Middle-earth political tit for tat for naught

Those who are not yet convinced that British politicians are either corrupt, crazy or 'having a laugh', are discussing the latest point-scoring competition between the two top parties. It basically has to do with both a Labour and a Tory politician currying favour with a Russian oligarch (with criminal ties, according to the US) on his yacht moored at Corfu. This is little more than a score-settling between private-school boys (including some of the other Brits who were present, and who are the ones who ratted out the politicians). In the end, it's zero sum gain because other stories of both parties' corruption have come to the fore as well.
The one such sordid case that has not been mentioned, outside of one tv show, is that of Lord Somesuch who is a citizen, but also a super-rich 'non-resident' tax-dodger (how can he be a UK politician, you may ask?). Still, he bought his lordship (which is apparently illegal) and is funnelling more 'donations' to Labour (again illegal for a non-resident) through a shell game with his various companies, British and non. Now, that's interesting and proof exists to back it up. Why is nobody else talking about it?
Back to the previous case, there is no hard evidence that anybody did anything wrong, so, why the fuss? Is it for purposes of distraction? It seems that the Labour guy, who had been seconded to the EU as trade minister, seems to have done the Ruskie a favour by lowering tarriffs on the aluminum he was exporting to the EU. Was this done illegally? What was the pay-off? Money for Labour, which is near bankruptcy, or access to high-society lady-boys for the minister?
Side note: it has always been British policy that the Ruskies were not to have access to the Mediterranean. Most recently it was sorted post-WW2 at Yalta (which wasn't enough to convince the Greeks who had a 4-year civil war anyway). Now it seems that not only are they out on the Med, but they are also 'drowning' 'officers' of the British government. Vodka, Meester Bond?
See Economist 25th Oct pg46.