Meyer broke our trust says Straw.

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by PartTimePongo, Nov 11, 2005.

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:


    Jack, while we're talking about breaking trust..........
  2. I sort of see Straw's point.

    How on earth can very senior civil servants and politicians hope to have cordial and constructive working relationships if the suspicion that the civil servant is scribbling it all down for future profit is in the back of his mind?

    Conversely, Straw might want to ask himself this: does he, at any point in the future, plan on writinh is memoirs and letting rip on the mandarins that pished him off?

    I prefer the CIA confidentiality clause: if you want to write a book, crack on, but the Agency vets it and takes all the profits. That would make the likes of Meyer and Rimmington think twice.

  3. You make a valid point regarding the possible impact on future working relationships but, on the other hand, shouldn't the democratic process include the ability for former insiders to bring to light the inestimable fcuk-ups that our elected officials (and others) have masterminded? Sooner or later historians, journos etc. will be able to dissect the decisions they made, in detail. all this means is that the information is out there in a more timely manner. The fact that the politician's decisions will be in a position to be judged might just give them the motivation to not be so fcuk-witted in future.

    Hopefully any vetting that takes place will be for OPSEC only and not to spare HMG any embarrassment.
  4. No, you're right C_T but lets be honest: we've all made decisions that at the time were difficult but seemed OK. Then, like the mother of all hangovers, you realised how sh*t it was the next morning. So tomorrow's OPSEC was today's embarrassment.

    Difference is, our decisions as mere peons normally occur on a micro level. Well, usually, that is.

    So I think that politicians deserve a level of confidentiality during their decision-making. I'm held to all sorts of confidentiality agreements that if I broke I would find myself in court, out of a job with no pension. Funny thing is, my seniors and others seem to have no difficulty getting memoirs out that if I wrote I'd be toast. Very annoying. Oh well, I'm a bit more professional than them.

    So I'm not defending Blair's right to make pump decisions or lie. Although the game has changed...can you imagine Yalta with 21st Century media commentary? EISENHOWER SELLS OUT EUROPE TO COMMIES FOR A QUIET LIFE! "I can't believe his stupidity" says Colonel Snooks, staff officer to the delegation.

    OTOH maybe that would have been a good thing...
  5. Hmm...

    If there was a proper Civil Service Act (as recommended, but ignored) with all decision-taking minuted without the improper employment of special advisors, then maybe Straw would have a point.

    Until then, the very scorched pot should lay off the slightly tarnished kettle somewhat.

    I recall that these memoirs were waved in front of the Cabinet Office and can only conclude that the Cabinet Office had been instructed not to torpedo any books in a manner that might prevent the Dear Leader from cashing in after he decided to abdicate.
  6. Trust?

    The words 'pots' and 'kettles' spring to mind! :lol:
  7. Never let it be said that Jacky boy doesn't know how to take the p1ss.
  8. If Sir Chris had praised the government to high heaven im sure he would have been in ermine by now.

    Mind you, imagining John Prescott babbling on about the "Balklands" and "Kovosa" cheered me up considerably :D
  9. Man of Straw, Trust!
    Does not go together in a decent sentance.
    However you would have thought by know that all these high and mighty would have worked out a practical sysytem.
    Today I have seen both Michal Heseltine and Jack Straw condem Meyer, Me I'd take it as a compliment.
  10. If I remember the interview with Jack Straw on R4 yesterday morning correctly, one of his biggest objections was to Sir Christopher Meyer's description of briefing John Major first thing in the morning before he was fully dressed, and particularly that he went into detail about John Major's underwear. Holding politicians to account and shedding light on the decision making process is one thing, but going into details of the underwear of a former prime minister is something very different...
  11. Who gives a toss about Staw's views.

    He submitted the book for censorship - they failed to take the opportunity - touch shit.

    Straw is a parasite politician - he abuses the trust of the electorate in a deliberate and calculated manner everyday.
  12. [quotemaking process is one thing, but going into details of the underwear of a former prime minister is something very different...[/quote]

    A certain ex-pornographer Mr A Campbell was not so cautious with regard to the details of Prime Ministerial underwear. The myth that John Major tucked his shirt into his underpants (how could he if they were on the floor of Edwina's boudoir?) fuelled hundreds of (admittedly funny) Steve Bell cartoons in the Guardian.

    The boot is on the other foot (pants?) as the current occupant of No 10 is being depicted in this manner, a direct comparison with John Major.
  13. What is their problem? If the guy is telling the truth, he should be allowed so to do. What makes politicians so protected - maybe it is the cheating swindling and duplicitous way they do things that lead them to want to keep them secret. If he isn't telling the truth - book him Danno. He can always plead for clemency on the grounds that the Big Boys made him do it.