![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
cover ups and lies in UK politics
Apr. 11th, 2009 11:12 pmIf this subject bores you, skip it... I won't mind. :) It's not terribly interesting, more a mix of irritating and boring.
I don't vote, because generally I think politicians are worthless and the people who work for them even more so. I was nicely reminded of this by a little row that kicked off a couple of days ago, where a leading civil servant working out of 10 Downing Street was found to have been planning a smear campaign against several Conservative MPs.
That alone is distasteful enough from people paid out of our taxes, but even worse is the slimy scheming that took place between this story first coming to light and the present time. Since the content of the emails wasn't initially revealed, the people implicated were able to sneak a damage-limitation article into the Telegraph, depicting it as a "security scare" due to the implication that hackers could have stolen the emails, and downplaying the content of the emails themselves by saying "It’s just embarrassing for Number 10 that members of staff are spending their time sending smutty emails to their mates instead of running the country." One embarrassingly over-cited line was that the emails were 'juvenile and inappropriate', also said here on YouTube (note anti-male sexism, too), implying it's been carefully rehearsed across the party to try and present a unified line of defence.
Unfortunately for them, it became clear that the actual content of the emails was to be published in 2 Sunday papers tomorrow, meaning they could no longer pretend that they were merely "smutty emails to their mates", and that 'juvenile and inappropriate' is a severe understatement. The Sunday Telegraph reports that the writer "wrote about how to 'sequence' the stories for maximum impact" and that they contained "links to websites and photographs that could make the allegations appear more credible". (Some choice quotes here.) Yet the person responsible, like a child more upset at being caught than at realising that he did anything wrong, writes in his resignation statement (spot the 'inappropriate and juvenile' line used a 3rd time) that he's "shocked and appalled that [...] these e-mails have been put into the public domain". Yet he's now on record of saying he intended them to be in the public domain, at a time most suited to him.
Unfortunately, this has been my experience with all politicians, Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat, Greens. Political parties are there to win power and having to run the country is an annoying distraction from the actual job of discrediting your opponents enough to win more votes than them. Carefully rehearsed lines and personal attacks are what they're all about. It makes me think that those countries which banned political parties had a point. Get rid of these freeloaders! [Insert your own preferred complaint about MPs' expenses here.]
I don't vote, because generally I think politicians are worthless and the people who work for them even more so. I was nicely reminded of this by a little row that kicked off a couple of days ago, where a leading civil servant working out of 10 Downing Street was found to have been planning a smear campaign against several Conservative MPs.
That alone is distasteful enough from people paid out of our taxes, but even worse is the slimy scheming that took place between this story first coming to light and the present time. Since the content of the emails wasn't initially revealed, the people implicated were able to sneak a damage-limitation article into the Telegraph, depicting it as a "security scare" due to the implication that hackers could have stolen the emails, and downplaying the content of the emails themselves by saying "It’s just embarrassing for Number 10 that members of staff are spending their time sending smutty emails to their mates instead of running the country." One embarrassingly over-cited line was that the emails were 'juvenile and inappropriate', also said here on YouTube (note anti-male sexism, too), implying it's been carefully rehearsed across the party to try and present a unified line of defence.
Unfortunately for them, it became clear that the actual content of the emails was to be published in 2 Sunday papers tomorrow, meaning they could no longer pretend that they were merely "smutty emails to their mates", and that 'juvenile and inappropriate' is a severe understatement. The Sunday Telegraph reports that the writer "wrote about how to 'sequence' the stories for maximum impact" and that they contained "links to websites and photographs that could make the allegations appear more credible". (Some choice quotes here.) Yet the person responsible, like a child more upset at being caught than at realising that he did anything wrong, writes in his resignation statement (spot the 'inappropriate and juvenile' line used a 3rd time) that he's "shocked and appalled that [...] these e-mails have been put into the public domain". Yet he's now on record of saying he intended them to be in the public domain, at a time most suited to him.
Unfortunately, this has been my experience with all politicians, Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat, Greens. Political parties are there to win power and having to run the country is an annoying distraction from the actual job of discrediting your opponents enough to win more votes than them. Carefully rehearsed lines and personal attacks are what they're all about. It makes me think that those countries which banned political parties had a point. Get rid of these freeloaders! [Insert your own preferred complaint about MPs' expenses here.]
