Transparency
 

Oh dear. Oh deary me. To clarify in advance: this is not political in spite of the fact that the individual involved is a most senior member of the government. It’s about transparent honesty, or more the lack of it in our daily life, and the collusion of insiders when they are nose-to-the-grindstone on our behalf.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer, the chap who has just showered our money around like confetti, has avoided having to disclose huge family riches and ownership of extensive companies and holdings recently transferred to his close family. It amounts to billions and supposedly means his family is wealthier than the Queen.

In doing this he has apparently avoided the need for disclosure to parliament. The internal committees responsible for disclosure by members have allowed it to go unchallenged. So far, anyway. The companies involved also allegedly hold contracts over a range of government interests although no fraud by those companies is suspected.

If commenting, it might help to confine thoughts to the activities of the House committees and their responsibilities on our behalf.

Source: Guardian.

One is not surprised that people in power do this sort of thing.

Take a look here
https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/th...7772-167262185

macafee2

Crooks and charlatans, the old pals act makes me sick.

I’m in no way defending the pigs at the trough but I see so many experts at running the country or at least by their comments they’re perfectly qualified to do it so I say give it a go. Why don’t those who shout the loudest on how to run things throw their hat in the ring and go for it, I think you’ll find it is so clear cut as we think

There will always be more to these things than meets the eye.

Those with power and influence have a myriad of ways to ensure that the "correct" decision is made.

It is exceptionally unlikely for any really significant changes to be made because those who have the power to change the Law are, invariably, the ones who are making use of the "loopholes" that their predecessors carefully buried deep in the paperwork many moons ago.

For my opinion, anyone who holds a position that is voted for by the public - MP's, local councillors etc. should have their full finances published for the 5 years before they take office and for a further 5 years after they leave. Any evidence of "contracts for the boys" or other shenanigans should be thoroughly investigated with the punishment being personal bankruptcy.

If a life in Public Service is such a wonderful thing then honesty, transparency, decency and truth should be part of it.

At local level this is over the top. District and Borough Councillors complete Declarations of Interest (pecuniary or other) annually, and have to state whether they have any to declare at every Committee and Council Meeting. I have been a Borough Councillor for the past 18 years, including as Mayor, and I have never come across any malpractice or skullduggery. I always have found it very offensive when we are accused of receiving brown envelopes and the like (particularly as a member of the Planning Committee) - I have never even claimed expenses (and there are plenty), and they are published in the paper annually. Do not tar the many with the faults in the few.

Playing devils advocate, I am in the fortunate position of being finacncially secure and as a result the aquisition of more wealth holds no interest for me. Likewise In the case of the Chancellor I think the fact that he is extremely wealthy and has no need of or motivation in aquiring wealth is all to the good. I am cautiously optimistic that Sunak is actually motivated by a belief in public service, but I am prepared to be dissapointed.

Its been no secret that he is married to a Billionaires daughter.

It do not make you a bad person.

Not a bad person for being married to her but perhaps a less-than-honest one for shifting his interests to her to avoid disclosure.

But then, there are all sorts of odd things going on at the moment. Interesting that the Russian billionaire that Johnso celebrated his election victory with is being elevated to the House of Lords. Can you imagine the fuss if this happened under Labour.

I wasn’t thinking about local elected representatives, they have their local opponents who are great at digging and I don’t mean horticulture.

In the case in point, the individual has a very limited experience in government and a background of great personal wealth. More importantly the personal and family connections put into context a rather different outlook. Especially the context of government contracts.

To obtain dispensation of compliance with the rules on such a scale is just a bit on the south side of ‘honourable’.

It’s not just this particular case. For instance, an earlier holder of the same rank and currently seeking a return to front-line positions has been signed by one of the world’s largest bankers. His reported award for a maximum 12 days ‘work’ over 1 year is reportedly over £151,000.

That seems a lot for the reported onerous duties demanded of him. £12,500 for a day’s work can only mean extremely large rewards by return. I wonder if it’s subject to P.A.Y.E.