Shock, Horror, Ministers Obey Law!

Free tickets for the gravy train: Whitehall committee that NEVER says no to ministers cashing in
Acoba is Whitehall committee that scrutinises post-government appointments
However, it has not knocked back a single minister or civil servant in eight years

So, the rules are laid out, whatever they are, good or bad. Ex-ministers and ex-civil servants have been obeying these rules, whatever they are, good or bad.

Shock, Horror!

I’m reminded of Ritchie’s Lament that so few were prosecuted after the Swiss Banks opened up the books about British citizens and their accounts. The idea that this proved that almost all were in fact obeying the law wasn’t something he could contemplate.

7 comments on “Shock, Horror, Ministers Obey Law!

  1. Poli-scum should not be able to walk into good jobs–nor Directorships what have you.

    Given the record of the British state and its antics they aren’t getting the jobs cos they are super-competent. Except perhaps super-competent at knowing the way around vile bureaucracy and corrupt/in-breed influence.

    They may not haver transgressed the rules but the rules need to be wiped out along with the corrupt system.

    Then the pork can get the jobs they deserve–working in a flower shop perhaps or street sweeping. It was good enough for poor old Dubcek.

  2. “he idea that this proved that almost all were in fact obeying the law wasn’t something he could contemplate.”

    Because doing something that Ritchie doesn’t do can only, yes only be for reasons of tax avasion or evoidance. There is no other plausible explanation.

  3. Are they obeying the law? I thought the committee sat and gave permission for people to take up jobs. They checked it for conflicts of interest and the like.

    So if it is never saying no, it isn’t that the Ministers are obeying the law. It is that their chums always agree with their snouts in the trough. In the same way that they can get a committee of their chums to agree to their wage rises.

  4. So if it is never saying no, it isn’t that the Ministers are obeying the law. It is that their chums always agree with their snouts in the trough.

    Or that the rules are sufficiently simple that even a politician can understand them so they don’t take cases before the committee that the committee would reject.

  5. “So if it is never saying no, it isn’t that the Ministers are obeying the law. It is that their chums always agree with their snouts in the trough.”

    +1

  6. The idea that this proved that almost all were in fact obeying the law wasn’t something he could contemplate.

    because for them Laws aren’t things which guide behaviour, but are weapons to use against enemies. If a weapon doesn’t inflict any casualties, you view it as defective.

  7. abacab said:
    “Because doing something that Ritchie doesn’t do can only, yes only be for reasons of tax avasion or evoidance.”

    Sometimes even doing exactly the same as Murphy does can be for reasons of tax avoidance. But it isn’t when Murphy does it, for his heart is pure.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.