| Why am I not surprised that they were 'forced' into doing this? on 08:05 - Dec 5 with 1163 views | MattinLondon |
Why did they try and not do the decent thing? I’ve just read a couple of articles but neither went into detail highlighting why they opposed the amendment. |  | |  |
| Why am I not surprised that they were 'forced' into doing this? on 08:36 - Dec 5 with 1093 views | bluelagos |
| Why am I not surprised that they were 'forced' into doing this? on 08:05 - Dec 5 by MattinLondon |
Why did they try and not do the decent thing? I’ve just read a couple of articles but neither went into detail highlighting why they opposed the amendment. |
The Tories claimed they were going to address the claims once the inquiry had completed (in March?)
But the campaigners had little faith in them sticking to their word.
Also last night the Tories voted down an amendment to enshrine a Duty of Candour for public servants at inquiries. (Drafted in response to the police lieing with impunity at the Hillsborough inquests)
This Wednesday the govt. will make their response to the Bishop's report (only taken 6 years) which called for a Duty of Candour for public servants...Am at an event Wednesday at Parliament on this but not really sure what to expect tbh.
For me, any duty of candour has to have the backing of criminal sanctions if it is broken. Otherwise it's nothing more than window dressing. Will see... |  |
| |
| Why am I not surprised that they were 'forced' into doing this? on 08:39 - Dec 5 with 1085 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Why am I not surprised that they were 'forced' into doing this? on 08:36 - Dec 5 by bluelagos |
The Tories claimed they were going to address the claims once the inquiry had completed (in March?)
But the campaigners had little faith in them sticking to their word.
Also last night the Tories voted down an amendment to enshrine a Duty of Candour for public servants at inquiries. (Drafted in response to the police lieing with impunity at the Hillsborough inquests)
This Wednesday the govt. will make their response to the Bishop's report (only taken 6 years) which called for a Duty of Candour for public servants...Am at an event Wednesday at Parliament on this but not really sure what to expect tbh.
For me, any duty of candour has to have the backing of criminal sanctions if it is broken. Otherwise it's nothing more than window dressing. Will see... |
It is a consistent plan of this government (and perhaps others) to delay expenditure whenever possible. They make a fortune out of it. See, for instance, backdated public sector pay awards.
They also want to land the next government with this issue in their budget, rather than having to deal with it now. |  | | |
| Why am I not surprised that they were 'forced' into doing this? on 08:51 - Dec 5 with 1046 views | bluelagos |
| Why am I not surprised that they were 'forced' into doing this? on 08:39 - Dec 5 by redrickstuhaart |
It is a consistent plan of this government (and perhaps others) to delay expenditure whenever possible. They make a fortune out of it. See, for instance, backdated public sector pay awards.
They also want to land the next government with this issue in their budget, rather than having to deal with it now. |
Think that's hard to argue against. The case for a compensation scheme is pretty overwhelming. | |
| |
| Why am I not surprised that they were 'forced' into doing this? on 09:22 - Dec 5 with 983 views | MattinLondon |
| Why am I not surprised that they were 'forced' into doing this? on 08:36 - Dec 5 by bluelagos |
The Tories claimed they were going to address the claims once the inquiry had completed (in March?)
But the campaigners had little faith in them sticking to their word.
Also last night the Tories voted down an amendment to enshrine a Duty of Candour for public servants at inquiries. (Drafted in response to the police lieing with impunity at the Hillsborough inquests)
This Wednesday the govt. will make their response to the Bishop's report (only taken 6 years) which called for a Duty of Candour for public servants...Am at an event Wednesday at Parliament on this but not really sure what to expect tbh.
For me, any duty of candour has to have the backing of criminal sanctions if it is broken. Otherwise it's nothing more than window dressing. Will see... |
In my naïvety, until quite recently I always thought that people had to tell the truth at inquests - and if found to have lied then they would face serious sanction. I was really shocked when I found out that this was not the case. | | | |
| Why am I not surprised that they were 'forced' into doing this? on 10:36 - Dec 5 with 924 views | EdwardStone |
| Why am I not surprised that they were 'forced' into doing this? on 08:05 - Dec 5 by MattinLondon |
Why did they try and not do the decent thing? I’ve just read a couple of articles but neither went into detail highlighting why they opposed the amendment. |
This wretched Govt and the Tory ones before have spent ages delaying any compensation.
I guess there hope is that all and any claimants would expire before payment had to be made. ( See also Post Office Horizon scandal)
It makes them look devious, shallow and uncaring.
There was always a sound case for immediate interim payment to allow these poor souls some comfort whilst the full settlement details were finalised.
Strange how there seems to be unlimited cash in the kitty for Rwanda vanity scheme but no money available for righting these very obvious wrongs.
I guess it is all about political choices and the moral compass of those who make these decisions |  | | |
| Why am I not surprised that they were 'forced' into doing this? on 15:45 - Dec 5 with 793 views | BlueBadger |
| Why am I not surprised that they were 'forced' into doing this? on 10:36 - Dec 5 by EdwardStone |
This wretched Govt and the Tory ones before have spent ages delaying any compensation.
I guess there hope is that all and any claimants would expire before payment had to be made. ( See also Post Office Horizon scandal)
It makes them look devious, shallow and uncaring.
There was always a sound case for immediate interim payment to allow these poor souls some comfort whilst the full settlement details were finalised.
Strange how there seems to be unlimited cash in the kitty for Rwanda vanity scheme but no money available for righting these very obvious wrongs.
I guess it is all about political choices and the moral compass of those who make these decisions |
'It makes them look devious, shallow and uncaring.'
There's a reason for that. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
