MPs Expenses affair - deep skullduggery afoot

[Peter Presland]

What is the coverage like there now?

Magda

It's pretty much still the dominant story for most of the MSM. I too keep a lookout for the issue(s) it may have been designed to distract from. It still seems to me that the most likely target (at least in terms of its timing) is to influence the European Parliamentary elections - timed to perfection in fact with the polls taking place next week. The net effect so far has been near total disgust and disillusionment with the main political parties and the clear beneficiaries in terms of potential protest etc voting, the BNP and UKIP.

I have no time for the simpering whimpering special-pleading Tory MP Nadine Dorries but the removal of one of her blog posts under legal action threat from the Billionaire owners of the Daily Telegraph (The Barclay Brothers) lends some weight to that view. She accused them of timing the whole thing to precisely that effect and they are clearly very sensitive about it. The offending blog post is available on Wikileaks.

Nothing more on John Wicks the leaker other than his string of failed businesses and that he clearly needed the money. I'm still waiting for the possible piracy-leaks connection to be made.

On the wider effect, I have no doubt that whatever theoretical ability the Westminster Parliament may have to hold the executive and the Deep-State apparatus to account (little enough as it was in practice anyway) will be further weakened. I suspect that is the root cause and that the position of the UK as poodle and EU trojan horse for the US will be strengthened thereby.

[Jan Klimkowski]

Peter - thank you for posting the wikileaks saving of the blog that has been taken down after legal threats.

The hypothesized consequence of day after day of publishing the sordid details of MP's silly and, sometimes, fraudulent expenses claims is as follows:

His very poignant words to me were "if any of this conjecture is true, Parliament will become full of racists, fantasists, and has-been celebrities. We will be rendered impotent and may never again regain the authority to withstand the pressure, opinion and whims of the overtly wealthy."

Bang on the money.

Oh, but that's a conspiracy theory, isn't it....

[Peter Lemkin]

So, it looks as if they will kick more than half of the 'bums' out with the next elections...but will they just vote-in a new set of bums?.....I think yea!...sadly.....its the system dummy - not so much the corrupt people in it!.....:eating:

[Magda Hassan]

Britain: The Depth of Corruption

by John Pilger / May 28th, 2009
The theft of public money by members of parliament, including government ministers, has given Britons a rare glimpse inside the tent of power and privilege. It is rare because not one political reporter or commentator, those who fill tombstones of column inches and dominate broadcast journalism, revealed a shred of this scandal. It was left to a public relations man to sell the “leak”. Why?
The answer lies in a deeper corruption, which tales of tax evasion and phantom mortgages touch upon but also conceal. Since Margaret Thatcher, British parliamentary democracy has been progressively destroyed as the two main parties have converged into a single-ideology business state, each with almost identical social, economic and foreign policies. This “project” was completed by Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, inspired by the political monoculture of the United States. That so many Labour and Tory politicians are now revealed as personally crooked is no more than a metaphor for the anti-democratic system they have forged together.
Their accomplices have been those journalists who report Parliament as “lobby correspondents” and their editors, who have “played the game” willfully, and have deluded the public (and sometimes themselves) that vital, democratic differences exist between the parties. Media-designed opinion polls based on absurdly small samplings, along with a tsunami of comment on personalities and their specious crises, have reduced the “national conversation” to a series of media events, in which the withdrawal of popular consent — as the historically low electoral turnouts under Blair demonstrated — has been abused as apathy.
Having fixed the boundaries of political debate and possibility, self-important paladins, notably liberals, promoted the naked emperor Blair and championed his “values” that would allow “the mind [to] range in search of a better Britain”. And when the bloodstains showed, they ran for cover. All of it had been, as Larry David once described an erstwhile crony, “a babbling brook of bullshit.”
How contrite their former heroes now seem. On 17 May, the Leader of the House of Commons, Harriet Harman, who is alleged to have spent £10,000 of taxpayers’ money on “media training”, called on MPs to “rebuild cross-party trust”. The unintended irony of her words recalls one of her first acts as social security secretary more than a decade ago — cutting the benefits of single mothers. This was spun and reported as if there was a “revolt” among Labour backbenchers, which was false. None of Blair’s new female MPs, who had been elected “to end male-dominated, Conservative policies”, spoke up against this attack on the poorest of poor women. All voted for it.
The same was true of the lawless attack on Iraq in 2003, behind which the cross-party Establishment and the political media rallied. Andrew Marr stood in Downing Street and excitedly told BBC viewers that Blair had “said they would be able to take Baghdad without a bloodbath, and that in the end the Iraqis would be celebrating. And on both of those points he has been proved conclusively right.” When Blair’s army finally retreated from Basra in May, it left behind, according to scholarly estimates, more than a million people dead, a majority of stricken, sick children, a contaminated water supply, a crippled energy grid and four million refugees.
As for the “celebrating” Iraqis, the vast majority, say Whitehall’s own surveys, want the invader out. And when Blair finally departed the House of Commons, MPs gave him a standing ovation — they who had refused to hold a vote on his criminal invasion or even to set up an inquiry into its lies, which almost three-quarters of the British population wanted.
Such venality goes far beyond the greed of the uppity Hazel Blears.
“Normalizing the unthinkable,” Edward Herman’s phrase from his essay “The Banality of Evil,” about the division of labor in state crime, is applicable here. On 18 May, the Guardian devoted the top of one page to a report headlined, “Blair awarded $1m prize for international relations work”. This prize, announced in Israel soon after the Gaza massacre, was for his “cultural and social impact on the world”. You looked in vain for evidence of a spoof or some recognition of the truth. Instead, there was his “optimism about the chance of bringing peace” and his work “designed to forge peace”.
This was the same Blair who committed the same crime — deliberately planning the invasion of a country, “the supreme international crime” — for which the Nazi foreign minister Joachim von Ribbentrop was hanged at Nuremberg after proof of his guilt was located in German cabinet documents. Last February, Britain’s “Justice” Secretary, Jack Straw, blocked publication of crucial cabinet minutes from March 2003 about the planning of the invasion of Iraq, even though the Information Commissioner, Richard Thomas, has ordered their release. For Blair, the unthinkable is both normalized and celebrated.
“How our corrupt MPs are playing into the hands of extremists,” said the cover of last week’s New Statesman. But is not their support for the epic crime in Iraq already extremism? And for the murderous imperial adventure in Afghanistan? And for the government’s collusion with torture?
It is as if our public language has finally become Orwellian. Using totalitarian laws approved by a majority of MPs, the police have set up secretive units to combat democratic dissent they call “extremism”. Their de facto partners are “security” journalists, a recent breed of state or “lobby” propagandist. On 9 April, the BBC’s Newsnight program promoted the guilt of 12 “terrorists” arrested in a contrived media drama orchestrated by the Prime Minister himself. All were later released without charge.
Something is changing in Britain that gives cause for optimism. The British people have probably never been more politically aware and prepared to clear out decrepit myths and other rubbish while stepping angrily over the babbling brook of bullshit.
John Pilger is an internationally renowned investigative journalist and documentary filmmaker. His latest film is The War on Democracy. His most recent book is Freedom Next Time (Bantam/Random House, 2006). Read other articles by John, or visit John's website.


http://dissidentvoice.org/2009/05/britai...orruption/

[Jan Klimkowski]

That so many Labour and Tory politicians are now revealed as personally crooked is no more than a metaphor for the anti-democratic system they have forged together.
Their accomplices have been those journalists who report Parliament as “lobby correspondents” and their editors, who have “played the game” willfully, and have deluded the public (and sometimes themselves) that vital, democratic differences exist between the parties. Media-designed opinion polls based on absurdly small samplings, along with a tsunami of comment on personalities and their specious crises, have reduced the “national conversation” to a series of media events, in which the withdrawal of popular consent — as the historically low electoral turnouts under Blair demonstrated — has been abused as apathy.

The "lobby correspondents" are the filthy grease that keeps the wheels turning. They're not journalists. They're propagandists and lackeys - fed bogus stories which they weave into pseudo-narratives to divert the somnolent masses.

The National Union of Journalists should withdraw their accreditation.

Marketing is the ultimate pseudo-science. And provides the spurious justification for much of this nonsense.

[David Guyatt]

A goody. The fetid crooks in Westminster have now released tens of thousands of expenses claims for the express purpose of public scrutiny.

The caped crusader does it again. Good on you Gord! Not.

The only teense-weensy catch is that one will need specially encrypted x-ray vision and futuristic classified night goggles to read through the large amounts of black marker pen redaction.

It does the cockles of my heart good just to know that there truly is genuine public accountability in the modern age. Not.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/4/20090618/tuk-...a1618.html

Expenses details released by Commons
Thursday, June 18 02:25 pm

Details of MPs' expenses claims have finally been published by the House of Commons. Skip related content

The release of tens of thousands of claim forms and receipts on the Parliament website come more than a year after the High Court ordered their publication and weeks after they were leaked to the Daily Telegraph.

But with much of the detail that led to a public outcry blacked out, their publication is likely to lead to demands for greater openness.

Revelations about the claims have forced a series of MPs to announce their resignations in the past month.

Junior Treasury minister Kitty Ussher became the latest scalp on Wednesday night when she quit the Government following allegations that she avoided paying capital gains tax by "flipping" her second home.

In a letter to Gordon Brown, the Burnley MP said she had not abused the expenses system, but did not want to cause "any embarrassment" to the Prime Minister or his Government.

The publication covers printed documents and receipts relating to MPs' claims between 2004/05 and 2007/08 for a series of parliamentary allowances, but with many personal details edited out.

These include claims under the £24,000-a-year Additional Costs Allowance, which reimburses MPs for the cost of having to maintain a second home while serving at Westminster; the £22,000 Incidental Expenses Provision, which pays for running an office; and the £10,400 Communications Allowance, which covers the cost of newsletters and websites to inform constituents about their activities; as well as details of expenditure on stationery and postage.

The expenses claims and supporting receipts published by the Commons authorities feature large blacked out areas where it is not always clear what has been obscured.

There are no addresses for MPs' homes, meaning it would have been virtually impossible to identify so-called flipping, whereby MPs switch the designation of their second properties to maximise their claims.

Also edited out are the names and details of people and companies to whom payments were made using expenses.

Correspondence between MPs and the Commons Fees Office has also been removed.

[Peter Lemkin]

A goody. The fetid crooks in Westminster have now released tens of thousands of expenses claims for the express purpose of public scrutiny.

The caped crusader does it again. Good on you Gord! Not.

The only teense-weensy catch is that one will need specially encrypted x-ray vision and futuristic classified night goggles to read through the large amounts of black marker pen redaction.

It does the cockles of my heart good just to know that there truly is genuine public accountability in the modern age. Not.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/4/20090618/tuk-...a1618.html

Expenses details released by Commons
Thursday, June 18 02:25 pm

Details of MPs' expenses claims have finally been published by the House of Commons. Skip related content

The release of tens of thousands of claim forms and receipts on the Parliament website come more than a year after the High Court ordered their publication and weeks after they were leaked to the Daily Telegraph.

But with much of the detail that led to a public outcry blacked out, their publication is likely to lead to demands for greater openness.

Revelations about the claims have forced a series of MPs to announce their resignations in the past month.

Junior Treasury minister Kitty Ussher became the latest scalp on Wednesday night when she quit the Government following allegations that she avoided paying capital gains tax by "flipping" her second home.

In a letter to Gordon Brown, the Burnley MP said she had not abused the expenses system, but did not want to cause "any embarrassment" to the Prime Minister or his Government.

The publication covers printed documents and receipts relating to MPs' claims between 2004/05 and 2007/08 for a series of parliamentary allowances, but with many personal details edited out.

These include claims under the £24,000-a-year Additional Costs Allowance, which reimburses MPs for the cost of having to maintain a second home while serving at Westminster; the £22,000 Incidental Expenses Provision, which pays for running an office; and the £10,400 Communications Allowance, which covers the cost of newsletters and websites to inform constituents about their activities; as well as details of expenditure on stationery and postage.

The expenses claims and supporting receipts published by the Commons authorities feature large blacked out areas where it is not always clear what has been obscured.

There are no addresses for MPs' homes, meaning it would have been virtually impossible to identify so-called flipping, whereby MPs switch the designation of their second properties to maximise their claims.

Also edited out are the names and details of people and companies to whom payments were made using expenses.

Correspondence between MPs and the Commons Fees Office has also been removed.

Glad to hear there is an ample supply of black intelligence marker pens there too....thought that American 'intelligence' might have cornered the entire market.....anyway, not to worry, it is only the best bits under the black ink...and more than just their home addresses and phone numbers etc. [as detailed above!......:driver:
'the names and details of people and companies to whom payments were made using expenses'....would be most enlightening, no? :marchmellow:

[Peter Presland]

This from 'The Guardian'

Poor dears - my heart bleeds for them

Email sent by No 10 gives Labour MPs switchboard number to ring for support, advice or legal help
Gordon Brown has set up a team in Downing Street to counsel and support distressed Labour MPs facing flak from constituents over their expenses claims, the Guardian has learnt.
An internal email sent out by the Labour party to all MPs reveals that a "wellbeing" support line has been launched from No 10. MPs are being told they can ring the Downing Street switchboard to be put through for support and advice.
The team is being headed by Anne Snelgrove, Brown's newly appointed parliamentary private secretary, who used to work for Ed Balls and is an avid user of Twitter, recently using the micro-blogging site to publish a link announcing her appointment.
The internal email sent today reads: "'Well-being' support and advice available from colleagues: Anne Snelgrove will act as a first port of call for colleagues on these matters. Anne will have a team of colleagues working with her on this. Anne can be contacted via the Number 10 switchboard."
The email, sent at 8.51 am, nearly three hours after the expenses claims became public, reveals that lawyers are standing by to help in the worst cases. "The Labour party is able to put colleagues in contact with a legal adviser, should you require one," it says.
The team is offering MPs help to keep the full details of expenses secure on their computers. It says: "The Labour party's network analyst, Chris Walker, is able to offer helpful advice on issues relating to secure publication of materials online." The email offers a direct line to contact him.
The email has been sent out by Martin O'Donovan, director of the parliamentary Labour party's resource centre and secretary to the PLP. He offers a mobile number for people to contact him should they need help outside office hours.
It also discloses that MPs can get advice on how to handle the media from all Labour's regional directors, press officers or straight from the Labour party press office – whose direct line number is also contained in the email.

Here is the website containing all the expenses information - suitably redacted with black marker pen to hide the more embarrassing detail naturally - For the reference archive.

[David Guyatt]

Apocalypse Now:

Killgord: I love the smell of spin in the morning. You know, one time we had the country spinned, for 12 hours. When it was all over, I walked up. We didn't find one of 'em, not one stinkin' dink expense. The smell, you know that spin smell, the whole country. Smelled like
[sniffing, pondering, sadly]
Killgord: victory. Someday this elections gonna end...

[Magda Hassan]

Legging It With the Cash

The media have bought hook, line and sinker the story that Thomas Legg has been hard on poor MPs, making them pay back gardening or cleaning bills over an arbitrary limit.
In fact, on average those MPs asked to make a repayment are being asked to pay less than 0.25% of their salary plus allowances over the period. And with the media diverted to slight repayments of trivial items, the real big money - fake mortgages and capital gains tax evasion through "flipping" - where MPs rake in tens and even hundreds of thousands of pounds, has gone completely undisturbed.
Don't look over here, look over there! Talk about a dumb media.
Meantime at least the Mail, Independent and Telegraph, and perhaps others, have quoted me on Legg and the Sierra Leone inquiry, because journalists nowadays seldom leave their offices and do their "research" through google. The implication is that in fact Legg has turned into a ferocious prober of iniquity. Why anybody would pay for the facile mainstream media is beyond me.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/articl...-last.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/pol...01331.html
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/