| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
It is madness.Originally Posted by the other bob wilson
If she libels someone in a personal capacity she pays the damages and costs herself.
But if she claims to have committed the libel as a government minister, we pay for her!
Doesn't this breach the ministerial code - or is that so debased now that no one cares?
Penny Mourdant was shameful yesterday in supporting her
I thought does she really think we are stupid ?
No surprise that the board's Conservative voters are giving this thread a wide berth I suppose, but I would have thought something like this goes beyond party politics.
who are the conservative voters on here ?
Well, I would have thought that those who slavishly defend the Government in threads on here are - don't worry, I'm not accusing the Board's "independent thinkers" of being tory voters, they're above such trivial things as party politics unless it's in America.
Small change really that 15k.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics...ate-legal-bill
God you are so divisive!
Agree with me, or you slavishly defend the government!
Surprised you didn't accuse anyone not in agreement of literally taking the money from babies mouths to pay the bill!
The reality of course is far simpler. If someone makes a mistake in the course of their job they rarely pick up the tab. The bloke in the council who lays paving that someone trips on won't be sued personally and it's the same here. Thought you supported workers rights?
Where I would agree is that hopefully it leads to less mudslinging on twitter. Something that demeans every one of us really and will also mean a great many in opposition now will need to wind their necks in if in government!
It's another thing you've been successfully wound up about whereas what you want to see here would set an extremely dangerous principle that would be far more damaging
As someone who doesn't get involved in the right v left spats on here, your comparing faulty paving with a very deliberate libel is totally ingenuous.
You really do pick out arguments that suit your agenda and yet stay almost silent on matters that don’t fit with your narrative. It’s hilarious.
How about commenting on this whopper or many more if required ?
Welsh government admits failing to follow law apparently when cancelling free school meals.
Jeremy Miles who wants to be First Minister said they could not afford to do it.
But they could afford new road signs for 20mph speed limits (costing more)��
And here he comes - slavish defender number one!
Once again, no link I see, but, assuming what you say is right, the WAG are wrong in that case, what more do you want me to say?
That's more than you'll ever get from the slavish defenders of the Westminster Government mind.
Absolutely spot on. Even the most swivel eyed Tory must be able to comprehend the difference between a genuine error during the execution of work and a deliberately provocative and idiotic attack?
The self-serving, intellectually challenged gobshite should have been made to pay all the expenses herself and removed from Westminster unceremoniously by the ear.
So have I got the facts right here:
She wrote a letter to a public body, claiming incorrectly that this professor was a terrorist supporter, with no evidence to support it.
Then chose to make that letter public by tweeting it out.
Lost a defamation case which was then paid by her government department.
is that about right?
to be honest I'm in 2 minds about whether she should pay it herself or her work should pay it. I can see an argument that she thought she was acting in a professional capacity, and £15k is a piss in the ocean of the money the tories have wasted.
However she should definitely lose her job.
She's tried to throw a professor under the bus in order to gain some kind of culture war brownie points - potentially wrecking someone's career in the process - there used to be consequences for this kind of thing, not that long ago.
The point is , it wouldn’t matter who was elected , they are both “cheeks of the same derrière” regardless
It cost the tax payer 15k - is that it ? feck me Wilson havent you got better things to do than jump up and down over 15k?
ps - if you want to know a secret I have some good friends at the beeb in Cardiff both floor staff and some that present. They are conservative with a small c - but they never talk politics at work because due to bullying and abhorrent behaviour of others. To quote one "At work it is like the far left of Starma - like Corbyn on steroids, I just dont respond"
I'll answer your point though to my mind slander is a person thing - unless she was quoting am official Whitehall source - in which case it is definitely a civil service problem - as in they have got their news wrong.
And here’s slavish defender number 2.
Nearly five hours ago, I said in this thread that something like this should be above party politics, it’s just wrong.
No, I just disagree with you for the reasons outlined.
It's not defending her. I just understand why the employer paid. As do you, you just can't seem to think straight if the situation involves a Tory, but that law doesn't discriminate in the same way you do, thankfully!
Again, you are just being divisive. You present a situation that goes with legal precedent and anyone who disagrees is "slavishly" defending something.
Ridiculous.
I notice you have not replied to TBG, not surprising really because he nailed it didn’t he.
The problem with you is that it is really hard to believe we’d see the same reaction if it had been a member of the WAG that did what Michelle Donelan did - same with Pipster.
Legally it's the same principle. She made a libellous mistake in the course of her work. Be careful what you wish for in terms of legal precedent!
Oh right, maybe you can illustrate your point by pointing to all the times I've started threads on WG ministers, the WG in general, or where I have labelled anyone slavish merely for believing in legal precedent?
You'll be wasting your time Bob. Its annoying of course, she shouldn't have done it, but don't pretend this is an honourable thread, as there are far far greater wastes of public money that you choose to overlook for political reasons
Im not quite sure what you actually wanted to happen.
People to not respond to your thread ?
People to respond to your thread (who god forbid) may have disagreed with you - so you can trigger yourself?
Or people to 'slavishly' agree with you - so you can puff your chest out and feel good about yourself ?
The sun is shining - breath in , breath out , go and make love to your wife... you'll have a much better time
Damages for libel and damages due to injury caused by negligence are not the same principle at all.
In terms of the responsibility it clearly is, as this is the precedent and that's why it happened. There's consequences to changing that if it was done in the name of the job, which in this case it was determined it was.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote