Cash-for-honours:, What will the fallout be? Options

[Elliot Carver]

Cash-for-honours: What will the fallout be?

The Crown Prosecution Service has said there is not enough evidence to bring charges in the long-running cash-for-honours inquiry. What is your reaction?

There will be no prosecutions over claims that people were nominated for peerages in return for political loans.

Police interviewed 136 people including former Prime Minister Tony Blair in the 16-month probe, which cost an estimated £1m.

What consequences will there be now that the investigation has ended? Will this affair affect how political parties are funded in the UK? What lessons can we learn from the investigation?

BBC news "Have your say" topic

lo folks,

*shock* who was expecting that? Perhapse now that Blair isnt PM anymore they should hold another inquiry? Ok they might not get the still active members of the cabinet but they might be able to get Blair ... 'not enough evidence' being the key phrase here ... just means they were able to berry the evidence well. I wonder what Browns first scandal will be like?

Cheers,
Carver

[D@V£]

Where's a revolution when you need one, 'eh?

[BigglesTrevor]

all the partys have been doing it, it would have been so unfair just to punish labour. The conservatives are perhaps far more guilty, which explains there lack of interest in pursuing criticism.

[D@V£]

Biggles, I think your mistaken, the only party that has been in the Cash for Honours scandle is Labour, only the Government is capable of giving Honours. Donations to the Conservatives and Lib Dems are all legitimate, the idea is Labour have been offering peirages to potential donators, which is corruption. It's also letting people buy their way into the political process.


Although, in all honesty I think the best solution would be an elected second chamber, it seems to me Labours "Lords Reform" hasn't really changed much as it stands.

[BigglesTrevor]

Biggles, I think your mistaken, the only party that has been in the Cash for Honours scandle is Labour, only the Government is capable of giving Honours. Donations to the Conservatives and Lib Dems are all legitimate, the idea is Labour have been offering peirages to potential donators, which is corruption. It's also letting people buy their way into the political process.
Although, in all honesty I think the best solution would be an elected second chamber, it seems to me Labours "Lords Reform" hasn't really changed much as it stands.

Yes but how many Conservative funders have donated on the premis of honours. We will never be able to tell but you can be as sure as hell its an awful lot more than labour when some of the people who fund the conservative party are revewed.

[Elliot Carver]

lo folks,

D@V£: There was talk for a day or two of the Tory party from, what i remember, having also been involved. After holding an internal inquiry into the allegations and a rowdy PMQ's from hug-a-hoodie Cameron the focus turned back onto former dictator Blair as he was interviewed by the Police and the subsequential removal of 'freedom of speech' by the state on the media.
---
Brownie should have chaired a personal public inquiry into the cash-for-honors inside his party as his first act as PM after he formed a cabinet. Instead of standing strong, removing the criminal element from his party and restoring public faith in Nu labour he shuffled them around replacing the people involved with babies.

All three of our parties - the only credible leadership this country has to choose from - have major image, integrity and identity problems. Labour, who ever sits on top, is still the thatchorite party that continues to screw the poor guy, Tories are stuck in the rut of instead of aiming to win an election, aiming to be conservative ... and anyone remember the liberal democrats? the yellow guys...says it all ...
If I'm being honest here it makes me want to withhold my vote. Yes we've had this debate before but i belive the goalposts have changed. In 1945 we fought for our freedom with Winston Churchill. Your vote stood for something then. These days your vote is just an act, a ceremony to lull us into a false sense of control. By withholding my vote I am saying that none of the parties are fit for office which i will add is just as pertinent as voting itself.

cheers
carver

[D@V£]

I quite like the idea of Voting for UKIP, shame no one else seems to like it... curse this pluralist system!

However, to be honest, there's no way state funded parties is going to work. I mean, I don't want my money funding the BNP, and I sure as hell don't want my money funding the Green Party. And, more to the point, I don't want my money being used for £1,000 haircuts for anyone! Campaigning really goes too far these days.

I think this is the point when John Locke comes and tells us to start a murderin'.