Integrity 2

Mehdi Hasan, appearing on ‘The Politics Show’ this morning, and talking about the furore surrounding David Laws expenses boob, put across his view in a reasoned, logical manner and he outlined the important facts. The issue isn’t his sexuality, it’s his integrity. And his lack of common sense.

Laws was in charge of tax payer’s money and was given the role of making cuts in spending, cuts that would impact on many peoples quality of life, cuts that are going to hurt and someone in that position should not have taken £40,000 of our money and paid it to his partner as rent. Laws can argue what 'partner' means all he likes but this person was his 'cohabitee' and as such paying them this money was clearly against the rules. It is possible that, as has been suggested, Laws and his partner started out in a landlord/tenant relationship, in which case the money was legitimately claimed, but the minute their relationship changed Laws should have made other arrangements. Laws is a millionaire and it seems an odd choice for a millionaire to rent a room in a house. He’s not a student for fucks sake but a grown man. He could have legitimately rented a home of his own, moved his lover in and claimed for all the rent or mortgage on the new property. He would of course have had to pay that money over to a third person and Laws decided instead to keep bunging his lover the money. Or if he really was so worried about being ‘outted’ he could have just decided not to claim the expenses at all. The fact that he is a millionaire does not mean, as some people have suggested, that £40.000 is chicken feed to him. £40.000 is a lot of money. Let’s not forget that it is more that most people earn in a year. He is reported as to have been in turmoil because he wanted to keep his homosexuality a secret. However, reports this morning from his constituency, where he is much admired and, indeed, enjoys a huge majority, claim that his homosexuality was an open secret. Like another high profile Lib Dem politician who is held very dear by his constituents and manages to lives quietly with his male lover…no questions were asked, no eyebrows were raised, no one gives a flying fuck. Why did Laws take the role of Chief Secretary to the Treasury, a role that meant he would be wielding the axe on public spending? Hypocrite.

How then can Clegg continue to say Laws is a man of integrity? Does Clegg have any idea what the word ‘integrity’ means? Obviously not. Mr Clegg, ‘Integrity’ is wrapped up with truth and honesty, integrity embraces principles and values and most of all it means someone has an inbuilt mechanism for ‘doing the right thing’. Laws clearly didn’t. He is saying to someone in genuine need ‘Oh, no, you can’t claim that benefit…cut backs my dear’ while he is claiming for a benefit he knows he is not entitled too. Ugh! *shudders*

Laws is claiming this mess arose out of his desire to keep his sexuality a secret. Yeah right. This mess has nothing to do with him being gay. It has everything to do with him being greedy. Didn’t Laws once work in the city? Hmmm, the Greed Capital. And didn’t he do very well in that hot bed of dog eat dog? Hmmm…Greed motivated.

Our fledgling coalition government have had a huge setback, as by all accounts, Laws was the ideal candidate for the job. If that really is the case we really don’t have much hope of ever being a fairer society do we?




Sarah Ferguson is a woman who lacks integrity.

Once upon a time Sarah married a Prince. Although she never became an actual Princess herself she did become a Duchess and she bore the Prince two little Princesses. Unfortunately the marriage did not last long and Sarah was, for a time, banished from the royal palace, something to do with apparently sucking some blokes toe in front of the tiny Princesses. Sarah was still a young, healthy woman and off she went to seek her fortune in the big wide world. Her Princesses were still very much part of the royal family and enjoyed the privilege this afforded them so Sarah only had to financially provide for herself. Sarah threw herself into making money and managed to secure a deal worth a couple of million pounds, she cultivated rich friends and lived the high life. To give the Dutchess her due she also raised lots of money for charity and while doing so managed to keep her profile in the media and consequently appeared on chat shows and in magazine interviews. Sarah also managed to stay on good terms with her ex, the Prince, who bizarrely continued to pay her £15.000 a year, which is half the money he is reported to earn - as opposed to the money paid to him each year by the tax payer via his mummy the Queen.

Sarah found it hard to keep pace with her rich friends, who no doubt assumed that as a Duchess she was worth a bob or two, and she soon saw her millions dwindling and so she started to live off her daughters trust funds and 'rent' a room in her ex husbands palace. Maybe her and David Laws could join forces and rent a house share between them - somewhere between the two palaces, Buckingham and Westminster. Laws could definitely advise her on what benefits she may be able to claim, for the time being at least, as he didn't have time to axe them all.

Sarah, now living in poverty (well, it is all relative) decided to sell her Prince to the highest bidder and in doing so was the victim of a sordid little sting. When discovered she bleated that in the past she had been too highly principled to demand more money when she divorced (unlike, she hinted, that little minx Diana, who stiffed her Prince for 20 million before she was stiffed by....oh that's a whole different story) and those high principles are the ultimate cause of her downfall. Sarah has now seen the error of her ways and is investigating the possibility of stinging her ex for more 'maintenance'. Not for her children, the royal family certainly take care of their 'own', but for her. Why does this woman think that her ex and his family have any responsibly for her food, travel, clothing etc, or for the roof over her head? Why does this woman think it's OK for her to 'dip into her children's trust funds' or to go on living in the home of her ex...what will that do for any relationship her ex may want to enter into? Girlfriends tend to feel uncomfortable by the ex wife living in the attic. Sarah has shown herself to be greedy, selfish and lacking in common sense. What has she done with all the money she has been earning over the years? Unless she takes a good long look at herself, how she lives and what her motives are this is one fairy story that isn't going to end in 'happily ever after'.