Tally-ho, it's a Fox hunt

[french frank]

I no understand:

"The Times newspaper reported that Mr Werritty set up the firm, Pargav, as a not-for-profit company to fund his trips abroad."

Doesn't that just mean the 'profits' were spent on ... or have I missed the point?

[scottycelt]

Profumo brought down the only good Tory prime minister ever to have existed.

In the interests of fairness, that is probably one more than Labour ... ?

[Lateralthinking1]

I think I have mentioned in the past that I met Harold MacMillan. It was on a sea cliff in Pembrokeshire in 1975. He was quite pleasant and happy to talk to a twelve year old who was interrupting his holiday. I wonder how many of our current politicians, if any, would do the same.

I was born at the end of 1962 and his Government was not as it had been by that time. Nevertheless, a combination of history books and experience leave me with the conclusion that he was the best Prime Minister in my lifetime.

[amateur51]

In the interests of fairness, that is probably one more than Labour ... ?

Oh I see, The Atlee government wasn't good enough for you, eh scotty?

[Nick Armstrong]

Oh I see, The Atlee government wasn't good enough for you, eh scotty?

[Serial_Apologist]

Well Oliver Twitwin (I believe this is what he's is known as in political circles) looks like he's going to get away with it using the Fox resignation as a smoke screen. I'd have been sacked if I'd been found chucking personal information in a public place. I cannot believe how people like him get away with it and how a man of such stupidity can be in government.

Knowing Letwin, he'll probably joke his way out of this one by claiming his role in jobs creation by giving work to those who empty the bins...

[handsomefortune]

I no understand:

"The Times newspaper reported that Mr Werritty set up the firm, Pargav, as a not-for-profit company to fund his trips abroad."

Doesn't that just mean the 'profits' were spent on ... or have I missed the point?

no french frank, i don't think you have missed the point. perhaps you've just seen straight through the 'solution' to conspicuous greed, (post £ crash) and torys (mis)using terminology once associated with the left, and kudos of the voluntary sector of olde. (up till 90s/early 2000s)

many 'small' third sector orgs, nor some typically reticent individuals, have one iota of a clue (apparently), between the difference in 'helping yourself, feathering your own nest first' and the original objectives of a genuine 'not for profit' org! as you may well be aware, voluntary sector orgs were traditionally once run by knowlegeable, experienced, committed, and scrupulous volunteer committee, careful to serve people, rather than one individual, or employee. the transference of many orgs to 'charitable status', imo helped muddy the waters initially, (under major and blair). this transition paved the way for what's going on now. no one can 'whistle blow', because charitable status withdraws the right to 'be political' or publicly campaign in protest.

there are other (tiresome) examples of 'small' 'not for profit' orgs such as a4e. the recent paradoxical suggestion of 'co-operative capiltalism' if anything, is worrying. (though i loved your recent suggestion that the beeb might be run as a co-operative btw! IF it really was run properly, it'd be a compelling, progressive solution: the perfect remedy for intellectual/emotional preservation, in times of financial hardship). neither of the rogers would give the idea one second of contemplation however! both are 'particularists' and not pluralists.

as with 'co-operative capiltalism', a4e, (see 'it's about jobs stupid' r3 forum thread).... bears no resemblence whatsoever to a 'not for profit' org, where it arguably counts - money, and proper accountability. proof is surely in the price of the mansion owned by its multi millionaire 'dictator'. mid 2000s onward, increasingly transparent 'lipservice' dominates. reappropriating language, rather than ethics of co ops/nfp/social enterprises/etc.

i suspect sections of the third sector may well collapse, under the sheer weight of its own style of 'lipservice', and chronic inability to serve consitutional objectives, rather than upper management employees. especially as increased use of litigation + pension greed converge.

although currently, third sector employment tribunals tend to represent sacked/disciplined frontline workers' appeals, (not such a push over to sack these days). perhaps middle, and upper management may be next? though imv the real culprits, are the current haphazard voluntary committees, who effectively oversee, apparently allow 'shady stuff' to continue. though committee members don't officially get paid for committee work, there's now other ways of 'attaining' pension plumping schemes, and (so called) 'partnership' working is 'useful'. both elements help insatiable capitalistic individuals, sloshing around in the third sector, drunk on their own good fortune and lucky timing, which is precisely who fox thinks he is emulating, in establishing 'pargav' imo.....except he's been caught. precisely because of his status as mp, and defence sec.

realistically, perhaps fox's resignation is only really of interest, because of the lessons revealed about current 'not for profit' third sector trends? had liam fox not been high profile, the 'not for profit' org of 'pargav' would have gone undetected. even if some poor sid whistle blew....the latter would merely be silenced - before anything was sorted as to the real culprits responsible - members of 'pargav' committee/trustees. incidentally, where are their collective thoughts on recent events? in fact, who are they?

of late, hoodlums have identified that the really 'great' aspect, peculiar to volunteers, (therefore committees) is that they're not subject to the same rules, as officially employed people. the third sector can therefore get away with more ... a loophole which is at the very heart of 'the big soc' imv. though to be fair, appalling practises originally flourished under new labour, incredibly! in a recent 'guardian' obituary, i read of a woman attributed with establishing best practise, as per the manchester co-operative movement, ....a shame she missed this political/third sector media drama, as it underlines all that needed emphasising. or, perhaps it's best she went when she did! since the media emphasis is not focused enough on the legitimacy of 'pargav', and the wider implications, detriment to the public longterm. instead, many will typically prefer to muse as to whether fox's marriage is a sham, or not, and who will replace him. glowing recommendations as to fox accessing better broadband for his dorset constituents, was actually due to european funding. though typically, no one mentioned this on r4 pm, last night....as if fox did this out of a sense of charity, and 'hard work'! it was an eu objective (albeit a while back) to get everyone online .... so, not necessarily a measure of fox's 'magical touch', and philanthropy, as presented. still, every little detail typically helps detract from the real issues at stake!

[teamsaint]

Handsomefortune... this is very interesting stuff.
Can you point us towards futher good quality internet reading on this subject? Sounds like something that needs a LOT more publicity !!

[Lateralthinking1]

It all made sense in the end. Following the headline that spoke of a secret agenda to sort out Iran. Following a nice walk in the sunshine around a lake full of swans. It was so obvious really......

Fox didn't win the competition to become Tory leader. He therefore waited until the election results and introduced Plan B. Plan B involved convincing himself that he was the Tory leader and hence Prime Minister. Even better, in that version of events, there were no pesky Lib Dems or a coalition.

The Atlantic Bridge was his cabinet in waiting. Helpful to make it international with a heavy American contingent. No worries there then of the real cabinet being more convincing or indeed influential.

Werritty of course became Prime Minister Fox's Secretary of State for Defence at the very least and might even have been his Foreign Secretary. Arguably Hintze and Boulter were his Chancellor of the Exchequer and Chief Secretary to the Treasury.

Sanity is a difficult word to define precisely isn't it, perhaps particularly in Westminster.

[mangerton]

Sanity is a difficult word to define precisely isn't it, perhaps particularly in Westminster.

Quite. I'm not sure if they're insane, even although they act as if they are. I think it's just breathtaking arrogance. They think they're better than us, so the rules don't apply to them.

Consider Letwin. If I or any other civil servant* went around scattering confidential material around a park like confetti, we'd be lucky not to be dismissed or prosecuted for breaching the Official Secrets Act.

It's the two fingers attitude which I mentioned a few days ago.

*I should perhaps qualify that by saying "ordinary civil servant at the sharp end". What about Vodafone, and Goldman Sachs to name but two?

[Lateralthinking1]

Completely agree.

[Flosshilde]

at a tangent, great photos of Oliver Letwin shredding documents
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politic...5875-23487379/

My quote of the year - a 'spokeswoman for No. 10' said that "Most of the business Mr Letwin does in the park is constituency based."


Is that 'business' as in "Are you looking for business, sir?"

[amateur51]

My quote of the year - a 'spokeswoman for No. 10' said that "Most of the business Mr Letwin does in the park is constituency based."


Is that 'business' as in "Are you looking for business, sir?"

[Nick Armstrong]

a 'spokeswoman for No. 10' said that "Most of the business Mr Letwin does in the park is constituency based."

With spokespersons like that, who needs satirists...

[Stillhomewardbound]

<<Most of the business Mr Letwin does in the park is constituency based>>

'Oooh, yes, it's quite tonight. Was you looking for anything special, sir?!'