Coronavirus

Treasury and Cabinet Office Minister resigns after the **** show he's had to oversee regarding the lack of oversight in government contracts handed out to their cronies during the pandemic and the fraud allowed to take place in Covid loans amounting to £4.3b being written off.

Lord Agnew, who was both a Treasury and Cabinet Office minister, dramatically quit his role in Boris Johnson's government in the House of Lords on Monday afternoon.

The peer told the chamber that the Treasury "appears to have no knowledge or little interest in the consequences of fraud to our economy or our society", adding that a mix of "arrogance, indolence and ignorance freezes the government machine".

"My Lords, you can see is my deeply held conviction that the current state of affairs is not acceptable," he told peers.

"Given that I'm the minister for counter fraud, it feels somewhat dishonest to stay on in that role if I'm incapable of doing it properly, let alone defending our track record.

"It is that is for this reason that I've suddenly decided to tender my resignation as a minister across the Treasury and Cabinet Office with immediate effect."

Lord Agnew added: "Total fraud loss across government is estimated at £29bn a year."

Well at least there's one honourable bloke in this cesspit of an excuse for a government.

 

Boris had a birthday party in the first lockdown. Happy belated birthday wishes Boris.

 

Pleased to hear there was cake….

 

Latest update from number 10 mate, it was a 'work birthday'

please log in to view this image

 

please log in to view this image

 

At least he didn't claim it was a woke birthday

 

Met Police to investigate Downing St parties - they have said they will not give running commentary but will give significant updates.

 

The Sue Gray report will now be delayed and will not be available this week, which gives Boris even longer in power, speculation of whether it will now even be available next week, due the Met Police announcing that they will now be investigating the parties.

I remember someone saying a few weeks back, that if the police get involved, it will take so long to investigate, that it would hinder any attempt to remove Boris via the Sue Gray report.

Seems like Boris has been thrown a life jacket.

Edit: Met police have confimed since, the report can be published during ongoing investigations.

 

The Sue Gray report could become evidence and handed over to the police, which could save the police quite a considerable time investigating, as a lot of it would be covered in her report.

 

£20 extra per week for Universal Credit would bankrupt the nation though ....

 

Goowon

 

It would be interesting to see if a Labour government got into power, or any other government ie Liberals, if they would make a £20 per week increase permanent as some MP's were asking for, I believe I even heard Ian Duncan Smith request it not be taken away.

Sadly my guess is, that NO party would do that, because of the amount of money it would cost. I know people can argue, but the Tories have wasted billions, but I still do not believe ANY party would give a £20 a week increase to UC

It's all well and good saying it as the opposition party, but a completely different matter to delivering it themselves, and would voters agree to such an increase, my guess again is no.

 

If it was between this or track and trace i know where i would prefer my money

 

I agree but it wasn't the point I was trying to make. That is that I don't believe any current existing political party in the UK would increase UC by £20 a week. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, saying I'd rather money go in to this, rather than that, Captain hindsight does that all the time. I will await the next GE where it will be party policy if elected that they will go ahead with the £20pw increase. It won't happen.

 

I think Labour's plans are to introduce a fair pay agreement where wages for the poorest paid workers would rise to meet the national living standards. The theory there is to reduce the need for an increase in UC or other benefits, by actually paying people what it costs to live.

So a large proportion of the current shortfall would be picked up by the private sector.

You have to remember that a vast amount of these benefits actually get paid to people who are in work. That in itself says that the wage structure is wrong, when you're working and still can't afford to pay the bills.

 

UC don't include just workers, it includes non workers as well, hence I stand by what I say, NO political party will increase UC by £20 per week to ALL claimants, including those that are on some of the old benefits system, and I know that was going through the High Courts, I don't know what the outcome of that was.

To go just the line of workers is a trait that Boris likes to use, so it excludes certain discriminated against members of our society. I will admit to being quite surprised that you repeat the same line. It's a very selective path to go and one that has ended up in the High Court for discrimination or unfairness at the very least.

 

Yeah, I guess the point is that if you increase wages to meet living standards, then you can afford an uplift for those who are on UC and out of work.

 

If you increase wages to take workers out of UC, then yes that would leave more money for the people that may never work due to disabilities not recognised by other benefit systems, because IDS took a lot of them out of it, well I think it was him when he changed the system. Which is why I find it quite laughable, that he was recently saying the £20pw should stay - I was like, well you're the arsehole that changed the system.

 

Yeah Duncan Smith was a tosser when he was in charge of benefits. Didn't he propose a massive cut to disability benefit and then resign over the same issue ? I can't remember how that played out.

 

I can't remember now tbph, but something we agree on is he is a grade A shhite of the highest order. I think I heard some later excuses he was forced to make certain changes, bullshite, you should have resigned, he might of done as you say, but not sure if it was due to his morals or some other reason linked to it. But to then call for the £20pw to remain, which is the right thing to do, was a bit rich coming from him.