Why is it so much worse for a Tory….,

…politician to solicit money (if that is what Osborne has done, consciously or not) from rich buggers, than it is for New Labour Stalinists to do so?

David Davis

Even the quisling right media Tory Press is all over the poor little boy. The left like to slag off Wikipedia, especially “teachers” in “State Schools”, probably because it takes precious knolwdge and gives it to everyone, for free…..  …but someone has updated his page in the last 12 hours…..and righties like us have not time to scratch our arses!

If Oleg Capitalistsky is a foreign national, but “controls” LDV, which is to sya that he has little interest in its affairs on a day-to-day-basis such as giving a mere £50,000 to a British political Party, then why is it anybody’s business if LDV wants to give it?

I don’t recall new Labour being coy about donations from Indian steel firms….or from Bernie ecclestone‘s empires in order to protect an interets in tobacco-derived-sponsorship of F-1 racing…..(*****see below)


IF New Labour has been guilty of attempting to think about the thoughts of selling honours and peerages to other rich buggers, in return for seats in the Lords (remember that? the Prime Minister questioned by police?) then this is much worse than poor little George Osboy.….THEY ARE ACTUALLY FRANCHISING OUT THE GOVERNMENT TO UNELECTED RICH BUGGERS WHOM THEY BROWN-NOSE…..)

Labour ought to remember what happened to Edward II, and what he got for doing a cash-for-honours thingy…..in return for money from his French wife’s chums for his wars, he effectively put them in charge of the State and Exchequer, and I don’t think you’d want to have happen to you what happened to him.

Of course, there is no proof of that.

*****This is what it says on Wiki about Bernie and the Labour Party:-

In 1997 Ecclestone was involved in a political controversy over the Labour Party‘s policy on tobacco sponsorship.

Labour had pledged to ban tobacco advertising in its manifesto ahead of its 1997 General Election victory, supporting a proposed European Union Directive banning tobacco advertising and sponsorship.[13] At this time all leading Formula One Teams carried significant branding from tobacco brands such as Rothmans, Benson and Hedges, West, Marlboro and Mild Seven. The Labour Party’s stance on banning tobacco advertising was reinforced following the election by forceful statements from the Health Secretary Frank Dobson and Minister for Public Health Tessa Jowell.[14] Ecclestone appealed ‘over Jowell’s head’ to Jonathan Powell, Tony Blair’s chief of staff, who arranged a meeting with Blair. Ecclestone and Mosley, both Labour Party donors, met Blair on 16 October 1997, where Mosley argued:

“Motor racing was a world class industry which put Britain at the hi-tech edge. Deprived of tobacco money, Formula One would move abroad at the loss of 50,000 jobs, 150,000 part-time jobs and £900 million of exports.”[14]

On 4 November the “fiercely anti-tobacco Jowell” argued in Brussels for an exemption for Formula One. Media attention initially focused on Labour bending its principles for a “glamour sport” and on the “false trail” of Jowell’s husband’s links to Benetton.[14] On 6 November correspondents from three newspapers inquired whether Labour had received any donations from Ecclestone; he had donated £1 million in January 1997. On 11 November Labour promised to return the money on the advice of Sir Patrick Neill.[15] On 17 November Blair apologised for his government’s mishandling of the affair and stated “the decision to exempt Formula One from tobacco sponsorship was taken two weeks later. It was in response to fears that Britain might lose the industry overseas to Asian countries who were bidding for it.”[16] In 2008, the year after Blair stepped down as Prime Minister, internal Downing Street memos revealed that in fact the decision had been made at the time of the meeting, and not two weeks later as Blair stated in Parliament. [17]


Leave a Reply