Haigh resigns

Mwelolo said:
I, like any other member of the public, reasonably reserve the right to comment on and question the actions of politicians.

Why is it a resigning issue now when it was a “trivial” matter 13 years ago?

Transparency?
Click to expand...

She is resigning because the press will use it to hammer the government, her action shows some integrity. If from the information available you do not think this was a genuine mistake than you are frankly a moron. Personally I think people regardless of job have the right to some privacy in their life especially around their past. If she had claimed for 1000s of pounds of items that didn’t exist I’d say 100% it is of public interest. You are attacking what was then a young 24 year old woman who had just been mugged for accidentally claiming a work phone that she would gain zero benefit from and clearly done by mistake while likely in shock and you seem even more annoyed her boss backed her and didn’t tell the public about this private matter.

Have a word with yourself.
 
Priv said:
She is resigning because the press will use it to hammer the government, her action shows some integrity. If from the information available you do not think this was a genuine mistake than you are frankly a moron. Personally I think people regardless of job have the right to some privacy in their life especially around their past. If she had claimed for 1000s of pounds of items that didn’t exist I’d say 100% it is of public interest. You are attacking what was then a young 24 year old woman who had just been mugged for accidentally claiming a work phone that she would gain zero benefit from and clearly done by mistake while likely in shock and you seem even more annoyed her boss backed her and didn’t tell the public about this private matter.

Have a word with yourself.
Click to expand...
You can choose to swallow whatever you are fed, which in my eyes makes you less than a moron.

I will keep an open mind and question, whenever I choose to.
 
Last edited:
I find it interesting that the Tory press will no doubt be spending hours and hours and hours trawling for ‘scandals’ on Labour politicians and this is all they can come up with.

Wait until they hear how much Nigel Farage was paid to advise the rich on how to hide their money offshore and literally buy passports from various countries. Didn’t the press used to hate people who did that? Like the Hinduja brothers, for example.

And just wait until they hear how much Farage has earned from second jobs since being elected to Parliament! The last count was over £200,000 wasn’t it, in less than six months. They really do hate that kind of thing. I’m sure it won’t be long until they apply the same sort of scrutiny to him and his mates as they have Louise Haigh and Angela Rayner and Rachel Reeves.
 
I can’t believe she got a criminal record if the facts are as reported. Conviction was spent too. I think there was some controversy over something she said a couple of months ago, so probably seen as a bit of a loose canon.
 
viv_andersons_nana said:
And just wait until they hear how much Farage has earned from second jobs since being elected to Parliament! The last count was over £200,000 wasn’t it, in less than six months. They really do hate that kind of thing.
Click to expand...
Their supporters (media and public ones) won’t care. They’ll either tie themselves in knots defending something they’d vilify Labour for, or be blissfully unaware of how much of a hypocrite they are, mainly because balanced and reasoned thinking is beyond their capability.

I’ve already had a couple of these types of chats with people in the pub since July - and I’ve had to quickly nip the topics in the bud and move onto other subjects. Waste of time.

I have no objection with the current Government being criticised and scrutinised. However it should be a level playing field. It seems Labour are held to a much higher standard than all right wing parties and politicians.

The PM could offer every citizen a free £500 Christmas bonus tomorrow, and the same tropes would still find a way to criticise. No matter what they do, they’ll never win with a certain element of the electorate, with the exception of lining up a load of Immigrants and chucking them off Saltburn Pier perhaps!

I’m starting to zone out on a lot of the political stuff at the moment. People have set agendas regardless of what decisions are made and they’re the ones who will shout loudest. I can’t be bothered listening anymore.
 
TeaCider said:
I know a civil servant who works in Westminster and according to them somebody in the higher ups of Labour really wanted her gone.

Probably explains why she's quit over a fairly soft issue from a decade ago.
Click to expand...
Other than the PM himself and his deputy whom he can’t sack (as deputy, he doesn’t have to give her a cabinet job of course) she must’ve been the last one left standing who served in the Corbyn shadow cabinet and didn’t resign during the mass flounce that tried to unseat him. Unfinished business maybe.
 
Otto42 said:
I can’t believe she got a criminal record if the facts are as reported. Conviction was spent too. I think there was some controversy over something she said a couple of months ago, so probably seen as a bit of a loose canon.
Click to expand...
She pleaded guilty to a recordable criminal offence, so it’s not exactly rocket science to work out why she had a criminal record.

The point that it is spent is a more valid one. We have clear rules in principle surrounding criminal activity and disqualification or recall as an MP and serving as a minister. But to some extent, it was Labour during the last parliament that led the race to the moral high ground in suggesting that such rules should not be followed and that people should resign anyway so there’s an element of hoist by your own petard about this.
 
Otto42 said:
I can’t believe she got a criminal record if the facts are as reported. Conviction was spent too. I think there was some controversy over something she said a couple of months ago, so probably seen as a bit of a loose canon.
Click to expand...
It’s still a daft own goal
The press were always going to find out and always going to make a scene of it.

If they wanted to appoint her, fair enough it’s a minor issue.
But, tell us at the time of the issue.
 
FishofContemplation said:
She pleaded guilty to a recordable criminal offence, so it’s not exactly rocket science to work out why she had a criminal record.

The point that it is spent is a more valid one. We have clear rules in principle surrounding criminal activity and disqualification or recall as an MP and serving as a minister. But to some extent, it was Labour during the last parliament that led the race to the moral high ground in suggesting that such rules should not be followed and that people should resign anyway so there’s an element of hoist by your own petard about this.
Click to expand...

And now they have stood up to the standards they expected others to and she has resigned.

That will really upset the right wing media who cannot now accuse Labour of double standards.
 
I suspect the P&O comments and impact on huge Dubai investment helped encourage her resignation given another issue emerging, or at least has muted any defence of her.
Shame as I think her P&O comments were morally good, the phone issue is trivial and so long ago, and her early words on Transport were encouraging.
It is not a nice world.
 
indeedido said:
I suspect the P&O comments and impact on huge Dubai investment helped encourage her resignation given another issue emerging, or at least has muted any defence of her.
Shame as I think her P&O comments were morally good, the phone issue is trivial and so long ago, and her early words on Transport were encouraging.
It is not a nice world.
Click to expand...
I was thinking the same thing
Starmer won’t have been happy that he had to phone the P&O boss up to get him to change his mind and come to the investment conference
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top