David Laws' expenses

[longfingernailspaintedblue]

I really thought he was the very best of the Lib Dems.

Given his fortune he obviously doesn't need the expenses, but hiding his landlord/partner from the authorities is unacceptable, even if it was to hide his sexuality.

I'm completely shellshocked.

I also have to go!

When you say "you can't classify your relationship as you like depending on what suits," though, you're implying by "depending on what suits" that it was for financial advantage, when it wasn't.

so he was doing this to save the taxpayer money?
Is that the "argument"?
again I say oh COME ON!
He isn't even trying to make that claim himself.
If his argument is that this man wasn't his partner, then how can his supporters claim that he was acting for the greater good by not claiming he was his partner.
If Laws claims this man wasn't his partner, then this argument makes NO SENSE.
grubby, grubby, grubby

Of course Cameron can remove him, he's the PM, for heaven's sake. It may have been tricky to do this without the Lib Dems objecting before this scandal, but Clegg will know full well he'd look like an idiot if he kicked up a fuss about Laws now the man's been exposed as a fraudster. You can't have a thief in charge of the treasury. It'd be like bringing Archer back and making him chief secretary!

Didn't Mandelson bounce back a few times? I don't think Gotti is the only Teflon Don.

harpsichordcarrier - I don't think he wasn't doing it specifically to save money although he may have saved some money as a by-product, or compared to what he could have claimed under the alternative arrangement (where Lundie would have been a spouse-type partner). He didn't lose the taxpayer any money, though, that much is clear.

Edam - why is he a thief? Justify that.

Paddy Ashdown says that Laws is "Mr. Integrity". So that's OK then, above and beyond reproach.

The excuse about not revealing his sexuality is clearly a lie. Apart from anything else, does he really expect us to believe officials in the parly fees office would have run to the tabloids?

Edam. Show me where he's caused the taxpayer to lose out on money. And when you've done that, tell me why Ed Balls is running for Labour leader.

Because he lied in order to claim money to which he was not entitled. Public money at that. That's stealing - even my six year old could work that out.

How odd though that Laws reportedly raised money for Lundie's mortgage, yet wasn't on the deeds?

The difference with Mandelson is that it was another who failed to declare the loan.

Feel free to explain your problem with Ed Balls. But don't try to pretend Laws has done nothing wrong. He's a thief. That's clear.

Edam - if he'd have classified James Lundie as a partner in a spousal relationship, he could have still claimed the same amount of money.

Whereas Ed Balls did pocket profits from flipping houses.

but vesela he didn't do that. He broke the rules. He could have done a thousand things, but he chose to break the rules and now he wants to pay £40,000 back nad hope that it is all forgotten.

In defence of David Laws

yes, it's a pity he's paid the 40,000 - I suspect he was pushed into it.

No, he couldn't have claimed 'rent' (yeah, right) if they had admitted they were a couple.

Laws himself clearly admits he's fucked up, why are you so keen to justify his lie?

I don't recall Ed Balls flipping houses, there were so many MPs on that game. And they should ALL have had to pay the money back. Disgraceful that the flippers have got away with it while people who did far less have paid back or had to stand down.

MP in a neighbouring constituency to mine survived a deselection attempt and managed to get herself re-elected (on the 'stick a blue rosette on a baboon's arse and they'll vote for it round here' principle) despite stealing from the taxpayer.

She claimed for a 'second home' that was actually her daughter's flat, where her daughter has a registered company. Where the neighbours have never seen the MP. And despite the fact the dratted women lives in her own home ten miles away, where she lived before standing for this constituency.

And yet people voted her back in... amazes me. Same people wouldn't hesitate to slag off anyone massaging their benefits claim.

Please read these two short but interesting posts from Iain Dale on this issue. I agree with what he says.

Let us remember that David Laws claimed far less than renting a flat in London would have cost and has now paid it all back anyway. The tax payer got a good deal then and now.

LeninGrad good point and I totally agree with you - this is a co-habiting relationship, they are partners. Exactly the same as DH and I before we married.

Incidentally, DH and I only last year got round to having one single joint account - we've always had separate social lives but I considered us to be partners certainly at least from the moment I moved in with him.

ok, Ed Balls and Yvette Cooper paid their CGT on the flipping, but they nevertheless exploited a loophole that allowed them to profit.

Obtaining money by deception = theft.
He lied. He obtained money. He's a thief.
It's pretty damn straightforward.
doesn't it stick in your throat to pretend that he did it to save the taxpayer money.
bleugh.