- Jul 27, 2024
- 1,069
Same comment for him as for Haigh. Did something stupid like many of us did as teenagers. 20 years ago FFS. Persistent, serial offenders are different. For one-off twattery you have to get another chance.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Politics] Louise Haigh
- Thread starter abc
- Start date
darkwolf666
Well-known member
Interesting definition of twattery, I guess...
nevergoagain
Well-known member
https://news.sky.com/story/louise-haighs-photo-of-stolen-phone-taken-after-alleged-theft-13263796
I can see this unravelling for her very quickly if what sky have suggested is actually true.
I can see this unravelling for her very quickly if what sky have suggested is actually true.
ClemFandango
Well-known member
- Oct 2, 2023
- 199
It was NOT spent when she first put herself forward to be an MP, which was about a year after her court appearance. So in other words she hid that fact from voters in Sheffield. Hence she absolutely deserves the boot now. Btw, I’m guessing you wouldn’t be quite so forgiving if she was a Tory
- Jul 27, 2024
- 1,069
Charming. Some other blinkered NSC halfwit was accusing me of being a Tory just a few hours ago. That’s the trouble with talking about current affairs on a football forum. People can’t get their head around the possibility that you can be interested in politics without being tribal. Party-based political cheerleading diminishes people and their ability to take a reasoned view on anything. It’s why I support some form of proportional representation. It forces consensus on a population that can’t be trusted to manage power when it’s their turn to hold it for a while.
As for Haigh, ok, maybe it wasn’t a spent conviction when she was first elected. Maybe I was wrong about that but I stand by the 'disclosure' point. If she was asked about criminal convictions as part of the electoral registration process and said no, she didn’t have any, that’s unacceptable. If there's no obligation to disclose then she hasn’t ’failed to disclose'. When you go for a job interview and all is going swimmingly, you don’t volunteer the information that you once nicked a phone. Arguably she was an idiot to think it wouldn’t re-emerge courtesy of an enemy somewhere down the line. And it makes her pronouncements about lawmakers not being lawbreakers pretty nauseating. She shouldn’t have got on her high horse there. But I still believe that everyone deserves a second chance, whatever party they represent.
Do we actually know what she declared in 2014 when standing?
ClemFandango
Well-known member
- Oct 2, 2023
- 199
Prospective MPs don’t have to declare as long as they weren’t banged up for 3 months or more. However Starmer fired her as he didn’t feel she’d made full disclosure to him, let alone Sheffield voters. This is from The Times:
Haigh pleaded guilty to fraud by false representation in 2014 after an internal investigation by Aviva, the insurance giant.
The Times has been told that the company launched an investigation after Haigh said that company mobile phones had been stolen or had gone missing on repeated occasions.
Aviva referred the matter to the police and Haigh was prosecuted in 2014. She pleaded guilty at a magistrates’ court. The conviction is now spent, which means it has been removed from her record.
Haigh was elected as MP for Sheffield Heeley in May 2015. Electoral rules disqualify people from standing only if they have been sentenced to three months or more in jail without the option of a fine.
Aged 37, Haigh was the youngest member of the cabinet. She has never publicly declared her conviction even when making judgments about political rivals who had dealings with the police.
Sources close to Haigh said that she reported the matter “in full” to Sir Keir Starmer when she joined the shadow cabinet in 2020.
However, Morgan McSweeney, Starmer’s chief of staff, advised her to resign when No 10 became concerned that Haigh had not revealed all the details of the conviction after a report in The Times.
Starmer was also concerned that Haigh did not declare the conviction to the Cabinet Office’s propriety and ethics team in line with the ministerial code, which requires government ministers to behave with transparency and honesty. Allies of Haigh suggested that she did not need to do so because the conviction was spent
Haigh pleaded guilty to fraud by false representation in 2014 after an internal investigation by Aviva, the insurance giant.
The Times has been told that the company launched an investigation after Haigh said that company mobile phones had been stolen or had gone missing on repeated occasions.
Aviva referred the matter to the police and Haigh was prosecuted in 2014. She pleaded guilty at a magistrates’ court. The conviction is now spent, which means it has been removed from her record.
Haigh was elected as MP for Sheffield Heeley in May 2015. Electoral rules disqualify people from standing only if they have been sentenced to three months or more in jail without the option of a fine.
Aged 37, Haigh was the youngest member of the cabinet. She has never publicly declared her conviction even when making judgments about political rivals who had dealings with the police.
Sources close to Haigh said that she reported the matter “in full” to Sir Keir Starmer when she joined the shadow cabinet in 2020.
However, Morgan McSweeney, Starmer’s chief of staff, advised her to resign when No 10 became concerned that Haigh had not revealed all the details of the conviction after a report in The Times.
Starmer was also concerned that Haigh did not declare the conviction to the Cabinet Office’s propriety and ethics team in line with the ministerial code, which requires government ministers to behave with transparency and honesty. Allies of Haigh suggested that she did not need to do so because the conviction was spent
“If we win this, how would you feel about becoming my Minister for Transport?”
“Do I get a phone?”
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
A conditional discharge conviction is spent straightaway, not a year later.
Check if you need to tell someone about your criminal record
When to tell a potential employer, university, college or insurance company about a criminal record, when it becomes 'spent' and what shows up on a DBS check.
Now there's an honourable news source with th UK's best interests at heart.
The king has spoken.
ClemFandango
Well-known member
- Oct 2, 2023
- 199
What do you consider an honorable news source? Genuinely interested
I read the Guardian and BBC online , FT weekend, news on TV is usually BBC1 or 2 or sometimes C4
Sky may not be that bad according to this, but its Murdoh, so 10 000 demerit points IMO
Which media outlets do Britons trust in 2023? | YouGov
The BBC and FT top the list, depending on how you measure it
yougov.co.uk
Is it PotG?
Thrifty non-licker
Found this quote quite interesting. The difference is quite stark.I read the Guardian and BBC online , FT weekend, news on TV is usually BBC1 or 2 or sometimes C4
Sky may not be that bad according to this, but its Murdoh, so 10 000 demerit points IMO
Which media outlets do Britons trust in 2023? | YouGov
The BBC and FT top the list, depending on how you measure it
"Comparing the levels of trust between Conservative and Labour voters reveals which outlets are the most divisive politically.
The largest difference applies to The Guardian. While the paper receives a net score of +41 among those who voted Labour in 2019, among Conservatives it scores -6."
The Grauniad, like the Telegraph, are both well written but politically biased. So deeply opinionated people wil praise/slag regardless.
whilst its very easy to be drawn in by lies and bull shit it is also quite easyy to check facts.
I do read 'opinion' and at least the Guardian has the balls to publish it as such, I don't always agree with it.
Is it PotG?
Thrifty non-licker
I've mentioned before that their TV, fillum and music reviews tend to be pretty good and balanced.....the rest of it I take with a massive scoop of salt.
Well you got that completely wrong.
@Professor Plum is not a Labour supporter I would suggest, from his posts, which are, I should add, perfectly well argued and sensible, if somewhat to the right of me.
And I say that as a Labour man. Which presumably means you automatically agree with me. Which is nice.
Still, mustn't grumble about a bit of blue-on-blue fisticuffs
Edit, for clarity, the last comment was meant as mischief. In case I whoosh anyone else this weekend
Last edited:
That seems to explain the entire matter fully.
Thanks for posting.
It all makes complete sense now.
Anyone trying to make anti-Starmer capital out of it would be wise to stop, now, or risk appearing bitchy and spiteful.
Wallace
Active member
- Nov 9, 2016
- 186
So having previous voted UKIP in my life that makes me a wife beater, really?? Do you want to check your facts with my wife before you post such malicious nonsense?
ROSM
Well-known member
I don't know if you are Wallace or gregg Wallace. But just to be clear I am talking about the reform uk mp who claimed his conviction was for gently pushing someone when it turns out he full on hit and kicked his girlfriend causing her ro require hospital treatment. It was aimed at a specific person not the people who vote ukip in general