Sunday, December 17, 2006
The farce that is the "cash for peerages" investigation
Mr Blair was questioned as part of the investigation into a possible breach of the Honours (Prevention of Abuses) Act 1925. He said he nominated those individuals in his capacity as party leader ensuring the honors for party supporters just “as other party leaders do”.
"The honours were not therefore for public services but expressly party peerages given for party service. In these circumstances the fact that they have supported the party financially could not conceivably be a barrier to their nomination."
But what services to the party have these people done? At least one has no record of any party affiliations, and they've said they understood they were nominated for their public service to the nation.
What is the New Lies response to this, and wondering if the one who thought up this latest spin kept a straight face: it's for the services they'll do in the future...
"The honours were not therefore for public services but expressly party peerages given for party service. In these circumstances the fact that they have supported the party financially could not conceivably be a barrier to their nomination."
But what services to the party have these people done? At least one has no record of any party affiliations, and they've said they understood they were nominated for their public service to the nation.
What is the New Lies response to this, and wondering if the one who thought up this latest spin kept a straight face: it's for the services they'll do in the future...
# posted by threaded @ 12/17/2006 01:46:00 pm 
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
