skip to main |
skip to sidebar
In today's Sunday Telegraph Robert Watts, Deputy Political Editor, writes that George Osborne has a £10billion dilemma on his mind ahead of this month’s Budget. In view of this report in the WSJ which is a precis of a report from the Dow Jones Newswires - and on which Lord Stoddart commented in the House of Lords - one wonders if our George has clearance for his proposals, whatever they are.
Presumably the picture in the article shows George Osborne in suitable pose while waiting for said clearance.
An article has appeared in today's Sunday Telegraph reporting that nine members of Ed Miliband’s opposition team have received free help from PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), the accountancy giant that helps its clients avoid millions of pounds worth of tax a year. The article, authored by Robert Watts Deputy Political Editor, lists those involved, amongst whom is Ed Balls whose disclosure in the latest Register for Members’ Interests shows that he has accepted "the services of a research assistant/analyst to support him in his opposition front bench role" for a four-day-a-week second between January and April of this year and that the arrangement is valued at £59,976, based on the PwC worker’s salary.
The article does not specifically state that this free help is for personal gain, neither does it state that it is to assist politicians with their parliamentary business. The criticism by John Mann, Labour, that it appeared that there was now a PwC “caucus” within parliament seems valid - especially when noting those ex-PwC employees now occupying senior positions in politics and advisory bodies.
If we take Ed Balls as an example - and the question can be put to every politician who has accepted these free services - what exactly are the duties of these research assistants/analysts and what support is provided. While their services may be free what, if any, other payments are made? Who pays their travel costs if said research assistants/analysts are required to accompany their political masters on visits/meetings outside Westminster? We all remember, during the Expenses Scandal, of reports of politicians claiming tax advice on their expenses. Unless the duties of these research assistants/analysts are made public the doubt will remain that politicians are up to their old tricks.
That our politics has the stench of corruption attached to it is well known and this story can only add to that stench. Transparency was trumpeted by Cameron and Clegg in their programme for government - sadly, as has been shown, this has been but another false promise. I note, incidentally, that Channel 4 intend to air a remake of 'A Very British Coup' with the twist that the series will pose the question what if the public voted in a prime minister who was committed to always telling the truth and sticking to his pledges. So, yet another fiction series for the masses to watch! Needless to say had we direct democracy and referism the series would not be fiction, but faction!
Articles in today's Sunday Telegraph on the subject of HS2, one by Robert Watts and Adam Lusher, the other by Andrew Gilligan, illustrate the lack of political principle and democracy. Both articles are substantially shorter than those in the print edition - which raises a question about censorship on-line, but I digress. As a result some of the points I raise are from the print edition.
On the front page of the newspaper a short 'intro' article by Watts and Gilligan states that documents published last week revealed that 91 per cent of those consulted opposed the scheme. Yet Cheryl Gillan is quoted as stating that she appreciates that there are many people who remain disappointed - but, given there is overwhelming support in the House of Commons across all parties, she believes good progress has been made in improving the protection of the Chilterns. Yet another example of democratised dictatorship!
Justine Greening does not escape condemnation either, because if her views against the third runway at Heathrow are used then her reported statement by Gilligan, one made in 2009, that at every stage the Government has ignored public opinion and shamelessly ignored the grave environmental risk and that the battle to preserve our quality of life is important must also hold true today. But then, in 2009, Justine Greening was just an MP, which lends weight to the argument that attaining high office with all the benefits of position, power and an increased salary, does affect a politician's principles.
Just saying..........
Afterthought: A statement from Greening and link to all the documentation can be found here.
