How Many More Fibbers Are In The Cabinet?

Lizzie mentions the latest Guardian article, which I presume is this one should posters care to follow up.

www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/nov/29/louise-haigh-labour-outspoken-young-survivor-is-derailed-by-her-past

My take: she should have declared it, but was not obliged by parliamentary guidelines, which are

"Prospective candidates for Parliament can stand for election despite having a criminal record, unless they have served a prison term or been detained for 12 months or more."

I don't personally see political shenanigans behind no 10's advice to resign (ie was she too left wing or whatever): her performance as Transport Secretary was more than adequate. -but she should have declared it-

Thankfully she remains the excellent constituency MP she has always been.

What I still mind a great deal are the double standards on James McMurdock, who broke the guidelines of being elected at all, having served a prison term, for violent assault fgs, and has Farage bleating about "Christian Forgiveness" and he remains an MP, unsuspended

I’ve now read the Guardian’s latest article on the issue. The full article puts things in perspective a little more than ‘the rumour mill’ does. Rumour mills don’t like detail!

Of course, it will be used as yet another stick with which to beat Labour - from all sides. I’ve come to expect it now🤷‍♀️

The Guardian is saying that Aviva is declining to comment. They are the only ones in a position to confirm or refute the accusations being made against her. I find that frustrating but maybe someone can come up with a good reason for why they are refusing to do so?

If you have a criminal record then it affects your job application but in this case, which was a very important job, she should never have been given the job.

Galaxy

I dont know about those rumours, but I was wrong about Starmer, if Glorianny was around she would be delighted in my change of heart.

I'm very much inclined to agree with you, Galaxy.

Is he being run by McSweeney? (I can't help thinking of Sweeney Todd every time I see that name...)

I think there's more to the Haigh story. At face value, it seems a genuine error. I'm not sure why she would not have gone straight to the police and said "look I've actually found my phone". I cannot understand - on the basis of what's been released - why this would have gone to court. There's a hint that in fact she claimed that "several" phones had been stolen which gives an entirely different spin on things. I hope the full facts come out and we can form an informed view.

LizzieDrip

Well then I suppose the right wing media (aided and abetted by SM) has achieved its aim … let’s whip up the ‘rumour mill’ and stir up division in the Labour cabinet.

Take a look at The Guardian. Not known for its right wing credentials.

More than one article about this.

According to them she was asked to resign.

And maybe there's more than one phone.

I'm no fan of MSM but let's be straight that both right and left leaning papers are somewhat unimpressed with Labour's first few months

I wonder what the cost to the employer was - a few hundred pounds at the very most I would have thought. Even if she did it more than once (as alleged), the cost wouldn't have been more than a couple of thousand.

What an astonishing attitude.Even shoplifters are prosecuted (supposedly) for theft above £200.

Senior trade union officials have accused Starmer's senior staff of plotting to oust Louise Haigh days before she revealed a plan for railway renationalisation. Morgan McSweeney is the person identified, after his successful power struggle to remove Sue Gray.
Haigh apparently made the controversial decision to grant the 15% pay rise to train drivers of her own volition once appointed as the Transport Secretary. Or so it is being claimed, now.

Ah yes, Himself says Swinney….

I dont know about those rumours, but I was wrong about Starmer, if Glorianny was around she would be delighted in my change of heart.

Ooh MaizeD that’s a very interesting concept!

Smileless2012

IMO her resignation shouldn't have been accepted. KS knew about this in 2020 and it didn't prevent him from making her transport secretary. He should have stood by her and weathered the storm which will soon be yesterday's news and let's face it, isn't the first and wont be the last.

I agree.
Is KS weak? Unless he tried to persuade her to stay and she declined (which to be honest I doubt).

LizzieDrip

Well then I suppose the right wing media (aided and abetted by SM) has achieved its aim … let’s whip up the ‘rumour mill’ and stir up division in the Labour cabinet.

I'm afraid that there's a strong body of opinion that thinks that a lot of this is coming directly from the grouping around the PM (if not from the PM himself) rather than the RW media.

There was something very iffy about the Sue Grey ousting, too...

The hounding of some individuals, and the media speculation is wrong when some people are picked on, and others with similar or worse crimes in their past are ignored or glossed over

Agreed Casdon.

That’s my issue with it - double standards!

That was in response to MaizieD

Well then I suppose the right wing media (aided and abetted by SM) has achieved its aim … let’s whip up the ‘rumour mill’ and stir up division in the Labour cabinet.

I don’t disagree Galaxy, I just think it would be fairer if the information about spent convictions was either available to the public for all MPs, or not available for any. The hounding of some individuals, and the media speculation is wrong when some people are picked on, and others with similar or worse crimes in their past are ignored or glossed over.

I'm fairly comfortable with it being aired in the media, Galaxy, but one has to ask, if it's been known about for four years by Starmer, who is, FGS, a lawyer, why has it suddenly emerged now? Her remarks about P & O were some time ago, why not then?

The rumour mill has it that the story was briefed to Sky by someone at No. 10. This is very disturbing.

I'm beginning to wonder how long Angela Rayner is going to survive if No.10 is trying to ditch its more left leaning ministers...

If you cant cope with scrutiny from a media which nowadays has ever decreasing influence then you probably arent suited to a role in politics. I dont want a media that doesnt report issues, would you prefer this was covered up, there are questions to ask about how we as a society deal with those with spent convictions ( I personally think Starmer should have supported her to stay, if the information we currently have is accurate) but I am perfectly comfortable with it being aired in the media.

growstuff

Allira

growstuff

Rachel Reeves didn't lie on her CV and Louise Haigh doesn't have a conviction for fraud.

Apparently Louise Haigh does have a conviction for fraud.

I apologise. Yes, she does. I hadn't realised that a conditional discharge, which was what she was given, counts as a conviction. It must be just about the lowest sentence anybody can be given.

The 'fraud' was pretending that a phone was lost/stolen and receiving an upgraded phone from her employer. I wonder what the cost to the employer was - a few hundred pounds at the very most I would have thought. Even if she did it more than once (as alleged), the cost wouldn't have been more than a couple of thousand. There is absolutely no evidence that 'losing' the phone(s) was premeditated. I would imagine that Aviva provides hundreds of pounds in providing laptops and phones and includes the cost in the company's expenses.

Compared with some cases of fraud, this must rank as one of the lowest value.

In any case, the conviction has now been 'spent'. In normal circumstances, Haigh would have been allowed to forget about it and get on with her life. IMO she's done the right thing, but it all seems like a storm in a teacup.

DH thought that her solicitor advised her wrongly.

He said it's all a load of nonsense - and he's not even a strong Labour supporter.

LizzieDrip

The right wing media clearly don’t like strong females in the Labour cabinet.

To date, they’ve conducted witch hunts on Angela Rayner, Rachel Reeves and Louise Haigh. They’ve dug into things that happened in their past, before all of them were MPs, and that have no impact on them doing their current job.

I suppose the seedy little reporters, and their billionaire paymasters, can’t cope with strong women in power who disagree with them. Sad really!

Frankly it is all bit pathetic!

Wyllow3

I would welcome that. She was good in transport, some great plans to improve our rail system oop north. Stood up on the P and O issue.

I think it is relevant to look at other MP's who've had convictions to get a sense of proportion. James McMurdock assaulted and repeatedly kicked his girlfriend, and was jailed for it, for goodness sake!

Haigh has stood down on a phone offence and did the right thing.

McMurdock - yesterday

"Farage says Reform UK MP who repeatedly kicked girlfriend deserves ‘Christian forgiveness’
Reform UK leader said James McMurdock’s conviction for an assault on a partner was ‘a long time ago’

Sorry but I don’t believe that a violent person can change that much!

Christian forgiveness ?

Whatever next!!!!

The right wing media clearly don’t like strong females in the Labour cabinet.

To date, they’ve conducted witch hunts on Angela Rayner, Rachel Reeves and Louise Haigh. They’ve dug into things that happened in their past, before all of them were MPs, and that have no impact on them doing their current job.

I suppose the seedy little reporters, and their billionaire paymasters, can’t cope with strong women in power who disagree with them. Sad really!

A storm created by the right wing media who don’t want to believe that Labour are in government.

Allira

growstuff

Rachel Reeves didn't lie on her CV and Louise Haigh doesn't have a conviction for fraud.

Apparently Louise Haigh does have a conviction for fraud.

I apologise. Yes, she does. I hadn't realised that a conditional discharge, which was what she was given, counts as a conviction. It must be just about the lowest sentence anybody can be given.

The 'fraud' was pretending that a phone was lost/stolen and receiving an upgraded phone from her employer. I wonder what the cost to the employer was - a few hundred pounds at the very most I would have thought. Even if she did it more than once (as alleged), the cost wouldn't have been more than a couple of thousand. There is absolutely no evidence that 'losing' the phone(s) was premeditated. I would imagine that Aviva provides hundreds of pounds in providing laptops and phones and includes the cost in the company's expenses.

Compared with some cases of fraud, this must rank as one of the lowest value.

In any case, the conviction has now been 'spent'. In normal circumstances, Haigh would have been allowed to forget about it and get on with her life. IMO she's done the right thing, but it all seems like a storm in a teacup.