Is Cameron himself safe ??

TonyfaceTonyface Posts: 1,602
Forum Member
✭✭✭
This Pre- Election BBC article, shows that it is not inconceivable that Jeremy Hunt was actually acting on the direct instructions of David Cameron.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8601711.stm

If it transpires that his pre- 2010 election statements on policy about removing many of Ofcoms powers if not abolishing it entirely and reducing the size of the BBC, were at the behest of Murdoch should he resign.

PS: Please no blind towing the Party line answers.

Personally, I do not actually think that it would be a resigning matter for a PM, provided that Governments actually learn from this, my bigger concern with all of this is that we may not learn anything from it and Governments of all persuasions will just keep rolling along, in representing their vested interests rather than the people that elect them.
«13

Comments

  • AnnsyreAnnsyre Posts: 109,476
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭
    Tonyface wrote: »
    This Pre- Election BBC article, shows that it is not inconceivable that Jeremy Hunt was actually acting on the direct instructions of David Cameron.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8601711.stm

    If it transpires that his pre- 2010 election statements on policy about removing many of Ofcoms powers if not abolishing it entirely and reducing the size of the BBC, were at the behest of Murdoch should he resign.

    PS: Please no blind towing the Party line answers.

    Personally, I do not actually think that it would be a resigning matter for a PM, provided that Governments actually learn from this, my bigger concern with all of this is that we may not learn anything from it and Governments of all persuasions will just keep rolling along, in representing their vested interests rather than the people that elect them.

    Towing the party line means dragging or pulling it along.

    Did you mean toeing?
  • Transient1Transient1 Posts: 1,185
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Tonyface wrote: »
    This Pre- Election BBC article, shows that it is not inconceivable that Jeremy Hunt was actually acting on the direct instructions of David Cameron.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8601711.stm

    If it transpires that his pre- 2010 election statements on policy about removing many of Ofcoms powers if not abolishing it entirely and reducing the size of the BBC, were at the behest of Murdoch should he resign.

    PS: Please no blind towing the Party line answers.

    Personally, I do not actually think that it would be a resigning matter for a PM, provided that Governments actually learn from this, my bigger concern with all of this is that we may not learn anything from it and Governments of all persuasions will just keep rolling along, in representing their vested interests rather than the people that elect them.

    I agree entirely with the conclusions you have drawn in your last paragraph.
  • glasshalffullglasshalffull Posts: 22,291
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Of course he is...other than Bill Cash or Peter Bone who else is barmy enough within the Conservative Party to try to get rid of him...and an Act passed in Nov 2011 prevents a General Election before May 2015...which would probably see him resign or dumped if the tories lose it.
  • TonyfaceTonyface Posts: 1,602
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Annsyre wrote: »
    Towing the party line means dragging or pulling it along.

    Did you mean toeing?

    OOPs yes well doen.
  • AnnsyreAnnsyre Posts: 109,476
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭
    Tonyface wrote: »
    OOPs yes well doen.

    Well at risk of being accused of toeing the party line I would say that replacing either Cameron or Miliband as leader would be an act of politically folly at present.
  • TonyfaceTonyface Posts: 1,602
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Annsyre wrote: »
    Well at risk of being accused of toeing the party line I would say that replacing either Cameron or Miliband as leader would be an act of politically folly at present.

    The reason that I think that it is not a resigning offence, because at the time in 2010 it was the accepted way of doing things.

    I think that there are still quite a few revelations to come out of this inquiry, and that the manner in which Lord Leveson is sticking to his schedule and line of questioning is indicative of this.

    What will be interesting is how the politicians deal with his ultimate findings and recommendations on how they conduct themselves in the future.
  • Transient1Transient1 Posts: 1,185
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Tonyface wrote: »
    The reason that I think that it is not a resigning offence, because at the time in 2010 it was the accepted way of doing things.

    I think that there are still quite a few revelations to come out of this inquiry, and that the manner in which Lord Leveson is sticking to his schedule and line of questioning is indicative of this.

    What will be interesting is how the politicians deal with his ultimate findings and recommendations on how they conduct themselves.

    Yes I agree with you completely. Cameron was basically sticking to a precedent set by his predecessors from Maggie's time onwards with maybe the exception of John Major and again I think your last paragraph is spot on.
  • Hit Em Up StyleHit Em Up Style Posts: 12,141
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    All this proves is that the Tories haven't changed at all.

    Hope more does come out. This lot being a one term government is the best thing for all of us.
  • MesostimMesostim Posts: 52,864
    Forum Member
    Thye'd just keep sacking lesser members... maybe recruit a few new ones if they ran out.
  • psionicpsionic Posts: 20,188
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Cameron himself will be fine IMHO. Worse case is Hunt will fall on his sword.
  • David TeeDavid Tee Posts: 22,833
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    All this proves is that the Tories haven't changed at all.

    Hope more does come out. This lot being a one term government is the best thing for all of us.

    Maybe the best for you - personally I'd much rather stick with this lot as the alternatives are completely unacceptable.

    The only threat to Cameron will come from his own party. That may well happen.
  • Hit Em Up StyleHit Em Up Style Posts: 12,141
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    David Tee wrote: »
    Maybe the best for you - personally I'd much rather stick with this lot as the alternatives are completely unacceptable.

    The only threat to Cameron will come from his own party. That may well happen.

    A party doing dodgy deals behind closed doors is corrupt if you ask me and therefore unfit to govern a country.

    In the words of Osbourne they have lost their mandate to govern if any of this turns out to be true.
  • AnnsyreAnnsyre Posts: 109,476
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭
    Tonyface wrote: »
    The reason that I think that it is not a resigning offence, because at the time in 2010 it was the accepted way of doing things.

    I think that there are still quite a few revelations to come out of this inquiry, and that the manner in which Lord Leveson is sticking to his schedule and line of questioning is indicative of this.

    What will be interesting is how the politicians deal with his ultimate findings and recommendations on how they conduct themselves in the future.

    Leveson wont be finished for at least another eighteen months and the police enquiry is ongoing.

    But this is now. And there are local elections coming up and those should be the focus of politicians right now.imo.

    Tom Watson who is Labour's election co-ordinator is currently schlepping round various media studios to bang on about the Murdochs. So obviously he has already co-ordinated Labour's campaign. Or, if he hasn't, he will do it next Monday or Tuesday or Wednesday in time for the elections on Thursday.

    I know what's going on in my local area but the local elections have been virtually blanked out by incessant focus on the Murdochs. They of course have swanned off and to date nothing has been resolved and wont be any time soon.

    Once the elections are over and Parliament is back from recess things should liven up. and we will be in a better position to judge Party Leaders.
  • David TeeDavid Tee Posts: 22,833
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    A party doing dodgy deals behind closed doors is corrupt if you ask me and therefore unfit to govern a country.

    In the words of Osbourne they have lost their mandate to govern if any of this turns out to be true.

    First off - this isn't a party, it's a Coalition, Second, a party doesn't do a dodgy deal - an individual / or individuals do. Third, if there is evidence of corruption, people resign and others take their place. That's how it works in the real world.

    Oh - and fourth, all "parties" have probably done dodgy deals - Ecclestone and Blair being an glaringly obvious example. Perhaps you could remind me whether that brought down the Government?
  • jcafcwjcafcw Posts: 11,282
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Cameron's survival will depend on the public perception of the proceedings. I don't think the public in general are at the moment that bothered by proceedings once you get beyond politicos like us. There may be a tutting but the the average man on the street doesn't spend a lot of his day thinking about this inquiry.

    What is the biggest danger for Cameron is the economy. The lead Labour finds itself having is more down to the recession being back in the news than the inquiry.

    It will take something big and concerted effort from the media for Cameron to look like enough of a lame duck from this inquiry.
  • TassiumTassium Posts: 31,639
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    From the BBC article at top (April 2010)

    ....But some people say the Tories are in hock to Rupert Murdoch - the Sun has come out in favour of the Conservatives - that their media policy is being written by Rupert and James Murdoch.

    "It's absolute nonsense," said Mr Hunt. "There is a great conspiracy theory that's been particularly peddled in the Guardian but I think you just have to look at the whole record.

    "Eighteen months ago David Cameron wrote an article in the Sun of all places, defending the principle of the licence fee. This is not someone who is trying to suck up the Murdochs.


    It's clear that David Cameron is a lying liar from castle lie, just off the coast of the Isle of Lies.
    Absolute blatant woppers, he knows what will convince people and has no shame/morals whatsoever in saying it.


    He might go, the GE is 3 years away after all. Who knows what might arise.
  • AnnsyreAnnsyre Posts: 109,476
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭
    jcafcw wrote: »
    Cameron's survival will depend on the public perception of the proceedings. I don't think the public in general are at the moment that bothered by proceedings once you get beyond politicos like us. There may be a tutting but the the average man on the street doesn't spend a lot of his day thinking about this inquiry.

    What is the biggest danger for Cameron is the economy. The lead Labour finds itself having is more down to the recession being back in the news than the inquiry.

    It will take something big and concerted effort from the media for Cameron to look like enough of a lame duck from this inquiry.

    I entirely agree.
  • David TeeDavid Tee Posts: 22,833
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Annsyre wrote: »
    Leveson wont be finished for at least another eighteen months and the police enquiry is ongoing.

    But this is now. And there are local elections coming up and those should be the focus of politicians right now.imo.

    Tom Watson who is Labour's election co-ordinator is currently schlepping round various media studios to bang on about the Murdochs. So obviously he has already co-ordinated Labour's campaign. Or, if he hasn't, he will do it next Monday or Tuesday or Wednesday in time for the elections on Thursday.

    I know what's going on in my local area but the local elections have been virtually blanked out by incessant focus on the Murdochs. They of course have swanned off and to date nothing has been resolved and wont be any time soon.

    Once the elections are over and Parliament is back from recess things should liven up. and we will be in a better position to judge Party Leaders.

    Of course he is. He has a book out on the subject - published just 9 days ago.

    Coincidence or impeccable timing?
  • LostFoolLostFool Posts: 90,623
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    jcafcw wrote: »
    What is the biggest danger for Cameron is the economy. The lead Labour finds itself having is more down to the recession being back in the news than the inquiry.

    Without a doubt. If the economy is on the way up by 2015 then the Tories will win the election (with or without the Lib Dems), if is is still in the doldrums then Labour will win as the public will be ready for "Plan B". Nothing else really matters.
  • john176bramleyjohn176bramley Posts: 25,049
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Tonyface wrote: »
    The reason that I think that it is not a resigning offence, because at the time in 2010 it was the accepted way of doing things.

    I think that there are still quite a few revelations to come out of this inquiry, and that the manner in which Lord Leveson is sticking to his schedule and line of questioning is indicative of this.

    What will be interesting is how the politicians deal with his ultimate findings and recommendations on how they conduct themselves in the future.

    Perhaps Cameron could be forgiven but two things would need to happen.

    1. He would need to admit he was acting on Murdoch's orders.

    2. He would have to admit he was wrong to do so.

    Neither of these things will ever happen.
  • AiramAiram Posts: 6,764
    Forum Member
    Cameron's safe as leader of the Tories because there's nobody else who's captured the electorate's attention as a possible alternative.

    As PM, his position depends on the durability of the coalition and if it falls, then the electorate will have to decide on the least bad option for PM - that could still be Cameron.
  • AnnsyreAnnsyre Posts: 109,476
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭
    David Tee wrote: »
    Of course he is. He has a book out on the subject - published just 9 days ago.

    Coincidence or impeccable timing?

    Obviously just coincidental.:D
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 6,400
    Forum Member
    Its not wether Cameron survives, its Osborne whos getting pulled into this more & more. He was the instigator of appointing Coulson, he suggested Hunt for the role of 'judging' the BskyB bid, he is one of the main driving forces in getting NI's backing , its he who has a lot of questions to answer & very important ones at that.

    Labour have very little to do other than present PlanB properley, as the lines go 'never interupt your eneny when they are making mistakes'

    Cameron & Osbornes desperation to become PM & chancellor was always going to be their undoing & so far they are doing a fine job of showing it.

    :)
  • clinchclinch Posts: 11,574
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Tassium wrote: »
    It's clear that David Cameron is a lying liar from castle lie, just off the coast of the Isle of Lies.
    Absolute blatant woppers, he knows what will convince people and has no shame/morals whatsoever in saying it.


    He might go, the GE is 3 years away after all. Who knows what might arise.

    And if the Tories are kicked out the odds are they will be replaced by another set of lying, cheating, fiddling, inept toerags in the form of the Milibands, Ballses et al. They are just the same, if not worse.Amongst the emails revealed by Leveson there were also attempts by Lib Dems to suck up to the Murdochs. The Lib Dems have also had problems with donations, and the SNP have also been caught out in the Murdoch emails. The whole lot are rotten to the core.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 446
    Forum Member
    I thought this was going to be a remake of Marathon Man.... is it safe, is it ?? :o
Sign In or Register to comment.