Cameron Sleaze

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by crabby, Mar 26, 2006.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. We've all rightly had a go at blair, now it's Cameron's turn:,,2087-2104544,00.html

    basically "The Tories under David Cameron have accepted £100,000 from the wife of a foreign arms dealer barred from making political donations in Britain"

    This adds to the £2m loan just before the election (Howard, not Cameron),,17129-2102348,00.html

    Nothing ever changes. I don't see any way out of these allegations of sleaze etc while political parties depend on money from private sources for election campaigns etc
    However, who wants tax payers money going on party political broadcasts etc when it could go to public services? Until we do though the parties will always be at the mercy of trade unions/investors, either for privelages/peerages/special treatment. I'm not suggesting everyone who contributes to a party is bent though... just those who receive it :D

    edited once cos I can't spell
  2. All politics is based on sleaze they are all as bad as each other. Ive given up being bothered about the political state of this country because its in s**t state and will be for a long time. Ill quote a cartoon here:
    'you have the right to vote, but it will always be between a giant dushe and a turn sandwich!'

    Appologies for lowering the tone.
  3. I do not belive this is comparable to the Labour loan sleaze.

    The sleaze element in this whole loans affair is largely down to Labour. Donors were asked to provide loans (later to be written off) rather than the normal donation-for-peerage in order to escape scrutiny. The Tories were doing something similar but - crucially - they were not in a position to hand out peerages (Bliar has this prerogative power on behalf of the Queen, although the Tories can put forward names) or to offer lucrative government contracts.

    The Tories should disclose details of their lenders, but the argument that they have requested anonymity because of a fear of losing government work should not be dismissed out of hand. Would the government penalise the company of a Tory lender? Almost certainly.

    Compared to the loans-for-peerages scandal (in which the PM is central) the fact a foreign arms dealer has a fondness for Tory auctions is merely distasteful rather than scandalous.
  4. Percy_Pigeon

    Percy_Pigeon War Hero Book Reviewer

    Mr PVR.

    It’s exactly the same, but the peerage takes longer.

    For my two pence worth, Now the cat is out of the bag all donors should be named, I think there are more skeletons in more cupboards. I believe the whole business is despicable, but foreign money is beyond the pale.
  5. I would have to concur with Mr PVR'd.

    Whilst distasteful, this is not on the same scale as the labour sleaze. They actively told donors to donate the money as a loan rather than an out and out donation. This was a deliberate attempt to hide the fact!

    Despite this, i had misgivings over Camerons dismisal of a request for the Tories to make their donor list public. Whilst his decision not to publish it (in order not to divert attention from the labour sleaze) was politically motivated, it did reflect badly upon the party and tarred them with the same brush as Labour.

    The whole system needs reformed to remove any possibility of corruption, but with that many lawyers, it's not likely to happen! :wink:
  6. It's all corrupt, it all stinks. The Tory party can recommend people for peerages, what's to say it hasn't happened in the Tory party to a lesser extent? They're all as bad as each other. Time for the armed overthrow of HMG that ARRSE always claims it's not promoting (yeah right...) :D