The end of Blair?

[The Man From G.O.P.]

You know the stories already, discuss this for me please.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Um, he's going to be resigning at some point before September anyway so...

[The Man From G.O.P.]

Um, he's going to be resigning at some point before September anyway so...

Not in disgrace! There's quite a different possibility now.

[afleitch]

Blair won’t go now, but he will go with quite a cloud over him. He is a tarnished man and has been even before these events transpired. It’s not a question of whether or not he had any involvement in the ‘cash for peerages’ scandal, it’s the possibility that he ordered, or at least knew of a cover up and a subsequent perversion of the course of justice. And for what? Everything was entirely short term, the scandal was rumbled and the party is financially close to bankruptcy. It will take years to recover. The Conservatives were tarred with an image of ‘sleaze’ that has taken a decade for it to overcome (partially helped by their opponents appear to ‘out sleaze’ them) but for Labour to be tainted by cover ups and scandals; even to be called ‘crooked’ has far more long term consequences for the party.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

It’s not a question of whether or not he had any involvement in the ‘cash for peerages’ scandal, it’s the possibility that he ordered, or at least knew of a cover up and a subsequent perversion of the course of justice.

But, unless the police are breaking their own rules (something that would, IMO, be far more serious than anything alledged to have gone on over this), he's not even being treated as a suspect. In other words, there is, apparently, no question of actual involvement in perverting the course of justice, or in breaking the outdated, and never seriously enforced, law from the '20's that sparked this whole thing off.

Or do little things like that not matter anymore? That otherwise intelligent people can even begin to think like that is probably an indication that there is something seriously wrong with politics in this country.

O/c I don't like him and think he should have quit a few years ago (and I will be pleased when he does eventually go) but that's not the point; things have to be done properly in order to protect the political system from any longterm damage; not something that I think a disturbingly high number of people seem to care about anymore.

[Bono]

It’s not a question of whether or not he had any involvement in the ‘cash for peerages’ scandal, it’s the possibility that he ordered, or at least knew of a cover up and a subsequent perversion of the course of justice.

But, unless the police are breaking their own rules (something that would, IMO, be far more serious than anything alledged to have gone on over this), he's not even being treated as a suspect. In other words, there is, apparently, no question of actual involvement in perverting the course of justice, or in breaking the outdated, and never seriously enforced, law from the '20's that sparked this whole thing off.

Or do little things like that not matter anymore? That otherwise intelligent people can even begin to think like that is probably an indication that there is something seriously wrong with politics in this country.

O/c I don't like him and think he should have quit a few years ago (and I will be pleased when he does eventually go) but that's not the point; things have to be done properly in order to protect the political system from any longterm damage; not something that I think a disturbingly high number of people seem to care about anymore.

Well, Blair was the one who started overturning constitutional order when he ended, among other things, the double jeopardy's protection. I won't shed any tears if it takes any damage to the political system to get him out.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I won't shed any tears if it takes any damage to the political system to get him out.

Yeah, but I wouldn't expect you to be even slightly concerned about potential damage to the political system here.

He'll be gone soon enough anyway and without any need to cause serious damage to it...

[afleitch]

Blair doesn’t need to be found guilty of anything, his government and his party is already damaged by ‘guilt of association.’ It’s unfair, yes but that’s the political climate we live in. This is of course coupled with the overbearing demands on ministers to resign over the slightest of administrative hiccups rather than get on with the job. Yet while that media bleating annoys me I have no sympathy for Labour; in opposition they pretty much wrote the rules on these matter and now the tables have turned.

The longer Blair stays, the worse it gets. He’s doing the country and his party no favours in staying, even if it’s ‘just until’ June or July (or immediately after what will probably be a fair bit of a drubbing in the May elections) He should meet with the Queen and resign.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

It’s unfair, yes but that’s the political climate we live in.

Which makes it all acceptable and not at all disturbing, how?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

While what went on then was excessive (some of the time anyway; an irony here is that politicians in general (and of all parties) were actually more corrupt then than they are now; the changes to the lobbying rules have had a big and very positive impact on the reality of the situation... while the media impression is the reverse of that) it was never this bad or hypocritical (and it's the all the hypocrisy over this that I dislike the most, btw), although perhaps (?) it would be if everything was repeated today; things have been going downhill for at least a decade now as part of an apparently endless cycle of dumbing-down and the growth SCANDAL!!!!111 type political "journalism".

This is something that the successive leaderships of all three serious political parties have encouraged, or at least participated in and not thought to try to stop it; and unless political culture changes dramatically over the next few years, it's just going to get worse and worse.

As for Blair himself, the most damaging thing he's done has been to consistantly try to give himself a few more years in office.
I don't think that, outside the Westminster bubble, this whole mess has damaged him much; it's re-inforced the general view of him as being a bit dodgy (while being a little too close with even dodgier people) and has made the general reputation of politics a bit worse than it was before; but that is probably it.
Do you know quite how little politics is reported in an average tabloid newspaper these days?

[MODU]

You know the stories already, discuss this for me please.

Nope, I don't.  What's the story?

[Bono]

I won't shed any tears if it takes any damage to the political system to get him out.

Yeah, but I wouldn't expect you to be even slightly concerned about potential damage to the political system here.

He'll be gone soon enough anyway and without any need to cause serious damage to it...

I think the more problems the political system has, the sooner Britain will adopt a written constitution, which is desperately needed to prevent power abuse from people like Blair taking rights away from the people.
And I don't see why I shouldn't be concerned, especially because I may be living in the UK by next year.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I think the more problems the political system has, the sooner Britain will adopt a written constitution,

But politics rarely works like that here; problems just result in more problems and the desire of short-sighted politicians to exploit these problems, rather than serious attempts to deal with the problems (example; the ancient tradition of selling peerages would have ended if the reform of the House of Lords had ever been completed).
What's really needed is a period, maybe not even very long, of calm. One reason why I dislike Blair is because he squandered such a period after he came to power (such an opportunity would likely not have been missed by just about any other Labour politician in his position then). Always was far too short sighted politically.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Waiting for the Presbyterian to take over are you? Sectarian bastard

Whereabouts?

[Bono]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Waiting for the Presbyterian to take over are you? Sectarian bastard

Whereabouts?

That depends on which university accepts me, if any.

I'm applying for Edinburgh, LSE, Warwick, Loughborough and Queen's Belfast.

BTW, I doubt any presbyterian takeover is going to occur, given that most Presbyterian Churches in the UK have totally gone off into liberalism, with a few free church exceptions.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

That depends on which university accepts me, if any.

Try Thames Valley; if you can count to three, you're in!

[Bono]

That depends on which university accepts me, if any.

Try Thames Valley; if you can count to three, you're in!

LOL
No, thanks, if I'm gonna settle for mediocrity, I can do that here.
However, check my edit of the previous post.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

The big question I have to ask is:

Does anyone in Britain (apart from the politically-minded like us) actually care?

The negative seems to be the reaction from the across the sea right now.

Oh, and Bono, Edinburgh is a great university... if you get in.. unlike me. Good luck.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Does anyone in Britain (apart from the politically-minded like us) actually care?

To be honest... outside of the various political and media bubbles, more people seem to care about Celebrity Big Brother than this...

[Tetro Kornbluth]

Does anyone in Britain (apart from the politically-minded like us) actually care?

To be honest... outside of the various political and media bubbles, more people seem to care about Celebrity Big Brother than this...

Not surprising given that more media coverage was given to the former..

[afleitch]

Does anyone in Britain (apart from the politically-minded like us) actually care?

To be honest... outside of the various political and media bubbles, more people seem to care about Celebrity Big Brother than this...

Not surprising given that more media coverage was given to the former..

It's the same on here truth be told. I mean we had pages and pages of stuff about Tory hopes in Northern England, but I had to bring up Lord Levy's arrest before current events even got airtime!

Truth be told the current media coverage is actually worse for Labour than blanket coverage would have been. All it takes is for a few sweeping headlines and it spreads like wildfire. It's not even got John Reid off the hook after last week. What should concern Labour most is that I don't believe it has money to fight an effective nationwide campaign next year. It's presence in some of the marginal Holyrood seats has been conspicuously absent even at this stage of the race.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

It's the same on here truth be told. I mean we had pages and pages of stuff about Tory hopes in Northern England, but I had to bring up Lord Levy's arrest before current events even got airtime!

I didn't start a thread on it because I'm not particularly interested in the story; most of it is gossip and there are better places to go for that. No idea why no one else started a thread though.