Conservatives take Note, you have lost your party, it has been hijacked.
Former Tory PM John Major does not think he would vote for the Boris Johnson Party. People have to be made to realise the Conservative Party is no more
The Conservative party has changed to the Boris Johnson Party. No more like John Major, even like Margaret Thatcher and certainly not Ted Heath, Heseltine. All those want/wanted to be in the EU.
Boris Johnson is a Fascist and so are his selected MPs and supporters, bent on Power, Corruption, Dishonesty, Dirty Tricks.
Regardless of bringing the country to it's knees and making the 1% rich richer and the rest poorer, they can no longer be recognised as Conservatives like Ken Clarke.
THIS IS AN IMPORTANT MINDSET
Your colleagues, pub drinkers, family, friends, the woman on the checkout, have to be told. Because the vast majority of Conservative voters will never vote for Labour . Most will abstain from voting at best , some will vote Lib Dem. The Young will vote Green.
Traditional Conservative voters have to be made aware their party has changed fundamentally for the above reasons.
THIS will allow the other parties to regain and pick up voters.
Remember it is not now tories or conservatives it is the Boris Johnson Party.
Johnson has hijacked his own party
Former prime ministers tend to avoid engaging in personal criticism of their successors, particularly if they served as leader of the same party. Sir John Major’s verdict on Boris Johnson’s handling of the Owen Paterson affair – “shameful and wrong” and “politically corrupt” – is an extraordinary and devastating intervention that shows how low the prime minister’s reputation has sunk with senior members of his party. Major has even gone so far as to say that he would face a dilemma were he to have to consider voting for Johnson at the next general election.
Johnson’s handling of the standard committee’s findings and recommendations on Paterson has been disgraceful. The Commons committee, comprised not just of cross-party MPs but members of the public, upheld findings by the parliamentary commissioner for standards that Paterson had egregiously breached the rules on several occasions, by lobbying ministers as a paid consultant for two private companies. It was a clear example of an MP using his elected office for financial gain to the benefit of private interests. Had the government not intervened, the Commons would have almost certainly voted to impose a 30-day suspension on Paterson, as recommended by the committee. Instead, the government interfered in what should have been a free vote to insist Conservative MPs vote to overturn the committee’s recommendations and support an amendment to reform the standards system, reportedly threatening that if they failed to back the government, they would lose funding for their constituencies. When it was clear the reaction this engendered even among the sympathetic press was far worse than the government expected, it U-turned.
This unedifying episode merely confirms what we already knew of Johnson: that he is a man utterly lacking in integrity, with no regard for standards in public life. Johnson has already been investigated by Kathryn Stone, the parliamentary standards commissioner, more than any other MP in the last three years and has previously faced sanctions for breaching parliamentary rules around registering his financial interests. The Electoral Commission is investigating the redecoration costs of his Downing Street flat based on the fact there are “reasonable grounds” to think many offences may have been committed; once this concludes, Johnson could face his fourth investigation by Stone into the same matter. It was therefore a gross conflict of interest for the business secretary, Kwasi Kwarteng, to launch an attack on Stone in the wake of her thorough and impartial investigation into Paterson’s conduct and gives the impression of a government looking to neuter an independent system for monitoring parliamentary standards at the convenience of the prime minister.
This is not just about corruption in the processes of government. It goes to the heart of what this government is about
Johnson faces other questions over his personal integrity, including over the value of a free luxury holiday he accepted as a gift in recent weeks in Spain. His attitude infects standards right across government. When an investigation found Priti Patel had broken the ministerial code by bullying civil servants, it was not she who resigned, but the independent adviser on ministerial standards. The National Audit Office found last year that those with personal ministerial contacts were far more likely to win lucrative, pandemic-related contracts for personal protective equipment.
This is not just about corruption in the processes of government. It goes to the very heart of what this government is about. Johnson was elected on a platform of getting Brexit done, after having led a referendum campaign that made deliberately misleading claims to voters: that leaving the EU would result in an extra £350m a week for the NHS (a claim the UK Statistics Authority later ruled was a clear misuse of official statistics) and a vote to remain in the EU was a vote to share a border with Iraq and Syria. These are the false promises of populism: abjectly disrespecting voters by pretending that there are easy solutions to big challenges facing the country. It takes a certain kind of charlatan, driven chiefly by the desire for power, not the national interest, to embrace this kind of politics as Johnson has done. Since becoming prime minister, he has expelled from his party his colleagues who disagree with him on Brexit, unlawfully shut down parliament to try to force through his Brexit deal against parliamentary opposition, lied about the consequences of the Northern Ireland protocol and has repeatedly threatened to break international agreements to get his way. A disregard for the rules and a lack of probity is not some byproduct of Boris Johnson’s tenure in No 10: it is the defining aspect of his character, his career and his politics.
This means that tightening up the rules can only achieve so much. The UK has a more lax approach to lobbying than many other parliamentary democracies; there is no question that tougher rules should be introduced, including a comprehensive register of all political lobbying and an agency to regulate the revolving door between ministerial and government office and lucrative private sector contracts. Parliamentarians should consider introducing a cap on their additional earnings and an advance approval system for any additional income they earn. But the problem goes much wider: a culture of impunity within this government and the erosion of an unwritten honour code, which new rules cannot by themselves wholly fix.
The damage goes beyond the ratings of a particular party or leader. Just as the expenses scandal did 12 years ago, the sleazy cronyism of this government will further erode public trust in our democratic institutions and the overall legitimacy of our political system. Boris Johnson serves at the pleasure of Conservative MPs: they have the power vested in them to topple him. They should be examining their consciences as to whether his rotten and corrupt leadership is really the best their party can offer Britain.
The idea Paterson had been denied justice is laughable. The process for regulating the conduct of MPs has multiple safeguards to ensure fairness. Any investigation will be carried out by an independent standards commissioner. After that, a committee of MPs and lay members recommends whether any sanctions should be imposed, and finally MPs approve or reject those sanctions. Our system is widely regarded as an example of best practice across the world. It is uncontroversial that Paterson was in breach of the rules – he was handsomely remunerated by two companies and he approached public bodies and government departments on their behalf.
The witnesses whom he complains were not interviewed by the standards commissioner were overwhelmingly character witnesses and their testimonials did not require interrogation, so they were not interviewed. Nothing they could have said could have changed the facts. The investigation process he was subjected to was determined by parliamentarians – including him.
The obvious truth here is that Paterson wanted to dictate to the commissioner who would be heard, when and by what means. If you face criminal charges, try dictating the terms of trial to the judge in the same way.
He also claims he was not given a right to an appeal, yet in its report the committee clearly notes that: “A member is entitled to contest, even vigorously contest, the commissioner’s interpretation of the rules and her findings.”
He must have forgotten that he was invited to appeal against the commissioner’s findings both in writing and in person, and did so. It’s a familiar pattern of behaviour from the Tories – whether it’s Dominic Cummings racing to Barnard Castle to test his eyesight or Matt Hancock putting his libido above lockdown – the rules are for little people, not for them.
It is no surprise that Tory MPs – including the two most senior law officers, the attorney and solicitor general – lined up to trash the rule of law and undermine our democracy. They also sought to threaten the standards commissioner with the sack for having the temerity to do her job. Kwasi Kwarteng’s attempt to bully Kathryn Stone out of her job was yet another breach of the ministerial code, and the latest example of the Tories’ slide into corruption and moral bankruptcy. Boris Johnson has had multiple run-ins with the standards commissioner. It is clear he simply wants revenge and impunity from the rule of law.
This level of flagrant norm-shattering and lawbreaking demands more than tut-tutting. That’s why we need the adviser on ministerial interests to launch an inquiry into Kwarteng’s threats. And it is why Labour has urged the standards commissioner to open an investigation into the prime minister over the financing of the refurbishment of his Downing Street flat.
However, we know that such breaches mean little to the PM – from Priti Patel’s bullying to Robert Jenrick’s liaisons with Richard Desmond and all the way through to rehiring Gavin Williamson, there is no outrage the PM is unwilling to excuse. How’s that for natural justice?
David Lammy is shadow justice secretary
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/nov/06/the-tories-reveal-yet-again-their-belief-that-the-rules-are-for-little-people-not-for-them?fbclid=IwAR10rT_-eI1aZLHwTfkRm-uYnxP8Hv3cs3gb9jtl0rWAXLdE0vzbHes_hbI
Comments