Lord Waheed Alli, has he bought the government?

Pippa22 rock bottom and still drilling

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.

Just because people are given loans and gifts or does not mean they are ' owned' or duty bound to do the givers bidding! If it's declared it's fine! Why not help people to carry out their roles as MPs by alleviating as much of the everyday strain as possible. The hidden 'old boys' networks, corporate, class and elite networks are far more sinister.

Wouldn’t it be easier just to say no gifts…full stop!
Must be upsetting for those who buy their own clothes and entertainment tickets etc and who are now freezing in their homes to see this wanton hypocrisy.
Also why do they need designer gear….? Delusions of grandeur….they should flaunt their working class roots not behave like tasteless peacocks. But then as always it’s one rule for them….
They should turn the heating down in Westminster and Parliament…not add more heaters…taste of their own medicine.

When Lord Alli gave gifts of clothing, spectacles etc, this was much criticised. He loans money for a terminally ill person and suddenly in some eyes he is a saint, subject to a witch hunt! Interesting.

I don’t believe that Lord Alli has bought the government but it’s brought to our attention that overgenerous personal freebies and luxuries can certainly look that way and could make refusing a donor anything awkward.
I think it’s time that politicians only accepted money to help campaigns and run offices, nothing more.

Well, when I had to count every pennies I did exactly that - if I was filthy rich, I don’t suppose I’d need or want to count pennies, maybe count millions

^ As a multi millionaire Lord Alli’s thousands mean the same to him as my fiver does to me.^

Do we know this for a fact or is it opinion?

This thread has gone sone way to reassuring me that gransnet still has some thoughtful, reflective posters who want to analyse and discuss rather than regurgitate inaccurate, often inflammatory, provocative distortions

On the wallpaper front, my outrage was at the ludicrous expense for lodgings the current inhabitants were unlikely to remain in long enough to get value for money from.

Wyllow3 @ Today 12:23
The state press regulator suggestion was during a media interview

Interesting to note the number of references to Waheed Alli in just this thread : referred to repeatedly as: a donor to the Labour party, donated over £500,000 over the past 20 years, labour donor for twenty years etc.
The cause of all the suspicion is that he has recently donated money to influential Labour members for specific purposes: parties, loans of the penthouse and American apartment, reading glasses and clothes, presented as office expenses.
Not for, more usefully: office space, folding machines, printers, posters, extra staff etc which most local election groups are desperate for, but instead unnecessary luxuries for his 'friends.' who could well afford to pay themselves.

That is what all the outrage is about, as there was when Boris was given money supposedly for ridiculously expensive wallpaper. Donations generally go towards the expenses of fighting elections, not for gifts to wealthy people, who are avidly seizing the perks they have accused other parties of enjoying.
Alli acquired a peerage for his support of Blair; I have no idea what he wants now, but there will be something. Perhaps it is just friend in high places. If he really cared for the Labour party he would have supported struggling members during the Corbyn era.

eazybee

Your quote refers to the paper of the time, The Manchester Guardian, published in Manchester sinc 1821.
It changed its name in 1959 to The Guardian, and moved to London.
The Manchester Guardian was an excellent newspaper. The Guardian is not.

I am aware of its history and IMO it is still the best daily paper in England. You may not like some of its regular columnists but it does have regular features by people of other political persuasions.

Yes, should have said thank you Maisie for the opportunity.

foxie48

Having read Hansard it seems Lord Alli was actually asking for the complete opposite of what Namsnanny was reporting. His speech is sensible and measured unlike some of the posts on this thread.

Yes. I just read it.
Thanks for the link MaizieD

Thank you Wyllow

(I was quoting not paraphrasing Alli's words above"

OldFrill

Yesterday 21:36Namsnanny

OldFrill

*He actually suggested, about ten years ago, that it might be beneficial to have a state run press regulator. He also suggested they should be a limit on the number of newspapers one company could own.
All this is now being regurgitated and twisted - not least, it seems, by Namsnanny*

^Thats just silly, you choosing to be using inflammatory language.
I'm just quoting and listening to others.^

*It's not silly he said he wanted a state press REGULATOR not a State Press 😉
Of course if it was an honest misinterpretation on your part it's odd you're still pursuing it.

The Levinson report specifically concerned itself with very moving report of the victims of some phone hacking and families of victims torn apart by press.

I've just completed the tedious job of sifting through the whole report in the HoL. No one suggests state regulation.

To be exact: this is what Alli actually said:

The first is that a free press, with all the rights and responsibilities that that entails, is essential

The second is the clear inadequacies of the PCC.

The third is the need for a genuinely independent and effective system of self-regulation for the press.

The fourth is the creation of a new body with teeth that promotes high standards of journalism and protects the rights of the individual.

Fifth is the importance of maintaining a plural media, particularly when it comes to sourcing news

The sixth is that the commercial pressures and ambitions of national newspapers should not be an excuse to lower standards or trample on citizens’ rights.

The seventh is that the relationships between senior politicians of all parties and the press should be much more transparent.

so what they were all discussing was the the choice between independent regulation versus self regulation.

The result of the Levenson report was to go for the
Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO), chaired by Sir Alan Moses.

Dont know how well it functions

eazybee points out that Lord Ali supported Tony Blair but had ‘no time for Jeremy Corbyn’.
I’m one of many who supported Blair (other than Iraq) but left the LP because of Corbyn. I rejoined so I could vote in the leadership election. Yes I voted Starmer and have no regrets about that

Your quote refers to the paper of the time, The Manchester Guardian, published in Manchester sinc 1821.
It changed its name in 1959 to The Guardian, and moved to London.
The Manchester Guardian was an excellent newspaper. The Guardian is not.

Dinahmo

Namsnanny Just to say I object to you linking the Guardian with GB News and the Daily Mail. The Graun is not owned by wealthy, offshore individuals. It is owned by the Guardian Media Group which in turn has one shareholder - the Scott Trust.

The Trust was created in 1936 - "secure the financial and editorial independence of The Guardian in perpetuity and to safeguard the journalistic freedom and liberal values of The Guardian free from commercial or political interference".[6]

👏👏👏👏

foxie48

Having read Hansard it seems Lord Alli was actually asking for the complete opposite of what Namsnanny was reporting. His speech is sensible and measured unlike some of the posts on this thread.

👏👏👏👏

Namsnanny Just to say I object to you linking the Guardian with GB News and the Daily Mail. The Graun is not owned by wealthy, offshore individuals. It is owned by the Guardian Media Group which in turn has one shareholder - the Scott Trust.

The Trust was created in 1936 - "secure the financial and editorial independence of The Guardian in perpetuity and to safeguard the journalistic freedom and liberal values of The Guardian free from commercial or political interference".[6]

Having read Hansard it seems Lord Alli was actually asking for the complete opposite of what Namsnanny was reporting. His speech is sensible and measured unlike some of the posts on this thread.

AGAA4

I just find it a bit sickening when large amounts of money are spent on those who are already well off while people are worrying about heating their homes and having enough to eat.
Lord Alli can be Father Christmas to MPs if he wants but is he entirely benign?

What does he have to gain? Influence perhaps in that the LP may listen to him. Isn't that what we all want? Our favoured political party to listen to us.

The difference is, for all those with generous friends allowing use of their holiday homes, it is unlikely that the recipients are in a position to exert influence on their behalf.
Waheed Alli was made a peer at the age of 33, the youngest appointment at that time, previously he had been equally generous to the Labour Party, AKA Tony Blair. He had no time, nor money, for Jeremy Corbyn.