Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Be among the first to know what’s going on! Here are the ways to manage it:
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the right margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
5) Join the uPopulus group at https://upopulus.com/groups/vox-political/
6) Join the MeWe page at https://mewe.com/p-front/voxpolitical
7) Feel free to comment!
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Hancock shock: he was the only MP interviewed by Led By Donkeys’ fake firm who actually pointed out that he had a responsibility to his constituents.
This took me a little by surprise. The last three Led By Donkeys video films about MPs trying to get an extra job with a fake foreign firm, ignoring the plight of their poverty-stricken constituents, have been released over the last 24 hours.
Here they are. Firstly, Tory Wimbledon MP Stephen Hammond, who already has two extra jobs that make as much money for him as his Parliamentary salary. The (relatively recent) saying is true: money isn’t earned any more – it is a commodity that may be demanded in greater or lesser amounts according to circumstances…
Here’s the clip:
It’s fascinating how he talks about his price range being at the lower end of the scale suggested – then he readily agrees to suggest remuneration at the middle-to-top end of the scale.
Next up: Sir Gavin Williamson, who left his last Tory government job under a cloud of bullying accusations:
Interestingly, he at least took a more sceptical attitude toward the fake company, seeking to establish that it was bona fide. But he still joined a Zoom call to discuss the fake job being offered to him.
And when he found out the firm wanted to meet government ministers, he made his excuses and hung up. It seems he did not want to be involved with an organisation that may seek to influence government policy.
It provides a curious footnote to Williamson’s career. After years on the wrong side of the headlines, he suddenly did the right thing.
That being said, and as with all the other Tories, the well-being of his constituents still took second place to his own comfort as he has since taken a second job with an education firm, for which he takes £50,000 per year.
Finally: Matt Hancock – described by Led By Donkey’s as an independent MP, having lost the Tory whip due to his appearance on TV’s I’m a Celebrity, Get Me Out of Here, and by a commenter on the video clip as the kind of person you have to admire: “Imagine waking up as Matt Hancock every morning and not simply throwing yourself into the ocean.”
He was interviewed in the week his damning WhatsApp conversations about the Covid-19 crisis were publicised in the press, and announced he would be standing down as an MP at the next election.
He still seemed to have time to discuss a second job with a foreign firm – although, let’s be fair: he was the only MP in the Led By Donkeys investigation who mentioned any responsibility to his constituents at all.
And, again, he stressed he’d stick to Parliamentary rules about meetings with government ministers.
Surprisingly, Led By Donkeys did not sum up their findings at all.
Well, I have a few – and here they are:
Firstly, it is clear that all five of the MPs who interviewed for the fake job were quite happy to have such a position alongside their work as MPs and for their constituents; they all wanted to get on the gravy train.
Four of them had no concerns about security – doesn’t that make them security risks?
Three of them did not have apparent concerns about being used as conduits for a firm to talk to ministers. Another one, who said he could not lobby directly, said there was a way around the rules. Only one refused to have anything to do with behaviour that might be used to attempt to influence government policy. So it seems the majority were happy to help influence the government by these means.
And only one MP – possibly the one who might be least expected to do so – actually mentioned a duty to constituents.
So the intention of the investigation is proved: it seems clear that, among some MPs at least, the well-being of UK citizens comes a distant second to the opportunity to use status as an MP to rake in pots of cash.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Be among the first to know what’s going on! Here are the ways to manage it:
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the right margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
5) Join the uPopulus group at https://upopulus.com/groups/vox-political/
6) Join the MeWe page at https://mewe.com/p-front/voxpolitical
7) Feel free to comment!
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
The trouble with politicians is their words always have a meaning below surface-level.
In this instance, it seems fledgeling prime minister Boris Johnson’s promise to put 20,000 more police officers on our streets within three years is empty.
He is on record as having said: “I promised 20,000 extra officers and that recruitment will now start in earnest.”
But it seems clear that retirement and natural wastage means that number of new police will keep numbers at a standstill.
There will be no extra police officers at all. I wonder if BoJob would care to explain this apparent calculation cock-up?
DCI Warren Hines, from the West Midlands Police Federation said: “I think the announcement is welcome, policing has been hollowed out to an unrecognisable position, but Boris said he wants 20,000 officers in post within next three years.
“Well if [you] look at number of officers we are likely to lose in the next three years, through retirement and natural wastage, we will lose 20,000 over that period. We will only be where we are now.”
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Bosses of both Jeremy Hunt’s and Boris Johnson’s campaign to become leader of the Conservative Party – and prime minister in the process – have begged party members who have received two ballot papers to use only one of them.
It seems that more than 1,000 people could have multiple forms, according to a BBC report citing a party source.
That’s a lot of temptation for the party whose members are known for doing anything to get what they want.
Cheating in a major vote?
I wouldn’t put it past them.
Better count all the papers once they’re in, Tories. Better get someone independent to do it for you. And that includes the spoiled ones.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
A priest, we’re told: Lynn Hayter in one of the costumes she apparently uses on a day-to-day basis as the leader of Seeds for Wealth Ministries on Facebook, which apparently has 69 members. Gosh!
The BBC is working hard to be the channel that hosts a debate on Brexit between Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn. There’s just one problem – the BBC appears to be a pro-Tory fake news outlet.
It seems that, on Monday (November 26), the BBC’s Newsnight show featured a Brexit-supporting priest named “Lynn” in an apparently-genuine debate on Theresa May’s Brexit deal:
"The reason they are sitting there is that they know far more about what's going on then we do. I've been a Conservative all my life and I back Prime Minister May."
Apparently, according to @AdamBienkov, the fact a woman who is not a vicar & who appeared on Newsnight wearing a dog collar & supporting May’s Brexit deal, having previously appeared in many BBC shows, is perfectly normal & if the think otherwise you’re a conspiracy theorist
So the allegation was that “Lynn” was not a qualified vicar, but was definitely a person who had appeared as an actor in BBC productions – but the BBC was denying that there was anything shady about her, and was claiming that anyone suggesting this must be a conspiracy theorist. Here’s what the Newsnight team had to say – and a response that suggests the social media sleuths were way ahead of the game:
“Pastor at her own, minute Facebook church”? That deserves a little extra digging – but here‘s Evolve Politics, a social media news site that has already done the hard work for us:
“Whilst Lynn is not a genuine vicar, she does regularly attend church. However, the church in question is her own.
“Yes… Lynn is … the creator of the “Seeds For Wealth Ministries”, who describe themselves as a religious organisation who can help you “realize, release and walk into your financial freedom in Christ. To Educate, Equip and Empower the saints.”
“Newsnight’s claims that Lynn is “a pastor” are incredibly misleading. Pastors are merely church leaders, and anybody can start their own church with absolutely no registration or official documentation needed.
“Hayter also calls herself a “minister” on her acting profile and on her Facebook page, and anybody is free to become ordained as a minister on the internet!”
“She is, in fact, an actor – and not only that, she has previously worked as a minor cast member on numerous BBC programmes.
“Lynn’s full name is Lynn Marina Hayter, and uses her middle name for her acting work.
“Lynn’s past acting work includes playing a Drunkard on the BBC show Eastenders, playing a “Theatre goer” on the BBC show The Dresser, playing a female beggar in the BBC programme Dickensian, and was cast as a nurse in the BBC show The Chronicles.
“Having been cast by the corporation on numerous occasions, Lynn is clearly a figure well known to BBC producers.
“And… her repertoire extends through many ranges, including – one would assume – the part of a supposedly pro-Tory vicar on a prime time political debate programme.”
So: Not a genuine priest, if by that we mean a member of a recognised church. But a genuine actor, and one known to the BBC. And the BBC is unlikely to admit trying to deceive us, so we have reason to doubt its claims.
Is that enough for an ordinary person to decide the Corporation has deceived us? Consider this:
Week after week we have a procession of scam artists appearing on @BBCNewsnight@bbcquestiontime and @SkyNews under the guise of audience participants or official commentators from opaquely funded lobbyists masquerading as educational charities….who checks these people out? pic.twitter.com/3UQwdKALQi
Lies lies lies. She is a paid actor. It is her job. She is not an ordained pastor – she is a right-wing, Trump supporting fantasist who calls herself a pastor. Using an actor posing as a member of the public to support the government is a RESIGNING matter.https://t.co/y0gS2PkTQBhttps://t.co/cpbB30IM62
Jesus @BBCNews do you actively recruit actors to play the role of ardent Brexcrementalists or are you too inept to research your interviewees? https://t.co/HljwXx6mhx
Dear @BBCNewsnight I wish to apply to appear on your actor-manager show on any subject. Yours sincerely, Monsignor George Galloway, Parish of Nowhere, Archdiocese of Brigadoon, Scotland.
No one believes you. It's only a few weeks since you photoshopped a photograph of Mr Corbyn to make him look Russian. You are completly corrupt. @bbc@bbcnews#bbcnews#VicarGate
These are hard words for an organisation that claims to pride itself on its impartiality – and there is clearly enough information here to cast doubt on that claim.
But the BBC wants to host the big debate on Brexit between Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn. If it wins the rights to the broadcast, do you think the programme it produces will be impartial?
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
‘Daftie’ Duncan Smith before a previous hearing of the Work and Pensions committee.
It’s a valid question.
More than a year ago, Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith told us “In work conditionality” within the Universal Credit system could encourage part-time workers and the low-paid to seek additional hours.
But it seems nothing is being done to “encourage” employers to provide the extra work.
So what, exactly, did Duncan Smith think he was playing at?
It seems we may soon find out, because Disability Studies specialist and disability activist Samuel Miller has written to the Secretary-in-a-State and his employment minister, Priti Patel, to find out whether employers will face sanctions for refusing to offer part-time and low-paid workers additional hours.
“My field of interest is disability,” wrote Mr Miller. “If the British government is truly interested in increasing employment opportunities for the disabled, why doesn’t it follow the U.S. example and compel businesses to significantly increase the number of people with disabilities that they employ?
“The U.S. rule requires most federal contractors to ensure that people with disabilities account for at least 7 percent of workers within each job group in their workforce.
“While officials at the U.S. Department of Labor say they are not establishing a firm hiring quota for contractors, they do expect that businesses servicing the government will work toward achieving the target. Contractors that fail to meet the goal and do not show sufficient effort toward reaching the 7 percent threshold could lose their contracts under the new rule.
“Disability advocates say the added pressure on federal contractors will go a long way—and, in my opinion, Britain should follow suit.”
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Iain ‘Daftie’ Duncan Smith before a previous hearing of the Work and Pensions committee.
Here’s something mentioned during Iain Duncan Smith’s session before the Commons Work and Pensions committee last week, that doesn’t seem to have enjoyed enough attention: It seems Daftie Duncan Smith wants to legalise breach of contract.
The sanctions would apply under the Universal Credit system – which is never going to work anyway – so perhaps this is an inconsequential matter, but it is disturbing that the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions understands so little about contracts of employment that he thinks this is a reasonable way to behave.
He told the Work and Pensions committee: “That is being investigated, as to whether we can now work to in-work sanctions – in other words, conditionality – so people get an opportunity to move up the hours if they can, and if they don’t wish to do that, we will see whether or not that system of conditionality works.”
Perhaps he doesn’t realise that some people are only able to work a certain number of hours per week, and that any increase means they will not be able to continue in the job. Perhaps he doesn’t realise that this will make them unemployed, and his “conditionality” prank means that they would be sanctioned off being able to claim benefits for a period of time after that, meaning they would be doubly punished for a situation that was not their fault.
Perhaps he doesn’t care. Yes, that seems more likely.
He certainly doesn’t understand contract law. When two parties enter into a contract of employment, it is a binding agreement on both of them – and if it is not honoured by either party – for example, if the employer tells the employee that their hours of work will be extended, rather than negotiating a change in the contract that is agreeable to both – then that party is said to be in breach of that contract.
And does this not open HM Revenue and Customs up to a potential explosion of Income Tax and National Insurance fraud?
Look at the situation Vox Political reported recently, in which a JSA claimant interviewed for a job lasting 22.5 hours per week and then had to turn it down when managers tried to increase the hours to 40; the employer told the Job Centre and he was sanctioned.
He had his benefit reinstated when he reported the employer for potential tax evasion and then told JSA decision makers what he had done, making it clear that he did not see why his benefit should be docked for refusing to take part in an illegal act.
Did Daftie consider this? Or did he think it would be okay because his government wants to reduce the amount of Income Tax it receives anyway, in order to justify cutting public services or selling them off to fatcat tax-avoiding businesspeople?
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. This includes scrolling or continued navigation. more information
The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.
