Why Lord Ashcroft's case is different

Nick

I consider your six o'clock news report as the most biased piece of political journalism I have ever witnessed.

ITV did not even mention it in their headlines.

1) Yorkshire Ripper trying to get out

2) Radovan Karadzic blames ITV News for his indictment

3) Chile earthquake

4) School places

You Ashcroft has been forced to come clean after 10 years of asking.

One question.

IN THE TEN YEARS WHY HAVE YOU ONLY FOCUSED ON ASHCROFT WHEN LABOUR HAS HAD AND STILL HAS UNANSWER QUESTION ABOUT THE TAX STATUS OF THEIR PEERS?

AND WHAT ABOUT THE LIB DEMS?

Nick

In part it is because for 10 years he and successive Tory leaders have dodged questions about his tax status.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

WHEN HAVE YOU EVER ASKED OR BLOGGED OR REPORTED ON YOUR TV OUTPUT ON THE TAX STATUS OF LABOUR PEERS?

MY ONLY CONCLUSION AFTER TEN YEARS CAN ONLY BE BIAS

Please don't DODGE this question.

Why Lord Ashcroft's case is different?

Its not if you look at it from a even handed point of view. The principle is the same whatever party they come from.

This second blog makes you look like you realise that you have gone to far and are trying to justify yourself.

I can only hope that during the cuts that are coming at the BBC that the occupant of the Political Editor's chair goes the same way as Six Music and the Asian Network.

Might as well just have saved myself the effort and logged into Labour Home instead. Same S**T, different name on the top.

Nick

biggest political donor in British political history

Err, Trade Union Movement?

Nick,

The main/top BBC news headline is currently:
"Lord Ashcroft, one of the Tory party's biggest donors, admits he does not pay full British tax on all of his earnings."

Now, that implies that he's not paying uk tax on his uk earnings (as the BBC doesn't mention that it's only his foreign earnings that he's not paying uk tax on, and those foreign earnings are subject to foreign tax as you can't pay income tax on the same income twice).

Would you like to retract that BBC headline ? or at least clarify it so that it's not implying tax fraud? or, if you are going to imply tax fraud then do the same for the labour non-doms?

Nick

The questions about Lord Ashcroft will continue.

Will you ever ask any questions about any other Lords from other parties?

Paul

Mandy

Mittal

etc.

Whats with the Tory obsession?

I heard a colleague of yours, Nick, on radio 5 say tha there wasn't really much difference between Ashcroft and Paul and that it was pretty much a non-story.

Now if everyone said that people would soon forget.

Luckily there's you, obviously YOU'RE not going to give this non-story a chance to die.

He has done nothing illegal. He agreed to become tax resident to help further his political ambitions? WOW! Hardly like to be the first one to do so and since his actions in becoming resident involved cost to him and voluntary actions on his part that broke no law, where's the harm?

A secret deal to get into the house of Lords? WOW! what was it? To keep the secret of the location of the holy grail? Oh, no, it was to become UK tax resident. Are you saying that no-one in the House of Lords has done any kind of deal except Ashcroft?

So what makes Ashcroft different? Seems only that his political opponents don't like him. He's a 4 letter word.

So i can't think why reputable journalist would be making such a song and dance about an issue that only really matters to Ashcroft's political opponents. Unless...? Surely not.

Nick what will BBC political journalist do now to assist the Labour Party . Todays coverage was the most bias reporting I have ever seen . Lord Ashcroft is Getting the wrath of the BBC for stringing them along by refusing to answer the question . He has said he will comply when its law unlike Lord Paul who it's reported will give up his seat rather than chaning satus . The Home Secetary has made his comments not because of Lord Ashcrofts tax status but because he is hurting Labour in marginal seats . I fear we are heading for a disaster after this election (If we get a Hung Parliment ) the Money Markets have already started to wobble just thinking about it .

is it unpatriotic to let the flood gates of imigration open to stick one up the right wing , which is seems that they have wit hthe rise of the odious BNP, and then allow 8m people on a benifit of some kind that keeps them in the "Control" of the Sitting labour Gov, ie buying votes with tax payers monies then

Is it unpatriotic to purchase the JSF instead of a navialised EFA
Is is unpatriotic to purchase Chinooks after cancelling the Meduim lift Helicopter programme

The list of how unpatriotic the current HMG is is long , very long,

good job the Home Sec has started on that one then, taking the BNP clothes are we,

but he did succeed the last HS how partner brought porn on the tax payers expense very very patriotic then

Zzzzzzzz.......zzzzzzzzzz.......zzzzzzzzz....

Unpatriotic not to have had a referendum on the lisborn treaty,

do hope that they will continue with this them it should be good

maybe a Zanu_Diebour last throw of the dice

I don't understand why previous questions were dodged by Conservatives about his tax status - it was blooming obvious!

Have Labour not dodged similar questions? or have they just not been asked?

all the right wing hard liners..so upset about this....
headline news on all the main tv news channels....
are they all anti-tory.... no. but the truth hurts and in many ways it represents all the problems within the conservative party. they are no different to the last tory govt and will hopefully self destuct further so the general public (those who dont already know) can see how appaling they are!

You seem to have changed tack from your previous post Nick. Now you make mention of all three main political parties who have "taken major sums from so-called non doms."

Thank goodness for some balance at last. The feeding frenzy over Ashcroft's tax status and the 'non-dom' attack line was getting out of hand.

It's dog eat dog in the disgraceful world of non-doms bankrolling political parties of whatever colour. These blistering attacks could backfire with all parties in the firing line.

Maybe they will now all cancel each other out and fizzle out as electioneering attack lines?

Isn't the real story here that the government quietly postponed a law to stop wealthy tax exiles bankrolling political parties until after a general election?

https://theorangepartyblog.blogspot.com/2010/03/dog-eat-dog-in-dodgy-non-dom-land.html

I think a Punch & Judy show by the Tories & Labour over their non domiciled contributors is NOT the real issue! The problem that these contributors pose to democracy in the UK is the issue because by bank rolling the party in power (or in waiting) they cynically expect to be calling the shots when laws and amendments to rules are being made by the politicians who's careers they have enhanced with their money. These contributors are successful business men and they are so because they know how to get what they want with their money. Therefore it is probable that they will be indirectly influencing government policy and are unelected and not paying tax here either! In other countries this would be described as corruption of democracy, why isn't it so here? The state must break this dodgy dealing relationship and fund parties directly to rebuild public opinion on the credibility of parties and politicians.

Since the truth clearly seems to be that ALL parties have taken donations from non doms, I think the question to be asked is why this is being run as a party political, anti Conservative, story on the BBC news. Surely it would be better to concentrate on the continued collapse of the pound today and the fact that whoever wins the election millions of private sector jobs are going to need to be created if the country is to recover. This is an important election for the British people and we need our news presenters, and politicians, to focus on the real issues.

#1 and #2 right on the money and how pays NR wages via a HMG levy ?

#5 and where does Trade Union monies manily come from now , the sovietisation of many parts of our country, via direct tax spend on jobs to buy votes and then donation can go from the workers to the union to the Labour party.

Now wonder they want the family courts kept as a closed shop , how many solicitors are using there fees to donate to the labour party ?

Why Lord Ashcroft's case is different

casue it might make a difference to labour being in power and all those that depend on the current status quo being kept in place,.

meanwhile the trains of the UK is clattering along with no one at the wheel into oblivion (based on a 1930 WSC speech in the Commons) now that was a patriotic man unlike the curerent home sec.

Alan Johnson's hypocrisy knows no bounds.
Ashcroft is a non-dom, yes, but so are many of Labour's donors.

He also has raised millons of pounds for Crimestoppers, Help for Heroes and other British charities. Seems to have the interests of this country to heart - seems pretty patriotic to me.

Lakshmi Mittal has given over £4million to Labour - what did he do that was patriotic? Oh yes, mothballed the Corus plant on Teeside, taking £600m carbon tax credits while transferring production to India.

Get your own house in order first Labour!

Nick David Cameron maybe uncofortable about this issue and it may last if you and the others within the BBC continue to aviod the real issues in the lead up to the election , by doing the Labour partys campaining for them. I will be voting Tory and hope other people vote for what they believe in not pander to the anyone but Tory stratergy put out this weekend by Mr Hain on the Andrew Marr show but it has not seemed to have got any reaction from any of your staff.

Starting to panic Nick? You should be. Dreadful blog earlier, dreadful news report, and p.poor justification here. Why not pursue Mital? Why not the Jack Dromey story? There's a chap who helps bung millions at labour, whose union then benefits from govt largesse, and goodness me, there he then is, parachuted into a safe seat?

Whereas Ashcroft... is accused of NOTHING! You're not accusing him of doing *anything wrong*, and he leads the news bulletin!!!

What will the BBC lead on tomorrow? Lollipop lady helps children across road? White cliffs of Dover still mostly white? Sun rises? Sun sets?

Try as I might Nick, I can't see the news values in this story - nor can Sky or ITN btw. But I can see the value for the Labour Party. Funny that eh?

but he did succeed the last HS, whose partner brought porn on the tax payers expense, very very patriotic then

I believe the bath plug was British-made!

Nick,
I'm sorry but that was very very biased. Both the main parties have a lot to answer for on this matter but you have gone over the top against the Tories and virtually ignored Labour.

Nick,

Having read the comments people have made regarding your earlier report and your comments on this blog, I think you owe it to your paymasters the license payers to come clean on who you will be supporting at the next election.

I hope that you and your colleagues will be asking Gordon and his colleagues why we should trust them for another 5 years - in the good years you need to put aside reserves for the lean years.

Calling Ashcroft unpatriotic is disgusting, he has done more for people than the wasters currently putting the boot in.

https://www.lordashcroft.com/charities/index.html

Even worse is Labours rank hypocrisy over this, it's a shame that the news didn't bother mentioning that opting instead to do Labours dirty work for them. The guardian have put together a spreadsheet showing donations from non doms to both parties, Labour have received over £1.5 million more than the Tories from non doms, why did the news not mention this? If the people at BBC news want to be trusted then they should start reporting the news properly, not just Labours version of it.

#16 they are already with the labour party Union donations from the public sector employies.

Do you fancy using tax payers monies for the BNP, I do not.

The real queustion is what have this lot been doing for 13 years
why did they not sort the issue out they have plenty of time ?

Oh for goodness sake change the record Nick!

I watched both BBC & ITV news tonight and ITV reported real stories and the BBC carried on with its witch hunt.


BBC news is a disgrace

was the current home sec bank rolled by the postal workers union ?

Nick,

Yet another example of why the BBC does not deserve to continue to exist in it's current form. You and your ilk do disservice to political reporting. Quite how you can justify this as impartial reporting I do not know.

Come on Nick where's your story on Unite bankrolling the Labour party and Dromey parachuted in to a safe seat.

Wind your neck in Lefty, there is far more important stuff going on than this bloody circus and thanks to the BBC, this s**t is headline news.

What about the loss of AAA rating on the debt?

What about the pound falling below the 90c/Euro barrier - if the greeks werent so screwed up you'd have parity with the euro

Gordon cancelling PMQ's again?

And all this crap about non-doms?

Its all s**te.

Kinda helps when you've got the BBC in your back pocket though, doesnt it?

Means you can dictate the news agenda instead of being accountable for the damage you're wreaking on the country.

Stinks to high heaven. Glad I'm out of it. The Badger in No11 can whistle for any tax from me.

Wow look at all the chaff the rightwing bloggers are putting up.

Why do the conservatives not understand that it is your patriotic duty to pay your taxes - just like the little people.

It is immoral that a foreign national should seek to influence the course of the general election.

The abuse of the electoral system is the biggest since the Tories gerrymandering scandal in Westminster.

This reinforces the image of the conservatives as an elite few who seek to gain power so that they can feather their own nest. It goes to show we are not all in it together.

The tories should give all the money he gave back and he should be stripped of his title.

Why are you not blogging or even reporting on the non-dom Labour donors? If you had taken as much room up writing about Labour non-dom donors we'd all need another screen to read the output. There is no balance whatever in your reporting at the moment (actually it's less reporting and more reproducing the Labour party line at the minute)

Interesting one. All the clown bloggers can do on this story is sputter about "BBC Bias" ... no points of substance offered in defence of Ashcroft or (more importantly) the Tory leadership. Only spurious comparisons to the unions and other individuals. Telling. Damaging for their beloved party too, I'd have thought.

14. At 8:25pm on 01 Mar 2010, lefty10 wrote:
all the right wing hard liners..so upset about this....
headline news on all the main tv news channels....


XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Never let the truth get in the way of your spin as with your Liebour party.

I refer you to number one on this blog which were the 4 top headlines on ITV.

I'm 'so upset' because I believe in unbiased reporting. Fair play to ALL and nothing I've seen on this blog and the one before represent anything like it.

Extract from the Sunday Times, 28 February 2010.

“The Treasury dropped plans to increase tax on private equity just days before two of the industry's richest tycoons made donations to Labour worth £1.25m.

In the run-up to last December's budget statement, ministers ordered officials to draw up proposals to end the special low tax enjoyed by venture capitalists.

However, according to Treasury insiders, hostility to the plan from No 10 meant that the private equity sector escaped any tax rises.

The pre-budget report of the Chancellor, Alistair Darling, on December 9 also exempted private equity bosses from the bonus tax imposed on other highly paid City workers.

Nine days later on December 18, Nigel Doughty, the chairman of the private equity giant Doughty Hanson and owner of Nottingham Forest Football Club, who has an estimated fortune of £119m, gave £1m to Labour.

On December 23 the venture capitalist Sir Ronald Cohen, whose fortune is estimated at £220m, donated £250,000 to Labour.”

Any comments Nick?

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

33. balancedthought
"It is immoral that a foreign national should seek to influence the course of the general election."

Murdoch? Or did that not count when the Sun was supporting Labour?

Nick, you have often raised the issue of Ashcroft's money. But never the Labour donors other than when Lord Cashpoint was in line for a public knifing

The difference is therefore based on whether journos asked about it, not whether it happened. You ask about Ashcroft, you dont ask about Bliar's buddies and Greedy Gordon's paymasters. Not to mention Mandy's chums.

Anyway, well done. I hope Brown gets back in. Why should anyone else clean up his mess? Cameroooooooooooooon and wee Georgie certainly are not up to the job

All the Tories here can keep on banging on blindly but there are some simple truths which cannot be ignored:

1. Ashcroft isn't just a donor - he is deputy Chairman and a central part of devising the Tory strategy.

2. Ashcroft and the Tories have tried to hide his tax status for years - if they didn't have anything to fear then why did they do that?

3. Ashcroft promised the Parliamentary authorities that he would become a full UK taxpayer - he still hasn't kept that promise.

And no it isn't like Labour's links with the unions - that isn't hidden, the unions pay UK taxes and union members vote to make those donations.

And no Ashcroft isn't like Mandelson who isn't a non-dom.

The simple fact is that Ashcroft should not be deputy Chairman. Cameron must sack him.

Nick how about something serious like why Government allowed extradition warrant on former Bosnian muslim-croat leader for alleged war crime on 40 serbian soldiers, but tipped off Ms Lipni about her arrest warrant.

35. At 8:59pm on 01 Mar 2010, sagamix wrote:
Interesting one. All the clown bloggers can do on this story is sputter about "BBC Bias" ... no points of substance offered in defence of Ashcroft or (more importantly) the Tory leadership. Only spurious comparisons to the unions and other individuals. Telling. Damaging for their beloved party too, I'd have thought.

-----------------------------------------------

Even when people DO offer "something of substance" - god knows what that has to be to meet with YOUR approval mind, - what do you do?

You lefties just ignore it and keep on chanting your dogwhistling propaganda.

And thats the stuff that the moderators DONT censor out!

As we've said before, it kinda helps to have the national broadcaster in your back pocket.

Means unemployed mummies boys can sit there in their borrowed lodgings between signing on sessions dishing out their puerile self loathing socialist bulldust with impunity, ignoring the rest of the nation going to hell in a handcart behind them.

Great.

Just the world I always wanted to grow up in.

Its simple,

If there was nothing to hide, all perfectly proper, then why hide the fact for 10 years (especially if you are politically active) - unless of course you thought it might smell!

No - Cameron and Hague have shown bad judgement and treated the electorate as idiots. They know what to expect

Now for something similar,
A number of our local Labour Councillors have resigned the whip after Labour Central parachuted in nominees for Don Touhig's vacant post, ignoring local party wishes.

Could come back to bite did same in adjoining constituency and lost to Independent.

re: 35 sagamix
"Interesting one. All the clown bloggers can do on this story is sputter about "BBC Bias" ... no points of substance offered in defence of Ashcroft or (more importantly) the Tory leadership."

I tried to provide a point of substance for defence, but the BBC banned it.

nuff said.

Typical Robinson, always slagging of the Tories, shame he doesn't do the same with Labour!
How many more biased rantings are we going to put up with?

Alistair Darling in his first interview as Chancellor told the FT "I don't believe in economic patriotism".

He then went on to prove it by ensuring the downfall of the UK economy. I consider that to be considerably less patriotic than giving the Tory party a few bob.

Perspective please.

Calling Nick Robinson biased towards Labour is laughably ignorant. The apologists for Ashcroft know their man has finally been caught and are responding by squirming and lashing out. Don't let the facts confuse you, though - as of course it is far easier to hide your stupidity behind a paranoia over any BBC journalists' politics - even when a trivial bit of biographical research would blow a hole through every last barrier of prejudice.
As to Ashcroft and what this really means - it is another horrible stain on the political process in this country. How can we preach to other countries about corruption and buying elections when we have this? And is this the sort of transparency we can expect from Dave's bunch? Out of the frying pan we go, and no wonder the polls can't split the two main parties.

If this was such an important subject, the government has had thirteen years to legislate and they did nothing..Why? because they benefit more from the status quo...more hypocrisy...the only person who has talked about reform for the non doms is David Cameron...

Breaking news! The Tory election slogan isn't going to be "Let's win it for Britain". It's now been replaced by "Let's buy it from Belize".

Apbbforum can call us all tories but the truth is i have voted labour all my life - until now. You don't have to be a Conservative to see how biased tonights reporting was.It did the BBC no creidt.

This is truly bottom of the barrel stuff.

I've read this blog for a while now but have never before felt compelled to comment, particularly given Nick Robinson's self-confessed contempt for his readership. Nonetheless, on the off chance that someone from the BBC reads this, I want to be seen as among the vast number who feel this excuse for reporting today is beyond the pale.

The four-letter reference was especially galling. Gutter snipes against a man who has done nothing wrong in comparison with numerous, well-known Labour donors and has considerably more good deeds to his name simply aren't on. The BBC has shown its true colours today which, in truth, were pretty poorly hidden beforehand.

I only hope that the comments page reflects the wider electorate: it really is time for a change and we all have a duty, patriotic or otherwise, to get rid of this government. If nothing else, at least it would wipe the smirk off the faces of Gordon Brown and Nick Robinson. That's incentive enough for me.

In essence, political journalists such as Nick inadvertently do the mainstream parties bidding as they continue to run with stories like this.

As long as, particularly Labour and the Tories, are getting more-or-less blanket media coverage, then the other players in the political marketplace do not benefit from the oxygen of publicity.

Did you know for example, that there are over 100 English Democrat, over 150 Greens and over 200 UKIP candidates standing in the forthcoming General Election in England.

If only the English people would take just a tiny amount of interest in politics, we would soon get to a much healthier political landscape here in our England.

In part it is because for 10 years he and successive Tory leaders have dodged questions about his tax status.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Labour's had 10+ years to tighten the law on non.doms - why make a fuss about the 'decent white toff' just weeks before a general election - I wonder why?

Perhaps labour have been more concerned with Blair's police investigation over donations and don't forget the 'passport for favours debacle' - I assume that was a 'non.dom issue' also?

Is Peter Hain still there - I thought that he had been chucked out of Parliament?

Is Lord Taylor still there in the HoL? Why

How did Speaker Martin make it to the House of Lords?

Nice to hear that El Megrahi is recovering well from his 'cancer' (I thought that it was my patriotic duty to mention that.

Is knowingly sending British troops untrained, ill-prepared and under-equipped into front line combat 'bullying'.

I can think of plenty of other stories that are worthy of the BBC's political blog.

There is a principle, I understand in British law that unless someone is breaking the law, then it, it is improper to question their arrangements - if you think that Lord Ashcroft has done something illegal then say so otherwise ....
Can we have some balance - the City of London is full of non.doms doing goodness knows what with whoever.

If Labour do not think that Lord Ashcroft's position is acceptable - then change the law and treat him the same as all of the other non.doms with or without oligarch yatchs - What Lord Ashcroft chooses to do with himself and his money is his business within the confines of the law.

Stop bleating and let's see the law changed!

Now who was it who said last year that they would press continually for the tax loopholes relating to tax havens to be abolished? ... And has done absolutely nothing about it since ...

51#

Breaking news!

Labour dogwhistlers in "lets not blog, lets not debate, lets just post up propaganda" shocker!

51 Apbbforum LOL

or maybe it should be 'You don't get much change out of property in Belize'.

Everyone knew the status of all the other non-doms who donate to all parties. What we were kept ignorant of is that Cashcroft kept his status secret, until thanks to Labour, which brought in the freedom of information act, someone asked for this information to be made public.

The solution to all this is very simple. Either Cameron sacks Cashcroft, or the country will sack Cameron, as the opinion polls will show in the coming weeks.

Well balanced and well done Nick.

Why are you all whinging BBC bias - last week you had your bullying stuff we did not complain that Nick should have balanced it with quoting the specific allegations against David Cameron.

Ride with it maybe you will get a surge in the polls - I think it is a vote winner foreign billionaire seeks to influence elections.

Maybe you should just buy the votes it would be simpler - oh yes you already did that in Westminster.

just tune on the TV andtune to BBC4 to see modern Zimbabwe.

It's heartbreaking what's happened in the last 10 years to what was a wealthy country.

Then just thank God we're here in the UK and stop blogging for the night.

#51: Earlier (#43) you said:

"Means unemployed mummies boys can sit there in their borrowed lodgings between signing on sessions dishing out their puerile self loathing socialist bulldust with impunity, ignoring the rest of the nation going to hell in a handcart behind them."

As far as I can translate that into something approaching English, it seems to me that rational debate isn't necessarily your forte.

As usual the tired old BBC Bias blah blah

Been listening to Sky's repetitive coverage of the Ashcroft Scandal.

Presumably they're biassed too? Even Murdoch's Tory Propoganda machine are covering "Ashcroftgate" in detail.

You would think even the Tory blog drones would feel slightly uneasy about the UK election being bought with untaxed money from the money laundering capital of the world.

SAME OLD TORIES!!!!!!

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

I note that the Conservatives claim that Lord Ashcroft 'only' donates 5% to party funds. That is 1/20th of their funding which is a heck of a lot to come from one person! And somewhat paradoxical now that David Cameron has now implied that voting Labour or Lib Dem et al is unpatriotic...

He Bought "Conservative Home"

He Bought "Politics Home"

Now he want's to buy the British election, only the gullible will be fooled.

Scandalous

SAME OLD TORIES

The report by you mr robinson on mr ashcroft was a disgrace.

I don't mind you doing a fair and balanced report mr robinson,but yours went well over the top with your own personal hatred of something the torie's have done to you or is it bred into all political reporting at the bbc (to hate the torie's).

This is another sad day for political neutrality at the bbc.

59#

I was going to reply... but its completely pointless.

You're as dense as lead and about as receptive to political debate as lead.

All you can do is sloganeer.

Pathetic.

Anyone noticed the Tory Blog Drones are even more shrill and panicky than normal tonight?

"Ashcroftgate" has really hit a nerve.

Now for "Bearwood" to get some serious scrutiny. If that turns out to be just a bogus front for syphoning money to the Tories and not a "genuine" company contributing to the UK economy, then surely it's curtains for Cam the Sham.

The slightest scrutiny on the Tories, nothing like you get in Government, but they've seriously wobbled.

SAME OLD TORIES

nee @ 43,

You have to stop squealing like a baby every time there's a story that's damaging to your Tory party. It's embarassing.

c555 @ 60,

Nice try at distraction from a poleaxing anti Clown story, Andy.

By the way, News at Ten on ITV have this as the top story too. And looks uncomfortable under tough questioning from ITN's political editor too - after all there's no airbrush on TV

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Labour has had huge majorities for the past 10 years. Why have they not passed a law to prevent "Non Doms" making campaign contributions if they don't like it? Could it be Labour received more money than the Tories? Poor Gordon Prentice - all that complaining about Ashcroft - why not ask his pal Gordon Brown to change the law??

61#

Your lack of education is not my problem.

32. perry. im sorry perry. i know your distaste for new labour. and yes they have made alot of mistakes...but the conservatives are not the answer...and slowly but surely they are showing their bad judgement and true colours.... a difficult pill to swallow for you...but im afraid thats just the way it is. best to just be honest with yourself and admit they are not fit for purpose.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

68#

Does Charlie Whelan fax this stuff to you mate? You taking over the nightshift from Multiple-Logon Naylor?

Doing your bit for the Labour war effort, eh?


Not on a retainer from UNITE are we?

One reason the Ashcroft story is getting so much coverage - at Sky as well as the BBC, so it patently isn't a case of bias - is that news teams tend to favour stories about individuals over stories about issues. It's the human angle. It's sexier. It's easier to relate to. Personally, I think it's a shame but it's how things are these days.

The other reason, of course, is that it's a right scandal.

Newsnight should be good tonight.

Now who will the Tories put up for a Paxman Grilling.

Please let it be William (Have you asked him) Vague.

What the country must be told now is how long have Cam, Hague and Osborne known of this Scandal?

To suggest they didn't know would be the frankly ludicrously dishonest.

Give em Hell Paxo (if they dare put someone up)

SAME OLD TORIES.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Mittal/ Labour donations / Romania

If we really want to go back over "undue influence" under 13 years of Labour Government I'm sure it can be done.

How about Tony Blair's letter of support for Mittal's company LNM to help it buy a Romanian steelworks?

Mittal made a gift of £125,000 to the Labour Party weeks earlier.

There is clearly an ongoing issue with financial influence over British politics. To their credit some bloggers have tried to discuss this calmly. To criticise Lord Ashcroft on the one hand, but to ignore Labour's financial dealings on the other, is unbalanced and hysterical.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Too little too late I think Nick - my brown eyes are still turning blue because the BBC insists I vote according to their LSE agenda.

I read that revenge is a dish best served cold - if this is so, and if Mr Cameron gets a working majority, then BBC - be very afraid!

Hmmmmmmm!

69 SAGA
said (re Perry)

"You have to stop squealing like a baby every time there's a story that's damaging to your Tory party. It's embarassing."

Its true Perry, I say this as a friend, have some self respect and dignity, and have an early night. (I'd give Newsnight a miss if I was you)

SAME OLD TORIES

"The slightest scrutiny on the Tories, nothing like you get in Government, but they've seriously wobbled."

Funny how its always scrutiny on the tories though innit?

NEVER scrutiny on Labour.

Helps to have the national broadcaster and the pigs in your back pocket.

Just who else have Labour bought off with public money over the last 12 years?

SagaMix,

Re your posts 35 and 70.

Oh dear - it seems you have fallen from the moral high ground - that fall MUST have hurt.... Was it only in January that you wrote.

86. At 11:41am on 22 Jan 2010, sagamix wrote:

"I don't call Tories "Clowns" anymore. Call them "Conservatives". And I've also stopped saying "babe" to people.......... So it's game on between now and then, and I do NOT want all those people - potential tory voters - who are persuaded by the power of my political analysis to be turned off by some stupid (and totally unnecessary) "Clowns" jibe. Or the like."


I am not supprised because on

38. At 3:48pm on 25 Jan 2010, sagamix wrote:

"Certainly not smug ... I'm still calling it Clowns by 36."

And now twice in one blog use use "clowns" yet again.

So you promise to do something, and then don't do it. Are you sure you are not a politician?

Mittal has donated $4 million to the Labour Party (why, by the way?).

Mittal Steel has been accused of exploiting the natural resources of Africa.

"A $900 million mining deal between the world's largest steel company, Mittal Steel, and the Government of Liberia is heavily weighted against the interests of that war-torn and impoverished West African country." Source: Global Witness

Of course all donations to Labour are of the highest ethical standard.

Hands up everyone who's not being paid to blog by a political party!

I thought as much...

77 Perry

said (shrilly)
"Does Charlie Whelan fax this stuff to you mate? You taking over the nightshift from Multiple-Logon Naylor?

Doing your bit for the Labour war effort, eh?


Not on a retainer from UNITE are we?"

BBC Bias not working eh Perry so you go to Plan B, the equally tired and Predictable Paid Rebuttle charge.

And they said Gordon was Paranoid.

SAME OLD TORIES

Isn't it strange.

I suspect I'm a natural 'Tory' voter...Labour (or is it GB?) are hopeless at managing money even if their heart is in the right place - and they just can't cut anything (too close to home it seems)....

Yet I have no empathy with the Tories - they seem like a bunch of naughty Eton schoolboys caught with a seedy secret behind the bike shed. Equally squalid.

I want tough action on public debt / pensions (lets say a real 10% cut above £25K) and the thumbcrews placed on those city spivs and other non-dom / bonus vultures.

Perhaps it is time to remove both main parties (or better their funding - no unions or billionaires - just a limit of £5K per UK tax-payer / business).

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

75#

{sigh, bashes head off brick wall again}

Look.

Will you lefties get this into your granite thick skulls.

I

AM

NOT

SAYING

THE

TORIES

ARE

THE

ANSWER.

Clear enough for you all?

What I AM saying and you lot are blitheringly ignorant of is that Labour are EVERY bit as bad, EVERY bit as BENT and YOU LOT, when you're given questions about it you ignore it and just keep on sloganeering as if you're the most honest bunch of parliamentarians in the whole of history.

THAT epic case of double standards and the complicity of the state broadcaster in this peddling of one sided sh*te is what is REALLY boiling my blood.

Got it now??

79#


ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

Nick wrote:

"In part it is because the only reason he's revealed it now is because the secret assurances which secured him a peerage after it was at first turned down were about to be revealed after a Freedom of Information request."

I don't think that these assurances were very secret as almost no sentient person alive at the time could possible have missed them!

This was indeed the basis for my belief that it is the decade long deception of the British people that is the reason that the Electoral Commission will be failing in its duty if it does not force the Tories to pay him his money back and refuse it the right to take any further money from him ever again. This is not a mild indiscretion, such as Jeffrey Archer's, this goes to the very heat of politics. It is a national disgrace, not that he should have been the main source of finance of the party, but that he refused to open about the critical matter of his tax status having given assurances in order to get his peerage. He should also be stripped of his peerage.

Get a grip moderators, I will absolutely NOT withdraw any accusation of bias. Your censoring of my posts is merely proving my point that you're stifling anything that is critical of Labour and of the owner of this blog in particular.

I can't beleive the bias of the BBC's reporting on this. The headline "Lord Ashcroft Admits he non dom status" is a joke. Gordon Brown's own campaign was funded by non-doms. Lord Paul is a non-dom and Gordon Brown promoted him to the Privy Council. What is the difference?

Ronald Cohen has given more to the Labour party this year than Lord Ashcroft.

Come on let's have some balance.

Labour funded by US Arms Manufacturers

"Raytheon Systems, the US arms manufacturer, paid the Labour Party more than £5,000 for sponsorship in 1997. They also flew MPs to Paris. In June 1999 they were awarded an £800 million contract from the MOD for their ASTOR battlefield radar spy-plane system." (source: Red Star Research).

All Labour donations follow the highest ethical standards ("white than white").

Nick your credibility as reached an all time low,this latest blog is disgraceful, how on earth you get away with such bias, beggars belief.

84#

I've explained why.

I'm currently watching newsnight. I'm only surprised that Kirsty Wark didnt accuse Ashcroft of being one of the Moors murderers whilst she was at it.

And as for that apparatchik Hyman, who is on... at least he is aptly named. Talks like one as well.

Suffice it to say, I'm glad I'm out of it. Five more years of this s**t and I'd be suicidal.

Sick to death of this now.

Has it ever occurred to anyone here that if the Labour Rebuttal Unit and CCHQ were somehow barred from the blog,it would cease to exist as there wouldn't be any other bloggers!