Louise Haigh

[Tryingtokeepgoing]

AIBU to think that if you really didn’t commit the crime, don’t plead guilty even if your solicitor advises you to. I mean, sure, for a traffic or speeding offence maybe that’d be the expedient thing to do. But fraud…?

Louise Haigh resigns over stolen mobile phone fraud conviction

https://www.thetimes.com/article/6772fe81-8e36-4e5d-baa8-4902a6553b4d?shareToken=3fe1e52cb5b31dc1a3e40721c219a69e

Well here you are minimising again. You say lied about a mobile phone, I say set out to deceive in a planned and premeditated way. Because you are not prosecuted for fraud, never mind plead guilty, if it was just a mistake. So yes, I think there is equivalence between a fraud conviction and being a minister, and a convicted paedophile working with children. I wouldn’t trust either. Your bar might be lower.

If you're comparing her to a predator of children then there's no point discussing it with you.

The best argument against employing criminals is they are thick as shit.

it sounds like there is more to come out about her and they are trying to get ahead of the story

fraud is extremely serious because it calls into question her integrity. This conviction would rule her out of a lot of jobs because of it

I suspect she breached the ministerial code as she didn’t declare things she should have done

all the Labour supporters here should be congratulating the government on having done the right thing - not trying to save her by comparing her to the last lot

If you don’t understand the point I am making about trust, then I think the feeling is reciprocated 😂

As said, you are entitled to have a lower bar. That’s up to you. I think the U.K. has a right to expect better.

fraud is extremely serious because it calls into question her integrity. This conviction would rule her out of a lot of jobs because of it

In the last government it seemed to be an essential part of a cv. Much more so than exam results.

I think the going rate was that two VAWG convictions equalled one fraud conviction. Although I guess it was dependent on how much bullshit you could get the media to swallow.

My bar for discussion is evidently higher than yours. I don't compare fraud to paedophilia.

I have already discussed trust, it's relative. Even the police treat convictions on a case by case basis.

Op wasn’t comparing them - she was saying that some crimes preclude you from some jobs - an obvious one being a sex offender being precluded from working with children or vulnerable people

fraud should preclude you from any career that requires integrity or management of large sums of money

I’m not sure your bar is higher. Certainly your comprehension is lower.

I don’t think many people would see fraud as a minor offence.

That's typically what people do when they've lost the argument - inane stone throwing.

What you re saying is no one can be reformed, that there is no redemption.

Your past will follow you until you die.

Thats pretty grim & vindictive.

But i guess if this was a Tory Government and Tory Minister, redemption would be all the rage!!!

No one on this thread is saying that a Tory would be forgiven for this though?

ultimately we’ve had a shit show the last few years and this new government came to power promising change.

I’m not expecting them to be perfect from day one but at least show us they’re moving in the right direction.

fraud is extremely serious because it calls into question her integrity. This conviction would rule her out of a lot of jobs because of it

Spent convictions, without a prison sentence, rarely disqualify someone from a job.
Even high level security clearance will be granted, i ve just done a reference for someone who has a conviction benefit fraud and causing an affray, over 25 years ago, all declared, good character since.

Depends on the fraud surely, it's hardly Enron.

That’s clearly not what I am saying. I am saying that for some convictions and some role there’s an incompatibility, and that’s often, if not always, because of trust. It doesn’t mean that those criminals can’t be useful members of society in some capacity post conviction.

As a non Tory I’m not sure of the point of your last sentence, but clearly if this was any minister of any party with a fraud conviction we would be having exactly the same conversation. Bet we have a Labour government, so it’s about her and them.

Indeed, Haigh herself said in 2022 you can’t be a law maker and a law breaker. So it’s clear cut even from her own perspective. Or, are you arguing that she didn’t mean that to apply to her, only to conservatives…?

I don’t believe she would ever get a job in financial services again with a fraud conviction.

I suspect though that @Tryingtokeepgoing would not have started this thread had it been a Tory minister with a relatively minor fraud conviction from 10years ago.

imho, offenders should be given a chance to redeem themselves, regardless of party or politics.

what sort of society do we want? can no one ever be rehabilitated?

We are behaving as if she'd just done this.

If you were looking for MPs to stand for your party you should perhaps ask

• are you of good character
• have you always been of good character - is there anything that will emerge that would damage the work you do for the party or the government?
• are you honest - I know lots of people think MPs are not particularly good at this bit but you've got to start them off honest surely!
• will you declare properly all interactions and donations to ensure the transparency of our democracy is not pissed on
• will you work for the good of the population and not for personal gain.

Probably a few other things you could add and there's a lot of previous ministers of all colours who would fail spectacularly. But we should have recourse when they are not acting in the interests of everyone.
I know they have union paymasters making donations to the labour party but someone has to pay for public sector workers pay rises so I am concerned that the rail pay rise was solely her decision and not a cabinet one. For that alone she should have been out on her ear.

Thats not what the FSA say, their advice to firms is to consider each applicant on merit, taking into account the nature and age of the offence and if prison was involved.
Also, whether the applicant was honest and disclosed ALL facts.

Government scandal this is tje first scandal ever in history of scandals ha ha rest where clean as whistles n straight as roundabouts lol

Indeed, Haigh herself said in 2022 you can’t be a law maker and a law breaker.

Starmer said that. I gave you the link.

We can be pretty sure that they wouldn't have brought it up had it been a Tory. They don't seem too bothered about the Reform MP.

Come on, facts ? Really !!!!! Surely we all know better by now ?

the whole thing with multiple phones that sounds bizarre - it she just wanted a new handset but they weren't being issued universally, why not just accidentally drop the phone in the loo? She apparently only worked for Aviva for three years - how many new handsets would you expect in that period? (according to wiki she was responsible for corporate governance 😮)

the thing that really surprises me is that the issue didn't become public when she first stood for election as an MP in 2015, when it wasn't a spent conviction.