Two former foreign secretaries in cash for access scandal

[kirklancaster]

http://http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31580374

Straw and Rifkind deny 'cash for access' wrongdoing
Sir Malcolm Rifkind and Jack Straw

TWO FORMER FOREIGN SECRETARIES IN CASH FOR ACCESS SCANDAL

Jack Straw and Sir Malcolm Rifkind are the subject of the allegations, arising from a joint investigation by the Daily Telegraph and Channel 4's Dispatches.

The documentary makers said reporters posed as staff of a fake Chinese firm.

The MPs have referred themselves to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards. Both deny any wrongdoing.

It is claimed that Mr Straw was recorded describing how he operated "under the radar" and had used his influence to change EU rules on behalf of a firm which paid him £60,000 a year.

On the subject of payment, Mr Straw is heard saying: "So normally, if I'm doing a speech or something, it's £5,000 a day, that's what I charge."

Sir Malcolm is reported to have claimed he could arrange "useful access" to every British ambassador in the world.

The Conservative MP for Kensington and chairman of Parliament's Intelligence and Security Committee was recorded saying: "I am self-employed - so nobody pays me a salary. I have to earn my income."

He said his usual fee for half a day's work was "somewhere in the region of £5,000 to £8,000".

MORE SLEAZY PIGS WITH SNOUTS IN TROUGHS. LEFT WING RIGHT WING WHAT THE FECK IS THE DIFFERENCE?

[joeysteele]

I actually don't like these 'traps' by journalists and investigators.

It also seems, as it unfurls more that under current rules neither have really done anything wrong.
Even though is sounds dodgy and seems both unsavoury and unnecessary.

I wll wait for the standard committee before I condemn on this one.
I agree with Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg that the issue of 2nd jobs has to be looked at and even maybe curbed.
If some people going into Parliament cannot accept that then simply don't stand for election.

I am sorry because these are 2 MPs I have a liking for,they have both held high office and it elaves me more and more wondering how MPs now don't smell a rat as to these entrapments by journalists.

All MPs, regardless of status in their parties, need to be on the lookout for this happening because even if in the end you have done nothing wrong, and it will take months before we learn if there is any wrongdoing at all as to what these 2 have been involved in here, the mud smeared by the entrapment sticks long after after any clearance of wrongdoing.

MPs have become a shady bunch in the eyes of the elctorate but for me, journalists and programme makers are even lower in their means at times.

Would I trust an MP or a journalist, I would trust the MP everytime over them,for me journalism by the actions of so called professional journalists just about has soiled the whole profession.

[waterhog]

i would give my view on these questions - but i would like a payment for my view ? if you pay me £10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 i even promise not to make my reply rhyme.

[Crimson Dynamo]

simple greed

smh

[arista]

But they must sort this mess out joey
trap or no trap
private talk or not

There is a Clear Line
did those 2 old fellas
cross it

[arista]

i would give my view on these questions - but i would like a payment for my view ? if you pay me £10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 i even promise not to make my reply rhyme.


I would buy you a Jnr Whopper
if I had time to meet you

[arista]

simple greed

smh


I will have to watch the Daily Politics
which I record
and if it is

Then each party must tell us so.

[kirklancaster]

But they must sort this mess out joey
trap or no trap
private talk or not

There is a Clear Line
did those 2 old fellas
cross it

Hi Arista, please 'take up the baton' and keep us informed with developments on this story - you do it so much better than me - I don't even really know how to post links correctly. :wavey:

[kirklancaster]

simple greed

smh

You said it brother. I could not agree more.

[kirklancaster]

i would give my view on these questions - but i would like a payment for my view ? if you pay me £10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 i even promise not to make my reply rhyme.

:joker: You slay me Hog.

[joeysteele]

But they must sort this mess out joey
trap or no trap
private talk or not

There is a Clear Line
did those 2 old fellas
cross it

Possibly but the things that need changing is what MPs are allowed to be doing under the rules.

We won't know if they have really crossed the line for months so I won't judge them as to that, just as I wouldn't want to be judged before some official investigation.
Personally, I cannot see Jack Straw or Sir Malcolm Rifkind intentionally doing wrong,so until officialdom says they have and not just journalists on a trapping misson, I will wait for that proper judgement.

[arista]

Possibly but the things that needs changing is what MPs are allowed to be doing under the rules.

We won't know if they have really crossed the line for months so I woun't judge them as to that, just as I wouldn't want to be judged before some official investigation.
Personally, I cannot see Jack Straw or Sir Malcolm Rifkind intentionally doing wrong,so until officaldom says they have and not just journalists on a trapping misson, I will wait for that proper judgement.


Labours Straw MP has done the right thing
he has suspended himself

Joey after BBC2HD Daily Politics
and at 7PM Ch4HD News
I will know tonight

[smudgie]

I actually don't like these 'traps' by journalists and investigators.

It also seems, as it unfurls more that under current rules neither have really done anything wrong.
Even though is sounds dodgy and seems both unsavoury and unnecessary.

I wll wait for the standard committee before I condemn on this one.
I agree with Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg that the issue of 2nd jobs has to be looked at and even maybe curbed.
If some people going into Parliament cannot accept that then simply don't stand for election.

I am sorry because these are 2 MPs I have a liking for,they have both held high office and it elaves me more and more wondering how MPs now don't smell a rat as to these entrapments by journalists.

All MPs, regardless of status in their parties, need to be on the lookout for this happening because even if in the end you have done nothing wrong, and it will take months before we learn if there is any wrongdoing at all as to what these 2 have been involved in here, the mud smeared by the entrapment sticks long after after any clearance of wrongdoing.

MPs have become a shady bunch in the eyes of the elctorate but for me, journalists and programme makers are even lower in their means at times.

Would I trust an MP or a journalist, I would trust the MP everytime over them,for me journalism by the actions of so called professional journalists just about has soiled the whole profession.

Well said Joey, I agree with your post.
I hardly think MPs need to look for a second income, leave all that shenanigans until they retire from parliament.
Absolutely no time for the media circus either.

[joeysteele]

Labours Straw MP has done the right thing
he has suspended himself

Joey after BBC2HD Daily Politics
and at 7PM Ch4HD News
I will know tonight

I agree Jack Straw has done the correct thing at this time, maybe it will be shown in the future that he didn't need to.
I will wait for the standards committee to report on this one still.

[Livia]

They actually haven't done anything wrong or broken any of the rules, so here we go with another trial by media.

An MP's basic salary is roughly the same as that as a deputy head teacher. They do claim expenses, but so would you if your constituency was miles away from London and you were required to live in London half the week for late night sitting, three line whips etc. If we want good, dedicated people from a wide range of backgrounds to stand as MPs then we need to pay them a basic salary that reflects the responsibility they shoulder on our behalf. Otherwise, we're always going to have MPs doing other jobs or living off their trust funds.

With a decent degree people can earn much, much more in the private sector than MPs get and I know I wouldn't want to do their job for their salary. If we want quality people representing us in Parliament, pay them a good salary and stop them doing external work of any kind.

[Kizzy]

Well they've removed the whip... seems they're taking it more seriously.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2015/feb/23/jack-straw-and-malcolm-rifkind-respond-to-cash-for-access-allegations-politics-live-blog

[joeysteele]

Well they've removed the whip... seems they're taking it more seriously.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2015/feb/23/jack-straw-and-malcolm-rifkind-respond-to-cash-for-access-allegations-politics-live-blog

With it being so close to an election,I think all parties will be more jittery whenever this kind of thing turns up.
MPs of all parties need to be really on their guard against reporters playing false and setting out to trap them.

Whether it is something simple like not knowing someones name or a particular area of some policy,or like these incidents where they set up false websites and pretend to be people they are not to try to ensnare MPs for any little thing.

I will never be convinced these reporters do this in the national interest or that they even care about the public/taxpayers really.
It is just to create scandal and gossip to put in their papers.

There are many MPs I dislike for lots of reasons but I really hate this kind of entrapment based on so much being false anyway from the people behind it too.

Jack Straw and Malcom Rifkind, love or hate them, have given decades of service to Parliament, they now have this all over the front pages.
When we do learn from the standards committee on this and if we learn from them that they did nothing wrong too, we will need a magnifying glass to find where the press list that they were wrong about them in those same papers,that is if we can even find the page it would be on..

MPs beware, 'never' trust reporters,it is an occupational hazard that they have to talk to them and be interviewed by them but they need to treat every question as suspicious from them and always be fully on their guard with this awful media we have in the UK at present.

[arista]

Joey I also watched Dispatches
Yes they were set up.

But I am getting sick of Ed Miliband moaning
that he will not allow MP's to be Consultants
So what The Feck is HIS Jack Straw doing?


Both those MP's go in in May
but as this tricking was done before then
They are fecking GUILTY

[arista]

They actually haven't done anything wrong or broken any of the rules, so here we go with another trial by media.

An MP's basic salary is roughly the same as that as a deputy head teacher. They do claim expenses, but so would you if your constituency was miles away from London and you were required to live in London half the week for late night sitting, three line whips etc. If we want good, dedicated people from a wide range of backgrounds to stand as MPs then we need to pay them a basic salary that reflects the responsibility they shoulder on our behalf. Otherwise, we're always going to have MPs doing other jobs or living off their trust funds.

With a decent degree people can earn much, much more in the private sector than MPs get and I know I wouldn't want to do their job for their salary. If we want quality people representing us in Parliament, pay them a good salary and stop them doing external work of any kind.


Yes I get you there
but 5K a day is fecking big money
so they will be in all Papers tomorrow
I post the lot later tonight
for Kirk to see the Mega Damage
for Labours Staw MP
and Conservatives Rifkind MP
who both should have known better.


After May
sure

Now No way

[joeysteele]

Joey I also watched Dispatches
Yes they were set up.

But I am getting sick of Ed Miliband moaning
that he will not allow MP's to be Consultants
So what The Feck is HIS Jack Straw doing?


Both those MP's go in in May
but as this tricking was done before then
They are fecking GUILTY

Jack Straw has it seems, been doing what is acceptable under parliamentary rules.
No one can say they are guilty of anything yet and I have afeeling the standards committee will exonerate them from wrongdoing.
I am certainly not going to just rush to believe jumped up reporters who have acted so falsely and deviously in these incidents.

I understand that Ed Miliband has said if there were to be a Labour govt; he would expect his MPs not to have other things going on outside of politics.
Nothing wrong with him saying that at all in my view.

However, it is for the parliamentary rules to change as to whether anyone is doing wrong.
Ed Miliband can guide as to what he thinks is appropriate as to behaviour but parliament sets the rules for all MPs.

That is what he would need to seek to change and if he believes that to be the right way to go, then he has the right to say so and try to gather support for it too.

[JoshBB]

it annoys me so much when people from any party do this, it really turns people away from politics.

[arista]

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2015/2/23/372763/default/v1/telegraph-1-720x960.jpg

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2015/2/23/372764/default/v1/star-1-720x960.jpg

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2015/2/23/372766/default/v1/mirror-1-720x960.jpg

[Kizzy]

They actually haven't done anything wrong or broken any of the rules, so here we go with another trial by media.

An MP's basic salary is roughly the same as that as a deputy head teacher. They do claim expenses, but so would you if your constituency was miles away from London and you were required to live in London half the week for late night sitting, three line whips etc. If we want good, dedicated people from a wide range of backgrounds to stand as MPs then we need to pay them a basic salary that reflects the responsibility they shoulder on our behalf. Otherwise, we're always going to have MPs doing other jobs or living off their trust funds.

With a decent degree people can earn much, much more in the private sector than MPs get and I know I wouldn't want to do their job for their salary. If we want quality people representing us in Parliament, pay them a good salary and stop them doing external work of any kind.


That's not true.
'The average head or deputy head in English state schools is now paid £55,500'

With all the expenses and kickbacks I'd say they got 3-4 times that.
Of course they could work in the private sector and earn more, so can teachers... the fact is MPs don't.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/9225962/Warning-over-school-pay-as-700-heads-pocket-100k.html

[bots]

There are 2 different issues here. Rifkind was selling his contact database, he was not taking money to directly influence decision making. Straw on the other hand openly admitted to influencing decision making for money - that is no different to the brown paper bag and cash for questions. Its corrupt.

[Nedusa]

Well I am confused with this story, are they guilty of a crime ? No then why are they being plastered all over the front pages, and why have they reported themselves for this non crime?

So is it a crime or not , strange state of affairs perhaps what they are doing is not legally wrong but morally wrong.

This needs to be made clear exactly where the line is and what is permissable and what is crossing the line.

[arista]

Well I am confused with this story, are they guilty of a crime ? No then why are they being plastered all over the front pages, and why have they reported themselves for this non crime?

So is it a crime or not , strange state of affairs perhaps what they are doing is not legally wrong but morally wrong.

This needs to be made clear exactly where the line is and what is permissible and what is crossing the line.



Yes Correct they never got paid
its just the The Clever Ch4 Under cover women
gets the men relaxed and talking big fee's
for a half day.


They were caught undercover


So its only both MP's saying & getting excited
with the sexy undercover lady says what fee's do you need
etc.

[arista]

There are 2 different issues here. Rifkind was selling his contact database, he was not taking money to directly influence decision making. Straw on the other hand openly admitted to influencing decision making for money - that is no different to the brown paper bag and cash for questions. Its corrupt.


Yes Straw and his Sugar
processing plant in Ukraine.


I prefer the brown paper bag
at least I know its Pure Corruption
not a can of worms

[kirklancaster]

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2015/2/23/372763/default/v1/telegraph-1-720x960.jpg

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2015/2/23/372764/default/v1/star-1-720x960.jpg

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2015/2/23/372766/default/v1/mirror-1-720x960.jpg

Genuine thanks for this Arista - you are indispensable on here.

[arista]

Conservative Rifkind MP has been sacked from the current
defence comittee and is standing down at the election in may

[Helen 28]

Conservative Rifkind MP has been sacked from the current
defence comittee and is standing down at the election in may

He hasn't been sacked he resigned from the committee.

[Nedusa]

So they both have resigned or been told to stand down because of what they might have done not what they actually did ?

No money was actually paid to anyone merely talk of possible money or fee's

surely a crime is committed when it has actually been committed not when it has only been discussed in the loosest of terms.

Seems like a set up to me a con a scam to get them to talk with a sexy interviewer who was flattering the old fools.

Are there not more important news stories at the moment ffs......do we really have to invent news stories by scamming old politicians like this.

Seems a bit sad really.

[Kizzy]

He was the security committee chairman, and was selling information... does that not strike as a little odd?

Mind you I'm wondering if this wasn't orchestrated... if Boris becomes MP for Kensington now I'll know it was.

[MTVN]

There seems to be a lot of problems with this second jobs motion of Labours. It also seems that on the one hand they're trying to capitalise on anti-establishment sentiment by banning them, but on the other that will just surely lead to a new breed of career politicians who are also responsible for public disillusionment with MPs: those who go straight from education to parliament, lacking experience or appreciation for life outside of the Westminster bubble and for whom politics is all they know.

[arista]

He hasn't been sacked he resigned from the committee.


Yes correct
but to me he would be sacked
if he did not move fast.

He is 70years old
so its time to get out of it.
In My View.


After May this year
he can bugger off
he has his own wording to blame

[Livia]

There seems to be a lot of problems with this second jobs motion of Labours. It also seems that on the one hand they're trying to capitalise on anti-establishment sentiment by banning them, but on the other that will just surely lead to a new breed of career politicians who are also responsible for public disillusionment with MPs: those who go straight from education to parliament, lacking experience or appreciation for life outside of the Westminster bubble and for whom politics is all they know.

That is an excellent point.

[Kizzy]

Maybe then those who split themselves shouldn't be classed as 'full time' MPs?
If they have other commitments and businesses they are part time MPs.

[joeysteele]

There seems to be a lot of problems with this second jobs motion of Labours. It also seems that on the one hand they're trying to capitalise on anti-establishment sentiment by banning them, but on the other that will just surely lead to a new breed of career politicians who are also responsible for public disillusionment with MPs: those who go straight from education to parliament, lacking experience or appreciation for life outside of the Westminster bubble and for whom politics is all they know.

I don't know really, I think Labour have a point as to 'other' jobs and commitments but I myself would prefer a little more give and take.

There was a Lib Dem MP on tonight, who has his own business,he became an MP too, now for me, that is fine, he has a business,however as an MP he could limit drastically his commitment as to time for that business,dealing more with political. parliamentary and constituency affairs.

It does see, if someone is involved with 2 or 3 things,then likely none will be getting the due attention they should.
Since being an MP is paid by the taxpayer then I do agree far more scrutiny shold be applied as to 'outside' of politics commitments.

It is my hope someday to go into politics and success willing become an MP, I could have embarked on that immediately on finishing UNi but chose not to.
I got involved in many issues in many areas and followed Uni with time in a law firm too.
I have explored lots of other issues and areas and am acquiring a wide knowledge of life generally in the UK and how things affect people of all backgrounds in the UK.

Once I have taken on board enough,then I hope to pursue a political career,if it happens, and I find myself in the right place at the right time.

I would then hope however, and feel pretty sure I would, that were that to happen, my time will be my constituents,my Party's and Parliaments,more to the point strictly adhering under the rules laid down by parliament at that time too.

That is where the problem lies,under the current rules, these 2 MPs likely have not done anything really wrong,no matter how bad it may look.

However,I agree now with Ed Miliband, that maybe does need to change. An MP can have a long or short career,depending on what seat they get and when elections are held.
There is nothing wrong with having something else or a career to fall back on after being an MP but once elected, their time should be dedicated almost fully to their constituency and supporting their party as to parliamentary matters.

I do feel the status quo as it is,will only fuel more anger and suspicion as to MP's from the electorate, so some things need to be altered.
From watching the 2 leaders today, it seems there is really little will on David Cameron's side to alter things really at all.
Which was actually disappointing to watch and hear from him too.

[MTVN]

Do you not feel Joey that sometimes a second job can benefit the service you're able to provide as an MP and make you more appreciative of certain issues outside Westminster politics? Being an MP is a very time consuming job I'm sure - I don't envy those who do it and feel they can get unfairly criticised - but I do also think that second jobs can complement the role that MPs serve. MPs used to not be paid at all, it was thought that by being salaried they'd be less capable of serving the public interest. I wonder if someone only has their MP wage to fall back on then it can encourage the whole career politician mindset where the only goal is to maintain your seat and stay within that Westminster bubble. By all intents and purposes MPs do get a good wage, its true. But there also many of them who could earn a lot more in different careers. William Hague made this point today: you try and cap secondary earnings, well what about politicians writing books? Is it ok for it to be an unsuccessful book - falling below the cap - but not a successful one. What if an MP is also a farmer (like Mark Spencer) - do they have to quit as an MP if they have a good harvest and then seek re-election when the crops fail? It's a very problematic thing.

If constituents feel that their MP is too tied up with a second job to suitably represent them then they can vote him out. We don't need a law to say what MPs can and can't do in their own time.

[bots]

The argument about second jobs is noise designed to deflect attention from the real issues.

Members of parliament are placed there by people who voted for them. If they don't measure up in representing those voters in parliament, they can soon be replaced at the next election. For years there have been some MP's that attend every debate, and those that do the bare minimum. Lazy people with no second or 3rd job can get away with doing next to nothing, while someone with multiple jobs can be an active and worthwhile MP.

The cabinet members and PM spend next to no time representing their constituents, do the constituents care? No. Why is an MP not subject to performance reviews as any other employee is. Why are cabinet members elected to represent a constituency yet don't do it in cabinet.

Getting back to the real issue. The real issue is one of conflict of interest, and a conflict of interest can arise whether someone is employed in an other capacity or not. Secondary employment is just a symptom of conflict of interest, but until the cause of the conflict of interest is eradicated within parliament, there will always be corruption.

[joeysteele]

Do you not feel Joey that sometimes a second job can benefit the service you're able to provide as an MP and make you more appreciative of certain issues outside Westminster politics? Being an MP is a very time consuming job I'm sure - I don't envy those who do it and feel they can get unfairly criticised - but I do also think that second jobs can complement the role that MPs serve. MPs used to not be paid at all, it was thought that by being salaried they'd be less capable of serving the public interest. I wonder if someone only has their MP wage to fall back on then it can encourage the whole career politician mindset where the only goal is to maintain your seat and stay within that Westminster bubble. By all intents and purposes MPs do get a good wage, its true. But there also many of them who could earn a lot more in different careers. William Hague made this point today: you try and cap secondary earnings, well what about politicians writing books? Is it ok for it to be an unsuccessful book - falling below the cap - but not a successful one. What if an MP is also a farmer (like Mark Spencer) - do they have to quit as an MP if they have a good harvest and then seek re-election when the crops fail? It's a very problematic thing.

If constituents feel that their MP is too tied up with a second job to suitably represent them then they can vote him out. We don't need a law to say what MPs can and can't do in their own time.

Well yes, I agree with just about all that, however I do think we have a great number of MPs who in fact have little knowledge across all society who have gone into parliament carrying all the baggage of their own interests that exist in their life.

I think if a Farmer is elected as an MP then of course he should need to be able to devote time to that, it is his livelihood if his time as an MP was cut short for any reason.

I think now, with fixed term parliaments it is harder to get rid of an MP not doing their job, once elected they are there for 5 years and that is some time to wait to removed someone no longer serving the constituency that actually fought to get them elected.
Such as for those who trusted and voted LibDem in 2010 and are still waiting to get that vote back to vote for someone else who maybe would honour the trust given.

One of the things for me, is there are probably way too many safe seats in parliament, if MPs were looking over theri shoulders at the prosepect of really losing their seats at general elections, I think we would get better politicians.
At present, rolling into a safe seat for a MP is a massive bonus, they can do much or even possibly nothing at all of note but be there for ages.
When they have outside businesses and interests, they can concentrate on them rather than worry about their time as an MP.

I would be looking at the creation of constituencies that left very few and hopefully no massively safe seats.

We,I think anyway, need to come out of our cocoons of our own little worlds and interests.
To serve the public,and I still would consider it an honour to serve as an MP,should if it happens be the absolute main focus of an MPs life.
What happens is, a fair amount of the time,I would say, is that those with their heavy commitments who come into Westminster only have those interests to bring to Westminster.

The sad fact is, most MPs likely have not a single idea how some of society exists or operates.
I also think and MP should be an MP because they want to geninely serve the public and Country as a whole,not to be something just to add to a list of experience or achievements.

Which I why I think, with some flexibility, common sense and understanding, that outside 'earning' interests as to MPs should be looked at and new rulings put in place.

A Farmer as an MP,to take your example, already has a knowedge of across the board of society.
What people need, how business operates,budgeting problems, and in fact all its needs.
It is already too a great commendable public service really,someone like that,where it is their livelihood,should be encouraged as a Farmer brings far more to politics,in my view, than most who are just looking to add to their wealth and status.

[Kizzy]

Let's look up our MP's and see how hard they are working, with or without 2nd jobs?

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24851/rachel_reeves/leeds_west