YateGate
Yates of the Yard is back.
Remember back in July when the CPS decided to bring no charges against any of those questioned in the "cash for honours" affair - including Tony Blair, the Labour fundraiser Lord Levy and the Downing Street aide Ruth Turner. Mr Yates - who incidentally is said to be a passionate Liverpool FC supporter and keen long-distance cyclist - will be appearing before MPs on the Public Administration committee at 3pm. We will, of course, be watching. According to reports, the committee will want to know why he took so seriously the complaint that was originally levelled by the Scottish National party which many politicians have denounced as a stunt.
In June, it was revealed that the probe had cost #773,177 between its launch on March 27 2006 and April 30 this year.
Was it all worth it do you think - for reasons of clarity? To get everything out in the open. Or was it fruitless from the start?
RSS feed
Email us
Listen to PM
#713,177, that's a heavy probe!
#733,177, that's a heavy probe!
"Mr Yates - who incidentally is said to be a passionate Liverpool FC supporter and keen long-distance cyclist" - Oh, and perhaps you should have published his age, Sequin? After all, that's another relevant piece of information, isn't it? Or so it would appear from the way such information is invariably reported in the nationals.
£733,177 is a tiny sum compared with some of the ones Tony Blair cost trying to get a place in the history books, and this one succeeded: he will always be the first Prime Minister to have been questioned by the police in this way whilst he was in office. Whether it was worth it or not is a different matter.
(posting first try, 11.50 tuesday)
£733,177 is a tiny sum compared with some of the ones Tony Blair cost trying to get a place in the history books, and this one succeeded: he will always be the first Prime Minister to have been questioned by the police in this way whilst he was in office. Whether it was worth it or not is a different matter.
(posting first try, 11.50 tuesday)(computer blank-screened until 11.54, claiming to be stalled, then 'server www.bbc.co.uk is currently inaccessible'; refused to return to comments, 11.56; back to blank screen in 'comments', 11.57; continuing, 11.59; lose patience 12.00, quit web-browser, empty cache, restart browser and try again... )
(posting second try, 12.11...
Chris (5)
So it was YOU who fixed it. Well done.
Chris (5)
You put your left leg in, your left leg out
In out, in out, you shake it all about
You do another reboot and you turn around
That's what it's all about
Whoa-o the joys a blogging
Whoa-o the joys a blogging
Whoa-o the joys a blogging
Knees bent, teeth clenched
Raa raa raa
all together now..........
Personally, I feel that this investigation was worth the money, despite it finding that there was insufficient evidence to warrant a prosecution. After all, without it, we would've had to settle for pure speculation and conjecture about the matter, with no chance at all of a resolution. It's better for the country, as well as the politicians for there to have been a proper investigation of the allegations. Without this ability, we would have even less trust in the political process...
Oh dear, after posting quickly on the beach, I seem to have been diverted towards café5 02
I bit if Joe-public had to quote Yates "...failed to co-operate fully with his inquiry..." they'd have been shown pretty short shrift. All Yates has confirmed is that this is yet another government whitewash.
FFred,
I agree, but must admit disappointment at the lack of prosecution. Guilt is pretty obvious, though difficult to 'prove' in the tight-knit circumstances, especially since at least both main parties are 'at it'.
Of course, in thirty years, we'll know a lot more.
Salaam, etc.
ed
We're all in this alone.
-- Lily Tomlin
Wed Oct 24 00:48:36 BST 2007
FFred,
I agree, but must admit disappointment at the lack of prosecution. Guilt is pretty obvious, though difficult to 'prove' in the tight-knit circumstances, especially since at least both main parties are 'at it'.
Of course, in thirty years, we'll know a lot more.
Salaam, etc.
ed
We're all in this alone.
-- Lily Tomlin
Wed Oct 24 00:48:36 BST 2007
All,
Regarding the cost of our Advertising-driven election system, wouldn't it be far better to apply severe limits (even zero) on election expenditure?
This would make the temptation to suck up to the super rich in order to finance political parties, and thus, at a stroke, reduce the corrupt honours-for-sale problem.
Most of you will know my opinions regarding Parties as the main impediment to proper democracy (see namelink if not), but with expenditure on advertising and other expensive PR, then it would become less ridiculous to consider methods of state funding for parties.
Our community woodland has gone from strength to strength ever since we decided not to bother seeking public funding. We've found that general volunteer spirit and enthusiasm, and generosity has (just got a 502 at random in the middle of typing this - WOW!) given us enough to be getting on with things at an absolutely appropriate pace....
Just some thoughts.
Salaaaaaams
ed
I'll learn to play the Saxophone,
I play just what I feel.
Drink Scotch whisky all night long,
And die behind the wheel.
They got a name for the winners in the world,
I want a name when I lose.
They call Alabama the Crimson Tide,
Call me Deacon Blues.
-- Becker and Fagan, "Deacon Blues"
Wed Oct 24 13:19:04 BST 2007
and
Wed Oct 24 13:23:18 BST 2007
Totally agree with you, Ed.