tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post2345727776223661932..comments2024-03-04T17:54:32.559+00:00Comments on Iain Dale's Diary: Why the Standards Commissioner Should Find Laws Not GuiltyIain Dalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03270146219458384372noreply@blogger.comBlogger91125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-89652563925586754382010-06-01T23:30:51.212+01:002010-06-01T23:30:51.212+01:00The court of public opinion has already found Davi...<i>The court of public opinion has already found David Laws guilty</i>From comments left here, and from people's own blogs, I think you can see that public opinion is split.<br /><br />The Telegraph does have questions to answer though, they claimed to have 'investigated' David Laws last May and found nothing untoward, yet overnight (after QT) they found enough information to damn him.Mrs Rigbyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02896765062231309345noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-73757215237184839152010-06-01T18:57:34.527+01:002010-06-01T18:57:34.527+01:00Iain, you're probably fed up with people disag...Iain, you're probably fed up with people disagreeing with you on the subject of David Laws but for what it's worth - I think you're wrong too :)<br /><br />I just think it's laughable (and slightly offensive to gay couples) to suggest that Mr Laws and Mr Lundie were not just as much a couple as any other. If it were *Miss* Lundie, I don't think you would even try to suggest that the two were anything other the long term partners.<br /><br />As for the privacy defence - I really can't believe you are supporting the view that Mr Laws should be excused because he broke the rules for <i>understandable</i> reasons. As sympathetic as I am to any gay man or woman's anguish if they have yet to come out to friends and family, I absolutely disagree with the idea that this is in any way a defence - any more than "I could have claimed more", "everyone else was doing it" or "it was an honest mistake". We all have our reasons for doing what we do - unfortunately, that doesn't relieve us from taking responsibility for our actions.<br /><br />Mr Laws (apparently) knew he was breaking the rules but thought it was okay to do so because of his personal circumstances. That is not a reasonable position for a senior member of the Government to take. It certainly isn't tolerated when the masses choose to break the rules and have to face the consequences.<br /><br />Laws' plight is unfortunate but entirely of his own making. I know his position must resonate a little more with you than others (from what you've written before) but I can't help thinking you're allowing that to cloud your otherwise very sensible judgment.<br /><br />Just saying.Intentionally Blankhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03308816777751570233noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-66709948311480978892010-06-01T16:05:54.440+01:002010-06-01T16:05:54.440+01:00They were partners because the were 'spousal e...They were partners because the were 'spousal equivalents' - see my <a href="http://mrnonnymouse.blogspot.com/2010/06/were-david-laws-and-jamie-lundie.html" rel="nofollow">blog post</a>.<br /><br />If you are worried about your age then just join a union like Jack Dromey. Of course, the down side is the need to share a bed with Harriet.The Managementhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12096318663704341944noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-46180613377187347272010-06-01T15:24:52.003+01:002010-06-01T15:24:52.003+01:00One wonders whether Mr Lundie has declared the inc...One wonders whether Mr Lundie has declared the income received from David Laws on his tax returns. The sums taken in rent are somewhat higher than the room to let rates that are published by the HMRC.<br /><br />Mr Laws has shown incredible stupidity and then dressed it up as a right to privacy in his defence. What he has done is to demonstrate an incredible lack of moral and ethical standing and left himself open to the actions that have been taken.<br /><br />I might also say that given Lundie's occupation and position, Laws has also shown that he cares little for reputation. What secrets has he revealed to his lover, or what access has been gained. The speculation on this particular aspect of the relationship is compelling for investigation.Penfoldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16946700329323417719noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-49504675540317471592010-06-01T12:46:07.091+01:002010-06-01T12:46:07.091+01:00@Anna "If you want to keep your sexuality a s...@Anna "If you want to keep your sexuality a secret, DON'T LIVE WITH YOUR BOYFRIEND!"<br /><br />He wasn't his boyfriend when they moved in together, he started a relationship with his landlord two years after moving in together.NoetiCathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05403234052383312082noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-58286799588830981972010-06-01T12:16:24.408+01:002010-06-01T12:16:24.408+01:00Laws was a public servant. Compare what happened t...Laws was a public servant. Compare what happened to David Laws with what happens to an ordinary civil servant who breaks the rules. Recently, a civil servant who used the office post to dispatch his ebay sales (total postage costs £40) was not given the chance to resigning. He was summarily sacked and lost all his pension rights. He was told that prosecution was avoided only because the cost of court action was too high. He broke the rules and paid the price. David Laws, by contrast, was able to resign with dignity, and keep his job as an MP.<br /><br />His sexuality is a red herring. If you want to keep your sexuality a secret, DON'T LIVE WITH YOUR BOYFRIEND!. And certainly don't help him pay, from public funds, the mortgage on a house that was subsequently sold at a profit of £198,000. <br /><br />And, if you are an honourable man, don't advertise on your website how squeaky clean you are and remind the public of the excesses of MPs in neighbouring constituences. That was really, really shabby.<br /><br />Homosexuals have suffered appalling treatment in the past from the law, religion and social attitudes and thank heaven most of us are more civilised now. But sympathy for Laws' private anguish - and you'd have to have a heart of stone not to feel for him - mustn't blind us to the fact that he did a fiddle. OK, many MPs have got away with much worse - and these many unfairnesses are at the root of a lot of the ongoing hullaballoo. There is much unfinished business that the 'show trials' will not settle. People are still furious that many MPs got off so lightly or, like Laws, appeared to be squeaky clean when they were not.<br /><br />I'd have respected David Laws more if he'd admitted that he was sucked into a corrupt culture rather than using his desire for privacy as an excuse for his wrongdoing.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03809326553625044519noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-15154273747726360132010-06-01T12:13:00.182+01:002010-06-01T12:13:00.182+01:00That is a very technical as well as dubious quibbl...That is a very technical as well as dubious quibble to rely on Iain. Which is what the entire scandal has been about people doing.<br /><br />Laws is an extremely rich man who did not need to rip off the public so.neil craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09157898238945726349noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-10999331495195227702010-06-01T10:50:04.785+01:002010-06-01T10:50:04.785+01:00@ noetic: "The Green Book *is* the law on thi...@ noetic: "The Green Book *is* the law on this matter, for crying out loud!"<br /><br />No it is not. The Green Book is merely an internal document like club rules.<br /><br />Nobody is above the law, not even MPs.<br /><br />This is a clear clase of obtaining £40,000 by deception. This is a criminal law matter and not a Green Book matter.jailhouselawyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03795278184797990706noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-19500823024719107292010-06-01T10:24:34.962+01:002010-06-01T10:24:34.962+01:00"I will be 52 at the next election. Few peopl...<i>"I will be 52 at the next election. Few people get selected in their 50s."</i><br /><br />Isn't it bizarre that in politics, where you would most expect experience to count, there is this age bar that in almost any other field would be illegal?Seanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03234085314662011091noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-38448918530860178352010-06-01T10:18:02.658+01:002010-06-01T10:18:02.658+01:00Iain,
I think you may be a little too close to th...Iain,<br /><br />I think you may be a little too close to the problem to see it clearly, on a number of dimensions.<br /><br />Had this been a female other, there would be not a shimmer of doubt. Had this been a Labour minister, you would not doubt it.<br /><br />Regardless, Laws created a situation so as to put himself significantly at risk of blackmail*. That was irresponsible. Extremely so. <br /><br />In addition, Laws did signify, almost totemically, what was right about the Coalition in many peoples' eyes. He was willing to speak about cuts and had a good delivery.<br /><br />What is tragic is that if as it seems Laws will not bring himself to return, it might actually be an indication of his decency, unlike the shameless, brass-necked, shallow scoundrels we have had to endure for 13 years.<br /><br /><br />"The sharpest blades are easiest blunted".<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />*This is why it was so right to end the ridiculous laws against homosexuality.Roger Thornhillhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03591327286533118901noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-6116461347149292702010-06-01T10:18:02.659+01:002010-06-01T10:18:02.659+01:00If I have to hear one more time that this is a &qu...If I have to hear one more time that this is a "national tragedy" I will puke. He unquestionably broke the spirit of the rules (and in my view he broke the letter of them also). Wasn't it the Libdems that sat atop the moral high ground lecturing the two main parties about how important is was not just to comply with the letter of the law like some Belize dwelling non dom but to abide by the obvious spirit of the law? Laws himself sanctimoniously lectured his fellow members as to how clean he was by choosing to rent rather than claim a second home allowance.<br /><br />If Laws was not gay, there would be no room for debate at all. Man lives with woman for 9 years, has sex with her, loves her, helps her out with home purchase and then claims expenses for rent paid to her. Game over. The fact that Laws is seeking to argue that they did not treat each as other spouses because they "lived separate social lives" is an extraordinary defence. Is he pleading promiscuity as a defence? Or do they occasionally go to the pub with different people? Either way it's bollocks.<br /><br />And can we please do away with this nonsense that he is "Mr Integrity". Laws knew this was dubius but throughout the expenses furore he declined to come clean or even refer it. It was only once he was exposed by the DT that he referred it and even then, he intended to hang on. It was only once Dave made it clear to him that he could not have this hanging over his government for months that he "decided to resign".<br /><br />I have sympathy for the fact that his private life has been exposed to publicity but he didn't have to fleece the taxpayer to the tune of £40,000 to reimburse himself for rent paid to his unspouselike lover.p smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04412693505325590969noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-8872103330682315102010-06-01T10:02:38.202+01:002010-06-01T10:02:38.202+01:00Time to stop digging, I think.Time to stop digging, I think.Little Black Sambohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16699227938165106710noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-73241869248138359482010-06-01T09:46:40.177+01:002010-06-01T09:46:40.177+01:00Iain, I have to agree with uou on this point. The...Iain, I have to agree with uou on this point. The whole point about rules is that to be effective they have to be clearly defined and operated according to the precise wording wherever possible. <br /><br />If that that means that some borderline cases such as Laws seem to benefit, then so be it, life is like that some times.<br /><br />I think it comes to a pretty pass when we think that we can decide on behalf of others that they are a couple. <br /><br />The position of welfare recipients is slightly different. They are requesting support from the state based on their needs, which the state is quite entitled to assess according to specific rules.<br /><br />Laws is was <i>per se</i> entitled to recover the cost of his second residence, subject to the rules that would prevent him paying rent to a spouse or partner or someone who is treated as a partner.<br /><br />I would have thought that it was pretty obvious that to be treated as an unmarried/(civil partnershipped) partner, the first requirement would be that the nature of the relationship would be openly declared, which was not the case here.Alexhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13775753218753337766noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-30746017324350383382010-06-01T09:43:12.814+01:002010-06-01T09:43:12.814+01:00http://cyberboris.wordpress.com/2010/06/01/religio...http://cyberboris.wordpress.com/2010/06/01/religion-can-tear-your-soul-in-two/<br /><br />Iain, I know that religion can often come into these situations. We may think we understand what people go through when they come from very religious families, whose beliefs are at odds with their true selves. Unless you have first hand experience of the conflicts, you don't know.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-38504286647640607792010-06-01T09:38:32.815+01:002010-06-01T09:38:32.815+01:00@ Ian
I can assure you that envy did not prompt m...@ Ian<br /><br />I can assure you that envy did not prompt my comment and am aware that MPs, no matter what the state of their finances, are entitled to recompense for legitimate expenses.<br /><br />It would, however, be nice & a fine example to others, if those in a position to do so were to decline the offered recompense pro bono publico.<br /><br />You will understand I do not live in the real world.Tcheuchterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07213627230016662848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-14736497305542363162010-06-01T09:09:21.581+01:002010-06-01T09:09:21.581+01:00Laws has
(a) Resigned
(b) Admitted, albeit in some...Laws has<br />(a) Resigned<br />(b) Admitted, albeit in somewhat circular language, that what he did was wrong<br />(c) Committed to paying the money back<br /><br />It would be reasonable to conclude from this, wouldn't it, that it was David Laws who pronounced David Laws guilty, not the infamous "court of public opinion". So for that matter why does the Standards Commissioner need to investigate any further at all, especially if his investigation is going to trespass into the bedroom, a place we shouldn't be paying public servants to go? <br /><br />As I wrote in an earlier comment, I believe that Laws' honourable resignation did something to put a little bit of integrity back into British public life. It would be a shame if that all gets washed away through an investigation that serves no other purpose than to provide a platform for prurient speculation about the nature (or existence) of an MP's sexual relationship with his partner.HampsteadOwlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10579484010636107402noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-7888882002365129962010-06-01T09:08:07.350+01:002010-06-01T09:08:07.350+01:00The court of public opinion has found Laws guilty ...The court of public opinion has found Laws guilty but you have found him innocent.Politics is in a parlous state because of cheating politicians.Have you heard of priciple?The fact that the rent was reasonable is neither here nor there.It should not have been claimed.If Laws did not consider Lundie a partner why did he live with him for 8 years and lend him £200k towards a new house? Iain, get out of the westminster village and find ou what people in the real world are thinking.LEEROGERhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05954927647927460040noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-72899584197120981732010-06-01T08:40:20.577+01:002010-06-01T08:40:20.577+01:00@ Noetic & trevorsden
I am not questioning a ...@ Noetic & trevorsden<br /><br />I am not questioning a rich man's entitlement to legitimate expenses. I do however question why a rich man feels he should avail himself of the entitlement.<br /><br />@ Jimmy<br /><br />I take your point.Tcheuchterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07213627230016662848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-5120012482078413122010-06-01T08:05:35.845+01:002010-06-01T08:05:35.845+01:00Tcheuchter
Because it's not a means-tested sy...Tcheuchter<br /><br />Because it's not a means-tested system. It is there to cover expenses incurred as a result of being an MP, and wouldn't be incurred if he/she was not an MP.<br /><br />Good to see the politics of envy are still going strong though.Ian Simcoxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01518825067469269377noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-13202572696310033022010-06-01T07:51:49.763+01:002010-06-01T07:51:49.763+01:00Let's be perfectly honest here Iain, the only ...Let's be perfectly honest here Iain, the only reason you are attempting to defend Laws is because he is 'gay'.<br /><br />It's obvious to almost everyone that the guy has ripped off the taxpayer and for him to claim that he and Lundie were not partners/spouses is patent rubbish.Catosayshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02885445175868379750noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-81409833801071652272010-06-01T07:39:58.785+01:002010-06-01T07:39:58.785+01:00I cannot believe this !
What he does behind close...I cannot believe this !<br /><br />What he does behind closed doors is nothing to do with any of us.<br /><br />When he uses that as an excuse to cover dipping into the public purse that is what he is going to be criticised for.<br /><br />The worse that is going to happen to him is an apology to Parliament. In private business instant dismissal for gross misconduct and an investigation by HMRC.<br /><br />Stuff the Green book, he should have lived by the same rulebook imposed on the rest of usGuthrumhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17499979740864497256noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-80551059020735374972010-06-01T04:16:00.039+01:002010-06-01T04:16:00.039+01:00It's a shame that David Laws cannot continue i...It's a shame that David Laws cannot continue in his post. <br /><br />It's also a shame that when I, as a member of the armed forces, had to stand for 3 hours in a line to justify eating for the previous 6 days. <br /><br />When I was claiming it wasn't as a millionaire paying rent, it was as a member of the armed forces claiming to eat for food whilst being made to deploy for 4 months away from my family in support of the National Interest.<br /><br />Don't get me wrong please. I am not, and will never be, a Labour voter. I find their politics revolting. I do know that had I claimed in a similar manner as did David Laws I would face a court martial. <br /><br />He did wrong, he should accept it and all members of Parliament who have "juggled" the laws and rules should also accept the same and go quietly into the night. <br /><br />If Parliamentarians had to abide by the same rules as the people the send into conflict I would guess they would not fall foul of the rules.Lossie Beachcomberhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01985258623113056390noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-89555975163322925812010-06-01T04:01:48.852+01:002010-06-01T04:01:48.852+01:00Although I think it's a pity that Laws has had...Although I think it's a pity that Laws has had to resign, I don't think you can claim that he did nothing wrong.<br /><br />Nor do I think that MP's should now be given a break - we need to carry on until the whole sorry expenses mess is cleared up.Adrianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18133737535022180304noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-46603790566380685402010-06-01T02:11:40.056+01:002010-06-01T02:11:40.056+01:00So many hypocrites writing here. It is entirely r...So many hypocrites writing here. It is entirely reasonable for every employee to claim expenses, whether they are rich or not. This is just naked envy.<br /><br />More interestingly, what do you mean by giving up on national election politics?Gazza's UsefulTips and Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07847938388522035247noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-7618928051687062812010-06-01T01:38:37.417+01:002010-06-01T01:38:37.417+01:00"I don't get this 'saving the taxpaye..."I don't get this 'saving the taxpayer money' thing."<br /><br />He could have claimed even more.<br /><br />Amongsts ConDems this is apparently considered a defence, at least where their own are concerned.Jimmyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01542633492362670045noreply@blogger.com