Richer than the Queen: Sunak family’s huge wealth not declared by chancellor

[Nick]

And I excelled in English.

So you should coming from London.

[patman post]

Where does it stop?

Anything anywhere that's relevant.

It could extend to further relations, ie Kushner is Trump's son in law, do you think his holdings had any relevance to his biz dealings or position in Trump's administration or are you naive?

You aren't that naive, come on now.

So if the six degrees of separation theory gains traction, we'll all be tarred with each others' brushes and having to declare associations with all sorts of dubious characters...

[Thomas]

Rishi Sunak is facing renewed questions about his financial affairs after it emerged that his wife and her family hold a multimillion-pound portfolio of shareholdings that are not declared in the register of ministers' interests.

Akshata Murty – who married the chancellor in 2009 – is the daughter of one of India's richest men. Her father co-founded tech giant Infosys, and she has shares in the company worth £430 million – making her richer than the Queen.

The ministerial code complex Sunak to declare any financial interests "relevant" to his job that might constitute a conflict of interests. Ministers are also supposed to declare the interests of close family members.

After he became chief secretary to the Treasury in July 2019, Sunak revealed he was the beneficiary of a blind trust – meaning he can't make decisions about how his money is invested, but can still profit from his investments.

However, according to a Guardian investigation, Sunak's declarations make no mention of his wife beyond referring to her ownership of a small venture capital company.

But the paper revealed that Murty and her family hold a score of other valuable interests – including a £1.7 billion shareholding in Infosys, which employs thousands of UK staff and has held a number of government contracts.


https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/politics/richer-than-the-queen-sunak-familys-huge-wealth-not-declared-by-chancellor/27/11/

Hmm what was the govt described as? A hedge fund cabinet....

https://www.itv.com/news/2020-02-17/robert-peston-boris-johnson-s-hedge-fund-government

Have to admit dyno i dont see what the fuss is either.

The english left arent going to get back into power by sitting making a fuss about shite like this .

[johnofgwent]

Dynamis, are you saying Sunak committed an offence or breach of parliamentary rules?
If not, what's the story. It's just that I suspect there isn't one.

Well I've got a story to research, but that's largely to do with the family wealth being squirrelled away in India and the way wealthy Indian "entrepreneurs" think they can break all sorts of UK laws to make money here just like they can at home.


So I think it's definitely worth knowing he is in that position, just so I know what to look out for ...


But beyond that, probably a non story. Because the way we are letting people become trillionaires these days does sadly mean it's going to be a much more common thing for some obscure foreigner sitting in a country that still has tax and accounting principles on a par with those in11th century Britain to become richer than the queen ...

[Borg Refinery]

It's not my fault if you don't understand the subtleties  of the English language.

I said you copied and pasted a complete story and deliberately left the part......
The story you copied from was a complete story, you copied it but left bits out.

And like I said it's a non-story.

And you just changed your story.

"The story you copied from was a complete story"

So now I copied FROM a complete story, as opposed to copying & pasting A complete story. 

Is my pedantry annoying Nick? Now you know how it feels when you do it, as you oft do.

..And I excelled in English.

[Nick]

So someone hacked your account and typed:

"Regardless of that, you copied and pasted a complete story"

It's your own quote. You have no response other than to pretend it wasn't I guess. That or you know I'm right and have nothing left to add.. it's ok I accept your surrender.

It's not my fault if you don't understand the subtleties  of the English language.

I said you copied and pasted a complete story and deliberately left the part......
The story you copied from was a complete story, you copied it but left bits out.

And like I said it's a non-story.

[Sheepy]

So, in your opinion, conflicts of interest aren't a story and should go unreported and unlisted, and it's not suspicious when ethics advisors resign for dodgy reasons etc.

Well, you're entitled to your view, I disagree of course.

Well, no worries then General, you being the face of the next corporate step shouldn't be bothered about a few quid.

[Borg Refinery]

That's a no then.

So, in your opinion, conflicts of interest aren't a story and should go unreported and unlisted, and it's not suspicious when ethics advisors resign for dodgy reasons etc.

Well, you're entitled to your view, I disagree of course.

The Corporate machine will probably answer back soon denying its own of course, usual deflection bla bla etc, or perhaps voices in the back of their head...  ....

[Barry]

Just saying he should properly report any potential conflicts of interest perhaps?

Is that a bad thing?

Why shouldn't everyone in westmonster be subjected to the same scrutiny. Look at the rampant conflicts of interest in the commons among all parties.

Why should this be considered normal?

That's a no then.

[Borg Refinery]

Now you're just playing games to obfuscate the thread.

I didn't say you copied it completely.  I'll leave you to your English lesson.

So someone hacked your account and typed:

"Regardless of that, you copied and pasted a complete story"

It's your own quote. You have no response other than to pretend it wasn't I guess. That or you know I'm right and have nothing left to add.. it's ok I accept your surrender.

Dynamis, are you saying Sunak committed an offence or breach of parliamentary rules?
If not, what's the story. It's just that I suspect there isn't one.

Just saying he should properly report any potential conflicts of interest perhaps?

Is that a bad thing?

Why shouldn't everyone in westmonster be subjected to the same scrutiny. Look at the rampant conflicts of interest in the commons among all parties.

Why should this be considered normal?

[Barry]

Dynamis, are you saying Sunak committed an offence or breach of parliamentary rules?
If not, what's the story. It's just that I suspect there isn't one.

[Nick]

How can I have copied it completely if I left a part out?

Now you're just playing games to obfuscate the thread.

I didn't say you copied it completely.  I'll leave you to your English lesson.

[Borg Refinery]

Who do I trust?

An independent adviser on ministerial interests

Or

Some online rag?

Let me think! And you call me gullible?

If anything gullible may have been an understatement.

https://www.google.com/search?q=boris+independent+advisor+ministerial+conflicts&oq=boris+independent+advisor+ministerial+conflicts&aqs=chrome..69i57.12787j0j7&client=ms-android-h3g-gb-revc&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8

Anyway, you believe as you wish. Feel free to trust mr 'clean sweep' (under the rug) and resigned ethics advisor guy over a detailed investigation by the grauniad, which is where it came from. Sure, the grauni isn't perfect but I understand you trust anything Boris's corrupt cronies tell you over it, but that's not my fault.

Regardless of that, you copied and pasted a complete story and deliberately left the part

How can I have copied it completely if I left a part out?

Have you heard of copyright and only extracting partial snippets? Full c&p'ing is usually frowned on as a breach of copyright. If you as an admin are saying that's ok, then cool.

I apologise for trying to be respectful of site rules..  I'll be sure to paste the whole thing next time.. And it was pasted continuously up til a point with no middle bits left out, unless the ads got in the way possibly, but I didn't "omit" or alter anything inbetween, so that's an untruth on your part.

[Nick]

Great logic, so just overlook any conflicts of interest entirely because he's loaded it means he won't try to abuse his position to further enrich himself.... 🤔 Right..

His wife's family's wealth and connections aren't relevant now? And you neglect to mention his wife directly? Hmm.

So you trust some random advisor and a spokesperson without question to render this a non story.

That's fairly gullible or deliberate but expected.

Who do I trust?

An independent adviser on ministerial interests

Or

Some online rag?

Let me think! And you call me gullible?



Regardless of that, you copied and pasted a complete story and deliberately left the part that made your post balanced and debatable.

Let's all just copy newspaper reports and take bits out that don't enhance our point of view.

[Borg Refinery]

Well Id rather anyone getting elected is loaded when they arrive than is loaded when they leave . If he really does have that sort of cabbage to play with at home I can't see him striping the public up for a few shekel's to paint the boathouse on expenses .

That he doesnt have to do it  for the money gives me a little more confidence that he might be doing it for us  (never trust a tory )

Great logic, so just overlook any conflicts of interest entirely because he's loaded it means he won't try to abuse his position to further enrich himself.... 🤔 Right..

What relevance is his father-in-law's wealth? None, he lives in India.

His wife's family's wealth and connections aren't relevant now? And you neglect to mention his wife directly? Hmm.

I also note that you left out this bit.

A spokesperson said that the prime minister's independent adviser on ministerial interests "confirmed he is completely satisfied with the chancellor's propriety of arrangements and that he has followed the ministerial code to the letter in his declaration of interests".


You know, the bit that makes your story a non-story.

So you trust some random advisor and a spokesperson without question to render this a non story.

That's fairly gullible or deliberate but expected.