Comments on: Will Dave Really Crack Down on Lobbyists?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 12:39:10 +0000

@410 Re fake charities…

Did you know the Royal Town Plannign Institute was a registered charity?

Not like they put life and limb at risk as the RNLI people do every time they launch out to sea to save lives is it?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 11:34:46 +0000

What about the “Health” lobbyists (see fakecharities.org)? The likes of ASH and Alcohol Concern are paid to fund junk science reports and then lobby for change based on their recommendations. ASH Wales receives only 0.2% of its funding from public donations, the rest coming from the tax-payer and Big Pharma (ASH undurprisingly is a major shareholder in Nicotene Replacement manufacturers so it is hardly surprising they do this (even crowing about their relationship whwn trying to suck up more cash from the Pharma companies). Also unsurprising they then produce fake studies that show NRT products are twice as effective as they actually are (see Dick Puddlecote’s blog today). Until the likes of ASH and Alcohol Concern are forced to survive on public donations (or their well-known links are made clear to the simpletons in Government) I suspect this is just Dave blowing smoke up everyone’s arses again.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 00:29:52 +0000

You are exactly why so many people hate our party. You are a proper twat you retard fuck. Get a fucking brain you shy.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 00:26:12 +0000

Guido, let me know when MPs or their parlimentary assistans run through every single piece of legislation or statutory instrument they get to vote on and pick up every single detail. Reality is, lobbyists tell MPs where to look for obscure wordings, then they can make their mind up and vote according to their views.

I’m a lobbyist, I tell MPs here, look at this and these are my arguments to vote X or Y, then they can make their mind up about the issue. If they just simply follow us without questioning our arguments then they are probably not very good at their job, are they?

I thought you were a libertarian, son.

Fuck’s sake.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 22:40:35 +0000

A “supplier” (aka “independent” planning consultant) I know didn’t fail to make clear a conflict of interest, but actively denied it in writing during a public meeting.

By: No Fool

No Fool — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 21:29:17 +0000

60 million fools then

By: Commercial Property

Commercial Property — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 21:01:44 +0000

Then, straw dummies are tossed into huge bonfires. Commercial Property

By: Freeborn John

Freeborn John — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 20:54:39 +0000

So at last an admission from the establishment that it is seriously corrupted. Why did it take a political party so long to even pretend to arrive at this? The fact that they were all so tardy means that only a fool could be in favour of letting any of them oversee any reforms.

By: Budgie

Budgie — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 19:45:58 +0000

Jonathan Freedland (Guardian 7th May 2005): “The raw number of votes cast shows the Conservatives are, once again, the biggest party in England.”

By: Budgie

Budgie — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 19:37:19 +0000

Lizards don’t hang from the rafters at night.