 |
| Lovebirds Laws and Lundie. £40,000 scam. Bless |
David Laws, a Liberal Democrat politician in the 2010-12 Cameron-Clegg Coalition Government claimed more than £40,000 on his expenses in the form of second home costs, from 2004 to late 2009, during which time he had been renting rooms at properties owned by what the newspaper claimed to be his "secret lover" and "long-term partner", the dazzlingly handsome, cocktail-drinking, spinach mousse-eating James Lundie, a former Liberal Democrat Press Officer. They were not in a civil partnership. Laws misclaimed second home allowances of between £700 and £950 a month rent between 2006 and 2007, plus typically £100 to £200 a month for maintenance, to rent a room in a flat owned and lived in by Lundie. After Lundie replaced his property with a house in 2007, Laws then claimed rent at £920 a month, until September 2009. Since 2006 the relevant rules banned MPs from "leasing accommodation from... a partner." He also claimed small amounts in respect of his main home in his constituency and his Provencal holiday home. Laws resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury on 29 May 2010. His stated reason for his expenses misclaiming was that he had wanted his sexualityto remain private and that he had not benefited financially. No prosecution necessary. Laws returned to Government as Minister of State for Schools in the Department for Education and Minister of State in the Cabinet Office in September 2012.
A Kensington benefits cheat, Mr David Laws, was today given another week's leave from his job - he has been missing for months - and told not to be a silly-billy, or billyana. Laws, a multimillionaire who defrauded the tax-payer of tens of thousands of housing benefit pounds, said he only done it because his parents was against him being a poof, otherwise he wouldn't of done it, he definitely didn't do it for the money, even though he was rich enough to bung his loverboy a few quid, himself, and not trouble the taxpayer. It's true that he claimed the money and gave it to his wife or husband delete as appropriate but he hadn't meant to steal the money, but he did anyway, it was there, and so he had it, that's how you get to be rich, the former banker said, stealing money what doesn't belong to you. And then giving yourself a bonus out of somebody else's money, anybody's'll do.
The thing is, said Unelected Prime Minister, Mr CallHimDave, this is just the sort of deserving case that I and I am sure members of the public are happy to have our taxes spent on, unlike all these cripples pretending to be ill or something, when they could perfectly well go and do a jolly good day of work. Mr Laws is a perfectly decent chap, even though he is a snivelling, lying, disreputable thieving cocksucker, whom no-one has seen for months whilst he has been sulking and licking his wounds and puking his yellow guts up at the unfairness of it all. And quite right too. It's not as though he did anything wrong. I mean, you and I know that our Coalition partners are all arsebandits, every last one of them, and worse, and nothing is safe with them, but Mr and Mrs Law Senior clearly didn't know that junior fished from the other bank, travelled on the other bus or, as my friend, Boris, says, pushed the jolly old brown wheelbarrow uphill. What was he to do, he could either tell his parents that he played the spunk trumpet in his private life or, well, he could steal a load of money from the govament, ie me. But since he stole it but didn't really need it in the first place, that makes everything alright and we look forward to having him back in the govament as soon as jolly well possible. Unlike, of course, Mr Lord Taylor who will, most likely, be going to jail for doing much the same thing. But then he is a jungle bunny, not the sort we want in the Tory party, as I thought had been made clear to him.
The example of Mr Lawses honesty in the face of these allegations makes us all the more determined to crack-down on benefits, I mean benefits fraud, wherever we find it, only not in this place, or the other place, or any of the places where honourable and right honourable members go about their business. Unless they're Darkies or Scotchmen.
ANYDAY, NOW, ANYWAY, NOW,
I SHALL NOT BE RELEASED.
OUT IN TWO.
LORD SILLY-FUCKER.
THE WRONG SORT OF BENEFITS CHEAT.
On 16 July 2010, Lord Taylor of Warwick resigned the ToryWhip after being charged with offences connected with claims totalling £11,277.
Several hundred members of the House of Commons and House of Lords were involved in the expenses scandal but only six members of the House of Commons and two, including Taylor, of the Lords, were charged and convicted.(Is it becus I is black?)
Taylor's defence in the Crown Court was that on appointment to the House of Lords he had asked other peers for advice on expenses and allowances and that he was told that the overnight subsistence allowance, the office allowance, and the travel expenses were provided in lieu of a salary, as well as the daily attendance allowance. As a result of claiming for the cost of journeys he had not made, and the cost of accommodation he had not occupied, Taylor was convicted of six counts of false accounting. Mr Justice Saunders imposed a sentence of 12 months' imprisonment, relating to £11,277 in falsely claimed expenses. he also said that the expenses scandal had "left an indelible stain on Parliament". About 15 members of the House of Lords refused to give evidence to support Taylor's defence. - mrs ishmael
ANYDAY, NOW, ANYWAY, NOW,
I SHALL NOT BE RELEASED.
LORD SILLY-FUCKER.
THE WRONG SORT OF BENEFITS CHEAT.
On 16 July 2010, Lord Taylor of Warwick resigned the ToryWhip after being charged with offences connected with claims totalling £11,277.
Several hundred members of the House of Commons and House of Lords were involved in the expenses scandal but only six members of the House of Commons and two, including Taylor, of the Lords, were charged and convicted.(Is it becus I is black?)
Taylor's defence in the Crown Court was that on appointment to the House of Lords he had asked other peers for advice on expenses and allowances and that he was told that the overnight subsistence allowance, the office allowance, and the travel expenses were provided in lieu of a salary, as well as the daily attendance allowance. As a result of claiming for the cost of journeys he had not made, and the cost of accommodation he had not occupied, Taylor was convicted of six counts of false accounting. Mr Justice Saunders imposed a sentence of 12 months' imprisonment, relating to £11,277 in falsely claimed expenses. he also said that the expenses scandal had "left an indelible stain on Parliament". About 15 members of the House of Lords refused to give evidence to support Taylor's defence. - mrs ishmael
13 comments:
If nursie and quacko are worth a round of applause every Thursday evening, surely our parliamentary betters should bask (and, probably, basque, in some cases) in the servile admiration of a grateful nation at least twice a day? (Or maybe five times, with our backsides facing Westminster.)
v./
Thank you, mr verge, still the house filthster, I note.
The Post title is taken from Ian Dury's version of the Bus Driver's Prayer:
Our Farnham, who art in Hendon
Harrow be Thy name.
Thy Kingston come; thy Wimbledon,
In Erith as it is in Hendon.
Give us this day our daily Brent
And forgive us our Westminster
As we forgive those who Westminster against us.
And lead us not into Thames Ditton
But deliver us from Yeovil.
For Thine is the Kingston, the Purley and the Crawley,
For Esher and Esher.
Crouch End.
The thing that astonishes me is why anyone, having found out that their MP has been thieving from them, would ever vote for them again. it defies belief.
Busy night, mr mongoose, so I didn't get back to you. Talking to the ishmaeling on the oldfashioned phone (no zooming, what's apping, skyping or facetiming for us)for an hour, whilst the Blog-dog, Harris, became increasingly annoyed before he went to get his harness and lead and dragged me out of the house for his cliff walk in the bracing, bloody freezing evening air. We've had hail and snow up here.
You make a significant point: "why anyone, having found out that their MP has been thieving from them, would ever vote for them again"
Firstly, the majority of the public, even those who bother to vote, are not very interested in politicians, their discourses and behaviours, despite the best efforts of the PBC to engage them. They think that PBC stands for the Propaganda Broadcasting Corporation, rather than the Paedophile Broadcasting Corporation.
Secondly, the public have a deep-seated and probably accurate conviction, that all politicians are at it in some form or another - fiscally, sexually transgressively, or both and any of the above.
Thirdly, the memory of the public is very short indeed. The phrase "Nine Days' Wonder" was coined for a reason. This is why it was necessary for me to include a lengthy gloss in the essay. Back when he drafted it, mr ishmael could rely on these events having the immediacy of recent scandal and all he had to do was to contrast the racially-motivated prosecution of disbarred John Taylor and his comparatively minor fraud with the far larger sums gouged from the public purse by Laws and his catamite, for the readership to shout Ruin!
Fourthly, there is the possibility that those who rule o'er us are very well-tailored lizards who have subjected us to mass hypnosis in order to successfully prey upon us. It has been mentioned before. Would explain the revolving door by which those disgraced just have to wait a wee while before trundling back into the land of wealth, power, status, good suits and, above all, wealth.I did mention wealth?
No apology for including old news - it gives ishmaelites the chance to read more of the fine writing and encounter the caustically analytic political imagination of mr ishmael,and it serves to remind us that 'twas ever thus, this is what they're like until found out those that Westminster over us - the names may change (not all of them, as they are rather good at hanging on), the scandals come and go and come again, but the self-serving venality is dyed in the wool.
Which brings me to mr verge's rather important point. All this clapping and rainbowing. Endless free access to entertainment. It has distracted very successfully from the removal of Civil Liberties, jury trials, the crashing through Parliament of unbelievably restrictive legislation https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2020/7/contents (take a glance at the list of contents)and https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/129/contents/made, the extension of Police Powers, the deployment of the Armed Services into Local Authority areas, the house arrest of the citizenry, the abandonment of any discourse other than the National Emergency (remember Brexit, anyone?, removal of the right to travel, and on and on..
Never waste a good crisis, eh?
I'm not advocating that ishmaelites adopt mr verge's salute to those who Westminster against us. There's probably a law against it now.
You probably missed it, mrs i, having plenty of better things to do than read my ramblings but here back in the day, I used to talk of eating the cabinboy. Shipwrecked sailors were desperate and "the law of the sea" decided that they'd kill the wee one, the powerless one, the one least likely to be worried about. And eat him. (R v Dudley and Stephens, if you have your lawbooks to hand.)
They were tried and convicted of murder, although they peleaded necessity. It was necessary to kill the boy and eat him, they said. These days it is Law 101, as the children say, but the Judge was a better-read fellow and from his bench intoned from Paradise Lost:
So spake the fiend, and with necessity,
The tyrant's plea, excused his devilish deed.
From that day to this, necessity is the argument of the rogue.
I see that Saturday mail deliveries have just been stopped - strictly pro tem, of course. It was necessary apparently. Do you think that they will ever come back?
mr mongoose, I've always loved your ramblings. You, and the rest of the commentariat have made Call me ishmael.
Well, they're certainly not wasting a good crisis and the legislation is in place for total control of the citizen-suspect. Do you suppose that any of that legislation will be repealed when the time has come for us to co-exist with the virus? No, nor Saturday deliveries.
There's a brittle, faded papyrus in a cave somewhere which, if properly translated, would remind us that "Necessity is the Mother of Oppression" remains one of the oldest tricks in the playbook. And in the other corner of the cave is more than likely an ancient recipe for Cabinboy Goulash.
bon appetit
v./
Mrs I: no need for a primer for me, I remember these events vividly. Laws got away with it because he was a poof, and the Tories needed the "liberal" numbers. In other words, politics as normal. I think that people's ability to forget is just their lack of interest.
An aside for Mr Verge - its still dark here and I'm typing with the lights off so as not to wake the dog, who sleeps in my office. So, a lot of mis-hit keys. The spell checker just corrected my mis-typing of "ability" with "anilingus", a new word for me.
I once was in the firing line in front of a House of Commons select committee. All purple faces and aerosol spittle flying through the air. Facts meant nothing to them. When it was over, the Chairman, who was very aggressive, asked me if I wanted a drink, and to pay no attention as it was all for show. I politely declined the drink.
Says a lot that, Mr Mike. May they all rot. In time, of course, they will.
Crikey Moses, Mr Mike - that's surely a new milepost on Ruin's Highway, when the normalisation of depravity has even taken root in your spellcheck software. (I use depravity in an entirely non-judgmental manner, of course, before anyone reports me to some cyber watchdog or other.)
Maybe google was basing its suggestion on your (virtual) whereabouts at time of writing. There's a thought...
v./
Don't think I'll look that one up, Mr Mike.
I haven't forgotten too. I don't understand it. If people would steal from me, I cannot trust them with anything really, can I?
You could be right, Mr Verge. A personalised spell checker. That's a frightening thought.
Another manifestation of the surveillance state, messrs mike and verge? If we truly believed that, we would be either incredibly brave, in a foolhardy sort of way, or jawdroppingly stupid to raise our heads over these parapets. As for myself, I choose to believe that all is for the best in the best of all possible worlds. Despite all evidence to the contrary. It's safer that way.
Post a Comment