Jacqui Smith's Expenses & Sexism

[queenofthecapitalwasteland]

I've just read this article on the Independant website.

Do you think her expenses were looked at more closely as she should have been 'devoting more time to looking after her husband and children' or should she really have looked a bit closer at what her husband asked her to claim for?

Either way, I feel charging porn to the taxpayer was the dumbest thing to come up in the entire investigation and should not have been overlooked, but would it have been handled differently if it were a male MP?

So you aren't bothered that she designated a room in her sisters house as her Main Residence?

The porn was an embarrassment, but it's a little convenient to for her to claim that it was her undoing.

However, it has got her a gig on radio 5 next Thursday - a documentary about porn.

"She said it was a "very brave" way to head off the controversy, and hopes it may lead to further opportunities as a broadcaster."

Says it all really.

I hadn't realised about using her sister's house as her main residence, so was she claiming for that as well?

I thought it seemed a bit to blame it on sexism for the investigation, every MP was being investigated.

But, as you say, she's got a nice documentary out of it and complaining about sexism has boosted awareness for it so I don't think she's too put out by it all.

What a load of bollocks. She lost her job because she played the system like a fiddle. Her claims were not only dodgy, plenty of people's were questionable, but hers insulted intelligence. Did she really think that it was ok to claim a back bedroom in her sister's house as her main residence?

She should have been carted off to the dungeons as soon as her forms were received. A tenner on porn filsm? Yeah, I'll claim that. No reason why my husband should pay for his own wank, let the general public pay for his jollies.

To be fair to her, I think the porn could be put down to a genuine oversight. If it had been an ordinary pay-per-view movie, I don't think anyone would have been that bothered. It just made for lurid headlines.

If a male MP had claimed for his, or even his wife's porn, I don't think there would have been any less of a scandal.

Jeanine - I oculdn't care les what Jacqui's husband chose ot watchon pay-per-view.

the fact she thought she could slip it through on expenses (whatever the film was) says a lot about how she viewed her expenses, tbh.

why on earth would her husband's pay-per-view film be considered on eof her expenses?!

She was allowed to claim for her subscription tv, telephone and Internet access from Virgin Media. She submitted the bill without noticing that it included line items for the two porn flicks. I really don't think she was trying it on.

Exactly. Doesn't matter if it was the latest Harry Potter, why the hell did she think it was ok to get someone else to pay for that? It wasn't even her that watched it (that we know of), it was her husband, who isn't an MP.

But I have real issues with the expenses system anyway. OK (grudgingly) they need somewhere to stay and ok, it needs to be big enough and suitably furnished for a family. But why is it theirs to keep? Why should we fund new sofas and decor simply because they didn't like the existing stuff? Why should we pay for gardeners? Here's an idea, get a house with a smaller garden and do it your bloody selves like the rest of us. The whole thing is sickening.

Jeanine - she had no business submitting claims which she had not fully read/examined/signed off on.

it is not anyone's responsibility, except hers, to ensure her expenses claims are in order.

Indeed, but I still think the porn claim was an honest mistake. Unlike the deliberate and cynical designation of her second home.

Anyway, it wasn't really my intention to defend 'Wacky Jaqui', so I'll shut the fuck up now!

:o Aw, I was picturing you there surrounded by posters and an 'I love Jacqui' scarf

oh, I can see how it would happen, if you were in the habit of being lax re: your claims.

but given she was prone ot fiddling her expenses claim, I'm not sure it is too outrageous to suggest she may have deliberately submitted in full knowledge.

She was caught redhanded and now tries to say it is because of sexism...sorry not buying it.