Talk:Liam Fox

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Succeeded by? Bob Ainsworth?[edit]

In the box to the right, there is the suggestion that Bob Ainsworth, a former Labour Cabinet Minister under Gordon Brown, had succeeded Liam Fox following Fox's October 2011 resignation. This doesn't make sense, as Labour is not in the ruling coalition. I will be changing the box ... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abedwayyad (talk • contribs) 13:42, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, never mind ... I just saw the mistake :D — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abedwayyad (talk • contribs) 13:43, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments in 2005[edit]

Danni Minogue???? Are you sure? Maybe you mean Natalie Imbrulia but even that was just the usual media nonsense. Catchpole 12:49, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The only one of his siblings educated in the state sector![edit]

From personal memory, his brother and at least one of his sisters also attended St Bride's High in East Kilbride, all having also attended Our Lady of Lourdes primary school in the same town. One of these siblings then went on to Strathclyde University whilst the elder of his two younger sister's followed in Liam footsteps by studying medicine at Glasgow University. It may be the case that the youngest in the family did, at some point, attend a free paying school but Liam, when working at Hairmyres Hospital in EK was fiercely proud that all his siblings, to that point, had been educated in the state sector. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.242.102.242 (talk) 18:37, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

'The only one of his siblings educated in the state sector'.

This is incorrect. Liam's younger brother Paul attended St Brides and played the lead role in the school production of 'Oliver' when he was in second year. I recall a sister being a pupil too. It was a very good school with an excellent academic record. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.36.160.130 (talk) 11:58, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Expenses[edit]

Fox has claimed 19.ooo pounds over 4 years for his bill for his blackberry, this deserves a mention..[1] . Off2riorob (talk) 16:35, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Finances[edit]

There is no proof that Dr Fox earns any money, much less £25,000, from a company called Arrest Ltd. Just because it is reported in the New Statesman—which has a well known political agenda—doesn’t mean it is true. Even the New Statesman fails to state their source. Also, stating that “Fox accepted £50,000 from Jon Moulton, whose investment firm, Better Capital, owns Gardner Aerospace, a defence firm” without acknowledging that the donation was made before the purchased Gardner Aerospace is disingenuous.Guardian3 (talk) 13:29, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well it says here that he is a registered shareholder of Arrest ltd, which does support the comment. Off2riorob (talk) 16:23, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No where in your link does it state that Liam Fox earns any money, much less £25,000, from a company called Arrest Ltd. Just because it is reported in the New Statesman—which has a well known political agenda—doesn’t mean it is true. Even the New Statesman fails to state their source. Also, stating that “Fox accepted £50,000 from Jon Moulton, whose investment firm, Better Capital, owns Gardner Aerospace, a defence firm” without acknowledging that the donation was made before the purchased Gardner Aerospace is disingenuous. How is having wrong, and out-of-date information keeping in the spirit that makes wikipedia so great? Especially when so many voters in the Uk will be using Wikipedia ahead of the upcoming General Election. Lets try to work out something we can both aree on.Guardian3 (talk) 16:35, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Can we agree on this: Dr Fox is a registrable shareholder of Arrest Ltd.Guardian3 (talk) 16:39, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also, as I said above, stating that “Fox accepted £50,000 from Jon Moulton, whose investment firm, Better Capital, owns Gardner Aerospace, a defence firm” without acknowledging that the donation was made before Moulton purchased Gardner Aerospace, without mentioning that Liam Fox says that this has not influenced Conservative Defence policy, or that neither did anything wrong regarding the donation (as is implied in the original wording) is disingenuous. If you read the sourced article in full, it is clear that there is the use of selective quoting from the Times’ article to paint a biased picture against Liam Fox. I thought wikipedia is supposed to use well sourced and unbiased information? Furthermore, there is no consideration of Liam Fox’s position stated at the end of the article in the Times. Let’s come to some agreed wording to resolve this. Thanks.Guardian3 (talk) 16:51, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Although the new statesman is from one side of the agenda they are reliable and responsible for their content, comments from that citation from the statesman are used in the bios of other politicians, we can attribute it, it is not very controversial, he is a shareholder, what do shareholders do? they make money..so it is not a leap of faith to accept as more or less correct, as far as bias goes this article has almost no anti fox commentary at all, imo it is very neutral, if we can cite that he got the money from the guy in a certain year and we can cite that the guy acquired the company after that we can add that no problem, you have been trying to get this comment removed for a long time now, I have to respect your failing to give up. Its not very bad content though, so he is worth one million or whatever, that is nothing these days, and he makes a little money from here and there, not a big issue is it?Off2riorob (talk) 17:07, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For the £25,000 a year from Arrest Ltd, I think the New Statesman claim (here) is ok - in my opinion, the New Statesman is a reliable source for this sort of information. Information from biased sources are fine, provided the article is unbiased. It appears there is some other coverage in newspapers (though the articles are paywalled, so it's hard to be certain). Haven't checked any of the other sources yet. --h2g2bob (talk) 01:34, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Breaches of parliamentary rules[edit]

"Shadow defence secretary Liam Fox has admitted breaking the rules on two occasions, having visited Sri Lanka five times in the past three years courtesy of its government. He failed to declare the hospitality when asking ministers how much UK aid had been given to Sri Lanka.

In a statement, Mr Fox said: "I should have noted an interest and will be writing to the registrar to make this clear." He blamed a "changeover of staffing responsibilities" for registering one of his visits more than two months late."

All the above can easily be found in MPs' foreign visit rules breached Nunquam Dormio (talk) 11:11, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Questions have arisen in 2011 regarding Mr Fox's potential breaches of the so-called 'ministerial code' in relation to mixing he private relationship with his 'close personal friend' Adam Werritty. Some have discussed the possibility that his position as Defense Secretary may have been compromised by his 'life-style' - with much hearsay seeming to point towards a 'promiscuous' gay lifestyle (According to 'The Sun'). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.98.186.246 (talk) 02:05, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Member of Royal College of General Practitioners?[edit]

L Fox not found at the RCGP search page. He may be on the retired list which isn't searchable. - Pointillist (talk) 21:14, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Medical Directory 2006/07 lists his qualifications as "MB ChB Glas 1983, MRCGP 1989." To have become a member six years after qualifying, he probably had to pass their exam. NRPanikker (talk) 07:11, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Natalie Imbruglia?[edit]

Is this correct? It isn't corroborated on Imbruglia's page and there is no citation here. Which album cover is it on which she mentions him? Frankly, seems a tad far fetched. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.153.81.122 (talk) 21:17, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

They are apparently friends.[2] And the liner notes appear to be accurate (according to press articles,[3][4] though I have not personally seen them or her corroborate this in any way). Koncorde (talk) 23:55, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Today's Telegraph had a small quote from her, indicating that he was a friend of her manager. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.211.94.137 (talk) 15:30, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Resigned[edit]

the BBC has now confirmed that he is resigned from cabinet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.232.1.125 (talk) 15:14, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is student politics relevant?[edit]

The 'Early Life' section of this article currently contains a paragraph about Fox's activities while at the University of Glasgow, noting how he resigned from the SRC over its position on homosexuality. I have to ask, is this really relevant? It seems like excessive attention being given to a single event in student politics more than 25 years ago. I can't help but feel the only reason for including it in this article is to insinuate something negative about Dr. Fox without directly violating WP:BLP. Robofish (talk) 19:02, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What kind of negative thing did you have in mind, exactly? Is it something that might become relevant in his quest to return to government? RomanSpa (talk) 22:01, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
From PinkNews. Insinuating what exactly? That Fox might be, or have been, a homophobe or a hypocrite? The very thought! Admitting women to the Glasgow University Union didn't go too smoothly either. Fox gets a mention in the Poju Zabldowicz article by the way. Wasn't he responsible for selling off the UK's Harrier jump jets, which means that the country will have aircraft carriers with no aircraft?     ←   ZScarpia   22:48, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Guardian - Rupert Neate, Rajeev Syal, Rob Evans- Liam Fox resignation: Adam Werritty money trail was final straw, 14 October 2011.     ←   ZScarpia   19:55, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Guardian - George Monbiot - Sovereignty? This government will sell us to the highest bidder, 27 July 2016.     ←   ZScarpia   18:25, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Guardian - Nick Cohen - How Liam Fox got into bed with Azerbaijan’s kleptocrats, 07 August 2016.     ←   ZScarpia   01:52, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Independent - Andy McSmith - Rise and fall of the council estate boy who took up the Thatcherite flame, 14 October 2011.     ←   ZScarpia   17:54, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Glasgow Guardian (University of Glasgow student newspaper) - Henry Bell - Views: Liam Fox’s Glasgow past, 12 October 2011.     ←   ZScarpia   17:54, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. Fox[edit]

Liam Fox has a PhD, could "Dr" be added to his title in the lead? It gets used a lot in the media. --Nutthida (talk) 19:44, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That would be contrary to MOS:BIO#Academic titles. It was in for a while, but it was removed a few months ago for that reason. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:46, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Can a sourced statement stating that he has a PhD be added to the article body? --BurritoBazooka (talk) 14:54, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
An update, the closest thing I found to a sourced statement of his qualifications is that he got a MBChB in 1983 from the University of Glasgow. http://www.gla.ac.uk/alumni/ouralumni/lifeafterglasgow/notablealumni/ I also cannot find him on the RCGP's member directory (searched for Males surnamed 'Fox'), though the article mentions a BBC source saying he is a member, and people can opt out of being listed in the member directory. --BurritoBazooka (talk) 03:27, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
As stated above, the Medical Directory for 2006/07 lists his qualifications as "MB ChB 1983, MRCGP 1989." The entry would have been made by himself. That's where his old title of "doctor" came from. Wikipedia's policy of "no titles in the heading" precludes using either that or the "Sir" which superseded it. NRPanikker (talk) 07:19, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Main image[edit]

I feel that the current 'profile picture' of Dr Liam Fox is unnecessary and that it shows him in a negative light, thus showing bias. I propose a standardised image of his face, similar to the PMs etc, rather than one which is derogatory. Alex 02:43, 18 October 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bowyeraj (talk • contribs)


Does Liam Fox article require work?[edit]

I keep coming back to this article because I sense it needs quite a bit of work. Frankly it's lengthy which looks like the result of a battle between supporters and detractors - which rarely makes for a good wiki article. However, I haven't attempted to do anything much with this article because I suspect it is controversial too. In the past I've found that it's best to build a consensus about the need to resolve an article first. Does anyone have anything thoughts on this one? At 6,099 words it seems to me it has fallen into the trap of trying to cover everything that Fox says or writes, which isn't generally a good basis. Thoughts from other editors first? Contribsx (talk) 21:26, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're making a strong point there, Grant. Perhaps you could create another sockpuppet and re-write it. --OhNoPeedyPeebles (talk) 22:00, 21 April 2015 (

As a matter of fact, the article is much longer than articles about other UK politicians that are equally notable. It has also rotted there is a number of anachronistic assertions and quotes (e.g.: "British troops in the Sangin area of Afghanistan's Helmand province are to be replaced by US forces, the UK's Defence Secretary Liam Fox has said."

I can't be bothered with editing articles about politicians. My edits always get reverted by people that evidently have no job, but do have a political agenda. I don't like this politician, but I don't have time to go to war with other wikipedians about him. MrDemeanour (talk) 18:08, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Misplaced sense of humour[edit]

Is there a particular reason why neither the article nor the talk page currently contain either the word "Spice" or the word "joke"? I'd have thought it was pretty germane to any discussion of Dr Fox's political competence. JohnHarris (talk) 01:08, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn’t use his full title either, viz. “disgraced former Defence Secretary” Liam Fox. Mr Larrington (talk) 18:35, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality banner[edit]

I note that a "neutrality" banner was added to this article in May 2015. Can anyone suggest which specific areas are felt not to meet NPOV and what actions are needed to resolve this - or has it already been done?— Rod talk 11:12, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Medical career[edit]

Shouldn't this article have more about his medical career? I came here to find out more information about his medical background but there's little mention of it.Gymnophoria (talk) 17:15, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Liam Fox. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:27, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Liam Fox. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:29, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Liam Fox. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:37, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

The Guardian wrote "The former cabinet minister Liam Fox has been criticised for lobbying the prime minister on behalf of a business group that pays him £1,000 an hour. Fox, a former trade secretary, is the chairman and a “commissioner” of the Global Britain Commission, whose members include representatives of the banking industry group UK Finance, the private bank Coutts, Heathrow, Virgin Atlantic, Forth Ports and others. It is expected to pay him £6,000 for six hours of work over the past six months. In his role as a commissioner of the group, Fox wrote an open letter to the prime minister pressing for an export tax credit – a tax break for exporters – as well as a merger between the Department for Business and the Department for Trade – a move that Rishi Sunak made earlier this month. His letter also highlighted the group’s recent recommendations before the budget calling for the scrapping of air passenger duty and changes to the apprenticeship levy, while requesting a meeting with the prime minister to discuss its suggestions." Liam Fox lobbied PM on behalf of trade group that pays him £1,000 an hour

The Guardian is reliable, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources I think this should be in the article. Note, Fox had to resign due to rule breaking. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Liam_Fox&oldid=1141883169#Resignation Proxima Centauri (talk) 10:53, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Proxima Centauri, what you added did not reflect the source though. It wasn't the Guardian's criticism, it was Labour mischief-making they were reporting. The Guardian article made that very clear. The Guardian also made it clear that Fox's activities do not appear to fall foul of the rules that ban some forms of paid lobbying by MPs.
If you still think that a sentence from an opposition party chair, trying to make mischief over an innocent and common parliamentary act, has a place in this article you need to research how a cross-section (left/centre/right biased) of other reliable sources report it, and compare those with how The Guardian puts it. Then draft a balanced account, including what Fox says, and put it in this discussion and see it it achieves a consensus. If you can't find it in a balanced cross-section of sources then it's probably best to forget it as being totally undue. -- DeFacto (talk). 11:44, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Liam_Fox&oldid=1207465985"