26/05/2009
23/05/2009
Scots Police lead UK forces in recruiting ethnic minorities
Police forces throughout the United Kingdom are still desperately trying to improve the public's perception of them in the wake of an enquiry that found they were riddled with what it referred to as "institutional racism" after the murder of Stephen Lawrence, a young black man in London. In an effort to alleviate such accusations, they have been actively attempting to recruit members from ethnic minorities with varying degrees of success. One force that has been particularly proactive is that of Strathclyde in Scotland, where officers from non-British white backgrounds now make up almost 30% of the entire membership.
"Here at the Strathclyde Police, we realise that it is in both our own and the public's interests that we represent a cross-section of Scotland's vibrant, modern, multicultural society," says Chief Superintendent Bruce Robertson, "and as such we welcome applicants from any ethnic background." So successful has the policy been that Robertson's force now has black, Muslim, Jewish, Sikh and - uniquely amongst British police forces - even Jedi officers, the latter being especially welcome after the 2001 Census revealed that 2.6% of Strathclyde's population are followers of the monastic, non-theistic religion that has its roots in the Old Republic.
"It hae been oor experience tha' Jedi make excellent polis officers," Robertson says. "They hae a long tradition of piss-kipping and battling against whit they call the Dark Side - which seems tae include criminals, holligans and the like. Basically, all we hae tae dae is persuade them tae wield a truncheon in place of a lightsabre, stick a helmet on their heads and they're ready tae gae. Historically, they have also adhered tae a strict hierarchical system of rank, which means they fit right in with oor ain system."
However, Jedi officers have not been accepted by all members of the public. Acid Rabbi spoke to one citizen who is not so keen. "Noo, I don't want tae come across as a racist," said the man, who wishes to remain anonymous, "and I hae naething against the Jedi personally - I mean, they seem tae be a law-abiding and peaceful bunch, and thanks tae them the cornershops are open till 11 of a nicht which can be very useful; but I dae think Scoatish police officers should be Scoatish, and should speak proper Scoats. A lot of people hae difficulty in understanding the Jedi's accents. We have one of them who patrols round my area and none of us can really follow whit he's saying, which was never a problem when we had PC McPatel before he got transferred tae Edinburgh."
"Good for Jedi is employment in police force," Constable Yoda, who has been a member of Strathclyde Police for two years, told Acid Rabbi. "Hard-working and honest are Jedi. No longer living a long time ago in far, far away galaxy, some of noble Jedi order have Glasgow as their home now chosen. Right it is that we take active part in organisation and protection of society."
16/05/2009
Chaytor Chopped - "Bloodfest" claims another head
David Chaytor, MP for Bury North in Lancashire, is today's victim after being suspended from the Parliamentary Labour Party after he - like Elliot Morley who referred to the current scandal over MP's expenses claims as a "bloodfest" - "forgot" a mortgage had been paid off.
The Commons' chief whip decided to take action after investigating the small matter of £13,000 which Mr. Chaytor received in expense allowances to pay for interest on the loan, which was in fact paid for as long ago as January 2004. However, he continued to claim £1,175 per month until September 2005. In addition to suspension, he may face a criminal enquiry - though the police are reluctant to become involved in yet another Parliamentary scandal, several campaign groups are discussing whether or not to make formal complaints as has been the case with Mr. Morley who was suspended from the party earlier this week for similar inconsistencies regarding his own mortgage.
Mr. Chaytor voluntarily submitted his expense records to the Commissioner for Standards, but only after details emerged on Friday night - had he have done so before that time, or better still before the Daily Telegraph began publishing the results of their investigations, we may in a show of charity have given him the benefit of the doubt (well, some people may have done. We wouldn't). However, since he chose to come clean at the last possible moment before the shit hit the fan, we have to doubt his ethics.
The dodgy claims resulted from "an unforgivable error in my accounting procedures for which I apologise unreservedly," says the MP. As we said when commenting on Mr. Morley's suspension, Acid Rabbi can only wonder if such an excuse would be whatsoever were paid any heedyou, I or any other non-politician prole to attempt using it, or if we'd just get prosecuted for fraud. Who on Earth "forgets" that they've paid off a mortgage? I know I'd be celebrating for a good week at least, and that makes it seem highly unlikely that Mr. Chaytor is being entirely truthful, or so it seems to me and no doubt to a lot of other voters.
David "Chopped" Chaytor. Looks smug, doesn't he, just like the cat that got the £13,000.
It seems Mr. Chaytor has also been up to no good when it comes to which property is his second home, this being the one for which he can claim expenses, changing ("flipping", as the Torygraph has decided it should be known) between his London home, his Lancashire home and another property in Yorkshire. He also claimed for two other properties, including one at which his son was named as occupier on council tax bills. Wow - thanks, Dad!
Sheila Magnall, who last week took on the position of Mayor of Lancashire, said that "There are people struggling on low wages, losing their jobs and with mortgages to pay – and so they are going to be very upset. When we knock on doors and canvass people, we regularly get people saying 'you are only in politics for what you can get out of it', but that is simply not true. However, when things like this happen, you cannot blame them for thinking that."
Most of us would be willing to believe that there are some MPs who take up their positions for honourable reasons, even that most MPs start off with similar aims. But there are definitely several who are in it for no reason other than to line their own pockets, and even those who enter Parliament wanting to change their constituents' lives for the better often become seduced and corrupted by the benefits of the job leading them into sleaze and greed. That's why many of us believe that our representatives should get a flat salary and that is it. Those that work for constituencies a long way from London - and we mean a long way, not just outside Inner London, as in places that would require a journey of several hours in order to attend sittings - should expect to have basic accomodation made available to them, rather like the low-cost housing which built for young people and the needy. A single bed, a cupboard - they can use the £64,776 (basic salary - ministers get more) to pay for the rest, just like the rest of us are expected to pay for what we need or want out of our own (on average much lower) salaries.
Meanwhile, the National Executive of the Labour Party is looking into proposals for any MPs shown to have acted in a dishonest way to be deselected, effectively preventing them from standing at the next election. Hey, relax - there's no need and you may as well use the time to do something else, nobody's going to vote for the bastards after this!
The Commons' chief whip decided to take action after investigating the small matter of £13,000 which Mr. Chaytor received in expense allowances to pay for interest on the loan, which was in fact paid for as long ago as January 2004. However, he continued to claim £1,175 per month until September 2005. In addition to suspension, he may face a criminal enquiry - though the police are reluctant to become involved in yet another Parliamentary scandal, several campaign groups are discussing whether or not to make formal complaints as has been the case with Mr. Morley who was suspended from the party earlier this week for similar inconsistencies regarding his own mortgage.
Mr. Chaytor voluntarily submitted his expense records to the Commissioner for Standards, but only after details emerged on Friday night - had he have done so before that time, or better still before the Daily Telegraph began publishing the results of their investigations, we may in a show of charity have given him the benefit of the doubt (well, some people may have done. We wouldn't). However, since he chose to come clean at the last possible moment before the shit hit the fan, we have to doubt his ethics.
The dodgy claims resulted from "an unforgivable error in my accounting procedures for which I apologise unreservedly," says the MP. As we said when commenting on Mr. Morley's suspension, Acid Rabbi can only wonder if such an excuse would be whatsoever were paid any heedyou, I or any other non-politician prole to attempt using it, or if we'd just get prosecuted for fraud. Who on Earth "forgets" that they've paid off a mortgage? I know I'd be celebrating for a good week at least, and that makes it seem highly unlikely that Mr. Chaytor is being entirely truthful, or so it seems to me and no doubt to a lot of other voters.
David "Chopped" Chaytor. Looks smug, doesn't he, just like the cat that got the £13,000.It seems Mr. Chaytor has also been up to no good when it comes to which property is his second home, this being the one for which he can claim expenses, changing ("flipping", as the Torygraph has decided it should be known) between his London home, his Lancashire home and another property in Yorkshire. He also claimed for two other properties, including one at which his son was named as occupier on council tax bills. Wow - thanks, Dad!
Sheila Magnall, who last week took on the position of Mayor of Lancashire, said that "There are people struggling on low wages, losing their jobs and with mortgages to pay – and so they are going to be very upset. When we knock on doors and canvass people, we regularly get people saying 'you are only in politics for what you can get out of it', but that is simply not true. However, when things like this happen, you cannot blame them for thinking that."
Most of us would be willing to believe that there are some MPs who take up their positions for honourable reasons, even that most MPs start off with similar aims. But there are definitely several who are in it for no reason other than to line their own pockets, and even those who enter Parliament wanting to change their constituents' lives for the better often become seduced and corrupted by the benefits of the job leading them into sleaze and greed. That's why many of us believe that our representatives should get a flat salary and that is it. Those that work for constituencies a long way from London - and we mean a long way, not just outside Inner London, as in places that would require a journey of several hours in order to attend sittings - should expect to have basic accomodation made available to them, rather like the low-cost housing which built for young people and the needy. A single bed, a cupboard - they can use the £64,776 (basic salary - ministers get more) to pay for the rest, just like the rest of us are expected to pay for what we need or want out of our own (on average much lower) salaries.
Meanwhile, the National Executive of the Labour Party is looking into proposals for any MPs shown to have acted in a dishonest way to be deselected, effectively preventing them from standing at the next election. Hey, relax - there's no need and you may as well use the time to do something else, nobody's going to vote for the bastards after this!
15/05/2009
Bees face investigation
Bees have come under investigation by the British Office of Fair Trading, it was revealed last night in the latest of a long line of shocks that have rocked the insect business and financial worlds in recent years. 
Suspicious behaviour? Bees crowd around honey manufacturing equipment to prevent our reporter from obtaining photographs.
The investigation was put into place after Government ministers received a report from the Competition Commission which claims bees have been illegally witholding certain information in order to unfairly monopolise honey production. "Following complaints made by several companies owned by ants and wasps, both of whom have been hit by tough trading conditions in the currently depressed economic climate, we have reason to believe that bees have been witholding non-patented details with regard to honey manufacture," an OFT spokesman told Acid Rabbi's correspondent. "With this in mind, I can confirm that they have been brought to our attention though I must emphasise that at this time it is merely an investigation - there is as of yet no evidence of foul play and no charges have been brought."
It seems that although everyone knows that bees make honey by collecting nectar from flowers, nobody is quite sure what they do with it once they've transported back to their hives in order to transform it into the sweet, sticky gloop. "We would like to know how they do it," says Ant McAntennae, spokeman for the Ant&Wasp Trade Union, "and we believe that under the U.K.'s anti-monopoly laws we ought to be able to find out so that we can compete with them, which we surely have a right to do in a free market."
Bee experts have suggested that the reason bees have been keeping their industrial secrets so closely guarded is that, were people to be made aware of what they do to convert nectar into honey, they probably wouldn't want to eat honey anymore. "I imagine it's got to be something fairly revolting," says Fred Felchett, a bee-keeper with 40 years experience.
If found guilty of unfair business practises by the OFT, beehives can expect to be broken down into smaller, Government-monitored companies. However, bee industrial groups have stated categorically that the information has always been in the public domain and denied any shady dealings. "The information is there if you care to look for it," says Beelinda Apidae of the Honeymaker's Guild, "But just as Mr. Felchett said, honey-lovers may prefer to remain in a state of blissful ignorance."
Parliamentary Ministers are launching a full enquiry immediately and promise plenty of attention-diverting revelations within the coming few days.
Brits "the angriest people in Europe"
According to a poll conducted by satellite television company Gold, the British are the angriest people in Europe and become irate four times every day. Various things particularly get our goat, including racist and bigoted behaviour which annoys 36% of us - well, it's a start, isn't it? Pity about those who find queue jumpers (48%) more likely to invoke our wrath than racism, but there you go.
Grr! Foreign call centres turned me into a baldy!
Acid Rabbi tends to find steam blasting from his ears rather a lot more often than this, particularly during the last week as we've discovered that our Parliament is more rotten than the apples in your local cornershop. 37% of people find foreign call centres to be especially irritating - personally, when I worked for a company that transferred its call centre to India, I found it a massive improvement. At least Indian people are easy to understand, unlike the staff in the old centre which was in North Yorkshire.
Grr! Foreign call centres turned me into a baldy!Acid Rabbi tends to find steam blasting from his ears rather a lot more often than this, particularly during the last week as we've discovered that our Parliament is more rotten than the apples in your local cornershop. 37% of people find foreign call centres to be especially irritating - personally, when I worked for a company that transferred its call centre to India, I found it a massive improvement. At least Indian people are easy to understand, unlike the staff in the old centre which was in North Yorkshire.
Met. Police face further probe over death of G20 Tomlinson
The Independent Police Complaints Commission will hold a further investigation into the Metroplitan Police's conduct following the death of Ian Tomlinson at the G20 protests in April this year, it has been announced. This will be separate from existing enquiries into his death and police conduct during the protest.
Mr. Tomlinson, 47, was returning home from his job as a newspaper vendor when he was hit with a baton and pushed from behind by officers, an incident that was captured on video and has been instrumental in probes into harsh police actions during the protests. There has been no evidence that he was in any way involved with the protests. He later died of internal injuries.
Ian Tomlinson, who was not involved with the G20 protests, was struck and
pushed to the ground by police officers. He later died of internal injuries.
CCTV footage showed that he had earlier approached a police cordon and appeared to ask to be allowed through so that he could continue making his way home, but permission was refused. A City worker also supplied photographs showing Mr. Tomlinson earlier in the day talking to officers after a police vehicle had come into contact with him - however, this has been referred to as a "gentle nudge" and is not thought to have contributed to his injuries.
During the inquest into his death, police made no mention of their earlier contact with the man leading many to accuse them of either deliberately misinformed the public or failed to make information available. IPCC deputy chairman Deborah Glass has said that both members of the public and MPs have raised serious concerns about the "state of knowledge" that police had concerning the incident.
If found guilty of either charge, the investigation will come as a serious blow to the Met's reputation which fallen steeply in public eyes since the events in question, with many people feeling angry over accusations that officers purposely obscured their badges - allowing them to commit unlawful acts without risking identification - and incited violent actions amongst members of the public, thus enabling them to react with greater force than would otherwise have been deemed acceptable, which is likely to bring about further enquiries and calls for a reform of police powers and regulations.
Mr. Tomlinson, 47, was returning home from his job as a newspaper vendor when he was hit with a baton and pushed from behind by officers, an incident that was captured on video and has been instrumental in probes into harsh police actions during the protests. There has been no evidence that he was in any way involved with the protests. He later died of internal injuries.
Ian Tomlinson, who was not involved with the G20 protests, was struck and pushed to the ground by police officers. He later died of internal injuries.
CCTV footage showed that he had earlier approached a police cordon and appeared to ask to be allowed through so that he could continue making his way home, but permission was refused. A City worker also supplied photographs showing Mr. Tomlinson earlier in the day talking to officers after a police vehicle had come into contact with him - however, this has been referred to as a "gentle nudge" and is not thought to have contributed to his injuries.
During the inquest into his death, police made no mention of their earlier contact with the man leading many to accuse them of either deliberately misinformed the public or failed to make information available. IPCC deputy chairman Deborah Glass has said that both members of the public and MPs have raised serious concerns about the "state of knowledge" that police had concerning the incident.
If found guilty of either charge, the investigation will come as a serious blow to the Met's reputation which fallen steeply in public eyes since the events in question, with many people feeling angry over accusations that officers purposely obscured their badges - allowing them to commit unlawful acts without risking identification - and incited violent actions amongst members of the public, thus enabling them to react with greater force than would otherwise have been deemed acceptable, which is likely to bring about further enquiries and calls for a reform of police powers and regulations.
"Secret Inquests" will not go ahead
Justice Secretary Jack Straw (pictured right - never noticed how much he looks like Ivor Cutler before...) has stated that so-called secret inquests - which would give the Home Secretary the right to name a specially selected coroner to run inquests into Governmental or police actions without the presence of a jury for reasons deemed to be of national security or not in the public's interest. The statement comes shortly after Mr. Straw also suggested that some of the laws - widely considered to be draconian - created by Labour in the wake of the World Trade Centre attacks could be withdrawn. The plans, outlined in Clause 68 of the 2008 Counter Terrorism Bill, would have given ministers the power to keep evidence in inquiries such as that following the death of Charles Jean de Menezes, shot several times with hollow point bullets by police on the London Underground, secret. The Menezes case has shown serious shortfallings in the police's actions that day. The Clause was created in an attempt to end the stalemate which arose during the investigation into the death of Azelle Rodney who was shot by plice in April 2005. In that investigation, coroner Andrew Walker (pictured left) said that he would not be able to continue with the case due to the large number of redactions - crossed out sections
of text - in police statements, which are thought to have related to evidence gathered by the use of phone taps and/or bugs. However, Alan Beith, Liberal Democrat MP for Berwick Upon Tweed and chairman of the Commons Justice Committee, said that he was "not comfortable with a situation where a politician is deciding there shouldn't be a jury in a particular inquest," adding that the proposal was dangerous despite Bridget Prentice's - Labour MP for Lewisham and a Minister of Justice - claims that it would affect a mere handful of cases every year.Daniel Machover, the Rodney family's solicitor, said that "These proposals mean that ministers and those responsible for intelligence gathering will never be held properly to account for the validity of their tactics." Helen Shaw, co-director of Inquest - a group which campaigns for people who have died during legal custody - said that "The public will find it difficult to have confidence that these coroner-only inquests, with key evidence being suppressed, can investigate contentious deaths involving state agents independently."
However, announcing that the proposals would be dropped, Mr. Straw said that they had not got the cross party support required to make them law. A joint committee on human rights made up of MPs and peers had previously advised that the proposals be scrapped, saying that inquests - especially those in which citizens had been killed at the hands of the state - must be "transparent."
What can MPs claim for?
So they can claim £750 for a television and various amounts for stuff like furniture such as massage chairs, but they can't claim for personal items like electric shavers? It all seems a bit confusing, doesn't it? Shahid Malik thinks so - he says that simple misuderstanding is the reason behind his own dodgy claims.
Basically, every MP of a constituency outside inner London is permitted to claim for a second home closer to Parliament so that they are able to attend sittings regularly. Their first home, which is defined as the one at which they spend most time, is their own business for which they are responsible. However, they can claim all sorts of allowances to cover the cost of maintaining and furnishing the second home - which is where the current problems stem from because, being politicians, many of them have worked out sorts of devious little ways in which they can use these allowances to improve their own lifestyles and let us, the tax-payers, foot the bill.
When they take up a second home, the MP is allowed to spend designated amounts on various items included on the Additional Costs Claims Guide, popularly known as the John Lewis List after the famous department store which specialises in selling everything one could ever need when setting up a home, up to an annual total of £23,000. Here's the full list with the maximum amount allowed for each item:
Air conditioning unit - £299.99
Bed - £1000.00
Bedside Cabinet - £100.00
Bookcase/shelf - £200.00
Bookcase/cabinet - £500.00
Carpet - £35.00 per square metre
Carpet fitting - £6.50 per square metre
Coffee maker/machine - £100.00
Coffee table - £250.00
Dining armchairs (each) - £150.00
Dining chairs (each) - £90.00
Dining table - £600.00
Dishwasher - £375.00
Drawer chest (five) - £500.00
Dressing table - £500.00
Dry cleaning - personal and household dry cleaning are permitted so long as they fall within a "resonable cost"
Food mixer - £200.00
Freestanding mirror - £300.00
Fridge/freezer combination - £550.00
Gas cooker - £650.00
Hi-fi/stereo - £750.00
Installation of new bathroom - £6,335.00
Installation of new kitchen - £10,000.00
Lamp table - £200.00
Nest of tables - £200.00
Recordable DVD - £270.00
Rugs (each) - £300.00
Shredder - £50.00
Sideboard - £795.00
Suite of furniture - £2,000.00
Television set - £750.00 (seems quite clear to me, Mr. Malik)
Tumble dryer - £250.00
Underlay (basic) - £6.99 per square metre
Wardrobe - £700.00
Washer dryer combination - £500.00
Washing machine - £350.00
Wooden flooring/carpets - £35.00 per square metre
Workstation - £150.00
Not bad, eh? Mrs. Rabbi and myself could've done quite nicely with that when we set up our own home. How about you?
Basically, every MP of a constituency outside inner London is permitted to claim for a second home closer to Parliament so that they are able to attend sittings regularly. Their first home, which is defined as the one at which they spend most time, is their own business for which they are responsible. However, they can claim all sorts of allowances to cover the cost of maintaining and furnishing the second home - which is where the current problems stem from because, being politicians, many of them have worked out sorts of devious little ways in which they can use these allowances to improve their own lifestyles and let us, the tax-payers, foot the bill.
When they take up a second home, the MP is allowed to spend designated amounts on various items included on the Additional Costs Claims Guide, popularly known as the John Lewis List after the famous department store which specialises in selling everything one could ever need when setting up a home, up to an annual total of £23,000. Here's the full list with the maximum amount allowed for each item:
Air conditioning unit - £299.99
Bed - £1000.00
Bedside Cabinet - £100.00
Bookcase/shelf - £200.00
Bookcase/cabinet - £500.00
Carpet - £35.00 per square metre
Carpet fitting - £6.50 per square metre
Coffee maker/machine - £100.00
Coffee table - £250.00
Dining armchairs (each) - £150.00
Dining chairs (each) - £90.00
Dining table - £600.00
Dishwasher - £375.00
Drawer chest (five) - £500.00
Dressing table - £500.00
Dry cleaning - personal and household dry cleaning are permitted so long as they fall within a "resonable cost"
Food mixer - £200.00
Freestanding mirror - £300.00
Fridge/freezer combination - £550.00
Gas cooker - £650.00
Hi-fi/stereo - £750.00
Installation of new bathroom - £6,335.00
Installation of new kitchen - £10,000.00
Lamp table - £200.00
Nest of tables - £200.00
Recordable DVD - £270.00
Rugs (each) - £300.00
Shredder - £50.00
Sideboard - £795.00
Suite of furniture - £2,000.00
Television set - £750.00 (seems quite clear to me, Mr. Malik)
Tumble dryer - £250.00
Underlay (basic) - £6.99 per square metre
Wardrobe - £700.00
Washer dryer combination - £500.00
Washing machine - £350.00
Wooden flooring/carpets - £35.00 per square metre
Workstation - £150.00
Not bad, eh? Mrs. Rabbi and myself could've done quite nicely with that when we set up our own home. How about you?
Duh, duh, duh, and another one bites the dust...
Labour MP and Justice Minister Shahid Malik is the latest politician to step down as a result of the current furore over Parliamentary expenses claims. The Daily Telegraph says that the Dewsbury MP's expenses are the highest claimed and include £66,827 over three years for his London second home (which equates to the highest amount it is possible to receive), £23,083 of which was paid last year - £443 a week; £2100 for a television (though he was only allowed half this amount, poor deprived creature that he is); £65 to cover a court summons for non-payment of Council Tax and £730 for a massage chair. £69,222 - not a bad little haul. What's more, his constituency home sets him back less than £100 a week. He has also regularly claimed the maximum £400 allowable each month for food.
Mr. Malik in Asda. "I'll have three of them, five of them
Mr. Malik in Asda. "I'll have three of them, five of them and a couple of them. Send the bill to the tax-payers."
That's on top of the £95,617 salary he gets as a junior minister. He was not allowed to claim for a portable DVD player and an iPod.
The trouble is, it seems Mr. Malik have been spending most of his time at his London address, it should have been declared as his first home - which he ought to pay for himself, instead of paying for the well-below-commercial rent Dewsbury property.
Neither he nor the landlord - Mr. Zaman - of the Dewsbury house have been willing to say if a formal lease agreement was signed, but Mr. Zaman's wife has revealed that it appears to be lived in by a constituency worker during the week, adding "He [Mr Malik] is a good friend and neighbour.He comes here just at the weekends...usually he comes here alone.” Mr. Malik denies this, claiming that he lives there for half of every week and during Parliamentary recess.
Mr. Malik insists that he will not pay back the amount he has received, saying that he is "as straight as they come" and that his actions were "one million per cent by the book." Meanwhile, he has agreed to donate £1050 - the amount he somehow managed to claim for his television, even though claims for such items are limited to £750 - to charities in Dewsbury. "I will not be giving it to the authorities in Parliament because it is legitimately mine," he said.
Mr. Malik has in the past said that the UK is the best place a Muslim could ever live. It's even better if you're a greedy, money-grabbing MP though. "With hindsight, I think every MP in this country would have done things differently," he says - what, you mean when you thought you were going to be allowed to carry on ripping off the tax-payers? Also, why did he feel the need to step down if, as he's acted as honestly as he claims?
He also calls for what he refers to as the "bloodfest" of media investigations and reporting on the expenses row to come to and end. No way, Shahid. We want to know what you and your friends have been up to. What's more, we're really enjoying seeing you squirm. :-)
14/05/2009
Cambridge MP's expenses
David Howarth, Liberal Democrat MP for Cambridge (pictured left), appears to be one of the few members who has not yet become entangled in the expenses row and says that he welcomes investigations in the wake of the Daily Telegraph's coverage."There is no justifcation, under any circumstances, for MPs to buy property with money from their allowances," he has said, which is quite right as far as Acid Rabbi is concerned. "The second homes allowance should be restricted to paying for hotel accommodation or a furnished rental property." We'd have to argue on that, feeling that they shouldn't get any allowance, but it seems David's a better man than most of his Parliamentary colleagues. Please don't let us down, David.
The same cannot be said of Cambridgeshire South MP Andrew Lansley (pictured right), however. Lansley, who is also the Tory Shadow Health Minister, claimed £4,000 to cover the cost of work on his Melbourn home just a short while before selling it for £433,000. What's more, according to the Telegraph, he "flipped" this property with his other home in London shortly before sealing the deal, thus allowing him to claim more on that one - including £750 for a Laura Ashley sofa. He rejects the notion that he "changed the designation" of his "second home in order to maximise benefits from allowances." But he would say that, wouldn't he?
The Cambridge News says that it "repeatedly" tried to contact Mr. Lansley to ask him about his claims but as of yet has had no response. A spokesman from the TaxPayers' Alliance - who earlier today lodged a complaint with the police over Elliot Morley's dodgy mortgage claims - said, "If Mr Lansley was claiming for renovation costs only a short time before selling this house, he should have paid back those costs from the profit he made."
AcidQuickie
Immigration Minister Phil Woolas has confessed that Parliament was wrong in estimating that just 5,000 East Europeans would migrate to the UK after the EU opened its borders between the A8 nations in 2004.
In actual fact, around 120,000 have come every year since according to The Daily Star, which predictably isn't very happy about it despite the fact that economists, who generally know a lot more about this sort of thing than third-rate red top journalists do, say that immigration tends to lead to economic growth.
Lucky you were wrong though, eh Phil? Without all those extra tax-payers, how would we ever have afforded all those MP expenses claims, like the stuff you apparently had and we paid for? Yet another reason to thank a Pole today.
In actual fact, around 120,000 have come every year since according to The Daily Star, which predictably isn't very happy about it despite the fact that economists, who generally know a lot more about this sort of thing than third-rate red top journalists do, say that immigration tends to lead to economic growth.
Lucky you were wrong though, eh Phil? Without all those extra tax-payers, how would we ever have afforded all those MP expenses claims, like the stuff you apparently had and we paid for? Yet another reason to thank a Pole today.
Nom nom nom! I can has stuffs paid for by tax-payers?
Here's a good one. A Tory backbencher - not yet named by the Daily Telegraph - claimed £230.17 for food in February 2007. That's the precise amount that was left available to him for that year.
Another MP claimed for an electric shaver, but it was refused because personal items are not allowed. Surely food counts as a personal item? After all, it wasn't vital to the MP's work, and it's not like he couldn't afford to pay it out of his own wallet. Perhaps he goes round bribing people with biscuits to vote for him.
Another MP claimed for an electric shaver, but it was refused because personal items are not allowed. Surely food counts as a personal item? After all, it wasn't vital to the MP's work, and it's not like he couldn't afford to pay it out of his own wallet. Perhaps he goes round bribing people with biscuits to vote for him.
Morley updates
Ooh, he's in deep shit, isn't he? Morley has not yet had his whip withdrawn, which would signal his permanent expulsion from the Labour party, but chief whip Nick Brown has stated that if the Scunthorpe MP cannot clear his own name he's out. He has also been sacked from his position as the Prime Minister's climate envoy, though currently he holds on to the chairmanship of the energy and climate select committee. His case will be reviewed by the National Executive Committee this coming Tuesday - supposing he hasn't committed hara-kiri and resigned by then.
Morley suspended from Labour Party after expenses row
Elliot Morley - the Scunthorpe scumbag MP who "forgot" to inform the Commons that his mortgage had been paid off, netting himself a cool £16,000 in the process as Acid Rabbi reported earlier today - has been suspended from the Labour Party. He is the second MP to relinquish his position, following Conservative Andrew MacKay's decision to resign as Parliamentary aide to David Cameron due to an "unacceptable" expenses claim.Prime Minister Gordon Brown, announcing the decision to suspend the Member during the launch of his party's European Election campaign, said that, "where there is irregularity now it has got to be dealt with immediately. Where standards have been transgressed and the evidence has been shown to be there, action has got to be taken," adding that he had made the decision due to the serious nature of the incident. He also stated that, "Where disciplinary action is necessary, it will and will immediately be taken."
So...who did put the cunt into Scunthorpe? We still don't know - but we know who took him out.
Labour peers face suspension from Lords
Ex-Transport Minister Lord Truscott (pictured above right) and Lord Taylor of Blackburn (pictured below right) face suspension from the House of Lords after an accusation in The Sunday Times claimed both men were willing to influence the passage of new laws in return for payment after the newspaper carried out an undercover investigation. The two denied the allegations, described by Labour's Lords leader as "very serious," but a probe subsequently found them guilty of the charges. The Tories have, as one might expect, used the incident as an opportunity to attack their opponents and said that it represented a bleak day in the Upper House.
Both men will be suspended for up to six months if the move is approved, but the Lords will take a vote on whether or not to permanently exclude them later this week. This will be the first time a Lord has been suspended since the 17th Century, according to BBC political correspondent Gillian Hargreaves - so one or two members will already be familar with the protocol in this sort of case.
Meanwhile, Lord Moonie was found not responsible for brainwashing young people into joining his cult and Lord Snape, the ex-MP for West Bromwich East, was cleare
d of accusations claiming he used malicious magic and was involved in the unlawful killing of Albus Dumbledore.Conservative peer Lord Strathclyde said that both Lords had "fallen short of what both the House and the country is entitled to expect" of public representatives. However, the country as a whole has long ceased to expect anything other than sleaze and dubious financial shenanigans from any politician, regardless of House or party.
Britain thrown back into the Stone Age
The United Kingdom telecom giant BT was forced to slash 15,000 jobs in the last year with a similar amount expected during the coming 12 months after it reported an annual loss of £134 million, along with a £1.6 billion write-down at its Global Services Unit. Previous cuts reduced the company's workforce to 147,000.
Press editor Robert Peston claims the main problem at the Unit, which counts the NHS - Britain's largest employer - and Microsoft amongst its customers, has been spiralling costs. The company has also been hit by firms seeking cheaper services during the recession. Andy Kerr, of the Communication Workers Union, said that he hoped the cuts would not involve involuntary redundancies, though this looks unlikely since it would mean the loss of a further 10% of BT's employees.
Meanwhile, Royal Mail (previously known as the General Post Office, then Royal Mail, then Consignia until they realised everyone thought it was a silly name, then Royal Mail again - at a cost of more than anyone would like to think about), the company responsible for Britain's postal service, has seen profits of £321 million in the year up to 31.03.09, almost double the previous year's figure. This is the first time Royal Mail has made a profit in two decades and comes after what chief executive Adam Crozier called a "huge effort" to modernise and improve its efficiency.
Hedge-fund manager Tarquin Boscastle has lived in a tree for six months. "House prices
have become ridiculous, and I suppose I just fancied a simpler lifestyle," he says.
Industry experts are putting the figures down to a general tendency towards Ludditism amongst the British population, with many people claiming to distrust technology such as computers which prevents them from using e-mail, making it necessary for them to communicate with others using antiquated letter-writing techniques. Sales of metal tools such as knives have also dropped dramatically in recent years, while educational organisations offering courses in flint knapping have reported a massive rise in interest. Estate agents have also reported that large numbers of people who have found the price of houses to be out of their range are electing to instead live in caves or up trees.
Press editor Robert Peston claims the main problem at the Unit, which counts the NHS - Britain's largest employer - and Microsoft amongst its customers, has been spiralling costs. The company has also been hit by firms seeking cheaper services during the recession. Andy Kerr, of the Communication Workers Union, said that he hoped the cuts would not involve involuntary redundancies, though this looks unlikely since it would mean the loss of a further 10% of BT's employees.
Meanwhile, Royal Mail (previously known as the General Post Office, then Royal Mail, then Consignia until they realised everyone thought it was a silly name, then Royal Mail again - at a cost of more than anyone would like to think about), the company responsible for Britain's postal service, has seen profits of £321 million in the year up to 31.03.09, almost double the previous year's figure. This is the first time Royal Mail has made a profit in two decades and comes after what chief executive Adam Crozier called a "huge effort" to modernise and improve its efficiency.
Hedge-fund manager Tarquin Boscastle has lived in a tree for six months. "House priceshave become ridiculous, and I suppose I just fancied a simpler lifestyle," he says.
In a roundabout way, HMG admit they were wrong
Justice Minister Jack "Evil Headmaster" Straw has indicated that some of the laws made in the wake of the World Trade Centre (no US spellings here, matey) - seen by many as draconian - may be withdrawn.
"There is a case for going through all counterterrorism legislation and working out whether we need it. It was there for a temporary period," he said in response to a question over whether some of the laws are an infringement of civil liberties and stated that the public perception of them could be counterproductive - by which he chiefly means "may cause people to vote against Labour." Labour have passed approximately one law concerning criminal offences for each day that they have been in power since Tony Blair's electoral success in 1997.
There have been several indications of disquiet amongst Labour MPs desperate to guarantee their own success in the next election over the laws, especially since the Tories - who are currently far in the lead in the opinion polls - have announced their intention to introduce a repeals bill which would make it possible to dispose of laws thought to adversely affect civil liberties.
Er, guys? You forgot "repressive..."
Recent Home Office figures have revealed that of the 1,471 people arrested for suspicion of terrorism between 11.09.01 and 31.03.08, only 340 - around a third - were later charged with offences related to terrorism and a mere 196 have been subsequently convicted.
However, there has been no mention of the moves to introduce ID cards, legislation that would force British citizens to carry means of proving they have the right to live in their own country. Well, it's a start, I suppose, even if it is one that to cynics looks rather an attempt to gain some much-needed support amongst voters.
"There is a case for going through all counterterrorism legislation and working out whether we need it. It was there for a temporary period," he said in response to a question over whether some of the laws are an infringement of civil liberties and stated that the public perception of them could be counterproductive - by which he chiefly means "may cause people to vote against Labour." Labour have passed approximately one law concerning criminal offences for each day that they have been in power since Tony Blair's electoral success in 1997.
There have been several indications of disquiet amongst Labour MPs desperate to guarantee their own success in the next election over the laws, especially since the Tories - who are currently far in the lead in the opinion polls - have announced their intention to introduce a repeals bill which would make it possible to dispose of laws thought to adversely affect civil liberties.
Er, guys? You forgot "repressive..."Recent Home Office figures have revealed that of the 1,471 people arrested for suspicion of terrorism between 11.09.01 and 31.03.08, only 340 - around a third - were later charged with offences related to terrorism and a mere 196 have been subsequently convicted.
However, there has been no mention of the moves to introduce ID cards, legislation that would force British citizens to carry means of proving they have the right to live in their own country. Well, it's a start, I suppose, even if it is one that to cynics looks rather an attempt to gain some much-needed support amongst voters.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
