For Ashcroft And Paul: What Influence Can They Have?

As the 'Ashcroft-Hague-Cameron' deceit engulfed our very interesting and non-stop eventful politics, for many, it has been difficult not to sink into the party poly-tricks side of it.

The Tories, decided to pick the fight with Labour party as usual because, as they have constantly demonstrated in the contest for the next general election, it is all about party politics or character assassination; appalling.

Lord Paul of the Labour party however has set the record distinctively today by flagging up the difference between him and Lord Ashcroft. Nevertheless, this does not mean that either party is right to have allowed these partial residents to be making laws for full residents.

Away from that, the deceit that went with Ashcroft's case is unacceptable and hence non-comparable to Lord Paul's. By what we now know, it is evident that these two men have different level of influence on their respective political party.

While Lord Ashcroft has given the Tories a whooping £5m in donation over the past year or so, Lord Paul has given a paltry £70k to the Labour party... barely matching you will say.

Also, Ashcroft holds party position as the Deputy Chairman of the Conservative party, controls a whole campaigning machine which he funds too and hence has 'a say' in how the party is run. 'A say' that may just be more influential taking into consideration his colossal financial investment as well as position.

Lord Paul, on the other hand, has none of these privileges in the Labour party. Apart from being a member of the House of Lords, he is not in any way official a key decision-maker in the Labour Party. And I doubt his insignificant (compared to Ashcroft's) gift is anything to allow him control of who gets selected to run for political office.

Needlessly, it is right time the correction is made that we are ruled by people who has our interest and full but not half commitment to it at heart.