> But, in the light of his decision to launch legal action, Paterson may be glad the government never followed the advice of the prominent Tory who gave a speech in 2014 saying the UK should break free of the European convention on human rights, on which the court adjudicates. That was Paterson himself.
LMAO. Loving the sass, Grauniad
Still can’t get over the leaked official government email threads where Matt Hancock refers to him as “O-Patz” to help him get his covid contracts fast-tracked.
So let’s follow the train of logic here: Mr. Patterson, who was (as I recall) booted off the Parliamentary gravy-train for some fairly blatant cash-for-influence action, now displays the imbecilic arrogance and hypocrisy required to sue the country (i.e. the Crown) which he swore to serve in a court which he wanted removed from the UK; and he’s doing so because his private life (presumably said cash-for-influence deals) was interfered with.
Should we assume, then, that the private lives of other Conservatives also feature similar shady dealings? Should the Standards Committee take a closer look at such people, perhaps?
Is there any merit to his case? Why did Johnson back him so much? Prima facie, it seems super corrupt but I can’t believe so many people would back him without any merit.
4 comments
> But, in the light of his decision to launch legal action, Paterson may be glad the government never followed the advice of the prominent Tory who gave a speech in 2014 saying the UK should break free of the European convention on human rights, on which the court adjudicates. That was Paterson himself.
LMAO. Loving the sass, Grauniad
Still can’t get over the leaked official government email threads where Matt Hancock refers to him as “O-Patz” to help him get his covid contracts fast-tracked.
So let’s follow the train of logic here: Mr. Patterson, who was (as I recall) booted off the Parliamentary gravy-train for some fairly blatant cash-for-influence action, now displays the imbecilic arrogance and hypocrisy required to sue the country (i.e. the Crown) which he swore to serve in a court which he wanted removed from the UK; and he’s doing so because his private life (presumably said cash-for-influence deals) was interfered with.
Should we assume, then, that the private lives of other Conservatives also feature similar shady dealings? Should the Standards Committee take a closer look at such people, perhaps?
Is there any merit to his case? Why did Johnson back him so much? Prima facie, it seems super corrupt but I can’t believe so many people would back him without any merit.