Quote Originally Posted by AdrianII
Bernie Ecclestone for instance, now there's an upstanding millioniare who gets things done in ninth gear.

Or Rupert Murdoch...They didn't buy Tony Blair and the Labour government. They're stake-holders, you see, it's a whole new concept!
Maybe I've been corrupted, but I can't get angry about these things. I lived through the depressing 1980s as a Labour party activist, when the Labour Party was crucified by the media and failed to appear an electable alternative to Mrs Thatcher. Blair and New Labour may have made some minor concessions to get a half-decent press and become electable, but it's pretty tame stuff compared to the personalised graft and pork-barrel politics you see in many other countries.

For example, the Blair-Murdoch thing - there's a reality of public opinion underlying both player's wary dance. There's no way Blair could go for the single currency for example - he'd lose a referendum. So promising to consult Murdoch on it is a small debasement that means little. Similarly, Murdoch partly backs Blair because his readers see them as more electable than the opposition. If that were to change, the daggers would be out whatever Blair offers.

On the Ecclestone thing, I frankly don't care whether Formula 1 has tobacco money adverts/sponsorship. If stopping the money just means it leave the UK and still promotes tobacco companies, I can't see the point. If Ecclestone is going to give my party £1m to do something I am not opposed to, fine. Well, I did say I may have been corrupted.

Yes, British political parties tell half-truths and are open to influence. They are political parties. But I still think it is a joke to say British politics is hopelessly corrupt. (Maybe seeing Kenyan politicians handing out 100 shilling bills to electors colours my perspective a little here.)