Jump to content


Photo

Corruption In The Uk


  • Please log in to reply
133 replies to this topic

#21 David Lammy (?)

David Lammy (?)

    Advanced Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 104 posts

  • Are you African: Y
  • Cultural Heritage:
    An obvious parody

Posted 24 July 2006 - 01:58 PM

QUOTE (MarcusGarveyLives @ Jun 24 2006, 11:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Revealed: Blair's secret role in loans scandal...



Please do not believe everything you read. Mr Blair is involved in no such thing.

#22 MarcusGarveyLives

MarcusGarveyLives

    Family

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3804 posts

Posted 25 July 2006 - 09:51 PM

Meanwhile ...



"... (Det Sgt) Davidson told me that he was looking after Norris and that to me meant that he was protecting him, protecting his family against arrest and any conviction ..." - Former Police Officer turned Whistleblower Neil Putnam

(Stephen) Lawrence case 'corruption' probe (click for more)


#23 MarcusGarveyLives

MarcusGarveyLives

    Family

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3804 posts

Posted 02 September 2006 - 01:08 PM

Dirty money darkens Britain's reputation

Britain is high on a list of the world's most corrupt countries, along with the United States and Switzerland, because of the refuge it offers to dirty money in tax havens such as the Channel Isles and the Isle of Man, researchers said yesterday ...

Read it here ...

#24 Toyin

Toyin

    Ligali Member

  • Moderator
  • 1532 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London
  • Interests:Pan Africanism & Human Rights
    Female Empowerment
    African Literature, Film and Arts
    Conscious Music
    Sci-Fi

  • Are you African: Y
  • Cultural Heritage:
    Yoruba (Nigeria)

Posted 02 September 2006 - 02:25 PM

Labour's £2bn army of consultants
Guardian - 2 September 2006

The annual bill for Whitehall consultants advising government departments is running at more than £2.2bn, an investigation by the Guardian reveals today. Our findings paint a disturbing picture of millions of pounds wasted on controversial or abandoned schemes and huge differentials in pay between civil servants and consultants brought in to do similar jobs.

Read it here...

Toyin says: Instead of merging ideologically with the racist anti-African ‘New’ Tories, ‘New’ Labour needs to practice good governance before it expects Africans in Britain to contribute to its corrupt electoral process and extensive system of exuberant taxation. dry.gif

#25 GPOFA

GPOFA

    Advanced Contributor

  • Expired
  • PipPipPip
  • 497 posts

  • Are you African: N
  • Cultural Heritage:
    Caribbean

Posted 02 September 2006 - 02:32 PM

Greetings Marcus Garvey Lives,

Well done for spotting that article and let it not be forgotten that Holirood House, the Scottish Parliament building was estimated to cost $40 million pounds to build, but ended up costing $400 million pounds!

Now if i were an accountant and did such a lousy job, i'd expect to be sacked or at least investigated for possible money laundering, conpiracy to over charge, gross incompetence and the list goes on, but nadda in this case happened.

Now if i were the minister in charge of such an operation that went sooooo badly wrong and cost the tax payers of England this amount of £'s in negligence...As if, i being a black minister would be out on my ear, but in this case nadda!

Then i listened to the government stooges, who rabble rouse and deceive the public on a daily basis on the radio talk shows and they more or less say "Ah forget it, what can ya do", or they may even say "disgusting, pigs in the trough etc, BUT NO CAMPAIGN TO HAVE ANYONE UP FOR A CRIME!

You see, they offer fake concern and then move the story on and i say they are complicit in the "gutting" of the UK infrastructure, to which we all have an investment.

The corruption is deep and on going, especially under Tony "WAR CRIMES" Blair, because he continues Thatcherite policies of selling off what doesn't belong to "New Labour" same on S-Tory, to sell off in the first place, hence we are witnessing ECONOMIC TREASON, in that eg our Water system is supposedly owned by a German company, but WHO OWNS THAT GERMAN COMPANY?

Furthermore, when that German company finds it can no longer make a pretty penny out of what it should NEVER have been sold, it will dump it.

One things for sure, we the people can charge Thatcher and Blair, along with their accomplices of Treason against the state, as our infrastructure is the property of the people of the UK and their offspring to come and not the possession of a custodian/government, that is elected for a brief period.

As for the idea of buying it back off the private company that happens to have benefitted from the dodgy deal, done by which ever minister, i say this, "To the buyer beware", stolen goods are stolen goods and the people of the UK owe you nothing.

Again issue such as the Water rip off, are only a tip of the ice berg, as the book "The best democracy money can buy" by Greg Pallast indicates.

It sure does look like Tony "War Crimes" Blair's first ambition for the UK, when he came to office, was to put the UK on the street, like the pimp he is, to any and any shady yank with money to get a piece.

Hotep

ph34r.gif cool.gif ph34r.gif



Greetings Marcus Garvey Lives,

Well done for spotting that article and let it not be forgotten that Holirood House, the Scottish Parliament building was estimated to cost $40 million pounds to build, but ended up costing $400 million pounds!

Now if i were an accountant and did such a lousy job, i'd expect to be sacked or at least investigated for possible money laundering, conpiracy to over charge, gross incompetence and the list goes on, but nadda in this case happened.

Now if i were the minister in charge of such an operation that went sooooo badly wrong and cost the tax payers of England this amount of £'s in negligence...As if, i being a black minister would be out on my ear, but in this case nadda!

Then i listened to the government stooges, who rabble rouse and deceive the public on a daily basis on the radio talk shows and they more or less say "Ah forget it, what can ya do", or they may even say "disgusting, pigs in the trough etc, BUT NO CAMPAIGN TO HAVE ANYONE UP FOR A CRIME!

You see, they offer fake concern and then move the story on and i say they are complicit in the "gutting" of the UK infrastructure, to which we all have an investment.

The corruption is deep and on going, especially under Tony "WAR CRIMES" Blair, because he continues Thatcherite policies of selling off what doesn't belong to "New Labour" same on S-Tory, to sell off in the first place, hence we are witnessing ECONOMIC TREASON, in that eg our Water system is supposedly owned by a German company, but WHO OWNS THAT GERMAN COMPANY?

Furthermore, when that German company finds it can no longer make a pretty penny out of what it should NEVER have been sold, it will dump it.

One things for sure, we the people can charge Thatcher and Blair, along with their accomplices of Treason against the state, as our infrastructure is the property of the people of the UK and their offspring to come and not the possession of a custodian/government, that is elected for a brief period.

As for the idea of buying it back off the private company that happens to have benefitted from the dodgy deal, done by which ever minister, i say this, "To the buyer beware", stolen goods are stolen goods and the people of the UK owe you nothing.

Again issue such as the Water rip off, are only a tip of the ice berg, as the book "The best democracy money can buy" by Greg Pallast indicates.

It sure does look like Tony "War Crimes" Blair's first ambition for the UK, when he came to office, was to put the UK on the street, like the pimp he is, to any and any shady yank with money to get a piece.

Hotep

ph34r.gif cool.gif ph34r.gif

#26 Toyin

Toyin

    Ligali Member

  • Moderator
  • 1532 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London
  • Interests:Pan Africanism & Human Rights
    Female Empowerment
    African Literature, Film and Arts
    Conscious Music
    Sci-Fi

  • Are you African: Y
  • Cultural Heritage:
    Yoruba (Nigeria)

Posted 05 September 2006 - 04:22 PM

United Kingdom high on the list of Worlds most corrupt countries (Ligali Headline)
Guardian, Monday September 4, 2006

Britain, the US and Switzerland should rank among the world's most corrupt countries, according to a paper delivered to an economics conference at the weekend. The failure of these and other developed countries to clamp down on offshore tax havens is responsible for more hardship than any corrupt acts by third world leaders, a leading tax expert said.

"I would place the United Kingdom high on the list of most corrupt countries," said John Christensen, formerly an adviser to the Jersey government and now director of the Tax Justice Network (taxjustice.net), speaking at the Economic Geography Research Group conference.

He said he based this on Britain's role as a tax haven and a defender of the tax haven role of its overseas territories and Crown dependencies, as well as its "dismal role in undermining the effectiveness" of the european Union's attempts to close tax loopholes.

Mr Christensen said it was time to "turn the current focus on corruption and development on its head". He argued that there had been too much emphasis on corruption in third world countries and not enough on the abuse of offshore tax havens by the wealthiest nations.

Read it here....

Toyin says: I changed the original title which used African governments as a yardstick for corruption despite the fact that Africa was not the primary focus of the article. And these are the so called anti-racist ‘liberals’… mad.gif

#27 Tunduzi

Tunduzi

    Advanced Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 482 posts

  • Are you African: Y

Posted 09 September 2006 - 05:26 PM

Well start with cash for questions. Which is exactly what you think it is. Rich folks paid ministers money to ask the government questions in the house of commons.

What about breaking election promises because wealthy indivuals don't like them. New labour promised to ban ciggarette advertising but the boss of Formula one motor racing who recieved most of his revenue from ciggarrette firms paid New Labour a million to cancel that promise. They paid the money back to avoid charges of corruption but the policy had been changed *shakes head*

Anybody remember the Hinduja brothers paying for passports? Or David Blunkett the home secretary fixing a lil sumpn sumpn for his friends, rushing passport applications through and all that? Come on people it wasn't that long ago smile.gif

What about the paymaster of New Labour "misplacing" £200,000 from the esteemed Robert Maxwell?

Or New Labour recieving money from an Indian millionaire who paid Tony Blair to force the leader of Romania to hand over the nations steel industry to him. Sounds incredible? It isn't, look here.

We can then move on to cash for peerages which is far worse than cash for questions. These people paid to become members of the senior house, the house of lords. They paid therefore in order to be able to decide upon laws and the running of the country.... paying for titles. One example can be looked at here.

I guess it's a little better than this one, where Blair tried to bribe a rebel MP with a peerage to change his mind and vote with the party lol

I found this one in the paper I found annoying as well. This is "think tanks" selling access to policy and politicians. Not little bit money either.

I don't have the time or patience to go chasing down ALL the european corruption but damnit it's not hard to find

#28 MarcusGarveyLives

MarcusGarveyLives

    Family

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3804 posts

Posted 23 September 2006 - 06:32 PM

Labour for hire - £1,500 to chat with a minister

#29 Tunduzi

Tunduzi

    Advanced Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 482 posts

  • Are you African: Y

Posted 23 September 2006 - 07:48 PM

QUOTE (MarcusGarveyLives @ Sep 23 2006, 07:32 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Interesting... especially since the underlying principle of representative government is that ministers are accountable and approachable to their constituents.

#30 MarcusGarveyLives

MarcusGarveyLives

    Family

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3804 posts

Posted 23 September 2006 - 09:10 PM

Scandals empty Labour's treasure chest

#31 MarcusGarveyLives

MarcusGarveyLives

    Family

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3804 posts

Posted 24 September 2006 - 09:38 AM

1990 Trust accused of misleading Londoners over funding

#32 MarcusGarveyLives

MarcusGarveyLives

    Family

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3804 posts

Posted 25 September 2006 - 06:49 PM

Liberal Democrats Biggest Cash Donor Imprisoned For "very deliberate and pointed" dishonesty

#33 Ma-at Mama

Ma-at Mama

    Advanced Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 159 posts
  • Interests:Music, politics, poetry, good company, mind sex

  • Are you African: Y
  • Cultural Heritage:
    Caribbean

Posted 28 September 2006 - 09:33 AM



Roselane Driza. Aka "Red Hot Chilli Stuf"

Two immigration judges had no idea they were employing some who was in breach of the immigration rules.

Apparantly.


Click here for more on this story.

#34 MarcusGarveyLives

MarcusGarveyLives

    Family

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3804 posts

Posted 28 September 2006 - 06:44 PM





I think that you will find that he was doing a little more than "employing" her.


#35 Ma-at Mama

Ma-at Mama

    Advanced Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 159 posts
  • Interests:Music, politics, poetry, good company, mind sex

  • Are you African: Y
  • Cultural Heritage:
    Caribbean

Posted 28 September 2006 - 09:35 PM

Indeed

#36 Lady Vee

Lady Vee

    Advanced Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 180 posts

  • Are you African: Y
  • Cultural Heritage:
    Grenadian/Guyanese

Posted 28 September 2006 - 10:14 PM

A jury in the United States has found accountancy firm Arthur Andersen guilty of obstructing justice by shredding documents relating to the failed energy giant Enron.
The verdict could be the death knell for the 89-year old company, once one of the world's top five accountants.


The firm said destroying documents was routine

Andersen has already lost much of its business, and two-thirds of its once 28,000 strong US workforce. Following the conviction, multi-million dollar lawsuits brought by Enron investors and shareholders demanding compensation are likely to follow, and could bankrupt the firm.

The company called Saturday's verdict "wrong" and is contemplating an appeal, but at the same time did promise to stop auditing publicly traded companies - pre-empting an official ban that now is a near certainty.

Enron's collapse last December was partly blamed on questionable accounting that kept hundreds of millions of dollars in debt off its books.

Andersen, which audited Enron's accounts, went on trial in Houston, Texas, after allegations that employees had illegally destroyed thousands of documents and computer records relating to its scandal-hit client, which was based there.

The 12-member jury had heard nearly five weeks of testimony and was in its 72nd hour of deliberation over 10 days when it finally reached the verdict.

Andersen's defence lawyer, Rusty Hardin, said the firm was disappointed by the verdict.

He said it would file an appeal but had to wait until after the sentencing date - 11 October - to do so.

He added: "This company did not commit a crime."

Andersen also faces a fine of up to $500,000.

'Housekeeping'

The firm's lawyers had argued that the shredding of documents had been routine housekeeping, but the jury decided it was an attempt to thwart federal regulators investigating Enron.

The trial heard how one Andersen executive said on a training video that if documents were shredded and then the investigators arrived, that would be good.


Judge Melinda Harmon apparently set a legal precedent

But Mr Hardin had argued that a number of important documents had survived the shredding, suggesting there was no conspiracy to cover up Andersen's work on Enron's books.

The prosecution's star witness was former Andersen partner David Duncan, who was in charge of the Enron audit team.

He admitted obstructing justice in April and told jurors that he had signed an agreement with Andersen to present a united front, claiming that neither had done anything wrong.

He said that he had reneged on the agreement after much "soul searching".

Legal precedent

The verdict came after US District Court Judge Melinda Harmon made what is believed to be a landmark legal decision to break a deadlock among the jury.

She ruled that jurors could reach a verdict on the company as a whole, even though they failed to agree on the individual responsible for ordering the shredding.

Judge Harmon agonised over the decision for more than a day as she sought to clarify a point of law that mystified even seasoned attorneys and other experts on American jurisprudence.

"I'm kind of in a position of a case of first impression, which is terrifying for a district judge," she said, aware that her ruling could set a precedent and be subject to future legal challenges.

..plus many more "dealings" of the Big 5 accountancy firms.

I've been asked to "cloak" more dodgy transactions than you've had hot dinners!

Edited by Lady Vee, 28 September 2006 - 10:18 PM.


#37 Mogho Naaba

Mogho Naaba

    Family

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3233 posts

  • Are you African: Y
  • Cultural Heritage:
    Afrikan by way of the Native Indian homelands

Posted 28 September 2006 - 10:20 PM

He blew her back out like crazy.

#38 MarcusGarveyLives

MarcusGarveyLives

    Family

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3804 posts

Posted 29 September 2006 - 07:17 AM

... it's gone quiet on this one ... 1990 Trust accused of misleading Londoners over funding...

... which is interesting when Karen Chouhan, a trustee of The 1990 Trust and former director, has been appointed chairperson of the Black Londoners Forum.



Defective Memory?


#39 GPOFA

GPOFA

    Advanced Contributor

  • Expired
  • PipPipPip
  • 497 posts

  • Are you African: N
  • Cultural Heritage:
    Caribbean

Posted 29 September 2006 - 08:03 AM

Greetings Ligali peeps,

Hmmm, maybe some semantics afoot.

Being in receipt of, is akin to saying receiving a constant wage/salary/bursury/stipend.

Whereas a one off payment of £100,000 can be argued as, yes we did receive a fund, but we are not in receipt of a continuous fee.

Of course, Chouhan needs to be challenged and made to clarify her position on the same stage she chose to mislead the black listening audience.


Hotep ph34r.gif cool.gif ph34r.gif

#40 MarcusGarveyLives

MarcusGarveyLives

    Family

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3804 posts

Posted 30 September 2006 - 10:02 AM

Blair aide questioned in cash for peerages investigation



Ruth Turner is the Blair's director of government relations and
stood for Labour in the 1999 european Parliament election





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users