posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 12:10 PM
Cor, you go away for a week and this is what I find on return?!
Time to grow up, wise up, tune in and get real on this issue.
This 'example' is completely legal and is something all the major UK parties do (and I've heard of it happening in the USA, Ireland and
probably in Europe too).
Open, legal, publicly declared and fully above board political party funding is nothing like the same as 'corruption'.
It is nothing like the same as undeclared and secret payments of cash to individual MPs or the 'giving' of freebies on the quiet to individual
Here's the truth of the matter.
Parties are always broke.
Election campaigns are expensive.
No-one wants to pay for them.
They can either be funded by the taxpayer or by private individuals who may have their own agenda.
Take your pick.
The real point in all of this is that if the the extent of 'corruption' in UK government is confined to something that occasionally looks like 'the
purchase of peerages' (and even that is open to exposure thanks to the unprecedented evolving legal and accounting framework - thanks to this
government - documenting the parties incomes, gifts, donations, loans etc now in place) then we are probably not doing too badly.
If they weren't getting the gongs then you'd have to ask yourself what they were really after.
In America they don't have peers, major donors get to be ambassadors instead, which seems to me far more harmful.
It's a sign of the times that certain people (many of whom I'm sure ought to know better) will carelessly throw terms like "corruption" around to
try and score some cheap political 'points' (attaching it to things that plainly are not 'corrupt') but at the end of the day all it does is
nothing but counter-productively and rather foolishly devalue the concept itself.
[edit on 3-10-2006 by sminkeypinkey]