@@tmarritt Not at all, remember he blocked investigations into Russian money going to the Tory party. What he did which I think has confused is he repeatedly went to Ukraine to give apparent support, but he went as that was an easy way to get in the press and be away from parliament during awkward questions.
It is not possible to rely on MPs behaving in any ethical way and a legal code should be introduced with real penalties for those who break the code. Maybe then there will be some grounds for trusting our MPs.
We're allergic to saying 'corruption' about our ruling party. That's something that happens in *foreign* countries, says my strawman Middle Englander. We need to stop being afraid of accusing our government of corruption. There is the perception that our partially-elected representatives are looting the country and we're doing nothing meaningful about it. And even if someone is found guilty of wrongdoing, what happens to them? The absolute worst is that they lose their seat - more usually they lose their cushy appointment and/or have to wait six months until the PM changes. They should lose their shirt. As Alistair says, when Labour comes in there needs to be something that future historians will refer to as a bonfire.
A very deliberate, and very precise strike against British aid workers, why isn't HM Government trying to establish EXACTLY who is responsible, and then taking the appropriate judicial action?
Well, there is a link from mergers and such, but your right, claiming equivalence between now and one hundred years ago is a bit odd considering the political system was different then. We were still and empire and a global power.
Problem with reforming the honours system like this is the same one that happened with the fixed term parliaments act where there's nothing to stop a future government getting around any reforms by just passing an act of parliament to to appoint peers. I'm of the opinion that, like other countries, the UK really needs a formal written constitution that lays out the ground rules and requires a supermajority to amend.
It is a horrible coincidence that within days of the International Court of Justice ordering Israel to ensure that adequate food supplies are provided without delay to the population of Gaza the killing of workers in an aid convoy by the Israeli military has caused aid to be reduced by the withdrawal of some aid agencies.
Is it a coincidence? The fact that the aid convey was targeted 3 times, with 3 different vehicles and was clearly marked, speaks differently I'm afraid.
the issue is that no one can guarantee that the food aid will not go to supporting Hamas - which is considered by the same institutions - as a terrorist organization. And supporting a recognized terrorist organization is also illegal. Like everything with this - its more complicated than it seems.
@@existentialvoid That is specious nonsense. Illegal to provide food and water to dying people in case they might pass it to a terrorist? Surely you can'not really believe that.. Israel, or at least Netanyahu and his cronies, have demonstrated comprehensively that they care nothing for the lives of Gazans. They have killed tens of thousands in the pretence that some of them might have been Hamas. Tens of thousands more have and will die from lack of aid deliberately withheld.
This is exactly the attitude they want to engender in the population. Once people disconnect from democracy it becomes easier and easier for a vocal minority to dictate policy. Vote. It makes a difference.
Anaesthesiologist here. Alastair, I’m glad your anaesthesia and surgery went well. You were probably safer than a Tory would have been 😅 Sorry Rory, you’re one of the good ones. In case anyone’s interested in the specifics: Every general anaesthetic does involve a (hopefully) short respiratory arrest at the start, and difficulties with the airway can be fatal, indeed. But the vast majority of patients survive just fine. Some patients get too worked up about the risks, others are so oblivious it’s a bit concerning.
Gibraltar was captured by the British Fleet in 1704 during the war of the Spanish Succession. On 4th August 1704, an Anglo-Dutch fleet under the command of Admiral George Rooke took Gibraltar from the Spanish. From dawn on that day and for the next five hours, some 15,000 canons were fired from the fleet into the city. The invaders, led by the English majority, landed the same morning and not surprisingly encountered little opposition. Under the Treaty of Utrecht in 1713 Gibraltar was ceded to Britain. This treaty stated “the town, castle and fortifications were to be held and enjoyed for ever without any exception or impediment whatsoever.” This treaty was renewed again in 1763 by the Treaty of Paris, and in 1783 by the Treaty of Versailles.
Can we very clear, MPs holding directorships and consultancies is as much a form of corruption as taking bungs. They are not being recruited to these positions because they have a pretty face. They're literally, on board, to open up their phone lists and make introductions. That has to stop.
we don’t need to just stop cash for honours we need to strip the HoL from every member and hold local elections to ensure both houses are accountable to the public, these members should not be allowed to join a political party, true democracy
We need Direct Democracy, with a ratification of every bill by referendum rather than Royal Assent. Representative Democracy was rational in 1680, now we have fast telecommunications let the people sign the propositions into Law.
@@JelMain Do something ? Agreed. But I think I've heard that it's the people further to the edges who tend to vote. How do we motive the silent majority to become active? When I was at school in the 60s and 70s Political discussion was forbidden. After leaving school the young are then expected to make informed décisions. I've no idea what an answer could be, but you're right, something needs doing and urgently.
Banning newspapers from interfering in politics? The purpose of newspapers is to report on current affairs and hold politicians to account, trying to prohibit newspapers 'interfering' in politic is absolutely ridiculous and completely authoritarian. @@JelMain
OpenDemocracy has many articles about these friends of groups. The Conservative Friends of Israel group was the most active with 80% of tory MPs members. When Priti Patel was sacked for a series of meetings with senior Israeli government officials including Benjamin Netanyahu, they paid for the trip.
Anybody remember Bernie Ecclestone's 1million pounds donation to Labour and his sport's subsequent exemption from a tobacco sponsorship ban? It was all OK and above board because as Ally's boss explained, "I think I'm a pretty straight sort of guy". LOL
As you discuss the difficulty of performing an inquiry in the tiny state of Gibraltor (pop. 32K) I'm reminded of the Pitcairn Island (pop. about 60) Sex Scandal of 2004. Six men were ultimately convicted, and the first couple of months of their prison sentences was to build a prison on the Island.
Every type of gambling from bingo to bookies via lotteries and raffles are being advertised on TV . Has this reached an unacceptable level of predation on many who cannot really afford it?
Thank you for all the great interviews and discussions. Are you familiar with Vlad Vexler, political scientist with special insights in Russia? I think if you were to have a conversation with him on Russia, and the psychology of Putin and the people that surround him would make for a very interesting episode :)
I was close friends with Paul Judge, the Tory Treasurer who walked away over this: I built his Jury Team from folk like you on the Peston BBC Blog, not knowing he'd overdone it in our table-tennis games forty years before (he dropped dead, leaving his money from that time to set up Judge College at Cambridge).
This is the priority. So many problems in our societies, but if we don't address the issue of politicians basically being for sale, then there is no way anything else will be addressed.
There is a performative element to Singapore's clean image, which these two gentlemen have bought into lock, stock and barrel. Read further on their complicity in the 1mdb scandal.
Rory, you spend quite some time, laying out the disgraceful dealings between rich men and politicians which result in the men making huge donations and as a foregone conclusion given places in the Lords or given knighthoods in exchange. A very short time afterwards you then express surprise and dismay that apparently 80% of the British electorate think that this government of ours is corrupt. You’d barely finish telling us how corrupt they are!
Inequality is the biggest issue. Everything else is distraction. The world needs redistribution - inequality has always been problematic, but now it threatens the security of supposedly wealthy nations. Did you see what Barbeque (a famous gang leader) said in Haiti? He blames oligarchs and corrupt politicians. The same problems we have.
Even as a Labour voter, I would actually still be in favour of a HoL, or some form of upper House. However, it has been so badly abused for political gain that it has lost any credibility. Needs to be a system where the public has a say or there is some form of Independent committee. Prime Ministers dishing them out for friends makes an utter mockery of our country.
While I agree that shutting down independent media is concerning, Calling Al Jazeera 'independent media' is a stretch. The idea that US troops are going to escort anything into Gaza is bonkers. . . its basically asking for trouble. If anyone is going to do any escorting in Gaza - it has to be Egypt or Saudi. . .
Have I just entered some kind of parallel universe?? .....more commonly known as the Iraq Dossier.... or the Dodgy Dossier was a 2003 briefing document for the British prime minister Tony Blair's Labour Party government. It was issued to journalists on 3 February 2003 by Alastair Campbell, Blair's Director of Communications and Strategy.... He's now giving out advice on how to behave in public life???
I love the way Rory seems to instinctively know which thing I don't know all that much about. The explainer about the honors list - very handy! I have lived here for 40 years and yet still never really understood it all. I know there are lords and they sit in the second chamber and I know the odd snooker player gets made a knight for winning a lot, but beyond that, I really don't know. I always wondered whether you actually have to use the title, is it a crime to refer to cameron as just that, or do I actually have to say 'lord' like we were in 1840?
Gibraltar launders the South American cartels money and Malta does the Italian mafias, this all goes through the online gaming agencies and is signed of by the four big accounting firms.
Say something good about serious work done in House of Lords, in spite of the scandal of abusive appointments, by people such as John Tomlinson who has just died, his work as former MEP was also first class.
I would propose that the UK elect the PM and key cabinet members either via Parliament or directly. The commons are elected on national wide on a party basis as opposed to constituency basis. Seats allocated proportional to parties. Lords reserved for functional constituencies e.g. people representing the military elected by service persons, business representatives elected by business communities, legal profession, representatives from each nation and regional representative. Lords conduct select committee meetings and regularly fact check political parties policies and bills. The judiciary selects judges as it but with endorsement from lords and commons. Judges must present their judicial philosophy. Local election on a constituency basis.
On political honours such as Kinghthoods etc, I don't really care - because ultimately being a Sir or having some letters at the end of your name doesn't matter (it gives you no income, no extra power) its just a bauble. Appointments to the House of Lords are of course different. I think there needs to be a political balance, since these things can have an actual effect on the laws that get passed. I do think there is a place for Peers who are former politicians. If the House of Lords is meant to be a House of Experts, having former Members of the (Shadow) Cabinet or Select Committee Chairs makes a lot of sense. Allowing former MPs to remain in active public life by being appointed to the HoL might also be helpful in dissuading them from going into the sort of Private sector corruption. It can be controversial, but I also think the power to get anybody into Ministerial Office by putting them in the House of Lords is a strength of the system. (But there should be limits on number and it shouldn't apply to Secretary of State level, like with Lord Cameron). So I wouldn't want to completely remove the ability of the Party Leaders to make nominations - but they definitely shouldn't have the final say.
RS says when it comes to honours all the parties do it. Not true. The SNP has never nominated anybody for a peerage or a knighthood. Nor is it represented in the House of Lords. You might not like them very much Rory, but you should credit them when it's due.
I like how they talk about it, as if the Tories and Labour party are completely separate entities from their lives. Yet, (as they sorta allude to, without saying their own direct benefit) they both benefitted from the pay-to-peerage dynamic within their party's - party got funding, they and their MPs used that funding to get into some level of power. Funny how corruption is only an issue once they're not in it or benefitting from it. If only this thought process was with them when Rory was an MP or Campbell had that influence and power.
Given the amount of worldwide corruption ‘recognised’ in this podcast what hope have the electorate in any country that their government is ever going to do any good for them. The planet is farked…😐
30:00 inviting foreign mps to see situations is a legitimate educational tactic used by Ukraine! As long as it is transparent and no other favour/corruption involved.
You wrong mate. We need indepedent parliamentians. PR IN VOTING SYSTEM. MORE PEOPLE DECIDE WHO THE LEADER IS SEPERATE TO MPS DETERMINE . FLAT RATE PAY FOR MPS. MAXIMUM TIME FOR LEADER 2 TERMS MAX.
For a start the Lords should have no more voting 'seats' than there are MPs. Secondly they should be more proportionate to voting %. Nobody should be able to claim any allowance until they sign out after sitting for the day in debates. A panel should select worthy candidates based on proportionality from lists given by public and politicians. All parties should be publicly funded and made illegal for donors to give parties money
The House of Lords should be replaced by a 'House of All-Sorts' (with the same powers as the current Lords) to which a wide array of groupings can appoint (or internally elect, if they so choose) representatives. For example, the Girls Guides get X number of seats, ditto the Scouts, cricket clubs, schools, churches, professional associations, charities etc etc. Even life and hereditary peers could be allocated a few seats.
From one constitutional monarchy to another: Just get rid of the House of Lords (we did that in 1953) and change the voting system to the D'hondt method
Alistair: "Labour needs to *insert progressive policy that they definitely aren't going to do here*. It's sad because many people are going to vote Labour thinking that they might actually implement these policies, not understanding that they are subject to the very same corruption discussed in this podcast! Odd that Campbell can't see it given the outrageous PFI deals handed out to private companies by New Labour.
IMO anyone who is a member of a political party has a somewhat biased view of life so should not be sitting in the second chamber - keep politics in the Commons. Instead, have the Royal Colleges and professional bodies elect representatives from their members who have, say, ten years of experience since professional qualification during which time they have not held party membership. The HOC can be elected by those who are most vulnerable to unworkable political ideology. The HOL would become a chamber populated by a wide variety of apolitical experts, selected by their expert peers.
Alastair is being either naive or disingenuous if he thinks there's a chance Labour will try to clean up UK politics. Starmer literally lied and tricked his way into his role. His model relies on Labour having rich donors - that doesn't come without cost.
Let’s talk about “conflicts of interest” - if you use your position to give a direct advantage to your conflict of interest by means of manipulation, that should be outlawed. In the HoL to get the most knowledgable ppl in there I agree, conflicts of interest is inevitable… however, absolute detailed scrutiny needs to take place - and any sign of wrong doing should be heavily punished.
But, what do you do with 500k in cash? You do your weekly shopping for 50 years? I do not get it. If Banks were truly clean ( and I am not talking about being pains in the neck to send £ 500 to your little brother for his birthday), large amounts of cash would be useless. First step towards less corruption.
re. the discussion about reform of process for appointments to the Lords, I'd be interested in Rory and Alistair's thoughts on the process recently (2016) introduced in Canada for appointments to the Senate.
05:15. Rory is a bit feeble and gives up too easily over cash for peerages. One approach would be to pass a law which reversed the burden of proof. So if Joe Bloggs donated money to a political party and was made a peer (before or after) that would automatically be considered a corrupt transaction. So Joe Bloggs and the PM would be considered guilty until proved innocent.
I really appreciate and enjoy your podcasts however re Israeli’s power which is directly from the USA - so why don’t you tackle that hoary chestnut? I tend to think both of you don’t want to delve into or more to the point expose who holds the real power in our society. Politicians in cahoots with business and foreign parties, we know and observe that when politicians retire and work for their favoured business. The depth of corruption in our societies is why our fragile democracies is under attack. Why do don’t you interview Eric Weinstein who brings clarity to the big picture from a sociological point of view, even though he is a mathematician. Rather than hope Labour,if they win, will make changes to H of L etc get them to take a Bernie Sanders approach to winning over the younger citizens - who are the future.
@ 12:25. Recuse yourself?? How very American Rory. Don't you mean excuse yourself. This adoption of American terms is depressing. Thrown under a bus,double down etc. Oh dear. Nevermind, Love the podcast boys.
Some of the faces Rory pulls, do remind me of Wallace from Wallace and Gromit😀 I don’t know how you stop corruption in Politics, when you are asking the people who are doing it, to self regulate and vote for taking that away from them Feels like turkeys and Xmas situation
