Rewulf Posted September 21, 2023 Report Share Posted September 21, 2023 50 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said: The Culture Media and Sport Committee is a Committee of the House of Commons (all party) and is NOT a part of Government. Caroline Dinenage (the author of the letter) is an MP and government minister of state for digital and culture, I would say that makes her part of the government ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clangerman Posted September 21, 2023 Report Share Posted September 21, 2023 5 minutes ago, Rewulf said: Caroline Dinenage (the author of the letter) is an MP and government minister of state for digital and culture, I would say that makes her part of the government ? nice to see your still here pointing out the awkward truth never seen the like gov removing the income of a man totally innocent of any crime at this time welcome to police state Britain! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnfromUK Posted September 21, 2023 Report Share Posted September 21, 2023 (edited) 16 minutes ago, Rewulf said: Caroline Dinenage (the author of the letter) is an MP and government minister of state for digital and culture, I would say that makes her part of the government ? The letter is from the Committee - of which she is the chair, and it is clear in the letter that it is from the committee as it is on their headed paper and written in terms of a committee (e.g. "We would be grateful ....") and signed by her in the capacity as Chair of the Committee. She is not acting for or on behalf of the Government (which would have been written on headed paper from the Department or Ministry and signed by her as "Minister of State"). MPs wear many hats and in this case there is no suggestion from this letter that this is driven by Government. It is the views of an (all party) Committee of the House. Edited September 21, 2023 by JohnfromUK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rewulf Posted September 21, 2023 Report Share Posted September 21, 2023 1 minute ago, JohnfromUK said: MPs wear many hats and in this case there is no suggestion from this letter that this is driven by Government. It is the views of an (all party) Committee of the House. MPs and especially government ministers are governed by the ministerial code, a code she has clearly broken here. I would expect a swift rebuke from HM government, which clearly hasnt happened yet, and if this doesnt happen, then its also clear the government supports the committees action in this. The video I posted above explains this. This letter of rebuke from Rumble also explains why this action is so wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnfromUK Posted September 21, 2023 Report Share Posted September 21, 2023 6 minutes ago, Rewulf said: I would expect a swift rebuke from HM government, which clearly hasnt happened yet She is writing on behalf of a Committee of the House (and in such capacity I believe reports to the Speaker) not to HMG. Parliament is separate from Government. She is not acting on behalf of the Government. Ministers are subject to the Ministerial code in their capacity as Ministers, but MPs are not. Committees of the House need to be independent of HMG since it is they that hold HMG to account to the House of Commons. The clue is in the headed paper with the portcullis motif (Both House of Commons and House of Lords). Ministries and Departments have their own headed paper. As to her resignation - that would be up to her, or it would be up to the Speaker (I think) to discipline her as Chair of a Committee of the House. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted September 21, 2023 Report Share Posted September 21, 2023 RB is in my own opinion a **** of the highest order. I really think he should have every chance to clear his name in COURT! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnfromUK Posted September 21, 2023 Report Share Posted September 21, 2023 5 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said: I really think he should have every chance to clear his name in COURT! +1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rewulf Posted September 21, 2023 Report Share Posted September 21, 2023 16 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said: She is writing on behalf of a Committee of the House (and in such capacity I believe reports to the Speaker) not to HMG. Parliament is separate from Government. She is not acting on behalf of the Government. Ministers are subject to the Ministerial code in their capacity as Ministers, but MPs are not. I understand that, but there are two problems. The first is , does she cease to be a government minister, and cease to be governed by ministerial code, when she writes to private companies to order them to do something with a private UK citizen, IF she uses different headed paper ? 17 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said: Committees of the House need to be independent of HMG since it is they that hold HMG to account to the House of Commons. The clue is in the headed paper with the portcullis motif (Both House of Commons and House of Lords). Ministries and Departments have their own headed paper. As to her resignation - that would be up to her, or it would be up to the Speaker (I think) to discipline her as Chair of a Committee of the House. The second problem is this, if her job as chair of the committee is to hold HM Gov to account, why is she stepping outside of her job description to attack a private individual, who is not under any police investigation, and has been convicted of no crime ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnfromUK Posted September 21, 2023 Report Share Posted September 21, 2023 4 minutes ago, Rewulf said: order them to do something Where has she 'ordered anyone to do anything other than 'confirm' their stance. As to her role, that would be a matter for the Speaker who would oversee her role as chair of a Committee of the House. 6 minutes ago, Rewulf said: why is she stepping outside of her job description to attack a private individual She is requesting confirmation on behalf of her Committee - hence the use of "We". Letters from Committees are ofter written and signed by the Chair. 9 minutes ago, Rewulf said: who is not under any police investigation https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/russell-brand-latest-channel-4-documentary-accusations-police-investigation-b1107699.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted September 21, 2023 Report Share Posted September 21, 2023 Rewulf, why are you defending him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rewulf Posted September 21, 2023 Report Share Posted September 21, 2023 3 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said: Where has she 'ordered anyone to do anything other than 'confirm' their stance. What has it got to do with her ? 4 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said: She is requesting confirmation on behalf of her Committee What does it have to do with 'them' ? Ill ask you this , does this committee start sending letters out every time theres an allegation of sexual assault involving a celebrity? Every time a footballer is alleged to have raped or molested a young girl in a hotel room somewhere, do these letters go out asking their football clubs to 'confirm their stance' that they wont be getting their wages that month ?? 6 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said: Rewulf, why are you defending him? Im not defending 'him' I dont particularly like him. But whats being done to him is wrong on so many levels. Its a modern day witch hunt, with the accused being burnt at the stake on the allegation of anonymous actors , who may not be acting on moral or truthful grounds. When hes arrested and charged Ill shut up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted September 21, 2023 Report Share Posted September 21, 2023 9 minutes ago, Rewulf said: When hes arrested and charged Ill shut up Fair enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnfromUK Posted September 21, 2023 Report Share Posted September 21, 2023 4 minutes ago, Rewulf said: What has it got to do with her ? For the final time - she is signing as chair of a committee, not in a personal capacity, and not in a Ministerial or Government capacity. 6 minutes ago, Rewulf said: What does it have to do with 'them' ? I imagine someone (MP, constituent via MP, even the Speaker) asked the committee to look into it - as it is a 'Media' matter. 7 minutes ago, Rewulf said: Ill ask you this , does this committee start sending letters out every time there's an allegation of sexual assault involving a celebrity? I have no idea. How could I know that? They don't cc me in all their correspondence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rewulf Posted September 21, 2023 Report Share Posted September 21, 2023 7 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said: I imagine someone (MP, constituent via MP, even the Speaker) asked the committee to look into it - as it is a 'Media' matter. Did he also ask them to write to all media outlets that may be concerned with Brand, and tell them to de monetise him ? 7 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said: I have no idea. How could I know that? They don't cc me in all their correspondence. Im sorry John, but I think you do . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnfromUK Posted September 21, 2023 Report Share Posted September 21, 2023 5 minutes ago, Rewulf said: Did he also ask them to write to all media outlets that may be concerned with Brand, and tell them to de monetise him ? Im sorry John, but I think you do . My original point was that you are completely wrong in suggesting HMG is acting. It is not. You need to understand the distinction between HMG and Parliament. They are not the same thing at all. As to who else the Culture Media and Sport Committee may have written to, or how they came to get involved - I have no idea. It was you who brought up the letter from them. As I said by giving a +1 to TC's post, Brand should have the opportunity to clear his name in Court. I read that the pilice have been asked to investigate - so lets see if they get something - and if they do - if the CPS decides to proceed against him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rewulf Posted September 21, 2023 Report Share Posted September 21, 2023 1 minute ago, JohnfromUK said: My original point was that you are completely wrong in suggesting HMG is acting. It is not. You need to understand the distinction between HMG and Parliament. They are not the same thing at all. I accept the point youre making , but you are avoiding the question of whether or not a government minister, whether in her capacity as chair of the committee is acting morally or legally within EITHER capacity. 4 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said: As to who else the Culture Media and Sport Committee may have written to, or how they came to get involved - I have no idea. It was you who brought up the letter from them. It was you who suggested the committees job is to scrutinise and hold the government to account too. Do you seriously not find the committees action...unusual ? 4 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said: As I said by giving a +1 to TC's post, Brand should have the opportunity to clear his name in Court. That will be great, but what if it never gets to court, how will he clear his name then ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnfromUK Posted September 21, 2023 Report Share Posted September 21, 2023 2 minutes ago, Rewulf said: you are avoiding the question of whether or not a government minister, whether in her capacity as chair of the committee is acting morally or legally within EITHER capacity. I'm not avoiding answering. Morally she has a duty to write letters as requested by the Committee she chairs. The chair would be carrying out the committees instructions. Legally, I assume as the Chair of a Committee of the house she takes legal advice, but I don't know. 7 minutes ago, Rewulf said: It was you who suggested the committees job is to scrutinise and hold the government to account too. From here; https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/378/culture-media-and-sport-committee/ 9 minutes ago, Rewulf said: That will be great, but what if it never gets to court, how will he clear his name then ? If no case can be brought, then he is in the clear as it would mean that no evidence can be found. When you are 'in the media' the upside is fame and (usually) fortune. Fame can have a downside - as many have found out, and sadly in some cases it has been unjustified. It is part of being a media 'personality'. Some (e.g. Saville, Harris, Clifford) were guilty. Some (Leon Brittan, Lord Bramall etc.) were not, but if you are a known figure, an element of trial by media cannot be avoided) Equally, you cannot simply ignore the accusations from the alleged victims. Hopefully now that matters are with the police a proper investigation will be held. I genuinely hope Brand gets a fair trial should it come to that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tweedledee Posted September 21, 2023 Report Share Posted September 21, 2023 Innocent until proven guilty....remember what the accusations did to Freddie star??? Whether we like him or not he should be entitled to that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnfromUK Posted September 21, 2023 Report Share Posted September 21, 2023 3 minutes ago, tweedledee said: Whether we like him or not he should be entitled to that Entirely agreed, but his accusers/alleged victims also need to have their complaints investigated fairly - and him being a big media presence makes it difficult for both. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tweedledee Posted September 21, 2023 Report Share Posted September 21, 2023 10 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said: Entirely agreed, but his accusers/alleged victims also need to have their complaints investigated fairly - and him being a big media presence makes it difficult for both. Yes ..media hype turns out to be a witch hunt and destroys people's lives....I'd ask why it has taken years for these women to come forward?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnfromUK Posted September 21, 2023 Report Share Posted September 21, 2023 Just now, tweedledee said: I'd ask why it has taken years for these women to come forward?? Possibly because attitudes are different now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yellow Bear Posted September 21, 2023 Report Share Posted September 21, 2023 2 minutes ago, tweedledee said: .I'd ask why it has taken years for these women to come forward?? Probably because no one would listen until they wanted to bring the perp. down Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tweedledee Posted September 21, 2023 Report Share Posted September 21, 2023 Just now, JohnfromUK said: Possibly because attitudes are different now? No I'd have thought attitude changed years ago..if this happened I'd reckon the girls would have came forward long before now 1 minute ago, Yellow Bear said: Probably because no one would listen until they wanted to bring the perp. down He's annoyed a lot of high powers lately..maybe they don't like it..Andrew Tate and Jordan Peterson have hit troubles too in different ways Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clangerman Posted September 21, 2023 Report Share Posted September 21, 2023 23 minutes ago, tweedledee said: Yes ..media hype turns out to be a witch hunt and destroys people's lives....I'd ask why it has taken years for these women to come forward?? they waited until we had a system which allows women to make false sexual allegations while hiding then when found to be liars allows them to walk away scot free! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discobob Posted September 22, 2023 Report Share Posted September 22, 2023 16 hours ago, Rewulf said: MPs and especially government ministers are governed by the ministerial code, a code she has clearly broken here. I would expect a swift rebuke from HM government, which clearly hasnt happened yet, and if this doesnt happen, then its also clear the government supports the committees action in this. The video I posted above explains this. This letter of rebuke from Rumble also explains why this action is so wrong. Hands up who thinks Rumble will be blocked in the UK under the "Online Safety Bill" that has just been brought in to quash any free speech?? ✋ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.