Rishi Sunak and the Conservative Party.

[brad465]

Scandal of the century? I bet there are bigger ones already coming to the boil.

Considering there are so many scandals to actually warrant having a "scandal of the week" competition, that wouldn't be surprising.

 

[jon0844]

Considering there are so many scandals to actually warrant having a "scandal of the week" competition, that wouldn't be surprising.

Trump seemed to benefit greatly from loads of scandals, as people can't keep up or focus on specific ones, and over time it seems there are so many scandals that it is easy to sell the lie that people are just obsessed with trying to get at you.

 

[nw1]

Trump seemed to benefit greatly from loads of scandals, as people can't keep up or focus on specific ones, and over time it seems there are so many scandals that it is easy to sell the lie that people are just obsessed with trying to get at you.

But the current government of anonymous bean-counters doesn't exactly have the X-factor that Trump (rightly or, more likely, wrongly) had....

 

[The Ham]

Trump seemed to benefit greatly from loads of scandals, as people can't keep up or focus on specific ones, and over time it seems there are so many scandals that it is easy to sell the lie that people are just obsessed with trying to get at you.

Which is an easier sell if it's just one person, when it's a whole range of people it's still possible that people are out to get a political party however it's a more difficult defence.

 

[jfollows]

Yesterday a number of people were saying they thought it unlikely that Zahawi would survive in post by mid-day today - prime minster's questions. Today the focus seems to have shifted onto the fact that Zahawi threatened the people investigating his affairs for - essentially - uncovering the truth and reporting it (with prosecutions for libel). This hardly seems appropriate behaviour for a government minister. I sense that he's going to be sacked soon if he doesn't resign first.

EDIT If not, Sunak will have to clarify what he knew and when, after saying last week (https://hansard.parliament.uk/commo...83E8B-B7BD-4861-89DB-849C2E219861/Engagements):

Alex Sobel
(Leeds North West) (Lab/Co-op)

Q12. This month, the right hon. Member for Stratford-on-Avon (Nadhim Zahawi) was forced to pay millions to His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs to settle a tax dispute. Was the Prime Minister aware of the investigation when he appointed the right hon. Gentleman to his Cabinet and as chairman of the Conservative party? Will the Prime Minister demand accountability from his Cabinet members over their tax affairs?(903179)
The Prime Minister

My right hon. Friend has already addressed the matter in full and there is nothing more that I can add.

 

[brad465]

It is in the Grauniad. It would be interesting to know if he is one of the Russians who have donated money to the Conservatives, although it is possible that they may have felt he was just too toxic to be seen as a donor. However, there are plenty of ways to channel money to a party so that they know who it really comes from, but it isn’t too obvious to the general public. Raab (him again) needs to answer questions about who allowed the lawyers to take on the work, although that might have occurred before he took over.

Scandal of the century? I bet there are bigger ones already coming to the boil.

Update, the BBC are now reporting it, including linking the original in Open Democracy, and the fact the Treasury are considering changes is effectively an admission that wrongdoing took place:

Yevgeny Prigozhin: UK reviews rules after Wagner head sued journalist

Yevgeny Prigozhin, the boss of Russia's Wagner group, used an exemption to get around UK sanctions.

www.bbc.co.uk

The Treasury is considering changes to the process that allowed the head of Russia's Wagner group to get around UK sanctions and sue a UK journalist.
Investigative reporter Eliot Higgins faced action by Yevgeny Prigozhin - whose Wagner mercenaries are fighting for Russia in Ukraine - in late 2021.
OpenDemocracy reported the UK issued special licences so he could override sanctions and pay his legal fees.
The case was dropped when he admitted his ties to the notorious private army.
Mr Prigozhin was first sanctioned by the UK in 2020 in a bid to stop anyone doing business with him.
But under a UK law defining the Russian sanction regime, provisions allow sanctioned people to cover their "basic needs", including the ability to apply for a licence to pay for legal fees.
Decisions are taken by the Office for Financial Sanctions Implementation, a department in the Treasury which reviews applications by people placed under financial measures.
Mr Prigozhin successfully used this route to enlist the help of Discreet Law, a London-based law firm, in order to take action against Mr Higgins, reported Open Democracy, a UK website that focuses on human rights.
Treasury minister James Cartlidge told MPs on Wednesday that the guidance for these exemptions was "longstanding" - but said the government "is now considering whether this approach is the right one and if changes can be made".
A Treasury spokesman also said these applications are reviewed by officials with no political involvement - with Mr Cartlidge later telling the Commons "we are not aware of any decision being taken by a minister".

Shortly before the legal case was brought, Mr Higgins's website Bellingcat had recently published a story naming businessman Mr Prigozhin - an ally of Vladimir Putin - as the man behind the Wagner Group.
He denied involvement until after the February 2022 invasion began, despite having already been sanctioned by the UK government over the group's activities in Libya in October 2020.
The journalist was personally sued in the UK for tweeting articles by his publication and other outlets. He believes the decision to target him rather than Bellingcat was designed to intimidate.
Speaking to the BBC, Mr Higgins called for greater transparency about how the rules are applied. He said he was left with £70,000 in legal costs despite the case being dropped.
He said: "For me the question is, 'What is the process?' No one seems to fully understand that. Until there has been more transparency we can't make a judgement about if it was applied correctly.
"Then the next question is, 'Do we want this sort of process in place where journalists can be sued?'"
He added: "How do I know some other oligarch isn't going to do the same thing again to me next week? This time the costs were five figures but it might be five or six figures next time."
Mr Prigozhin has been sanctioned by the UK, European Union and US. He has been accused of interfering in foreign elections by Western governments using online "troll farms".
The 61-year-old rose from an obscure background working as a hot dog street vendor and serving time in prison for robbery before going on to become a key Putin ally.
His lucrative catering contracts with the Kremlin earned him the nickname "Putin's chef".
The Wagner Group has been accused of committing atrocities in Ukraine and was involved in the recent operation to capture the town of Soledar.

 

[Lost property]

I sense that he's going to be sacked soon if he doesn't resign first.

On the contrary, he will "step down to spend more time with his horses "...

 

[Macwomble]

On the contrary, he will "step down to spend more time with his horses "...

....and get a nice little "golden handshake" in the process

 

[jfollows]

The Guardian reporting (https://www.theguardian.com/politic...uch-broader-inquiry-civil-servants-complaints) that the number of formal complaints against Dominic Raab is "at least" 24, which makes the investigation into his alleged bullying look bad for him.
The end result could be that both Dominic Raab and Nadhim Zahawi have to resign or be sacked.
I don't personally see any reason why Zahawi should keep his job myself.

At least 24 civil servants involved in complaints against Dominic Raab, say sources​

Exclusive: Insiders believe depth of inquiry and severity of some claims means deputy PM will struggle to keep job
Raab has vowed to ‘thoroughly rebut and refute’ the formal complaints.

Dominic Raab is facing a much broader bullying investigation than originally anticipated with at least 24 civil servants involved in formal complaints against him, the Guardian understands.
Government insiders believe the depth of the inquiry and severity of some of the claims means the deputy prime minister will struggle to survive in post, and throws further doubt on Rishi Sunak’s judgment for having him in such a senior position.

The prime minister is already under siege on a separate front over the tax affairs of the Conservative party chair, Nadhim Zahawi, with growing pressure on him from senior Tories and the opposition to take decisive action irrespective of an ongoing inquiry.
Downing Street confirmed in December that the justice secretary was facing eight formal complaints over alleged bullying, six of them from his first stint at the Ministry of Justice (MoJ), one from when he was foreign secretary and one from when he ran the Brexit department.
However, sources said that all but two of the formal complaints involved multiple accusers with a number of his private office staff from his first stretch at the department believed to have made submissions. The total number of complainants is thought to be at least two dozen, and could be more than 30, sources claim.
The Guardian understands that Sunak personally read excerpts from a number of the written statements submitted as part of the initial tranche of complaints before ordering the investigation by Adam Tolley KC into potential breaches of the ministerial code.
The deputy prime minister, who has stayed in post while the inquiry is ongoing, has vowed to “thoroughly rebut and refute” the formal complaints. He has said he is confident he “acted professionally” throughout his time in three different cabinet posts.
However, the latest claims will come as another blow as he attempts to move on from the scandal. Raab faces potentially damaging allegations over bullying behaviour when dealing with civil servants, including some in senior roles, including that he “belittled and demeaned” them and was “very rude and aggressive” on multiple occasions each day.

Officials close to the inquiry are said to have been shocked by some of the claims that have emerged including individuals being physically sick before meetings, regularly in tears and, in more than one case, left feeling suicidal as a result of the alleged behaviour.
The inquiry, which began in December, is expected to conclude within weeks after Tolley held lengthy sessions with complainants. He will interview Raab, who will be able to consult lawyers before and after, although interviewees are not permitted to bring along legal representation.
Downing Street has denied suggestions Sunak is aiming for the Raab inquiry to be completed at the same time as the ethics investigation into Zahawi – so that both ministers could be sacked on the same day as part of a mini-reshuffle to divert attention – pointing out that the inquiries are on separate timetables.
However, Tory MPs are privately concerned that the prime minister’s handling of the two rows could undermine his pledge to instil “integrity, professionalism and accountability at every level” of his government as he tries to move the party on from the Boris Johnson era.

The Guardian first revealed in November last year that senior civil servants at the MoJ were offered “respite or a route out” of the department when Raab was reappointed by Sunak, having been sacked from the role by Liz Truss, amid concerns that some were still traumatised by his behaviour during a previous stint there.
Antonia Romeo, the MoJ permanent secretary, spoke to Raab when he came back to the department to warn him that he must treat staff professionally and with respect amid unhappiness about his return, according to sources.

The Observer revealed that concerns over Raab’s behaviour towards officials were raised inside Whitehall during his time as Brexit secretary in 2018, with a document outlining a “serious expression of concern” dispatched to the Cabinet Office by a prominent official in the former department.

Days later, the Guardian reported that Raab was also warned about his behaviour towards officials during his time as foreign secretary by the department’s top civil servant, who then informally reported his concerns to the Cabinet Office’s propriety and ethics team.

The deputy prime minister claimed in an interview with ITV that “no one has ever raised a complaint or grievance with me”. But Simon McDonald, the permanent secretary at the Foreign Office at the time, later refused to deny he had spoken to Raab, agreeing that the characterisation of him as “a bully” was a plausible one.

An MoJ spokesperson said: “There is zero tolerance for bullying across the civil service. The deputy prime minister leads a professional department, driving forward major reforms, where civil servants are valued and the level of ambition is high.

“There is an independent investigation under way and it would be inappropriate to comment further on issues relating to it until it is completed.”

A Cabinet Office spokesperson added: “The investigation by Adam Tolley KC is ongoing so it would be inappropriate to comment further whilst that process takes place.”

 

[Gloster]

The Grauniad is reporting yet another little bit of seemingly less than straight behaviour. Richard Sharp, who facilitated a loan to Johnson and purely coincidently became chair of the BBC, is a major shareholder in a company that was awarded money for COVID research while he was working at Downing Street. The sum was £600,000, relatively modest by current standards and he may not have had any direct influence on the decision, but it is a question of whether he should have been open about the matter, rather than waiting until it is revealed. An anti-corruption campaigner says the fact that he was a director ‘just stinks’, although he had ceased to be a director several months before.

(Sorry, I can’t do a link.)

 

[Busaholic]

The Grauniad is reporting yet another little bit of seemingly less than straight behaviour. Richard Sharp, who facilitated a loan to Johnson and purely coincidently became chair of the BBC, is a major shareholder in a company that was awarded money for COVID research while he was working at Downing Street. The sum was £600,000, relatively modest by current standards and he may not have had any direct influence on the decision, but it is a question of whether he should have been open about the matter, rather than waiting until it is revealed. An anti-corruption campaigner says the fact that he was a director ‘just stinks’, although he had ceased to be a director several months before.

(Sorry, I can’t do a link.)

The Times today carried a number of pieces on the various investigations/scandals/outrages that the government, its ministers, cronies, sycophants and financial donors (to the Tory party, of course, not the Exchequer) are mired in, and report that BBC journalists are enraged not only with the Sharp situation, but also that he became personally involved with the appointment of the new head of news. Some banana republics make better attempts to cover these things up.

(I too can't do links, and in any case it's behind a paywall.)

 

[najaB]

Matt Green sums up recent revelations quite succinctly:

 

[ainsworth74]

Matt Green sums up recent revelations quite succinctly:

Sums it very well. It's one of things that increasingly infuriates me (and has done since the PPE scandal started to break, it's just gotten worse as time has gone on). If this stuff was coming out in basically any other country our media, if they picked up on it all, would call it corruption. But because it's happening here? Nothing to see, move along citizen, this is all perfectly normal behaviour and you're all just getting worked up over nothing.

 

[edwin_m]

Sums it very well. It's one of things that increasingly infuriates me (and has done since the PPE scandal started to break, it's just gotten worse as time has gone on). If this stuff was coming out in basically any other country our media, if they picked up on it all, would call it corruption. But because it's happening here? Nothing to see, move along citizen, this is all perfectly normal behaviour and you're all just getting worked up over nothing.

Certain parts of the media are pretty much doing that - it's the government that's dismissing it when it would be condemning it if it happened somewhere else.

 

[ainsworth74]

Certain parts of the media are pretty much doing that - it's the government that's dismissing it when it would be condemning it if it happened somewhere else.

Yes that's true to be fair, I perhaps should have been slightly more nuanced. But it still doesn't feel like it gets the pick up that it should do!

 

[Lost property]

Certain parts of the media are pretty much doing that - it's the government that's dismissing it when it would be condemning it if it happened somewhere else.

And certain parts of the media have been diligently avoiding any reference to a (soon to be ) former Chairman and the "careless " tiny matter of tax payment...thankfully, Boris indulged himself with a short break to Ukraine, which, apparently, is considered to be essential front page news.

 

[edwin_m]

And certain parts of the media have been diligently avoiding any reference to a (soon to be ) former Chairman and the "careless " tiny matter of tax payment...thankfully, Boris indulged himself with a short break to Ukraine, which, apparently, is considered to be essential front page news.

If I could be bothered, and my blood pressure could stand it, reading the Telegraph could be quite a good way of following the twists and turns of Tory factions.

 

[brad465]

The head of HMRC, via Steven Swinford of The Times, has suggested Zahawi did not make an innocent error with his tax affairs:

https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1618560474504695808

Breaking: Nadhim Zahawi has not made an 'innocent error' in his tax affairs, head of HMRC has suggested Jim Harra told Public Accounts Committee that 'there are no penalties for innocent errors' 'If your error was result of carelessness then legislation says a penalty applies'

 

[Broucek]

Key question for me is what, if anything, Truss and Sunak knew when appointing Zahawi. There must be processes for highlighting this kind of issue! I'm not the biggest fan of either of them but surely they didn't just cover their ears and say "nah-nah, not listening"? But if they were NOT warned, that reflects extremely badly on the machinery of government

 

[Gloster]

In one of those ‘what on earth is going on’ situations Andrew Bridgen is suing Matt Hancock for £100,000 over a tweet calling him antisemitic; both were Conservative MPs but have had the whip suspended. Bridgen seems to have compared COVID vacccines to the Holocaust and Hancock accused him of making ‘antisemitic, anti-vax, anti-scientific conspiracy theories’; Bridgen has already been suspended by his party for his comments. Bridgen is being supported by the Reclaim Party, leader Laurence Fox, and the Bad Law Project, which the Grauniad reports as being linked to Fox. It is has produced the extraordinary feeling that you want Hancock to come out of this better.

 

[MikeWM]

In one of those ‘what on earth is going on’ situations Andrew Bridgen is suing Matt Hancock for £100,000 over a tweet calling him antisemitic; both were Conservative MPs but have had the whip suspended. Bridgen seems to have compared COVID vacccines to the Holocaust and Hancock accused him of making ‘antisemitic, anti-vax, anti-scientific conspiracy theories’;

Bridgen said on Twitter that someone else had said to him that it was 'the biggest crime against humanity since the Holocaust', which was a bit of a silly point, but (a) wasn't a point he made, he was quoting someone else (who it turns out is Jewish), (b) isn't really comparing *to* the Holocaust, just using it as a reference, and (c) is in no way whatever anti-semitic.

The problem for Hancock is that he posted the question he asked in Parliament (where he is protected by privilege) with accompanying text on Twitter (where he isn't so protected).

It is has produced the extraordinary feeling that you want Hancock to come out of this better.

Not in me it hasn't! If nothing else, I find these continuing attempts to shut down debate by calling things 'anti-semitic', when they are nothing of the sort, both cynical and sinister. Not least because it makes us less alert to the evil of *actual* anti-semitic comments and behaviour.

As such, I very much hope Bridgen wins. In spades.

 

[DelayRepay]

Not in me it hasn't! If nothing else, I find these continuing attempts to shut down debate by calling things 'anti-semitic', when they are nothing of the sort, both cynical and sinister. Not least because it makes us less alert to the evil of *actual* anti-semitic comments and behaviour.

As such, I very much hope Bridgen wins. In spades.

Personally, I think it's bad taste to compare anything to the Holocaust. However, I do not think this is antisemitic. I don't agree that the vaccine programme was a crime against humanity, and if it was it's certainly not the worse since the Holocaust, but these are legitimate opinions which Bridgen is entitled to express.

There's also the point that saying anything is the biggest crime against humanity since the Holocaust is actually acknowledging that the Holocaust was the most horrific crime against humanity. Had he said it was worse then the Holocaust then I could understand claims of antisemitism.

So I hope Bridgen wins too, even though I cannot stand the man (I cannot stand Hancock either, mind).

 

[brad465]

Sir Rod Stewart has openly said on Sky News that despite having been a long standing Tory voter, is now saying the Government should stand down and give Labour a go:

https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1618658346801709078

'In all my years in this country I've never seen it so bad...change the bloody government.' - @rodstewart
During a live phone-in on Sky News Sir Rod Stewart says: "This government should stand down now and give the Labour Party a go".

Video attached.

 

[DelayRepay]

Sir Rod Stewart has openly said on Sky News that despite having been a long standing Tory voter, is now saying the Government should stand down and give Labour a go

Probably the least of Rishi's worries!

Although the first cut is the deepest....

 

[DynamicSpirit]

The head of HMRC, via Steven Swinford of The Times, has suggested Zahawi did not make an innocent error with his tax affairs:

https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1618560474504695808

That's somewhat strange - and to my mind - misleading - phrasing on Jim Harra's part, since most people will assume 'innocent' means something like, no attempt to deceive. In fact, as Harra clarifies in practically his next sentence, penalties are in fact levied both where the taxpayer attempts to mislead AND where the taxpayer has been careless, but didn't deliberately attempt to mislead. I think most people would consider that latter category as 'innocent' (in the sense that there was no intended dishonesty). (To be fair, Swinford's tweet does include the clarification)

Personally I suspect that, judging from the way Zahawi's recent statements came unstuck, there probably was some attempt either by him or by his allies to mislead. But that doesn't directly follow from Harra's remarks.

 

[Yew]

Sums it very well. It's one of things that increasingly infuriates me (and has done since the PPE scandal started to break, it's just gotten worse as time has gone on). If this stuff was coming out in basically any other country our media, if they picked up on it all, would call it corruption. But because it's happening here? Nothing to see, move along citizen, this is all perfectly normal behaviour and you're all just getting worked up over nothing.

The media Moghuls don't want to cheer against their own horses.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Key question for me is what, if anything, Truss and Sunak knew when appointing Zahawi. There must be processes for highlighting this kind of issue! I'm not the biggest fan of either of them but surely they didn't just cover their ears and say "nah-nah, not listening"? But if they were NOT warned, that reflects extremely badly on the machinery of government

They will say they took advice from advisers so are not culpable and the Tories will close ranks whatever the outcome as they know they have their backs against the wall now

 

[nw1]

Never mind irrelevances like Zahawi. Apparently Bean-Counter-in-Chief Hunt wants to use the "genius of Britain" to stop the spiral of decline advocated by Labour, or something. We are saved!

Given how university cities tend to vote, I suspect the "genius of Britain" will help send Hunt packing at the next election!

 

[brad465]

The Johnson and Sharp loan revelations have expanded, with the latest Sunday Times' exclusive saying Johnson was ordered to stop asking Sharp for loan advice in a leaked Cabinet Office memo:

Richard Sharp: Johnson was told to stop asking for loan advice - report

The then-PM was told to "no longer" seek advice from Richard Sharp before he became BBC chairman, the Sunday Times reports.

www.bbc.co.uk

Links between Boris Johnson and BBC chairman Richard Sharp are under fresh scrutiny, following a report that the then-prime minister was told to stop asking Mr Sharp for financial "advice".
Mr Sharp's appointment is under review following successive reports in the Sunday Times that he helped Mr Johnson secure a loan before getting his job.
The paper's latest story cites a leaked Cabinet Office memo from December 2020. Officials have declined to comment.
Both men deny any wrongdoing.
They have separately said that Mr Sharp was not involved in arranging a loan for the then-prime minister, and say that neither man acted with any conflict of interest.
In the wake of the Sunday Times's fresh report, a spokesman for Mr Johnson insisted to the BBC that he had never received or sought financial advice from Mr Sharp.
Mr Sharp has resisted calls to stand down from his job - saying he expects to be exonerated, as he was appointed "on merit".
BBC News has been told Mr Sharp's position remained unchanged following the latest Sunday Times reporting.
However, his appointment is to be investigated by the public appointments commissioner as well as an internal panel. He also faces a grilling from MPs.
The Conservative government has also faced attacks from opposition parties over the appointment of Mr Sharp, whose role as BBC chairman is to uphold the broadcaster's independence.
Mr Sharp has previously acknowledged that he had contacted Cabinet Secretary Simon Case in late 2020 - to discuss an offer of financial assistance for Mr Johnson.
That offer came from his wealthy Canadian friend Sam Blyth - also a distant cousin of Mr Johnson.
Mr Sharp - who worked as a government adviser at the time - has said he "simply connected people", and that his involvement in the loan facility ended at this point.

The warning to Mr Johnson was sent on 22 December 2020 - about two weeks before his government unveiled Mr Sharp as the new BBC chairman, the Sunday Times wrote.
This leaked Cabinet Office memo was reportedly sent after the two men asked for advice on Mr Johnson accepting an £800,000 loan from Mr Blyth.
It reportedly came from Mr Case, a top civil servant, around two weeks before Mr Sharp was announced in his BBC role on 6 January 2021.
Mr Johnson is said to have secured his loan the following month.
The memo allegedly requested that Mr Johnson "no longer ask [Mr Sharp's] advice about your personal financial matters", making specific reference to Mr Sharp's "imminent announcement" as BBC chairman.
The then-prime minister was reportedly told he could take out the loan - without declaring it - as long as his guarantor Mr Blyth had no "business or personal interests in the UK" beyond his family ties.
But Mr Blyth was on a government list of recommended candidates for the British Council, without senior figures in the public body realising his relation to Mr Johnson, the Sunday Times reported.

 

[LowLevel]

Zahawi has now been sacked.

How are these people still calling the shots over other people's lives?