Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
There have been calls today for Mr Osbourne to apologise to Ed Balls over his accusation that ed balls was involved in his latest libor scandal.
Mr tucker made it clear no politician got involved.
should now mr osbourne apologise for his false allegation?
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
He has absolutely nothing to apologise for.
Try reading what Osborne actually said.
He said Balls has questions to answer. He is absolutely right. There are accusations that Labour Ministers applied pressure on Barclays Bank, not the Bank of England.
What the shifty Tucker said was nothing to do with that.
What we see here and in the left wing media is a classic smokescreen to divert attention from what the real question marks are over Balls.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
Mr Tucker appeared to indicate no politician was involved in either part, i would say barryw it is you that is trying to provide a smoke screen whilst your party falls apart in yet another issue
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Tucker can only speak for the Bank of England and would have no direct knowledge of what 'someone close to Brown' might have said to Barclays.
Try reading what was said Keith and thinking a bit before posting.
The reaction of Balls does make me wonder what he has to hide.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
"Speaking in the Commons, attorney general Dominic Grieve said pursing criminal charges could push back an investigation, although the joint-committee is likely to push ahead on the basis of continued legal advice.
The news came amid a temporary ceasefire between George Osborne and Ed Balls, after the chancellor admitted his counterpart was not directly involved in the Libor scandal.
The admission came just hours after Balls had challenged Osborne to apologise to him in the Commons, saying: "If he has any evidence he must produce it now.
"If he will not provide the evidence now he needs to stand at this despatch box now and withdraw this accusation."
The chancellor refused too back down in the Commons but hours after the debate his aides told sources at the BBC that Balls had not directly intervened in the affair"
From...
http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2012/07/06/burying-the-hatchet-osborne-retracts-balls-accusations
Might this explain why the accusation was made....
"...The chancellor's decision to personally involve Balls made cross-party consensus even harder to achieve than it was before, hijacking his own attempt to force through a joint-parliamentary inquiry..."
From the same article.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
All Osborne said was that Balls had questions to answer, he has.
Look at the actual words in the article in question:
'He starts by blaming the regulatory system devised by Brown and Balls for allowing these abuses to happen. But suddenly, and far more explosively, he moves on to the political efforts to keep Libor low during the financial crisis of 2008. 'As for the role of the Labour government and the people around Gordon Brown — well I think there are questions to be asked of them,' he says. He starts to discuss reports that those in the Brown circle were pressuring Barclays to manipulate the Libor rate it was paying. Then he drops a bombshell: 'They were clearly involved and we just haven't heard the full facts, I don't think, of who knew what when.'
All of the above is fair enough with no specific individual fingered and he highlights some clear issues that need to be answered. he goes on later in the interview and says:
'My opposite number was the City minister for part of this period and Gordon Brown's right hand man for all of it. So he has questions to answer as well. That's Ed Balls, by the way.'
That seems fair enough to me. Balls certainly does have questions to answer and his hysterical reaction to this article suggests he has something to hide.l
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
Andrea Leadsom MP, who is on the Treasury Select Committee and a leading Conservative to boot, said on the radio this morning that "Mr Osborne made a mistake and he should apologise".
I saw some of these nasty exchanges in The House which was shown live on the ol parliamentary channel and you can see Balls is clearly confident that he has nothing to answer for. If a guy in his shoes did have something to answer for they wouldnt be quite so robust in defence. I think the trend of blaming the previous administration for absolutely everything may have gone too far this time. Its habit forming isnt it..blaming the previous government, so before a current HMG chap knows what he's saying he has landed himself in it.
It would be a heck of a moment in politics if Osborne did apologise. It probably wont happen but Labour will get considerable mileage out of his discomfort in the meantime.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
yes. and its a little sad that other aides of his have to apologise on his behalf
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
I have said it, there is nothing to apologise for.
Explain what such an apology should be for Keith?
For saying Balls has questions to answer?
Being City Minister at the time of the crisis and when the Libor fiddling was happening does mean he has questions to answer.
He also has to answer the allegations made by Dianond about pressure placed on Barclays from 'people around Gordon Brown'. We certainly have not 'heard the full facts'.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
osborne has managed to make ed b*lls look good, something previously look unlikely.
trying to make it into a left wing conspiracy is crass, all the right wing press agree that osborne was in the wrong.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
No Howard, I disagree with everything in your post. Answer the questions as to what should be apologised for, ignoring Balls hysterical smokescreen.
Imagine it was a Tory Minister at the time, I am sure that you and Keith would be claiming such a Minister would have questions to answer.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
trying to turn this into a party issue is not on barry, this is what paulb referred to.
this lady is hardly a red.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9388591/Libor-scandal-Osborne-should-apologise-to-Balls-says-Tory.htmlGuest 715- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 2,438
If Osborne shot Balls there are those that would say he dived in front of the bullet
Audere est facere.
Guest 683- Registered: 11 Feb 2009
- Posts: 1,052
He should apologise for bringing the House into disrepute (if it is possible to drag its profile any lower!).
The Tories are positioning themselves for a hoped for election thus showing once more how out of touch they are with reality - they will not be voted in.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
You have still not answered Howard.
He was the responsible City minister at the time the scandal was taking place. Are you saying that he has no answers to give and that everything that needs to be known is known?
He may or may not have done anything wrong, Osborne did not say he had, he just said he has questions to answer. He has.
The comment from the Leadstrom is weird. She seems not to understand exactly what Osborne said and bought the Balls hysteria. The allegations are about pressure on Barclays by people 'close to Brown' not the Bank of England and only the BoE rep has spoken and he referred and can only refer to the BoE. Even then he was clearly doing some very careful 'footwork' to put it carefully.
If any of you can show where Osborne suggested Balls pressurised the Bank of England then you will prove me wrong - but you cannot, whereas I has gone direct to the interview to demonstrate what was actually said.
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
ok lets get this staright,ed balls has got as his name suggests,osbourne has none so should withdraw his statement and apolgize.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
barry
it is perfectly obvious that the chancellor has used the classic smear used by politicians and others over the ages.
by stating "he has got questions to answer" he has used the "no smoke without fire" routine because he doesn't have the eds to make a straight accusation.
as i said before he has now actually made the shadow chancellor look good and himself to be a two bob politician that when in a corner lashes out.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
You fail again to take into account the fact that he was the City Minister and the evidence provided by Diamond regarding people 'close to Brown' applying pressure on Barclays. So, yes - there are questions to answer.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
barryw
as stated in another thread
even your own conservative select committee chair stated osbourne was wrong and should humbly apologise
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
barry
if b*lls has questions to answer why doesn't osborne ask them rather than use petty innuendo?