to resort to using a little bit of honesty. Firstly he provided details on the two public inquiries being planned. 

The first, led by a judge, will get to the bottom of the specific revelations and allegations seen ... e.g. the illegal and utterly unacceptable practices taking place (e.g. phone hacking and illegal payments to corrupt police officers) ... to find out what happened ... and how it was allowed to happen.  This will include finding out why the first police investigation failed so abysmally ... what exactly was going on at the News of the World and what was going on at other newspapers, with this inquiry starting as soon as all police/criminal investigations are complete.

The second inquiry involves action associated with learning the wider lessons for the future of the press, conducted by a credible panel of figures drawn from a range of different backgrounds and who command the full support, respect and above all confidence of the public. They should be truly independent, without any motive but to seek the truth and clean up the press. In doing so they will look at the culture, the practices and the ethics of the British press, and in particular they should look at how our newspapers are regulated and make recommendations for the future (NB Cameron made clear self regulation and the Press Complaints Commission had failed).

He tried to limit the damage of his close personal relationships with Coulson and Brooks, but his final comments were the most damaging/telling of all ...

"But there is, as I said at the outset, a third question that this scandal asks of us, and it is not an easy one for me to answer. Because as we’re considering the devastating revelations of the past few days, it is no good just pointing the finger at this individual journalist, or that individual newspaper.

It’s no good, actually, just criticising the police. The truth is, we have all been in this together – the press, politicians and leaders of all parties – and yes, that includes me. We have not gripped this issue. 

During the last government, a police investigation was undertaken, it was inadequate and not enough was done. There were reports from the Information Commissioner and they went unheeded. There were Select Committee reports on phone hacking and there was no follow-up. Throughout all this, all the warnings, all the concern, the government at the time did nothing. And frankly, neither did the Opposition.

To be fair, it is difficult for politicians to call for more regulation of the media, because if we do so, we’re accused of wanting to stifle a free press or even free speech. But the deeper truth is this: there is a less noble reason. Because party leaders were so keen to win the support of newspapers we turned a blind eye to the need to sort this issue, get on top of the bad practices, to change the way our newspapers are regulated.

It’s a bit like MPs’ expenses. The people in power knew things weren’t right. But they didn’t do enough quickly enough – until the full mess of the situation was revealed.

Now, when the scandal hits and the truth is plain for everyone to see there are two choices. You can down-play it and deny the problem is deep – or you can accept the seriousness of the situation and deal with it. I want to deal with it.

These inquiries give us a chance for a fresh start and I want us to take it. Look, it’s healthy that politicians and journalists speak to each other; know each other. Democracy is government by explanation and we need the media to explain what we’re trying to do. But this is a wake-up call.

Over the decades, on the watch of both Labour leaders and Conservative leaders, politicians and the press have spent time courting support, not confronting the problems.

Well: it’s on my watch that the music has stopped. And I’m saying, loud and clear – things have got to change. The relationship needs to be different in the future. 

I’m not going to pretend that there’s some nirvana of two separate worlds, relating to each other on the basis of total transparency and ethical perfection. That's not real life.

But we can do a hell of a lot better than we’ve done so far. Because as this scandal shows, while it’s vital that a free press can tell truth to power it is equally important that those in power can tell truth to the press.

For people watching this scandal unfold, there is something disturbing about what they see. Just think of who they put their trust in. The police to protect them. The politicians to represent them. The press to inform them.

All of them have let them down.

So when the inquiries are over, the questions have been asked, and the truth found out I want a police that has proved itself beyond reproach, a political system that people feel is on their side and a press that is yes, free and rigorous; that investigates and entertains; that holds those in power to account and occasionally – yes, even regularly – drives them mad.

But, in the end, is a free press that is also clean and trustworthy. That is what people want. That is what I want. And I will not rest until we get it".

Indeed so ... but it's the collusion, corruption, and the blatant abuse/misuse of Power that is now clear for all to see ... not just with the Politicians, Media and Police ... but with the banks, corporate leaders, landowners and the whole judiciary too. e.g. if you started photocopying bank notes (and lending it out at interest) you'd be locked up ... yet this is what banks legally do everyday!

Such blatant abuses of Power are not going to go away ... not until more people wake up and smell the coffee ... and do something about it that is!

Aristotle famously said:

"Democracy is when the indigent, and not the men of property, are the rulers"

"In a democracy the poor will have more power than the rich, because there are more of them, and the will of the majority is supreme"

"The trade of the petty usurer is hated with most reason: it makes a profit from currency itself, instead of making it from the process which currency was meant to serve. Their common characteristic is obviously their sordid avarice"

"No notice is taken of a little evil, but when it increases it strikes the eye"

A failing country - rewarding irresponsibility, corruption and cheating

In a speech in London, Ed Miliband, the current leader of the Labour party, admitted that, following a decade in power, voters looked upon Labour as the party which protected claimants abusing the welfare system (cheating), allowed reckless gambling in the City (corruption) as well as the reward of failure in the boardroom (irresponsibility). 

He said "Labour - a party founded by hard working people for hard working people - was seen by some, however unfairly, as the party of those ripping off our society".

The Labour leader said the party must now focus on changing this perception, he said Labour must become a party that "rewards contribution, not worklessness." He said Labour must also focus on rewarding "entrepreneurship" and "wealth creation", and said that Labour "must change" in order once again to be "the party of the grafters". 

He said Labour had failed to change the 'take what you can culture' (i.e. 'greed') and had "failed to change the ethic of the country" ...

Indeed so ... and they have now effectively admitted it! 

In fact the truth is they made things far worse ... as they showed that Labour, a party backed by the unions, and supposed to represent the interests of honest hard-working people, failed to represent their interests at all ... and, corrupted by power, and focused on media sound-bites and self-interest, acted recklessly and irresponsibly ... without any moral/ethical values at all ... 

Indeed Labour politicians promoted the line 'greed is good', and 'took what they could' for themselves (e.g. just take a look at the expenses scandal, and at all the executive/non-executive positions in large corporations/banks they took up for themselves) ... as they 'milked' their position of power, whilst preaching the moral high ground to everyone else! The truth is that New Labour, during their decade in power, destroyed the country ... and the vast majority of people in the UK are now paying the price ... (nb Tony Blair, on leaving office, immediately joined the bankers, and paid £1m/year for doing virtually nothing!) ... 


So should we trust them now ... definitely not (nb Ed Miliband was himself part of the Government that destroyed the country - and will say anything to regain power). Ok, so should we trust the people currently in power ... definitely not.


One day there will be change ... but it will be led by very different people, and not the leaders of any of the current parties. It's a shame the unions didn't bite the bullet and create a new party to really represent the people (as they threatened to do following all the expenses scandals) ... to fight corruption and greed, as well Miliband, Clegg and Cameron.

Hypocrisy, corruption and the 'battle' ahead

Bankers have profited greatly from trading/gambling with other people's money and creating, packaging & trading 'dishonest' & 'socially worthless' financial products. The bankers were also closely aided & abetted by an incompetent & corrupt government - who proactively relaxed the rules so that bankers could act more recklessly and gamble using ordinary people's money (so they could build short term 'economic growth' upon it).

They allowed banks to integrate traditional high street banking with banking focused upon trading/investing securities (through the removal of previous barriers put in place following the last great depression). The Government also adopted a laissez-faire approach to the types of products & securities created/traded, whilst they also talked up (and profited from) the housing market (e.g. do you remember all the flipping of MP's second homes?) and allowed self-certification/120% mortgages to be introduced. Yet the Gordon Brown keeps telling us our crisis was caused by America!

As all the gambles of the corrupt bankers started to fail, and all the toxic assets created by them became clear, the Government bailed them out with tax-payers money, to reduce the risk of such banks collapsing and to avoid millions of ordinary people (i.e. voters!) losing their savings. The rest is history, and will arguably condemn the UK to history for generations to come - as an indebted and devalued nation, struggling with spiraling debt, unemployment and an ever increasing tax burden (targeted mainly at the hard-working middle class - as the rich pay huge sums of money to avoid any paying any tax at all).

Government leaders have ignored the fundamental issue (e.g. the integration of 'gambling' with 'traditional' banking) and have failed to solve the problem. To me their explanations for not doing so are clear - denial, self interest and greed - and the bankers are once again paying themselves massive bonuses, buoyed up by taxpayers money given to them in bails outs (which will have to be paid back through increased taxes, for instance covering the toxic assets left over from the bail-out of Northern Rock), and due to the Bank of England 'printing money' (QE) only for them to use it to start a spiral of gambling once again (rather than lending it to otherwise viable businesses)! Spin counts for little, action counts for a lot ... and this Government has done lots of the former but very little of the latter. It has largely ignored the advice of the Governor of the Bank of England, and the head of the Financial Services Authority too!

In China 'economic sabotage' is a major crime which warrants the death sentence, yet here in the UK no bankers have been challenged, arrested or had their assets seized! In fact we have seen quite the reverse - as they once again receive billions of pounds in bonuses as they rebuild their 'house of cards' with tax payers money. The few heads of banks who left office and were made the 'scape-goats' of this corrupt industry also left with massive payoffs and pensions too (Sir Fred Goodwin, RBS).

Bankers, supported by the politicians, have enacted 'economic sabotage' on the UK, yet none of them face criminal charges (never mind the 'death sentence') or have had any of their 'assets seized' (n.b. yet most of their wealth could be classified as 'assets from crime'). Gordon Brown likes to create the illusion of talking tough, but has done nothing to address the sabotage and daylight robbery that has taken place*. One might think this is something to do with the pressures of sorting out the economy, but this could not be further from the truth. The Government has been looking to extend the "Proceeds of Crime Act' (an act brought in to deal with 'organized crime' and to seize assets) ... but it has not focused on those seeking to 'profit' from the nation whilst creating 'economic sabotage' ... and our hypocritical & corrupt leaders in their 'wisdom' have decided to quietly (and underhandedly) use it to give more power to Councils to seize assets from 'minor offenders' instead!

Hypocrisy, corruption and double standards ... and whilst such people continue to be in power 'economic sabotage' will continue to go unchecked, with laws designed to protect them & allow them to pillage, and more laws introduced to stop & punish ordinary people for any minor misdemeanor (e.g. late paying a parking fine) ... nb even the Police Federation has raised concerns about this! However a great many politicians entering Parliament are a part of the lucrative & thriving legal profession, and are there to serve their own self-interest, as well as the existing justice system and political system (and all the bankers & landowners who 'bankroll' them).

More people need to 'wake up', 'take a look' and 'smell' what's 'all around them' ... and as they do, and they take responsibility for changing things, unrest will start to grow and the 'battle' of the future will begin ... a 'battle of values' ... and a new form of 'politics' and 'economics' will emerge ...

'For evil to flourish, all it needs is for good men to do nothing' [Edmund Burke 1729 - 1797]