frogwoman
No amount of cajolery...
yep.
honestly i'm starting to think you're right killer b, he's fucked and will resign at the end of the year
Missing Milly Dowler's voicemail "hacked by News of the World"
- Thread starter editor
- Start date
yep.
honestly i'm starting to think you're right killer b, he's fucked and will resign at the end of the year
claphamboy
The wheels on the bus go round and round....
Yay!
I've done two bets like this before on urban, which have benefited the server fund, IIRC, at the expense of Sass & Citizen66.
two sheds
Least noticed poster 2007
Come on, be fair. When you've spent £680,000 on getting Downing Street nice for Samantha there's obviously not going to be a lot left for security vetting key personnel.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/may/27/david-cameron-taxpayers-home-improvements
King Biscuit Time
Well-Known Member
Interestingly, odds on Cameron not surviving 2011 as PM have lengthened today (on Paddy Power at least) from 4/1 to 5/1.
I notice a lot of people are under scrutiny over this scandal but nobody is looking at editor and the server fund here?
Kaka Tim
Half Arsed and Slapdash till I Die
The story about News Interantional hacking - and putting under surveilance - the lawyers working for hacking victims is yet more evidence of how they operated. Industrial scale Intimidation and snooping into the private lives of anyone of interest to them. A large part of that was to generate stories but - far more seriously - the other arm was to use that info to threaten and control politicians, public servants, policeman and anyone else either threatened or who could be useful to them. That - to me - is the real corruption at the heart of this scandal and is rarely getting explained in those terms.
This is not about the media 'overstepping the mark' - its about a fucking gangster organisation calling the shots at the heart of the body politic.
Btw - if its proved they were doing this to the lawyers - would that be 'conspiracy to pervert the course of justice'? Like proper prison time.
This is not about the media 'overstepping the mark' - its about a fucking gangster organisation calling the shots at the heart of the body politic.
Btw - if its proved they were doing this to the lawyers - would that be 'conspiracy to pervert the course of justice'? Like proper prison time.
agricola
a genuine importer of owls
Thats the thing though - under this government, it was not "standard practice". From the Grauniad piece (emphasis mine):
If he (Oliver) is only undergoing this process now, then he didnt at the time of his appointment. That Labour spin doctors underwent DV in order to get access to secret material is not especially relevant, indeed as I said above that they did have access, and what they went on to do with that access, was a flagrant abuse anyway.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Well how long does DV take?
invisibleplanet
porter des cornes
I found this video there - it's a bit silly, and I'd have preferred to see a review of electoral pledges and broken promises, but never mind:
agricola
a genuine importer of owls
He did leak stuff to the press (albeit at Blair's behest), and his misuse / mischaracterization of intelligence sources for political ends should be well known.
weltweit
Well-Known Member
Well I was amazed that he seems to have escaped completely unscathed after the dodgy dossier episode.
agricola
a genuine importer of owls
No idea, though I would guess that it would be less than five months.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Just wondering as that would be the only excuse for the new one still undergoing DV, or them not having set up a group of people already vetted as standard. (Given that they will be there - without going into whether they should be)
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Ta. Sure it's out there somewhere.
agricola
a genuine importer of owls
TBH I think its more likely that he and the rest of the SPADs / political appointees (at least those in the departments where DV wasnt an issue) werent, but now that this line of attack has opened they have panicked and are shoving everyone through it. As for the "group of people already vetted", of course the relevant civil servants would have undergone DV checks and would be handling this material anyway (which is another reason why political appointees shouldnt be given access to it, there is no legitimate need).
invisibleplanet
porter des cornes
And, let's face it, the whole process is bizarre and alarming: currently we've got a Doctor of Medicine looking after Defence, a Hack looking after Education, a BA Modern History in charge of the Exchequer, and someone with a Bachelors in European Studies looking after Environment/Agriculture/Rural Affairs.
DaveCinzano
WATCH OUT, GEORGE, HE'S GOT A SCREWDRIVER!
Various responses from readers to the Guardian live blog yesterday and today put the parameters between around three weeks on a rush job to about six months for those which involve more checking.
It depends on how complicated the life that is being vetted, but several years ago it was around 6 months. Now with online personae, etc.. it could be a lot more work.
ETA: ...or the thoroughness of the vetting has been skimped on....
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Cheers both
Idris2002
canadian girlfriend
In the old days, that didn't matter because it was assumed that they'd have the intellectual chops to decipher advice from civil servants and make decisions accordingly. But that depended on a non-political civil service, and once that prop was kicked away. . . (I think there was a paper about this in the Socialist Register some years back)
E2A: I think it may have been this article. I can't get at the text, but here's abstract:
The cynical state
Colin Leys
Abstract
In recent years state cynicism has broken new ground. The British government's flagrant abuse of military intelligence to persuade parliament and the public to endorse its attack on Iraq was a dramatic case in point. Most famously, Blair told the House of Commons that it was 'completely and totally untrue' that there was disquiet in the intelligence community over the 45-minute claim, but a senior intelligence officer told the enquiry that he and one of his colleagues had submitted a written report about their disquiet. These stories, which could be replicated for almost any field of public policy in contemporary Britain, illustrate the emergence of a new, neoliberal policy regime that is more brazenly willing to dissemble, more indifferent to evidence, more aggressive towards critics and distinctly less accountable--to the point of being virtually unaccountable--than ever before. This policy regime is not peculiarly British. The old 'liberal/social democratic' policy regime which it has displaced did have distinctively British features. The new neoliberal policy regime is a more standardized affair. It not only spans the Atlantic but thanks to neoliberal globalization it is being gradually replicated, in essentials, throughout the world. Its key feature is that policy is now fundamentally about national competitiveness and responding to global market forces. The crucial roles are played neither by political parties nor by civil servants but by personnel seconded into the civil service from the private sector, a handful of 'special advisers' to the prime minister, a small group of certified market-friendly civil servants, and polling, advertising and media experts. Scientific evidence is still relied on, but only in so far as it serves competition policy; otherwise it is treated uncritically, if it helps the government, and dismissed if it does not. When this new policy regime is properly understood the lies about Iraq no longer appear as a special case, but only as a special dimension of a general one. Cynicism, we realize, is a necessary condition of neoliberal democracy.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
Grauniad questions to Cameron re vetting:
1. Was Andy Coulson asked to undergo developed vetting (DV)?
2. Did Coulson decline to undergo developed vetting?
3. Which Downing Street and/or Cabinet Office officials decided that it would be appropriate for Coulson to be vetted at the lower "security check" level?
4. Was the prime minister involved in the decision to have Coulson vetted at the lower SC level, or informed after it was taken by officials?
5. Were other officials and ministers who might ordinarily have expected a No 10 press secretary to have DV clearance informed that he was not vetted to that level?
6. What meetings did Coulson attend relating to national security issues, the war in Afghanistan or counter-terrorism?
7. Was Coulson interviewed as part of the process of his security vetting?
8. If it was not considered necessary for Coulson to have DV clearance why are both his successor and his former deputy undergoing developed vetting?
1. Was Andy Coulson asked to undergo developed vetting (DV)?
2. Did Coulson decline to undergo developed vetting?
3. Which Downing Street and/or Cabinet Office officials decided that it would be appropriate for Coulson to be vetted at the lower "security check" level?
4. Was the prime minister involved in the decision to have Coulson vetted at the lower SC level, or informed after it was taken by officials?
5. Were other officials and ministers who might ordinarily have expected a No 10 press secretary to have DV clearance informed that he was not vetted to that level?
6. What meetings did Coulson attend relating to national security issues, the war in Afghanistan or counter-terrorism?
7. Was Coulson interviewed as part of the process of his security vetting?
8. If it was not considered necessary for Coulson to have DV clearance why are both his successor and his former deputy undergoing developed vetting?
agricola
a genuine importer of owls
I have a couple of friends who work at AWE in Aldermarston and their background checks both took about 4 months and they were very detailed.
Barking_Mad
Non sibi sed omnibus
I had a friend who had to be vetted by the MoD, he put me down as his referee. Some weeks later I had a guy turn up in a dark grey pinstripe suit, brolley, and black briefcase knock on the door. He asked me a series of questions including "Has your friend ever shown homosexual tendancies?".
All quite surreal.
agricola
a genuine importer of owls
ferrelhadley
There is no love between us anymore.
editor
hiraethified
The Mirror have kept an uncharacteristic low profile during this scandal. And here's why!
Similar threads
