To think that Jacob Rees - Mogg is an effing hypocrite

[Poshindevon]

It has been in the papers today that Somerset Capital Management an investment company owned by Jacob Rees - Mogg has a large investment in a company called Kalbe Farme who manufacture pills used in abortions
The Somerset MP is against abortion even in rape cases, but profits from the sale of pills widely used in illegal abortions in Indonesia
tinyurl.com/y77m2yjl

Of course no one has bothered to read about the drug - its licenced use is for stomach ulcers, not abortions.

This is somewhat disingenuous. I would suggest that it is widely known, the pharma company particularly, the doctors that prescribe and the women that ask for it, what it is being used for.

He stopped when he became an MP. I suspect more to do with the workload and possible conflicts of interest (illegal) as opposed to washing his hands of any former investments.

This was also a small investment from a whole firm's diverse portfolio.

I think that despite his recent ambush interview, if they have to go digging this deep for 'dirt', he's doing okay.

Political opponents of R-M (tipped to be in the running for PM) have much more embarrassing stories at the surface.

The drug thalidomide was originally for multiple ailments before becoming an anti sickness drug and subsequently a drug for cancer treatment

Drugs are sometimes multi-purpose

And then there's sildenafil..... aka viagra

Topic - are you really that blind? It just on his payroll?

One idly wonders what the point of having religious views is, if you don't try and run the country by them ?

Maybe it makes sense to those who understand that their faith is not necessarily relevant to others.

There are already laws imposed on those choosing abortion. 24 weeks

I'm perfectly well aware of that, and FWIW I broadly agree with the law as it stands now

However in mentioning "constraints" I was thinking more of the complete ban which Mogg may well favour, in line with the teachings of his religion. He is of course absolutely entitled to his own views, but not to impose those views on others - and while I'd hope he realises that, this latest display of fast moral footwork makes me less certain than I'd like to be

do you really think the investment company don't know why their stomach pills are so popular in a country where abortion is illegal? Also these companies are organised to be vague about who is investing in them so that they can profit from misery like this or evade tax without anyone having to look directly responsible.
^ this

I agree that his moral compass is scewed. I wonder if the Daily Fail will pick up on this thread? Real women talking about real issues.

It's true that lots of us have probably got our pension funds etc invested in dodgy areas that we know nothing about. But then, most of us don't go on telly making a big song-and-dance about how virtuous we are.

Rees-Mogg owns this investment company, don't forget. He's making a profit out of illegal abortions. To my mind, this is extra distasteful, because illegal abortions are much more dangerous than legal ones. Women only resort to illegal abortions because their country is run by people of a similar ilk to Rees-Mogg, people who pontificate about what a terrible sin abortion is.

The man is, without a doubt, a very nasty piece of work indeed.

For me, the trouble with mentioning Thalidomide is that it dredges up the extraordinary lengths the UK government went to to hide the dangers and the results from the British public for years.

In the end, we have to thank that pesky European Court of Human Rights, who responded to a petition by the Sunday Times, to allow them to publish.

www.pressgazette.co.uk/top-scoops-british-journalism-all-time-thalidomide-sunday-times-1972/

So pleased we don't need human rights any more. It must have been dreadful in olden times.

Real women talking about real issues.

The issue is about the laws in Indonesia!

most of us don't go on telly making a big song-and-dance about how virtuous we are.
He went into to interview to talk about a completely different issue. Was asked about the issue and gave an honest response. Where does that translate into a song and dance. Obviously you prefer a dishonest politician.

Mr Rees-Mogg added: “I don’t manage the funds and haven’t done so since I became an MP. But the funds have to be run in accordance with the requirements of the investors and not according to my religious beliefs.

This is fucking hilarious in light of his voting history on abortion. I actually don't give a fuck if anyone is anti-abortion - you don't have to have one if you don't want. I do care when people are using their power to prevent people from having abortions when it should be everyone's free choice.

But this? It's ok for investors to have a choice that he feels is immoral but not THE ACTUAL WOMEN INVOLVED????

Let me rewrite this for you:

“I don’t manage the funds want an abortion and haven’t done so since I became an MP. But the funds have abortion access has to be run in accordance with the requirements of the investors women involved and not according to my religious beliefs."

He's a grade A twat.

He believes a woman who has been raped having an abortion is "morally corrupt"

If you are part of the government and you hold those views then you do need to go though investment portfolios with a fine toothcomb. He has profited from abortions.

His response is pretty much to shrug and say "not ideal but ho hum"

I'd say that was more than "click bait"

He believes a woman who has been raped having an abortion is "morally corrupt"

but no mention of the rapist ?

It's true that lots of us have probably got our pension funds etc invested in dodgy areas that we know nothing about. But then, most of us don't go on telly making a big song-and-dance about how virtuous we are

Most of us don't chase high power either, but it seems appropriate for those who do to face stringent questions about any extremist views they may hold, whether they're entirely personal or the result of some organisation they've chosen to join. As I suggested, someone's purely private belief is exactly that as long as they don't expect to impose it on others ... and unfortunately there's a long history of extremists of every stripe feeling an urge to do precisely that

Chrisitainity bashing is very vogue. I dont see anyone going up to Sadiq Khan and asking his views on sharia or stoning or multiple wives etc etc

You can't have been looking very far, SloeSloe. People were constantly asking those and even more offensive questions when he ran for Mayor, and I don't they've stopped now.

A Tory MP being a hypocrite? There's a first!

I think it does exonerate him. I think he's far enough removed to be 'okay'

How? He co-founded it, he's one of 21 members who were paid a total of £21.9m this year, according accounts at Companies House which also showed the fund has paid him at least £4 million since he became an MP. I wish I was that far removed from a lucrative source of income.

As I said (to you or another), it's fairly certain that I could find some dirt in whichever investment scheme you have) with a fairly short space of time.

No, I can say with certainty that you wouldn't.

If I did, would you forfeit any financial gain and withdraw your investment tomorrow?

Yes, particularly if I were a public figure being paid by taxpayers and taking a moral standpoint which was totally contradicted by my investment - particularly if I were advocating imposing my morals on others.

lucy: how nice of you to say I "obviously" prefer a dishonest politician. Do you really think that kind of crude attack is a helpful contribution to the debate? Given that Rees-Mogg is clearly a dishonest politician, professing to be opposed to abortion while profiteering from it, I think it should be "obvious" that I don't prefer a dishonest politician.

Whollyfather
Do any of you know what fund managers are and do? Doesn't look like it.
Yes I do know what fund managers are and what they do.

Rees-Mogg co-founded Somerset Capital Management (SCM) in 2007 and is one of 21 members who were paid a total of £21.9m this year, according to newly published accounts on Companies House.

Rees-Mogg, states that he owns at least 15 per cent of SCM in the register of MPs’ interests, but he isn’t required to and doesn’t declare the dividend he receives from SCM, which has paid its partners a total of £59.9m since he was elected in 2010.
Dont be naive , of course Rees -Mogg benefits personally.
The independent has a readership on line of 4.9 million
and Twitter followers of 2.3 million. So dont be so dismissive

Hand up, hand up! Me, me - I do. I know what they are and what they do! (worked with them for 15 years)

Rees-Mogg will be P.M within ten years..........

Very very very aware of what fund managers do, thank you. Also very aware of ethical investing and how it can be achieved. It's a balance for everyone. Rees-Mogg is getting cash from a partnership that runs a fund that runs contrary to his stated beliefs, giving the excuse that he's not the one running it and this is a choice individual investors make, whilst at the same time actively trying to prevent women from making that same choice about their lives and bodies.