Mr Laws resigns

[Trump]

Mr Laws expenses ? He may not have profited from the rent claims ? BUT his partner DID.

[Mick Mac]

As they were in a relationship they were both coupleable.

[dbboy]

But at least he's fallen on his sword (excuse the pun!!)

[Mick Mac]

We know a joke when we see one dbboy.

[SteveT]

He should do time for fraud if only things were straight and honest in this country.

They always have a reason for not prosecuting these crooked politicians.

[ruffers]

As I posted in the Question Time thread I'm sure it's coincidence it was him pencilled in for this week's show before the government kicked up about Campbell being the Labour representative.

[Mick Mac]

Ah - that does clarify that issue. Did seem very defensive of the govt. Probably thought alastair caampbell had wind of it slready.

[cate]

Why are there two threads on the same topic started by the same person? And his name is Laws, not Law.

Edited to say thanks for changing his name to correct spelling.

[woofmarkthedog]

Same...

..sh1t, different day (!)

* yawns at new era of politics *

* again *

W**F

[ImpetuousVrouw]

Well that lasted long innit?

So when is the next New Era?

[SteveT]

I think I might start buying the Telegraph they have been doing some great investigative journalism recently on the politicians, but more to the point they've printed it too.

This paper used to be the darling of the upper classes and other assorted toffs,

but now their remit seems to have changed and for the social good,

a dramatic change of direction and they seem to have achieved their transition superbly.

Full marks to the Telegraph, and they also have a good crossword too, which is a bonus.

[woofmarkthedog]

Yeah right....

But you still buy "The Star"

W**F

[*Bob*]

Best be quick, Steve.

The Telegraph's tiresome milking of their increasingly tedious expenses 'scoop' can't last forever - and then I'm afraid all you'll be left with is 'the news'.

[Loz]

Whilst the Telegraph scored with the Laws story, today's 'politician legally sells house' story is a bit like the mid election Clegg story silliness.

[Brendan]

Not to belittle what the guy must have gone through in his life regarding his sexuality and the motivations for what he did but for someone who is supposedly such a genius he seriously miss read the public mood at the moment. Did he not think this would get out or that considering what has happened over the last year it would not (quite rightly) cause him no end of trouble?

The Telegraph is just the Daily Mail with bigger words though. Borderline xenophobia and homophobia with the odd bit of patronising the poor thrown in to make its readers feel righteous.

[matthew123]

I suspect these Lib Dems simply failed to get their house in order because they never thought they'd get into power and face the scrutiny that comes with government office. What both have done is just plain wrong however which way they want to dress it all up.

[Loz]

matthew123 - whilst Laws did something wrong, what Danny Alexander did doesn't seem wrong to me. CGT laws give you three years to sell a residence that has been your main home.

I think the fact that no one else has picked up on the Danny Alexander story probably indicates it's a lame duck story that the Telegraph has tried to pump up.

[ruffers]

Not a million miles away from the original expenses story in many cases with lots of instances of no actual rules being broken. I think it's just boredom with the whole thing tbh.

[silverfox]

Despite a good article from Matthew Parris in The Times yesterday in defence of Laws, it was right that he resigned.

The new Chief Secretary to the Treasury Danny Alexander should also resign immediately. If you're about to oversee draconian cuts that will result in thousands of redundancies with the consequences of relationship breakdowns and repossessions then you need to come to the job with clean hands and suitable qualifications. Danny Alexander has neither.

[silverfox]

Latest from The Guardian:

David Laws in talks over informal advisory role

Downing Street confirms that Laws, who resigned last week, may play an informal role alongside Danny Alexander, his successor

Polly Curtis, Whitehall correspondent

guardian.co.uk, Monday 31 May 2010 21.51 BST

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/may/31/david-laws-danny-alexander-economics

[SteveT]

The dog wrote:- Yeah right.... But you still buy "The Star" W**F

Quadruped, how I love to disappoint you,

I have never purchased that publication.

If you were wiser you would keep the wild accusations to yourself.

Mangey cur!

[SteveT]

The Guardian wrote:-

Laws, the former chief secretary to the Treasury, was the subject of intense speculation today after friends expressed concerns that he might quit parliament altogether.

Who would choose a fraudulant embezzler for any post in the treasury?

There are honest people in this land but not it seems, in politics.

Would that be because they have to twist, turn, and make deals before landing there in the first place, ensuring their place in the "Commons" leaves them with "soiled hands"?

Tebbit wrote in the Telegraph:-

"I very much doubt if anyone could form a government based in the House of Commons without including some of those who have transgressed the rules on expenses."

Which all bodes well for the future of the "new era"!

Laws was in it to the tune of forty thousand pounds.

I know a guy who defrauded an insurance company of seven hundred pounds and got two years gaol for that first offence.

Laws is reported as being very wealthy,

if that is the case why should he be exempt from due process of the law of the land,

it's not as if he was desperate for the money for his personal survival,

he is hardly a starving waif. More 'snout in the trough' syndrome.

Wouldn't it be a shock to read the headline Laws becomes an outlaw, gets four years for fraud.

It'll never happen............

[Belle]

Embezzling? It wasn't fraudulent to claim back rent - MPs are allowed to do this on expenses. If he'd been living somewhere else, or indeed doing as many do and claiming morgtage repayments, it could easily have been more than 40k. It's a question of whether it was wrong not to declare who his landlord was.

[Trump]

Belle ? Rules changed and he [ Mr Law ] ignored this: Wanted in my view to maximise his friends income ? I have made a formal complaint to the MET and did his friend declare these payments to HMRC ? Did his friend claim 25% on his council tax as a single occupant?

[womanofdulwich]

?950 a month to rent a room? I have had a look on the forum and this is well over the odds. It makes me feel quite sick - all nods and winks- the sooner there is a purpose built block of tiny flats in vauxhall for all mp's fitted out with basic fittings the better. the closer it is to a scummy estate the better- and they will have to walk the street with real people and see what life is like for most of us.Preferably a pub outside with shouting and broken glasses/ fights too. ( bitter - me??)Maybe a few screaming drug dealers with guns too..........