Is a criminal record a prequisite for political life in France?

[Drooper]

Mitterrand, Chirac, now Cresson


Former French premier charged with fraud (http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_764384.html?menu=)

[Shane Costello]

Edith Cresson appointed her own dentist as an AIDS expert (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/255053.stm). She also speculated that one quarter of British men were gay.

[Hellcat]

Just like a concubine on the side is an essential item for the English Mp's :rolleyes:

[Supercharts]

Originally posted by Drooper
Mitterrand, Chirac, now Cresson


Former French premier charged with fraud (http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_764384.html?menu=)

It's either that or a documented history of having STDs.

[iain]

On a slightly different issue, I was reading something (not on the web so no link) about banking fraud and security.

It suggested that in the UK there are almost no cases of senior bankers or businessmen being prosecuted for fraud. To be prosecuted you really have to do something so obvious that the police really can't turn a blind eye. In the US this is not the case and prosecutions are far more common.

It was suggested that the main reason for this is that in the US police and prosecutors win promotion by winning big cases - there is an incentive for them to prosecute. In the UK, promotion (at least at senior levels of the police) is still much more based on having the right friends and connections so upsetting powerful people can kill off your career pretty quickly.

I don't know the situation in France (or, in this case, Belgium) but the French might see it as the sign of a healthy democracy where being powerful does not make you immune from the law.

(The book is "Security Engineering" by Ross Anderson).

[Drooper]

Originally posted by iain
On a slightly different issue, I was reading something (not on the web so no link) about banking fraud and security.

It suggested that in the UK there are almost no cases of senior bankers or businessmen being prosecuted for fraud. To be prosecuted you really have to do something so obvious that the police really can't turn a blind eye. In the US this is not the case and prosecutions are far more common.

It was suggested that the main reason for this is that in the US police and prosecutors win promotion by winning big cases - there is an incentive for them to prosecute. In the UK, promotion (at least at senior levels of the police) is still much more based on having the right friends and connections so upsetting powerful people can kill off your career pretty quickly.

I don't know the situation in France (or, in this case, Belgium) but the French might see it as the sign of a healthy democracy where being powerful does not make you immune from the law.

(The book is "Security Engineering" by Ross Anderson).

Another (IMO better) explanation is that the UK banking system is completely in private sector. In France large chunks are publicly owned. Politicians doing didgy things in public companies are far less likely to be caught out (or called to account if found out) than individuals trying a fiddle in a private company.

[iain]

Originally posted by Drooper


Another (IMO better) explanation is that the UK banking system is completely in private sector. In France large chunks are publicly owned. Politicians doing didgy things in public companies are far less likely to be caught out (or called to account if found out) than individuals trying a fiddle in a private company. Drooper,

I think you probably read my post too quickly. I was making a comparison between the UK and US, saying that in the UK prosecutions are rare. Since banking is in the private sector in both the US and UK, that wouldn't seem to account for the difference.

I then went off into a flight of fancy, suggesting that if more important people get prosecuted in France it might be because they investigate important people for crimes more than in the UK, not because more important people are committing crimes. I have no evidence to support this idea at all.

Still, you then say that people are more likely to be prosecuted in private than public companies. I'd be interested to see any evidence of that; but I don't see the relevance to any of my comments.