Corruption Condoned: Lord Taylor’s Risible Punishment 19

Anybody who doubts the deep, deep corruption of our parliament need only refer to the laughably light punishment given to Lord Taylor of Blackburn. He was caught red-handed offering to get legislation changed for money. He went into detail on his methodology.

He then, with typical New Labour arrogance, brought upon himself official criticism for the “Disdain” he showed the investigation.

His disdain was justified. They couldn’t touch him, and they didn’t. A measly one year’s suspension? Bollocks!!

Nobody outside the inane village of Westminster will think that a year’s suspension is sufficient. A year in prison would not be sufficient.

Lord Scumbag has been peddling influence for cash for decades. He has been the highest paid parliamentary “Lobbyist” for the defence industry. This site wes detailing it for two years before the Sunday Times’ investigation.

The modus operandus of this government, again and again, is to institute an inquiry into a scandal, with terms of reference so limited as to pre-determine the outcome. Sleazebag criminal Taylor has only been invesitgated for his willingness to go along with the Sunday Times’ fake scam.

Nobody has asked the vastly more important questions.

What did scumbag crook Taylor do for the very real millions of pounds he trousered for all those consultancies and directorships in the Defence industry since New Labour came to power?

Which of the methodologies he outlined to the disguised Sunday Times reporter did he actually use on behalf of his real defence and security clients?

Why was it worth the while of the defence and security agencies to employ this retired expert in the theory of primary school education?

How much of the influence he was peddling was actually his partner Jack Straw’s influence? How much of the proceeds did Jack Straw see apart from the admitted payment by Lord Taylor of his election expenses and by companies of hospitality events in his constituency?

We have only scratched the surface of this scandal so far.

Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

19 thoughts on “Corruption Condoned: Lord Taylor’s Risible Punishment

  • MJ

    “A year in prison would not be sufficient”.

    In light of Craig’s revelations it is likely that Jonathan Aitken went to prison for a much lesser offence.

  • subrosa

    Craig, how can the whole corruption in Westminster be resolved? The likes of Taylor are firmly embedded within the Westminster culture and I see no way of breaking that.

  • paul

    I believe a gentleman by the name of Mr Cromwell had a solution to that problem.

  • Mentalogirl

    “Lord Taylor’s explanation that he was aware the lobbyists were in fact journalists and he had continued to meet them in order to discover the truth was dismissed as “inherently implausible”.

    The police decided not to mount a criminal investigation into the case earlier this year, citing the difficulty of obtaining evidence among other factors.” BBC news website

    You couldn’t make it up!

  • Leo Davidson

    You can have an inquiry in any colour you want, so long as it’s whitewash.

    I live in hope that one day there will be *proper* inquiries which aim to find the truth, not cover it up. The first one should be an inquiry on all past inquiries to work out who to punish for the fact they were calculated to rubber stamp absolute filthy things as if they were sparkling clean. Sadly, I doubt that day will ever come.

    As for Taylor, I don’t really think even a year in prison would be enough. This person has intentionally subverted our democratic process in return for money. Sounds like treason to me.

    At the very least Taylor should have to pay a fine to the tax payer greater than the money that was made as a result of this. Much greater, considering the harm it will have done to the country.

    Justice? We’ve heard of it!

  • Jason

    “Another Labour peer, Lord Snape, will be asked to apologise to the House.”

    Instead of campaigning for the laws ordinary folk live by to apply to MPs and peers, perhaps we should demand that the rules they (occasionally) abide by should be extended to the rest of us.

    I would welcome the chance to simply be able to apologise after any investigation that found me guilty of wrongdoing, it would be such a jolly way to live.

  • Jason

    Particularly when dealing with the IR.

    “While I certainly did pay less tax than I should, and you eagle-eyed investigators certainly caught me red-handed, as it were, I would be more than happy to apologise for this, and perhaps we can leave the matter there.”

    yours faithfully, etc.

    P.S. – Jack Straw (or was it Lloyd George) knew my father…

  • David McKelvie

    This business is going to continue until there are decent people in Parliament.

    I’ve no idea how New Labour and the LibDems select their candidates. I imagine that it is analogous to the Conservative Party.

    In the case of the Conservative Party, this business is controlled by a coteries of people at Central Office who operate an ‘A’ List – only people on this list get official backing and these people are handpicked by the coteries and Cameron and his buddies.

    Cameron – if he’s serious – has to scrap this list and clean out Finkelstein and his gang from the Agents’ Office at CPCO. Ditto for New Labour and Lib Dems.

  • lwtc247

    V had the solution. Why doesn’t life imitate art on the important issues.

  • Jaded

    ‘The police decided not to mount a criminal investigation into the case earlier this year, citing the difficulty of obtaining evidence among other factors.” BBC news website’

    An individual made that final decision. They always hide behind the label of a large organisation. It’s the police! It’s the Home Office! It’s the Foreign Office! It’s the Crown Prosecution Service! No, really, it is an individual. Does anyone know which individual the buck stops with? Craig did a good job identifying that BBC woman on a previous thread. That’s what we need to do all the time. That tactic csn really work, as once ‘dodgy folk’ begin to see this happening they will think twice about acting undemocratically. Those that do we can easily identify for removal from office.

  • anticant

    And of course Taylor is an arch-crony of Jack Straw, whose contribution to the grovelfest was ‘Sorry for that … accountancy does not appear to be my strongest suit’.

    I wonder what he thinks his strongest suit is? Tergiversation?

  • David McKelvie

    The reason for the long recess, just as for Long Leave at school, is to help bring in the harvest and get everything ready for the coming autumn.

    That requires quite a lot of heavy physical real work: something that these bludgers are incapable of.

    So they should only get the statutory two weeks that most employees get and that’s it.

  • mary

    His latest entry in the HoL Register of Interests. Fingers in many pies.


    *12(d) Non-parliamentary consultant

    Adviser, NPL Estates

    Adviser, Alcatel-Lucent

    Adviser, Canatxx Energy Ventures Limited

    Adviser, BT plc

    Adviser, Gersphere UK Limited

    Adviser, T-Systems Limited

    President, Wrens Hotel Group

    *12(e) Remunerated directorships

    Non-executive Director, A Division Holdings Limited

    Non-executive Director, Eisis Limited

    Non-executive Director, Building Themes International Limited

    Non-executive Director, Pine Mountain Resorts Limited

    15(a) Membership of public bodies

    Deputy Lord Lieutenant of Lancashire

    Life Member, Court of Lancaster University

    Freeman of the City of London

    Freeman of the Borough of Blackburn

    15(d) Office-holder in voluntary organisations

    Vice-President, Association of Lancastrians in London

    16(b) Voluntary organisations

    Patron, Friends of Real Lancashire

    Patron, Holidays for Carers

    Patron, Lancashire Wildlife Trust

    Patron, Outreach Schools

  • Jives

    Oh but he “‘oooombly” apologised…

    So that’s all right then?

    Twat.War criminal.Trougher.

Comments are closed.