Michelle Donelan - Why on earth are WE paying?
Discussion
Just reading the news that Cabinet Minister Michelle Donelan has paid compensation to an academic whom she wrongly accused of being a Hamas sympathiser.
Except it turns out in reading the article that she isn't paying the compensation at all. We, the taxpayers are!!!
This is, allegedly, to reduce overall costs to the taxpayer in the event of a protracted legal case, but in the event of a protracted legal case, why the bloody hell shouldn't we expect her to pay those legal costs as well???
If you or I defamed someone like this we might realistically expect to lose our shirts on it, so why on earth should Michelle Donelan be any bloody different???
Except it turns out in reading the article that she isn't paying the compensation at all. We, the taxpayers are!!!
This is, allegedly, to reduce overall costs to the taxpayer in the event of a protracted legal case, but in the event of a protracted legal case, why the bloody hell shouldn't we expect her to pay those legal costs as well???
If you or I defamed someone like this we might realistically expect to lose our shirts on it, so why on earth should Michelle Donelan be any bloody different???
Kermit power said:
Just reading the news that Cabinet Minister Michelle Donelan has paid compensation to an academic whom she wrongly accused of being a Hamas sympathiser.
Except it turns out in reading the article that she isn't paying the compensation at all. We, the taxpayers are!!!
This is, allegedly, to reduce overall costs to the taxpayer in the event of a protracted legal case, but in the event of a protracted legal case, why the bloody hell shouldn't we expect her to pay those legal costs as well???
If you or I defamed someone like this we might realistically expect to lose our shirts on it, so why on earth should Michelle Donelan be any bloody different???
Because, as Mr Bates pointed out in the sub-postmaster scandal, it is always the skint, little people who have to pay anything.Except it turns out in reading the article that she isn't paying the compensation at all. We, the taxpayers are!!!
This is, allegedly, to reduce overall costs to the taxpayer in the event of a protracted legal case, but in the event of a protracted legal case, why the bloody hell shouldn't we expect her to pay those legal costs as well???
If you or I defamed someone like this we might realistically expect to lose our shirts on it, so why on earth should Michelle Donelan be any bloody different???
Kermit power said:
Just reading the news that Cabinet Minister Michelle Donelan has paid compensation to an academic whom she wrongly accused of being a Hamas sympathiser.
Except it turns out in reading the article that she isn't paying the compensation at all. We, the taxpayers are!!!
Along with Boris Johnson's £265,000 legal fees to defend his lies over partygate.Except it turns out in reading the article that she isn't paying the compensation at all. We, the taxpayers are!!!
This government is like a magician using slight of hand to misdirect the public. In the same week that the Chancellor is talking about reducing budgets to stop 'woke' council spending, they are using our money to pay for stupid political grand-standing from their own cabinet ministers.
This annoyed me immensely last night.
Both the headline saying she paid - when thats the exact opposite of what happened, and the taxpayer footing thr bill for her stupidity.
I can kinda see the taxpayer thing as she messed up during her work. If i dropped a b
k at work which cost employer money, i wouldn't expect them to chase me personally for it !
As for the headline.... still irritating me.
Both the headline saying she paid - when thats the exact opposite of what happened, and the taxpayer footing thr bill for her stupidity.
I can kinda see the taxpayer thing as she messed up during her work. If i dropped a b
k at work which cost employer money, i wouldn't expect them to chase me personally for it !As for the headline.... still irritating me.
Chimune said:
This annoyed me immensely last night.
Both the headline saying she paid - when thats the exact opposite of what happened, and the taxpayer footing thr bill for her stupidity.
I can kinda see the taxpayer thing as she messed up during her work. If i dropped a bk at work which cost employer money, i wouldn't expect them to chase me personally for it !
As for the headline.... still irritating me.
First, check your employment contract as there is probably something in there about that.Both the headline saying she paid - when thats the exact opposite of what happened, and the taxpayer footing thr bill for her stupidity.
I can kinda see the taxpayer thing as she messed up during her work. If i dropped a b
k at work which cost employer money, i wouldn't expect them to chase me personally for it !As for the headline.... still irritating me.
Second, libelling someone l is very different to making a mistake. This wasn’t something done in good faith as part of employment. Most employers would not only not pay but you would also be out of a job. Just look at GB News and how even they are treating journalists who get in this kind of trouble, when they are working. She was s
tposting on Twitter.Finally, she is an MP, not an employee, anyway.
I think it was a dumb and pointless thing for her office to allow to happen but as a civil servant I can see why she is not paying herself. It does seem to have been a cock-up made as part of her job and as much her office's fault as it was hers. I'd be the first to slag-off a Tory minister and support civil servants, but in this case I'm doing the opposite.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff