The Politics Thread

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Is it possible to distinguish between Westland and Finmeccanica like that though?

I did enjoy reading about 'courgettes' and Finmeccanica back in November...

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/2f549918-143d ... z2L4FsUGOT" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

If bribery is corruption then yes there were elements of that with Heseltine's cock up as I recall.

Ok, before my time - I'll take your word for it. Are you saying Tory politicians were implicated?

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Is it possible to distinguish between Westland and Finmeccanica like that though?

I did enjoy reading about 'courgettes' and Finmeccanica back in November...

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/2f549918-143d ... z2L4FsUGOT" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I thought, but I might be wrong, that Westland was a wholly UK based subsidiary of Fimeccanica.
I've seen that article before...

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Is it possible to distinguish between Westland and Finmeccanica like that though?

I did enjoy reading about 'courgettes' and Finmeccanica back in November...

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/2f549918-143d ... z2L4FsUGOT" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I thought, but I might be wrong, that Westland was a wholly UK based subsidiary of Fimeccanica.
I've seen that article before...

I think you're right, but this kind of murky stuff place takes place in the margins of those kinds of demarcations.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

If bribery is corruption then yes there were elements of that with Heseltine's cock up as I recall.

Ok, before my time - I'll take your word for it. Are you saying Tory politicians were implicated?

No. The Tories only are implicated this time over the fact that Cameron is refusing requests by the Indians to investigate in the UK, he's entirely blaming the Italians. The Indians are entirely blaming the British, and the Italians are running for the hills. But, it seems to me, similar to last time, that denials may well be a cover up - and last time was one hell of a cover up.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

What was covered up last time?

[Lost Leopard Spot]

What was covered up last time?

Who said what to whom and when were covered up and then disclosed only to be denied and covered up again. It was an ongoing story of leaks, bribes, letters, backstabbing, and infighting between members of the conservative government, and outfighting using dirty political tactics by a plethora of outside 'commercial' interests. It involved bribes that were disclosed but never investigated, and letters that were reported but appear to have been forged, and briefings by Thatcher and an inner coterie against Heseltine and a group of his chums. You had to live through it to understand the fast moving nature of the lies and cover ups that went on. It was the first time in my lifetime that the true insidious nature of political life was brought home to me.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

As I say, for me this is 'history', whereas for you it's 'current affairs'!

What were these bribes that were disclosed? From whom to whom?

[Lost Leopard Spot]

As I say, for me this is 'history', whereas for you it's 'current affairs'!

What were these bribes that were disclosed? From whom to whom?

It's hardly current affairs PB. As I said it's over thirty years ago. I really can't remember the details - I just have an overwhelmingly gestalt of how awful it all was. The bribes were mentioned in the press fallout during the press furore over the subsequent 'inquiry' but it was all part of the mud-slinging that was going on. I remember that one side wanted Sikorsky to buy Westland and the other side favoured some other solution. Bribes were mentioned about both an American bidder early on and on the part of the Sikorsky option. The fact there was no investigation into any of this was also part of the scandal if I remember correctly.
I can't tell you a detailed blow by blow account - I've only got what little my memory is relinquishing - and to be brutally honest, I never was a Thatcher fan and so I'm not any kind of reliable independent witness.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

And don't get me wrong PB, I'm not in any way saying that what's happening (or not happening, as the case may actually be) is the same as the last time that the Tories and Westland collided. What I'm saying is I'm surprised that Dave is so dismissive of it (this here and now potential scandal) given the the fact that he must be aware that there has been a Westland scandal in his party's history.
Politics resonates with powerful words and slogans and Westland is one of the more recent examples.

[2399]

Assange stand-off costing London police $4.3 million


The cost of keeping police round the clock outside the Ecuadorian embassy in London in case WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange emerges has hit 2.9 million pounds ($4.3 million), British police say.

Officers have been stationed outside ever since the Australian jumped bail and fled there on June 19 last year after losing his battle in the British courts against extradition to Sweden, where he faces questioning over allegations of sexual assault.

Ecuador has granted him political asylum and says the UK government has failed to give assurances Mr Assange will not be extradited from Sweden to the United States.

On Saturday, Scotland Yard police headquarters estimated the total cost to the end of January to be 2.9 million pounds - 2.3 million pounds in salary for the officers stationed on duty and the rest in overtime payments.

The embassy is a flat in a mansion block in west London's plush Knightsbridge district.

Mr Assange, a 41-year-old former computer hacker, founded the WikiLeaks anti-secrecy website which enraged the US government by releasing US diplomatic cables, as well as war logs relating to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in the biggest security breach in American history.

A spokesman at the Ecuadoran embassy said: "The Ecuadoran government is concerned by the significant cost to the taxpayers of London of policing the embassy."

"However, we believe this expenditure could be avoided if the UK government would provide the undertakings that the Ecuadoran government has sought that there will be no onward extradition of Julian Assange to the United States.

"The Home Office (Britain's interior ministry) has the power to offer such an assurance but has so far declined to do so.

"Until we obtain these undertakings, the Ecuadoran government will continue to protect Julian Assange's human rights that are enshrined in international law."

Earlier this month, British heiress Jemima Khan became the latest defector from the WikiLeaks camp, declaring that Mr Assange risks becoming Australia's version of Scientology founder L Ron Hubbard.

The former wife of cricket superstar turned Pakistani politician Imran Khan, Ms Khan had been a high-profile supporter of Mr Assange and was one of the people who put up $30,000 to ensure his bail.

[Hoboh]

Assange stand-off costing London police $4.3 million


The cost of keeping police round the clock outside the Ecuadorian embassy in London in case WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange emerges has hit 2.9 million pounds ($4.3 million), British police say.

Officers have been stationed outside ever since the Australian jumped bail and fled there on June 19 last year after losing his battle in the British courts against extradition to Sweden, where he faces questioning over allegations of sexual assault.

Ecuador has granted him political asylum and says the UK government has failed to give assurances Mr Assange will not be extradited from Sweden to the United States.

On Saturday, Scotland Yard police headquarters estimated the total cost to the end of January to be 2.9 million pounds - 2.3 million pounds in salary for the officers stationed on duty and the rest in overtime payments.

The embassy is a flat in a mansion block in west London's plush Knightsbridge district.

Mr Assange, a 41-year-old former computer hacker, founded the WikiLeaks anti-secrecy website which enraged the US government by releasing US diplomatic cables, as well as war logs relating to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in the biggest security breach in American history.

A spokesman at the Ecuadoran embassy said: "The Ecuadoran government is concerned by the significant cost to the taxpayers of London of policing the embassy."

"However, we believe this expenditure could be avoided if the UK government would provide the undertakings that the Ecuadoran government has sought that there will be no onward extradition of Julian Assange to the United States.

"The Home Office (Britain's interior ministry) has the power to offer such an assurance but has so far declined to do so.

"Until we obtain these undertakings, the Ecuadoran government will continue to protect Julian Assange's human rights that are enshrined in international law."

Earlier this month, British heiress Jemima Khan became the latest defector from the WikiLeaks camp, declaring that Mr Assange risks becoming Australia's version of Scientology founder L Ron Hubbard.

The former wife of cricket superstar turned Pakistani politician Imran Khan, Ms Khan had been a high-profile supporter of Mr Assange and was one of the people who put up $30,000 to ensure his bail.

Hell even a drunken sniper would be able to hit him there and save us a bleedin' fortune then someone could take out the sniper like in the sixties.

[boltonboris]

So.. Our credit rating has been dropped from AAA, to AA1. Which presumably means we're not defaulting, but our borrowings are too high for our GDP?

[thebish]

So.. Our credit rating has been dropped from AAA, to AA1. Which presumably means we're not defaulting, but our borrowings are too high for our GDP?

hmmm...

Osborne: "If Labour are elected we will lose our AAA rating and that would be disastrous for our economy..."

[Athers]

The downgrade's impact will be painful only for the Chancellor as he's put a lot of political capital into keeping it at AAA. I doubt it will really affect our cost of borrowing - we're still a good safe haven.

[Hoboh]

The downgrade's impact will be painful only for the Chancellor as he's put a lot of political capital into keeping it at AAA. I doubt it will really affect our cost of borrowing - we're still a good safe haven.

Aye and after what happend last time these lot cocked up with the US sub prime, I doubt most will take any notice whatsoever!

[thebish]

The downgrade's impact will be painful only for the Chancellor as he's put a lot of political capital into keeping it at AAA. I doubt it will really affect our cost of borrowing - we're still a good safe haven.

indeed... I suspect he may now regret announcing that keeping our AAA rating should be the primary measure by which to judge his economic programme...

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

The downgrade's impact will be painful only for the Chancellor as he's put a lot of political capital into keeping it at AAA. I doubt it will really affect our cost of borrowing - we're still a good safe haven.

indeed... I suspect he may now regret announcing that keeping our AAA rating should be the primary measure by which to judge his economic programme...

Did he ever actually say these words?

[thebish]

The downgrade's impact will be painful only for the Chancellor as he's put a lot of political capital into keeping it at AAA. I doubt it will really affect our cost of borrowing - we're still a good safe haven.

indeed... I suspect he may now regret announcing that keeping our AAA rating should be the primary measure by which to judge his economic programme...

Did he ever actually say these words?

yes - he did - in a speech back in february 2010 - I heard it quoted this morning by a leading economist...

he said:

"For the first time ever we are asking to be judged against eight clear and transparent benchmarks - Benchmarks for Britain - against which the public can judge the success or failure of their Chancellor and their Government over the next Parliament."

he then went on to describe those benchmarks...

"Today, for the first time in our history, Britain's credit rating is under threat.

Indeed, some commentators think a downgrade is inevitable.

That would mean higher interest rates on our national debt and throughout our economy could tip us back into recession, with more jobs lost and more businesses going under.

That's why our first Benchmark for Britain is to...

...Cut the deficit more quickly to safeguard Britain's credit rating.

I know that we are taking a political gamble to set this up as a measure of success."

you can check this on the Conservative Pary's own website:

http://www.conservatives.com/News/Speec ... Model.aspx

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Yes, I know he has said things like that.

Listing it amongst 8 benchmarks not the same as saying our credit rating is the primary measure by which to judge his economic programme, which is what you said.

As Athers said - there is a more nuanced point here which is that what is actually important is that our cost of borrowing stays down and that we are considered a safe haven in relation to other countries. Now, it used to be that AAA rating was convenient shorthand that expressed all that, and was inextricably linked to it, but the world has changed a bit since then.