Friday, 19 October 2012

Us And Them

The irrepressible Witterings from Witney has two cracking posts today: one that the Tory chief whip has resigned and has appeared to confirm in his letter that he swore at police despite previous denials that he didn't and that with "Expensegate II bubbling away nicely" our 'esteemed' chancellor was caught in first class with a standard class ticket.

One wonders how long this contempt for us can go on...?


  1. BF
    "One wonders how long this contempt for us can go on...?"

    As long as they want it to go on.

    Just think about the view from where they see things, why would they give a shit what we think? We'll carry on paying for the lifestyles they've become accustomed to, and expect, no matter how much they shit on us.
    They know we're sheep, Bah Bah.

  2. The ridiculous amount of time and media attention on this matter (and the Savile case) shows, I think, how little real work politicians have to do. It's all simply about media exposure.

    "Minister irritated by officious Bobby" might be the headline.

    Also - the police record of the incident somehow made its way to the Sun. Yet, as far as I know, there has been no demand for Lord Leveson to look into this. In any case, in the wake of Hillsborough revelations, we know that police records are not always as reliable as they should be.

  3. TBF, in all of the furore about Mr Mitchell, I haven't seen an explanation of why it ocurred in the first place. Why did the policeman refuse to open the gate; was it a legitimate refusal and was Mr Mitchell aware of the rules, if there were any? If not, was the policeman being perverse, or uppity? And why are the police so thin-skinned; I'm sure they've been called worse things than effing pleb.

  4. He bought and upgrade ffs. I'm no fan but he went and paid for one out of his own pocket.

  5. @Edward Spalton I do agree about the amount of media coverage regarding Andrew Mitchell...and that largely it's a Westminster village thing. But two things come to mind. Using one gate instead of another doesn't really warrant Mitchell's reaction. It strikes as a minister who thought he was above the rules...I've been under far worse provocation without having to swear.

    I fully agree with your point of the accuracy of Policeman's records yet even if either record is true then why wasn't action taken at the time. If we had made any of the comments attributed then we would have got an £80 fine quicker than you can say 'Section 5'

    At an evening match I attended last month, one of my fellow supporters got one for saying to a copper "ffs we're going to miss the last train home" after shambles by plod in getting us away from the ground meant we did exactly that - missed the last train.

    So if the Policeman thought that was said to him then it begs the question why did he not issue a fine at the very least - undoubtedly because he was a Govt minister.

  6. @JiC Considering the job they do I can't work out why they get so upset about it...and usually they throw section 5's about like confetti as a result

  7. @F***W*T TW****R. He sat in First Class with a standard class ticket, and refused to move - "he can't sit in standard class" er why not? Is that for lowly plebs?

    Then was very reluctant to pay for the was only the stubborn actions of the inspector that he did.

    As for out of his own pocket..I suspect that will be plonked on expenses.

  8. A tad late TBF but many thanks for the two links and your kind words.

  9. Just came from Witterings. This is getting incestuous.

  10. My daughter, an accountant, gets first class rail travel which allows her to work -so I don't begrudge it to MPs. Trying to get away with paying only for a second class ticket seems to be copy cat behaviour with MEPs who claim first class fares as an entitlement but actually pay for cheap flights.

    It was in 1971 that the beginnings of the present expenses system originated. MPs used to vote their own salaries. I believe (but am open,as always, to correction) that the only other perks they got were first class travel to their constituency, franking of mail and 2,000 sheets of paper per year -no second home allowance, no researchers or office staff - nothing.

    Many MPs had been toing and fronting to Brussels in the run up to joining the EEC and must have got to know how very much better their continental cousins did themselves. So they put their remuneration and perks under something called "The Top Salaries Review Body " instead of their own responsibility - which developed into the system they have come to know and love.

    One prescient MP spoke out against it, saying that the existing arrangements were perfectly adequate to enable unmoneyed men to serve their country in Parliament. The more an MP's career came to be like a salaried,pensioned post, the greater would be the power of the party selectors and that would change the relationship of the MP to his party and of Parliament to the government - to the advantage of the latter in both cases. I think this is one occasion when it is uncontroversial to say that Enoch was right.