When in a hole, stop digging

In the end, only four MPs will be prosecuted by the Police.

Full details of the story can be found at the BBC News website.

The extent of the immorality of these scumbags, the four that are being charged and the many that are getting away scot-free is beyond comprehension. But surely the top prize for conceit, the number one award for guilt-free theft has to go the the RH Jim Devine MP.

I almost choked on my fish and chips watching this interview in Channel 4.
The Labour member of parliament for Livingston admits to submitting false receipts. But wait, things can only get better: he did so on the advice of a Labour whip.

Under questioning by the C4 presenter, Mr Devine refuses to disclose the ientity of the Labour whip who alledgedly advised him to submit false receipts. I trust Mr Devine will not be as shy under interrogation by the Metropolitan Police.

But here is the interesting thing about Mr Devine's explanation: he claims he moved money around but did not benefit financially himself. So who did? Were there any bank transfers between Mr Devine's "communications" and "staffing" accounts and a bank account of a third party, let's say a Labour party bank account?

This is only the start.

The rule of the law -for some

It is quite extraordinary what is happening in the UK in the last few months.

A few weeks ago, we woke up to discover that our elected representatives are more corrupt than any of us ever imagined. To its credit, The Daily Telegraph provided great and unpartisan coverage of the scandal. They are all, the vast majority, at it: Labour, Tories, LibDems and even the SNP. Milking the system for their own benefit.

I wonder how the Police and HMRC would react if I told them that I forgot to declare rental income from an old flat, or if I told them that I was getting tax exemption for items that had nothing to do with the rented property. Would a very sincere apology suffice?

They would probably let me know that “ignorance of the law is not excuse” or less likely they would intimate “ignorantia juris non excusat”.

Today, we woke up to find out that a newspaper has been breaking the law repeatedly and systematically, and that it is settling with the victims out of court trying to conceal the matter.

The Guardian reports that the News of the World, a British tabloid, has been tapping into mobile phones and landlines of public figures, with a view to get “exclusives”. [BBC]

The Metropolitan Police has decided that there is no case to answer and that further investigation is not in the public interest. Once again, the Metropolitan Police is not going to take any further the investigation of alleged crimes. [BBC].

So the question is:
- When is an alleged crime not deserving of a police investigation?

Answer:
- When the alleged criminal has more power and more means than the vast majority of citizens.

Thus, News International and particularly News of the World are left off the hook.

I see a pattern:

1) Insolvent banks are saved and bail out by the taxpayer, despite being private companies, because they are deemed too big to fail;

2) Politicians are immune from prosecution despite overwhelming evidence of tax fraud;

3) A powerful newspaper is spared a police investigation into alleged criminal conduct on an industrial scale, because it has the means to pay off its victims.

Thank God things could only get better.

Campaign struggling to start...

Well, the campaign to stop shaking hands with the less-than-honourable members has not made the impact I was hoping for… never mind.

I honestly think it would be a historical event if it were to catch on and spread all over the UK ahead of the European election on 20 June.

Any way, if you have a blog and want to spread the word, perhaps it is not too late.

http://trenator.blogspot.com/2009/05/dont-shake-hands-campaign.html

I have posted in The Independent, The Guardian, even it that Guido Fawkes blog (apologies Tom & Graeme, I thought this could get traction that way...) and other blogs but nothing is happening.

BBC censorship of Speaker's criticism

Sometimes I cannot help thinking that the BBC’s reputation for objectivity, neutrality and high journalistic standards is more a myth than reality. Particularly when it comes to criticism of the Scottish Labour party. In Spain everyone if full of how great the BBC is and how it should be a model for all public broadcasters. I used to agree. Now, after living in the UK for over 10 years, I am not sure. Myth, perception and reality intermingle.

Yesterday, I posted the below text in the Blether with Brian blog.
To my amazement, it has been removed as it apparently breaks the house rules on defamation.

Can anyone let me know what is in this post that is defamatory?

I have posted it again with a toned-down version, let’s see if it makes the cut…


========================
Brian,

The Speaker of the House is not a mere class rep.
The Speaker is supposed to lead.

If the less-than-honourable members have been up to no good, it is the Speaker’s job to tick them off.

Michael Martin was an awful speaker: inarticulate, mumbling, discourteous and with a tendency to gag people down. Nothing to do with class or background or accent: all to do with competence.

Michael Martin committed far too many errors to deserve any sympathy:

1) He was the main force behind the push for exemption from the FoI Act. He wanted the expenses system to be kept secret and wasted thousands of our tax money on legal fees.

2) When it was clear that this was going to come out, instead of saying sorry, instead of showing contrition or remorse, he calls in the Police to investigate the leak.

3) When a couple of backbenchers raise the issue, he shuts them down in the most childish and discourteous manner. (Hoey)

4) When another backbencher raises the issue of the no-confidence motion, again the mumbles, fumbles and shows why he should have never been the Speaker in the first place.

All this after having had a number of years to do something about this mess.
So, you understand that most of us have no sympathy for the shop steward that became one of them. Good riddance.
======================

Don’t shake hands campaign

Since the extent of the expenses scandal became clear, I have been flabbergasted at the dishonesty and the lack of morality of the vast majority of MPs.

Today, I propose that the public takes a stance.

I know I am a total nobody in the blogosphere but I think this is worth trying. If you can spread the message, perhaps it will catch on and set a global trend. With the European Elections campaign in June fast approaching, the least-than-honourable Members will be out and about campaigning to get our vote. Before we give them our vote, we should give them a piece of our mind.

What I am suggesting is that elected politicians are given the cold shoulder by the voting public.
I advocate that we should not shake hands with them, let alone let them kiss our babies for that arranged photo-opportunity.

Before we do such a thing, we are entitled to ask:

“Do you have a clear conscience with regards to your expenses claim?”

Alright, the answer is obvious: many of them do not seem to have a conscience; but still we should ask this and other questions. For example:

“Have you claimed for any personal items such as furniture, luxury
carpets, garden maintenance, pool cleaning, TVs, pet food, etc?”

“How many times have you flipped your home since becoming an MP?”

“How much have you claimed under the expense system?”

Just look them in the eye and watch their face.

If they are not elected yet, then we should be asking what expenses they are intending to claim on. I personally think that travel and mortgage interest should be enough for anybody on a £63k salary -nearly three times the national average before perks.

Then, after listening to their answer, and remembering at all times that they are highly skilled at lying and deceit, we will decide whether we want to shake hands or hand them over our precious baby to be kissed.

Be wise.

Labour and the lost moral compass

There is a massive scandal engulfing British politics. It relates to the expenses system operated in the House of Commons, the British Parliament. It turns out that our elected representatives are milking the system and claiming for everything under the sun: not only mortgage interest but food, newspapers, toilet rolls, home furnishings, gardening, porn movies, swimming pool clearning, horse manure, anything and everything you can think of.

This story has been led by The Daily Telegraph, also known as The Daily Torygraph , since last Friday. When it started last week, I was a bit sceptical. I thought it was just the start to the campaign for next year’s General Election. I wrongly assumed the newspaper would only publish embarrassing revelations about the Labour party and would leave Conservatives MPs in peace. In case you are not too hot on British politics, this newspaper is a bastion of Conservatism, a proper right-wing, Euroskeptic, anti trade union, free-market newspaper. Nothing wrong with that: everybody is entitled to their own opinion. Apart from the crass Europhobia and its unrepentant Thatcherism, it is/could be a decent newspaper I would buy every now and then. But I don't.

Today however, it has been the first time in over 10 years that I have picked up a copy of The Daily Telegraph at Glasgow Airport on my way to London. Despite the flight being full exclusively of suited types, I was the only one to pick a free copy. The Daily Telegraph is not a popular read in Scotland, not least because of their Scottish Politics correspondent, a resentful, narrow-minded British Nationalist with a profound disdain for Scottish devolution.

Anyway, back to the story, I have been astounded at the lack of compunction by the shamed MPs. You see, what they did was within the rules, apparently. The rules that they themselves designed and policed. Reading these revelations made my blood boil. Had I seen any of these scumbags in the plane I would have given them a piece of my mind.

If you want to read about it, check The Daily Telegraph or BBC News.

But if that was not bad enough, just wait.

Yesterday, Tuesday 11 May, a Labour backbencher challenged the Speaker of the House about this issue. The Speaker is responsible for the office that manages the expense system. This parliamentarian raises her concerns about this mess. But this idiot, this disgraceful member of the Labour party, instead of acknowledging the scale of the problem, tries to bully the MP.

The following day, Tuesday 12 May, another parliamentarian puts it to the Speaker that he should consider the tone and the way he addressed his colleague.
The Ogre of Sprinburg declines:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8046601.stm

Right. But that is not enough.

Today as well, another of the Labour grandees, Lord Foulkes, [wiki] when challenged by a BBC journalist, instead of showing repentance, instead of apologising for the way MPs are screwing up taxpayers, furnishing their homes at our expense, tries to bully the journalist and retaliates back with a personal attack. Watch this:


The party of the people: Iraq war, backing of nuclear weapons on the Clyde (anyone remember CND?), ID cards, privatising NHS, tuitions fees, faith schools, PPP/PFI, privatising Royal Mail, infatuation with the banking industry, more tax loopholes than ever for the rich, and now this.

There is absolutely no policy difference between the Conservatives and Labour. None.

Somehow, even though I have never voted Labour whilst living in the UK, I do feel sorry for all the hardworking, if delusional, grassroots activists who can only witness in dismay how the party of the people has ended up being ruled by a spineless, warmongering, lying bunch of self-serving bullies.

The Labour party has lost its moral compass and the sooner there is an election the better.
After all, if we are going to be ruled by a bunch of self-serving arrogant twats, then I’d rather it was the genuine article. At least then we know where we all stand.