Transactional politics?

Can anybody supply ' Factual Evidence ' Theresa May has offered a bribe?

Spotted this interesting item yesterday, but maybe the Downing Street 'official spokesperson' would have been better to say nothing?

"Mrs May’s official spokesman hinted at extra financial support for deprived areas as part of a programme of “national renewal” after Brexit. “The Prime Minister has a long-standing commitment to tackling inequality between communities,” he said. “No community should feel that they are left behind.”

Read more at: inews.co.uk/news/brexit/labour-mps-split-by-theresa-mays-attempts-to-woo-party-to-her-brexit-plan-with-cash-offers/

This makes for an interesting read:

www.thebriberyact2010.co.uk/what-is-a-bribe.asp

Good defence effort POGS - I do agree with you regarding facts.

You mentioned: the use of 'bribery ' , politically called ' Confidence and Supply '

If May had not said many times that there was no money available, how was it possible to offer money in exchange for 'confidence and supply'?

If the DUP were swayed by the offer of cash in exchange for their political support - whatever phrase was used - how is that different to bribery?

I understand your comments around proportional representation, but democracy is best served through compromise, not confrontation.

The UK's FPTP system does not represent the population in a democratic way, since surely it forces the choice of black or white, and does not count any views that differ.

Actually, I would call it bribery and corruption!

What if you have a community with equal need but an MP who honestly believes they would be better served, long term, by not voting for TMs deal? Sell your soul? Throw your belief out of the window? 7 pieces of silver???

But why offer the money now? Not long ago she was saying there was no money tree. The money should have been available for deprived areas ages ago, not suddenly when her Brexit plans are in jeopardy - that’s what sticks in the craw. Of course it’s not lining pockets, it’s going where it’s most needed - the immorality of this move is the timing of it.

so maybe we should all go about offering our Doctor, Dentist, local police community support officer cash to turn a blind eye to things is now going to be acceptable norms of civilised behaviour.

so where should a line be drawn?

If the so-called bribe is going into someone's pocket that is despicable but if it is in the form of doing some good for the community in exchange for what you were going to vote for anyway is that different or not?

What if your community was desperate for this money and it is forthcoming because your MP - a staunch Brexiteer - votes in exactly the same way as he would have done is that wrong?
If he said he wasn't taking that money would his constituents ask why not, we needed that money and you were going to vote that way anyway - where should the line be drawn?

Bribery or expediency?
I'm sure it happens all the time in politics on all sides.

^ but without one of the saner voices in the Labour Party, his actual Brexit Secretary, Sir Keir Starmer - why was that^
Yes, Grammargran - that was the first thing I said to DH when he agreed to meet TM.
At least Keir Starmer knows what he's talking about (and is probably averse to bribery too).

Ramblingrose I can't see the point of the bribe. John Mann and colleagues in Leave-voting constituencies will still support TM even if she hadn't offered the money.

That's why they'll probably take it.
Yes, it's obvious isn't it!!
But at least it would be better than crashing out with no deal.

Politics is a dirty business - how else do the Whips keep order?
Threats of deselection etc.

Perhaps we need a new Reform Act.

MaizieD Fri 01-Feb-19 08:46:18

" Politics can be a corrupt and dirty business. I think it stinks but I expect that POGS will be along very shortly to shout 'hypocrisy'.
---
Hmmm. As you made it personal.

It is not the act I would ' shout hypocrisy ' at it is ' hypocrisy ' if posters /commentators only spin the use of 'bribery ' , politically called ' Confidence and Supply ' to suit their agenda without accepting it is not the domain of only one party they dislike when it is usual practice in politics. In other words moan about it when it doesn't suit keep schtum when it does. Hypocrisy!

Hung Parliaments require back room shenanigans to obtain power that is why Proportional Representation as an example will create more not less accusations of bribery, you have to offer something to get even a ' Confidence and Supply ' government through.

Whether it was Gordon Brown with the DUP in 2010 or Theresa May in 2017 with the DUP the fact is governments with no overall majority use the political backroom
' Shenanigans / bribery ' as we call it to get ' Confidence and Supply ' Agreements.

Question and I do not hold the answer as a ' FACT '

What evidence is there that Theresa May HAS OFFERED A BRIBE ?

Labouyr MP Lisa Nandy says she has not been offered a bribe.

Labour MP John Mann as far as I read into his words has not categorically stated a bribe has been offered.

I am more than happy to be told ' Factual ' evidence that this has happened , I AM NOT SAYING IT HAS'NT , I prefer to know facts not possible spin which is sadly rife these days.

N

Is anyone keeping out there in such despair as I am? Parliament and television is just full of men and women, politicians or otherwise, just talking, talking, talking and nothing actually gets done. Theresa May has now resorted to bribery to get her deal through, and Jeremy Corbin finally comes to the table but without one of the saner voices in the Labour Party, his actual Brexit Secretary, Sir Keir Starmer - why was that? The whole issue was far too important to be left to one party to negotiate and everyone has come to realise far too late that we have managed to elect between us, with a very few notable exceptions, the most incompetent bunch of politians ever to call themselves Members of Parliament. And if she says ‘I’m absolutely clear’ just one more time, I shan’t be responsible for my actions. ??

For some people their values are underpinned by the principle that if you have the cash you can buy what you want and sod anyone else. Extreme capitalism!

I assume those politicians who are accepting the cash for votes now will be having a closing down sale soon, so we can buy their votes at discounted prices.

Maybe we should consider offering a university cash for a degree, or a college cash for a certificate of compliance for an electrical installation.

Why stop at MP's votes, why not offer cash to complete customs declarations for importing food unfit for human consumption, chlorinated chicken, hormone fed beef, etc.

I can't see the point of the bribe. John Mann and colleagues in Leave-voting constituencies will still support TM even if she hadn't offered the money.

That's why they'll probably take it.

However if the amount is a pittance they should tell her to get stuffed.

I'm with you MaizieD - this is bribery pure and simple.

The protestations about "if it does good on both sides so what" - so maybe we should all go about offering our Doctor, Dentist, local police community support officer cash to turn a blind eye to things is now going to be acceptable norms of civilised behaviour.

Yes, I know it's always gone on, but that must not be justification for ongoing corruption.

Don’t know which is worse - the one who offers or the one who takes.

You're right grammargran, this whole mess is really about the machinations and infighting in the Tory party starting with David Cameron's decision and perpetrated by a long line of inept negotiators - think David Davis - they bought the DUP support and are now seeking to bribe Labour MPs. What a sorry mess we've been reduced to.

I had actually thought TM was honest and she didn't lie when others did, but stooping to bribery is just as dishonest. Tories wouldn't give the people from those areas the time of day normally, but hey, they DO have the money to ease the poverty after all! That is dishonest. The austerity wasn't necessary after all then?

It's unscrupulous to place the onus on those MP's to turn down money for their run down, impoverished areas. Despicable, and we have the bare-faced cheek to criticise regimes in other countries.

We're not talking about manifestos or relationships between MPs and their voters. We are talking about an MP from the Opposition party being bribed to vote for May's 'deal'. It is utterly disgraceful.

I could actually understand if he voted with the government on principle, however much I disagreed with his principles, but to sell your vote is corrupt and disgusting. I hope he has the Whip removed...

"Vote for us and we will abolish tuition fees"
"Vote for us and you will get your new hospital, by-pass, school".
Etc
Until they gain power.

You could call that 'bribery'

The woman is totally without scruples - so much for church every Sunday! It’s Tory party first and the country a very long way behind in second place.

The referendum happened. Whether we agree or not with the result, I'm sure most wish to ensure the best outcome.

I agree, Aepgirl and to think anything else is naive.

It’s just what a manifesto is. Vote for us, we will do this, that and the other thing.

It could be regarded as 'bribery' but if it results in good outcomes on both sides should we worry unduly?



Oh, it's all right.
Corruption is absolutely FINE.

No wonder everyone is so cool about the illegalities, lies and foreign involvement in the referendum. It's absolutely fine because it got the right result (for a third of the population)

I can't believe what I am seeing...

troops on the streets may or may not be required to ensure delivery of foodstuffs etc - not to quell the population.
Troops are called in in times of emergency eg to help in times of flooding, building emergency bridges and, if I remember, when firefighters went on strike.