Quote:
Originally Posted by Angua
Let's see £6,600 per year as share of rent to hide a relationship with a secret partner. 
V
£20,000 per year for a second home for an open relationship. 
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. |
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.