David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

A year after the expenses scandal broke and more cases still rise to the surface

Are they ALL at it???

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8712383.stm

Re: New Treasury Minister David Laws refers himself to Parliamentary Standards Commis
 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...000-claim.html

http://www.libdemvoice.org/?p=19728&...mpaign=twitter

Re: New Treasury Minister David Laws refers himself to Parliamentary Standards Commis
 

You'd have thought the Telegraph could have mentioned it earlier - or maybe it's one they missed ;)

Re: New Treasury Minister David Laws refers himself to Parliamentary Standards Commis
 

Why mention it earlier, when they can save it for when the MP in question has gained more power & popularity & is a more enjoyable target to take down?

Re: New Treasury Minister David Laws refers himself to Parliamentary Standards Commis
 

It is the nature of the link to the person he rented the room from that is the issue, and that would not have been apparent at the time of the original revelations.

Re: New Treasury Minister David Laws refers himself to Parliamentary Standards Commis
 

Couple of blog posts I've just read commenting on this:

http://eachwishresigned.blogspot.com...o-himself.html

http://nickthornsby.wordpress.com/20...-will-survive/

Re: New Treasury Minister David Laws refers himself to Parliamentary Standards Commis
 

Oh, sorry I only looked at the news story briefly and thought 'not another one'

Re: New Treasury Minister David Laws refers himself to Parliamentary Standards Commis
 

Tory Blogger & aspirant politician Iain Dale: David Laws: I Hope He Survives

Re: New Treasury Minister David Laws refers himself to Parliamentary Standards Commis
 

He wasn't paying a third party for them both to have somewhere to live in, he was paying the other person that he was living with. That is what was wrong. He was, in effect, having the cost of the other person paid from expenses.

Re: New Treasury Minister David Laws refers himself to Parliamentary Standards Commis
 

Or, in effect, having the cost of himself paid from expenses, something which was allowed & was the point of the old regime... unfortunately however the person he was paying for his accommodation was also his partner (so there are issues regarding the later changes to the rules)... But even so, whether his landlord was just a random landlord, or whether his landlord was also his partner, he would still have needed to pay the cost of his own accommodation... Living with a partner doesn't mean you live for free, you still have to pay your share of the rent/mortage & other bills.

I think it was a mistake, but I doubt he did it to line his own pockets (doesn't need to*!), it seems more a case of an error of judgement made when trying to keep his private life private.



*[Of course he has enough money that really I think he should have paid all his accommodation costs out of his own pocket... however that goes for many MPs]

Re: New Treasury Minister David Laws refers himself to Parliamentary Standards Commis
 

What a surprise David Laws is gay.:rolleyes:

Re: New Treasury Minister David Laws refers himself to Parliamentary Standards Commis
 

This piece on David Laws in the Guardian yesterday was very good:

David Laws: Diehard liberal with no qualms over wielding Treasury axe

----------------

This blog post makes some good points I think:

The Laws simply don't cater for such privacy

Especially, if you focus on the money, this part (given that if he had been open about his relationship & the London property had been a proper full-on Second Home he could have claimed far *more* money than what he actually claimed)

Re: New Treasury Minister David Laws refers himself to Parliamentary Standards Commis
 

Well that's ok then...He can be excused as he's now part of a NEW government and he was just protecting his partner and his own sexuality.:rolleyes:

I don't give a stuff who or what their reasons or what party they are.The Telegraph (traditionally a Tory rag)has done it's duty and reported the facts.
If any other such cases come up I hope they will report them which ever party they belong to. :tu:
One can only hope that other media outlets will do the same thing about new or old MPs

If we are going to have to tighten our belts and suck it up during the future cutbacks then so must the MPs.

Re: New Treasury Minister David Laws refers himself to Parliamentary Standards Commis
 

I don't think its about privacy or respecting homosexuality. Its about preventing another Derek Conway situation from happening.

Re: New Treasury Minister David Laws refers himself to Parliamentary Standards Commis
 

He was claiming rent and other expenses for a room that he wasn't using at all.
One of his excuses:-
You could be married for 50 years and that could still be true.

Re: [Update] The Liberal-Conservative Coalition
 

To me Prescott is the quintessential Champagne Socialist.

In other news David Laws has been caught with his fingers well and truly in the till. Nice actions to try and make up but a tad too late I feel.

Re: [Update] The Liberal-Conservative Coalition
 

David Laws has now resigned.

Re: [Update] The Liberal-Conservative Coalition
 

Now being said that Danny Alexander to take up his role.

Re: [Update] The Liberal-Conservative Coalition
 

I don't think he 'had his hand in the till'. I don't know how everyone else's situations work but when you share accommodation you pay rent, it's just in this case it was a partner. So against the rules but it's not like he was trying to scam people or to make a tidy profit like so many of the other MPs attempted to do.

Re: [Update] The Liberal-Conservative Coalition
 

What a pity :(

Re: [Update] The Liberal-Conservative Coalition
 

Exactly.

I know the rules were changed to say that you cannot use 2nd home expenses to pay rent to a partner, but I don't think that it's "wrong" as such, certainly not in this case.

If you live with your partner, in a property rented/owned by your partner, then you pay them money towards rent & bills, same as if you lived in a property owned by a random landlord. Living with a partner doesn't mean you live for free & have no rent.

He actually re-mortgaged his constituency home to help his partner fund the purchase of the London property.

The sad thing is, if he had been open about his relationship, & the property was classed as a proper 2nd home he had a stake in, he could have claimed far more money per year (e.g. the full £20,000).

I have no problem whatsoever with him paying his partner for accommodation.

[Although, given his own financial situation, I don't think he should have claimed any expenses at all in the first place... ditto for any other MP with that much money].

I think this is a very sad thing. OK, he made a mistake, but he wasn't after profit, just privacy. And now the Coalition Government has lost someone who, to me, seemed pretty much ideal for the role he was in.

Re: [Update] The Liberal-Conservative Coalition
 

Which kind of begs the question, how many are they not telling us about? How much will they never tell us?

---------- Post added at 22:58 ---------- Previous post was at 22:57 ----------

A little self-serving perhaps, but immoral? I don't think so.

---------- Post added at 23:00 ---------- Previous post was at 22:58 ----------

How many more excuses to we need for MPs fiddling their expenses. This forum was the last place I would have expected to read support for a MP caught flipping and renting.

Re: [Update] The Liberal-Conservative Coalition
 

David Laws wasn't "flipping".

Re: [Update] The Liberal-Conservative Coalition
 

It would only been identified as an issue after the relationship link had been established. The details of the expenses would have been public, which meant anybody else could of reported the story before now if the link was apparent all along. So it's not the Telegraph holding onto the story. If the Conservatives had won a majority then releasing the story now would have had less of an impact. It would have made more sense to release the story before the election. That's assuming the accusations of certain ridiculously biased people are true.

He took out a mortgage to give/lend to his partner, so that Mr Lundie could buy an expensive house. If it was a loan, how was Mr Lundie going to pay it back? Could Mr Lundie have afforded to buy the expensive house if he wasn't receiving the rent.

The expenses were for a room that would not have been used for sleeping in. That implies fraud whatever any relationship was or wasn't there.

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

I still think that the Telegraph's timing is rather suspect, coming during the week of the Queen's Speech, & after David Laws has gained a high profile due to his (now short-lived) role at the Treasury.

Also, although the Telegraph claimed that it "was not intending to disclose Mr Laws’s sexuality", what exactly did they think would happen if they published a story saying he had claimed expenses to pay rent to his long-term partner? I know Mr Laws pre-empted it by disclosing it himself, but I think that's only because it would be better coming straight from him rather than people digging around & discovering it due to the Telegraph story.


As for not sleeping in the room... well yes, presumably he would not have been sleeping in the room in question. I don't see it as implying fraud though, it is not as if he would not have been sleeping anywhere at all in the property itself: he would presumably have been sleeping in the same room as his partner. He did not mention that however due to not wanting to have to disclose his sexuality: he wanted his private life to stay private.

It is not as if he was claiming money for a property he didn't actually use at all. He did live there, did sleep there, did use the kitchen, & the bathroom, & the utilities... He just presumably slept in the same room as his landlord given that his landlord was his partner.

If your landlord is also your partner, you still need to pay towards the rent & the bills...

As mentioned earlier, if he had been open about his sexuality & his relationship, he could have officially been a co-owner of the London property with his partner & could have claimed FAR MORE MONEY THAN HE ACTUALLY DID. By trying to keep his private life private, & doing his expenses claims the way he did, he claimed *less* money.

Alternatively, he could have claimed that his constituency home was his 2nd home, & claimed the full £20k per year on that (= more than he actually claimed for London), & used his own money to contribute towards the cost of living with his partner.

Although, as I said before, given his personal wealth he really should have not claimed anything at all (& that goes for plenty of other MPs). That way he would have been safe too: if he paid for everything himself, this wouldn't have happened.

Re: [Update] The Liberal-Conservative Coalition
 

Fraud because he didn't want to reveal he was gay, not because he wanted to fiddle expenses. Who cares if he slept in that room or in another room with this partner? It's none of our business.

Re: [Update] The Liberal-Conservative Coalition
 

Yup. And even if it wasn't the same specified room, if was still the same property. What does it matter which actual room was slept in, so long as he was sleeping in, and making use of, the property?


Still, too late now. He's gone, & I think it's a damn shame. Hopefully Danny Alexander will be as good a Chief Sec. as Laws looked like he would be. I bet he won't be as popular with the Tories as Laws was though.

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

He claimed expenses for something he didn't use.

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

So he used a different room in the same property to the actual specified room. Big deal! :rolleyes:

He still used the property in question. Still slept there, still used the gas & electricity there, still used the water there. He just used a different bed...

It's not like he claimed for that property, but only ever stayed somewhere else, simply using his expenses to fund his partner.

[something which I believe some MPs *did* do, .e.g. I'm sure there was at least one MP who claimed expenses for a property he never actually lived in, & which was actually used by his daughter or some other family member].

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

Nice try but he did in fact use the property. Unless we follow up on our elected officials to check they have actually slept in the bed of the room they are claiming for then living at the address provided is all the proof they can provided.

Besides, He still had to pay rent. Which he could claim for anyway. So he didn't gain anything by doing it is way around. The only problem is the technicality that he said his partner was his landlord and did not disclose fully the nature of the relationship. However that did not allow him to claim more than he was entitled for, he in fact claimed less anyway.

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

Things like Gas, Electricity, and Food would not be covered as they are not an additional expense as a result of having to have a second home.

Is this the first MP/Peer accused of receiving expenses for a accomodation that they didn't use? If not, were those other people criticised(at least) for it?

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

I thought that plenty of MPs did claim for items such as those?

And, even discounting that, it is still irrelevant IMO which bedroom he happened to sleep in, given that he did still sleep in the property in question. Why does it matter which bed he was in? Either way, he was still using the property in question which was being claimed for, & either way, he still had to pay rent!

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

Personally I think that the fact that his sexuality is now common knowledge, there are quite a few unenlightened people who will use petty financial technicality's as an excuse to have a dig at him.:shrug:

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

[May have been better if you had made a new post instead of a belated edit. More chance of being noticed ]

He is not actually being criticised for "receiving expenses for accommodation that he didn't use"!

The issue is that the rules were changed to prohibit claiming expenses to pay rent to a partner, yet he continued to claim expenses despite his landlord also being his partner.

His defence is that he wanted to keep his private life private. He could have come out & officially lived with his same-sex partner, and claimed FAR MORE MONEY than what he actually claimed, but he didn't. He has apologised, resigned, and is paying the money back.

He did use the accommodation (as in, the actual property he was claiming expenses for). It is just assumed however that he probably didn't use the actual bedroom, given that he would presumably have been sleeping in a different room in the same property with his partner.

Why are you so hung up over which bed he slept in? It was in the same property he was claiming for, & he would still need to pay rent regardless, who cares which room he was in?

If you want some actual examples of what I believe to be dodgy claims, then try these instead:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Cash#Expenses_claims

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Gib...es_controversy

Yup :(

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

The only people bringing his sexuality into it, seem to be the people trying to defend him. Others have been criticised, but he is being defended by certain people. My problem with this, is that he is being defended because of his sexuality, whereas others have been criticised. People are saying that "it's understandable because...". If those others had not been criticised then surely it would not have been an issue at all and not a resigning matter.

He apparently can easily afford to own his own London residence and so would not need to rent anywhere. He used the expenses system to intentionally make a profit for someone close to him.

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

Erm, the reason why he's resigned is because he was paying money to the guy he was sleeping with. He wasn't, it would appear, sharing a room with him or acting as his spouce. That's the crux of the matter.

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

I do not disagree with that, as I have said earlier. I think any MP who can afford it should pay for their own accommodation.

How so? I think that is a rather bold accusation.

Laws paid rent to his partner, & claimed expenses for it.

Laws' partner later sold the London property for a profit.

Laws then re-mortgaged his own constituency home to help his partner purchase a new property in London.

Laws continued to claim back his share of the costs of living in the property with his partner.

How was the expenses system used to make a profit? All he did was use it to pay rent to his partner, no different than if he was paying rent to a normal professional landlord. Living with your partner does not mean you live for free, there would still be contributions required just as if renting from a landlord rather than one who was also his partner.

As I said before, he claimed *less* than he would have done if he had been open about his personal life instead of wanting it to remain private, as he could have been open about his relationship & officially co-owned a property, and subsequently claimed the full £20k per year (as many MPs did!) instead of the lower amount he actually claimed.

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

I think the poor chap actually just wanted to be private about his relationship. That's fine by me even if he was straight rather than gay.

Let me tell you, just because my girlfriend lives with me doesn't mean she lives for free!! No one in their right mind nowadays could afford it.

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

Let's see £6,600 per year as share of rent to hide a relationship with a secret partner. :erm:
V
£20,000 per year for a second home for an open relationship. :dozey:

Silly lack of judgement in this enlightened day and age.

The real shame is in the grand scheme of things the Government has lost a highly able Secretary of State to the Treasury and will be much the poorer as a result.

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

The issue is that you cannot have a Chief Secretary to the Treasury having been seen to have his fingers in the till after all the expenses furore,having lied about it and carry on in the position three weeks into a new government.

At least he has behaved now in a gentlemanly manner.

Let's hope that there are no more political banana skins around the corner as we need for things to settle and the matter of government to continue so we achieve some sort of stability.

Re: New Treasury Minister David Laws refers himself to Parliamentary Standards Commis
 

one saved until a rainy day.

the rainy day been the capital gains tax increases so time to slander some lib dems influence.

thats my take on it.

will be interesting to see now if he is replaced by another lib dem or a tory.

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

Telegraph now has fantastic dirt to throw at any time of it's choosing and i doubt very much this will be the last one we hear about. Was he wrong yes he was and for that reason he had to go and he has done so admitting he was wrong end of the story as far as i am concerned no need for further witch hunting on the part of anyone. As for the relationship part of this and wanting to keep privacy about it sorry but as far as i am concerned if privacy is that big a deal to you don't enter public life he chose too and when you do that whether we like it or not you give up a part of your privacy.

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

DC said he was an honourable man.

He conned the British tax payer out of £40,000, how is that honourable

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

He was a conservative and they know honour better than most that is who labour copied:D.

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

I do love the double standards we the british public have on the whole expenses issue as though if any of us were in that position we wouldn't have played the system as well to whatever degree. He didn't con anyone he was less then forthcoming but ultimately claimed less then he could have done under the rules as they stood at the time so while i know it is oh so easy to constantly rip the guy down give him some credit.

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

So let's see... If someone can earn £15,000 in benefits legimately instead goes out and eans £10,000 cash-in-hand then its OK because its a smaller amount?

It doesn't wash. He was diverting public funds to his own ends. At worst it should have been recorded and at best it should not have been done at all. People keep hanging on to the homosexuality and privacy issues but they have to abide by the same rules as Iain Duncan Smith (who was innocent) and Derek Conway (found guilty). If he was that concerned at his homosexuality becoming public then why choose the 2nd most publicsed profession after TV personality? I think its clear he's trying to hide behind this but it's a the flismiest of flimsy excuses and gives him an opportunity to say he is being persecuted for his sexuality rather than just because he broke the rules.

I'm sorry but he's guilty which is why he offered to pay the money back and why he reported himself to the standards community and why his resignations have been accepted. People can fawn over him saying he was a victim of his sexuality and and excellent treasurer and hope he comes back soon, but that doesn't change what he did.

The timing is interesting by The Telegraph and if they have saved up pieces of news to use at opportune moments then that's certainly unethical. But the fact remains if he wasn't 'at it', they'd have nothing on him to report. I don't have any sympathy.

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

I don't have any sympathy for him but end of the day he came clean admitted to what had gone on took responsibility and went rather then clung having to be dragged away. If the telegraph does have more and comes out with it at a later date then they should face sanction as well because i already think the media have too much power and influence in this country to all our detriment but to have information and use it purely for the purpose of causing trouble is not acceptable. This issue is now dead as far as i can see and there is no legitimate reason to continue it unless there is an agenda personal to david laws and that is also not acceptable if we truly do hold dear the principles we claim too.

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

Missed the point entirely -

In this day and age hiding your sexual preference is idiotic and it was this that led to the error. He has resigned and behaved properly. Witch hunting and claiming double standards in comparison to how much he could have claimed is absurd. Up to the RECENT change to excluding partners he was perfectly entitled to claim rent for his share of accommodation in a property.

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

Yes, when in doubt label me a homophobe. Didn't see that one coming.

Re: New Treasury Minister David Laws refers himself to Parliamentary Standards Commis
 

I too was surprised that it was secret. I always presumed he was and that everyone knew.

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

Please explain where I have done so? :rolleyes:

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

That's unfair. I don't see where she claimed you where one? That's not the argument she was making and it's not fair to presume everyone defending him is playing the homophobe card.

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

:mad: He took a long time " to come clean" lets hope there are no more skeletons in the cupboard..... :(:(

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

He wasn't "carrying on" with it after the expenses scandal & into the new Government. He has been renting another flat in London since September 2009.

I expect plenty more "banana skins" around the corner, because certain sections of the media & Westminster do not like the coalition & will be keen on destabilising it.

I think that given the circumstances, & given his position, he had to resign, but I do not think he did anything seriously wrong. He was just trying to keep his private life private & made an error in judgement.

I don't think he "conned" anyone, as such.

He was trying to keep his private life private, but cocked up.

He lived with Mr Lundie as a tenant, & paid him rent accordingly. The rules allowed him to claim expenses for this, which he did.

At some point they entered into a relationship, & continued to live together.

Mr Laws continued to pay Mr Lundie rent, because Mr Lundie was still his landlord. However they were now also in a relationship.

Mr Laws continued to claim expenses, as there was nothing prohibiting this.

The rules did not prohibit paying rent to a partner until they were changed in 2006.

Once the rules changed, he could have stopped claiming expenses because his landlord was also his partner. Or he could have moved elsewhere.

However, he presumably thought that either of those options would be tantamount to "coming out", as it would be rather blatantly obvious that Mr Lundie was his partner if he changed his claims or his accommodation when the rules changed. And given his intensely private nature & his upbringing, he did not wish to "come out".

So he chose to keep as he was...justifying it to himself by saying that they were not actual civil partners or spouses, as although they were seeing each other they were not full-on "partners".

Was he wrong to do that? Probably. Did he do it to con anyone? No. Did he do it to line his own pockets? No.

As said before, if all he had been interested in was "conning the taxpayer" or lining his own pockets, he could have been open about his relationship & claimed the full £20,000 per year from living with his partner in a joint-property. Or he could have "flipped" his designated second home to be his constituency home in Yeovil, & claimed the full £20,000 on that. He didn't, he just kept things as they were before the rule change, & tried to keep private, while claiming far less than he could have done & far less than many other MPs.

Mistake? Yes. Thief? No.


---------------------------------

David Laws will bounce back from resignation, say senior Conservatives

Iain Dale in the Mail

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

The fact is that at the time the misconduct occurred he knew it wasn't right and he didn't admit to it until he was more or less forced too.Not the conduct for a Treasury Secretary whatever the timing.

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

Yes but I think we can understand his intentions where not corrupt. He did not want to scam the taxpayer and make a profit out of them. He wanted to cover up his relationship, and when the rules changed it would have meant revealing that so he carried on his agrement knowing it was now wrong. Yes, that's bad but honestly, it's not corrupt or sinister it's a human struggling with their personal issues.

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

I thought it was clear when Angua made the "witch-hunting" comment. Laws admits breaching parliamentary standards, far from it being his fault, its really down to me and an army of Daily Mail/Telegraph readers trying to hound homosexuals out of public office.

That's as is irrelevent as his sexuality.

And as I said before if he really wanted to be a closetted homosexual then he shouldn't have willingly became an MP let alone a cabinet minister. Anyone with half a brain would have said that. Even going by your words "cover up" should not be used in the same sentence as an elected official.

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

As soon as all these theiving MPs quit, regardless of what party they are the better.

But I wonder if anybody would be left to run the country :D

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

I think it's tenuous to suggest that she meant sexuality there. I perceived it as a witch-hunt against the liberal democrat side of the collation from the Tory press hostile to the idea of them influencing government policy. No one said it isn't his fault but that we should have a level of understanding on what happened, that is more complex than someone cheating on expenses.

Playing the homophobe card is wrong but attempting to portray others as using it is also wrong.


Not really. Intentions are important in judging someones character. We all make mistakes but our intentions are a far better indictor of our character and likely future conduct. He didn't seek to profit from this arrangement so we can assume he is not a corrupt, thieving individual that some wish to portray him as.

Sometimes people do not behave rationally on matters of sexuality, sex, and relationships. Cover-up should not be used by the way and, although he is entitled for his sexuality to never be an issue, what he did was wrong. It is very different to some previous MP's expenses though.

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

I find it odd that a political party and their followers who claimed to want more transparency in public offfice seem to be blase about someone in their own team covering up and misleading the public.

He wasn't just paying his "landlord" he was paying his lover. There is a clear distinction here and they must be treated separately for good reason. Otherwise we'll end up with more Derek Conways.

That's why we need transparency, honesty and proper scrutiny of our elected officials. Laws fell short of all of those.

That's the issue here. Not because his critics are hell-bent on chasing homosexuals and Lib Dems out of office.

Re: [Update] The Liberal-Conservative Coalition
 

Unlike some other politicians on both sides of the house, Laws hasn't been accused of flipping.

Yvette Cooper and Ed Balls on the other hand....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...-expenses.html

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

Yes, really. Commiting a crime with "good intentions" is still commiting a crime.

What, suddenly everyone can decieve and cover up so long as they are doing it under quote: "good intentions"? Would that apply to heterosexual conservatives as well?

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

Judges do take into account intentions and character when sentencing. In fact other intent helps decide what crime people are charged with. Intentions are very important.

For someone complaining about people using the homophobe card you sure do seem keen to use it yourself. Yes, it does apply to heterosexual conservatives as well! I resent this constant attempt to portray my argument as "He is gay so it is ok", honestly that is out of line.

No one can deceive and cover up and then say it's ok. But seriously there is a difference between someone doing it because they want to commit fraud and someone doing it because they are insecure about an aspect of their personal life. It's still wrong but it is far more understandable.

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

Still makes it a crime. And they are still held to account for their actions. That's why Laws was right to resign, refer himself to the standards committe and face the music.


I didn't start this. When the news broke I don't recall anyone bringing up his sexuality in any negative way until the Lib Dems and his supporters tried to hide behind it. He/they were the ones that brought it into the public debate. It was the Lib Dems supporters on this forum and off of it that have to tried excuse his actions by wrapping it in a blanket of his sexuality.

Peter Tachell was on TV earlier and even he said his sexuality wasn't an excuse. And he's normally the first to claim everything is a homophobic conspiracy.

And you say it does apply to heterosexuals but I can't see it happening. Imagine the same thing with an old man and a younger (16-18 year old) girl? Or a man with a black girl fearing a racism backlash? Would people still be so eager to say its OK for him to deceive the public to protect their privacy? I doubt it. If it is OK, where's the line? How much are elected officials allowed to decieve the public in the name of privacy?

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

RizzyKing says a very good point.

I wonder how many editor's get policies they want purely on the basis they can threaten and then report info to the public if they dont get their own way.

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

For goodness sake anyone would think the poor bloke had committed murder or worse.

Yes he was wrong and made a bad error in judgement. In the grand scheme of things he hasn't cost someone their livelihood or life and has owned up and paid the price - and more.

There are shades of grey and a little understanding, compassion & forgiveness go a long way. Regardless of who is at fault.

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

Exactly. Things are not always black & white. Yes, he cocked up, yes he appears to have broken the rules, but he did not do it out of a desire to defraud, he did it out of a desire to keep a certain aspect of his private life private. And he claimed far less than he could have legitimately claimed if he had been open about his relationship...


Regarding Derek Conway... I don't get the comparison.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7224538.stm

Mr Conway used £40,000 of taxpayers' money to pay his son as a "researcher", yet the standards committee said there was no record of Mr Conway's son actually doing any work at Westminster.

Mr Laws did not use taxpayers money to employ Mr Lundie for something he did not actually do, he used it to pay rent to Mr Lundie. It is not as if he was paying rent to Mr Lundie yet not actually living in the property in question.

Yes, Mr Lundie & Mr Laws became involved in a relationship with each other, but Mr Lundie was still Mr Laws' landlord & so Mr Laws would still have had to pay rent & contribute to the cost of his accommodation, regardless of his status with Mr Lundie.

Yes, the rules changed so that it became prohibited to claim for rent paid to a partner, so yes he should have done something about it when that rule change occurred. But it does not look remotely like it was done as a way of lining his or Mr Lundie's pockets. He just wanted to keep his sexuality & his relationship private.

My opinion would be the same if Mr Laws was a Labour MP or a Tory MP.

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

Tend to agree with Matt here and I'm no Lib Dem supporter. There's no doubt he did wrong but, unlike so many of his colleagues, the motivation for doing so clearly wasn't to extract as much money from the poor old taxpayer as he could. It was about preserving his private life and for that I have some sympathy although I do think he was right to resign.

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

The point I made was that when you are diverting public money in to someone who is a relative - be it family or lover - then that transaction should be held to a higher level of scrutiny. This makes sense as when there is a relationship, it is much easier to cheat the system. Hence why it was presumably banned in 2006.

I'm not going back and forth on this. Its obvious that the Lib Dems and their supporters have a lot invested in this man and need him to remain in power. They want to mitigate this man's actions down to irelevence. That's when I got fed up and spoke up. He doesn't deserve to be hung but likewise his offence wasn't exactly a parking ticket. Especially from a political party that campaigned so much on transparency and honesty. He has been caught, he has resigned, paid back the money and whatever censure he gets the parliamenary standards committee will presumably be fair and draw a line under it.

---------- Post added at 21:41 ---------- Previous post was at 21:37 ----------

That's the thing - he was brought down by £900/month that he refused to pay for himself and thought we ought to. Had he just paid for his own lovenest, he'd still be in office. Not too dissimilar from some of the MPs that claimed for small amounts that really they ought to have paid for in the first place. Had they did, they would have still be in office.

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

I agree in part but don't think it was about the money - it was about keeping his private affairs private although in order to do that it appears he did misuse public money and the relatively small amounts involved have clearly cost him very dear on both counts.

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

What did he do with the money?

This argument might well have been made, if he could have proved that he did something socially worthwhile with the money.

---------- Post added at 22:11 ---------- Previous post was at 22:07 ----------

I can see some relevance to parallels here. Laws paid his partner for a room he neither used, nor intended to use. Therefore paying someone for services never received.

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

I certainly think there should be a higher level of scrutiny if money is going to someone who is a relative or close friend etc.

However, what David Laws did is not at all the same as e.g. Derek Conway (claimed expenses to pay his son for work which allegedly was not actually done) or Ian Gibson (claimed expenses to help pay for a flat which his daughter used as her main residence).

Yes, he paid money to his partner, but his partner *was* also his landlord. It's not like he was paying for something which did not exist, or paying rent for somewhere he did not actually live. OK, it was against the rules once they changed in 2006, but I don't see it as being anywhere near as "wrong" as what many other MPs did.

It's not just the Lib Dems who had a lot invested in David Laws... the Tories did too. George Osborne didn't just want any old Lib Dem as his Chief Secretary, to tie the Lib Dems into the unpopular but necessary cuts, he wanted David Laws (& had previously asked him to defect, offering him a front-bench role with the Tories), someone who he said "had been put on Earth" to do the job of Treasury chief secretary. Other Tories apparently also considered him the best man for the job, & are quite disappointed that he has gone.

Danny Alexander has taken his place because he is a Lib Dem, & the Coalition agreement requires a Lib Dem to be replaced with a Lib Dem (or Tory with a Tory). I don't think he's going to be as good as David Laws was though, which is unfortunate given the importance of the position in this current economic situation.

Paid the cost of his accommodation... same as he did before he & Mr Lundie became romantically involved.

Hardly the same. Mr Laws may not have used the actual specific bedroom (although we do not actually know that), but even if he did not sleep in that bedroom & instead slept in the same bedroom as Mr Lundie, he still slept in the property in question & still used the property in question. Therefore he still would have had to pay rent, would still have had to contribute to the accommodation costs. Not the same as claiming expenses to pay a relative for allegedly non-existent research (Mr Conway) or claiming expenses to pay for a property a relative used as their main residence instead of him (Mr Gibson).

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

I find it very disappointing that in this day and age a corrupt politician tries to use his sexuality as an excuse. I mean ffs who didn't know, or at least suspect, that he was gay.

That was not important in the least. As a taxpayer there have been worse thieves working in the House of P. but a crook's a crook.

In this ,allegedly, new open political environment I find it even more disappointing that the PM and his deputy have been so supportive.

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

Excuse me but there were others who did things expenses wise that they shouldn't have and may or may not had the best of intentions but they got no leeway.Why should this person?

Funny how the tune has changed now it's a new government.

Frankly I can't care less about him and his sexuality.It's not an issue for me and in this day and age it's a bit specious to claim it is pertinant to the situation. It's total rot as most wouldn't have given the fact a second thought.

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

By all accounts David Laws is a very private man, & he kept his sexuality & his relationship with Mr Lundie a secret from everyone including his friends & family.

If he was "corrupt" or a "crook" as you allege, and if it was about the money & not his sexuality or his privacy, then why didn't he come out & declare his relationship officially, given that he would then have been able to claim far more money than he actually did? Or why didn't he "flip" his second-home designation to be his constituency home, and claim far more money than he actually did?

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

Any MP can rent a room with a person as their city accommodation without question and this is all perfectly LEGAL. The mistake Mr Laws made was continuing to pay rent via expenses AFTER he was in a relationship with his landlord in an attempt to keep said relationship private.

As for outing a gay - this should be for the person concerned, NOT some rag stirring things up because things are not going to plan.

You would be surprised how many people hide their sexuality from their family. Often with the unspoken collusion of their own family who are still hoping for grandchildren.

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

Just because it is not an issue to you, does not mean it is not an issue to David Laws or to other people.

Even if "most wouldn't have given the fact a second thought", it does not mean all wouldn't have given the fact a second thought.

Given that he kept quiet about his sexuality all these years, it suggests that he did certainly think that some people at least would have given it a second thought. Not all family members are accepting when someone comes out, not all friends are, not all colleagues are... He went to a Catholic school, & spent years working in the City, so you can see why he may have preferred to keep quiet regarding his sexuality.

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

I can't help wondering how many more of these revelations the Torygraph has stashed away for a more news-worthy day.
If they are sitting on more stories like the above and then drip them out for sensational headlines over the coming months this could well backfire on the paper, I still can't see why it has taken so long to break the story concerning Laws though.

Re: David Laws has resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury
 

And as if by magic...

CF Thread: "Next-up for the Telegraph: Danny Alexander"


As for why it took so long for the David Laws story... well, what would the point have been in doing it last year or earlier this year, when he wasn't anywhere near as well known & wasn't in a rather important position? More newsworthy doing it now, and also of course it's damaging to the Coalition...