Election 2010: The Results

This is the place for topical debate and discussion about anything in the world (non-Queen related).

Re: Election 2010: The Results

Postby Bristol Lass » Sat May 29, 2010 4:40 pm

If I was on benefits and told everyone I was single and had someone staying overnight at my house the DHSS would class us as a couple even if we were not and I would be done for fraud, so why should this be any different, if he stayed overnight they were a couple. Does anyone honestly think this is not deception? He might not have actually broken the rules but he bent them (excuse the pun) to snapping point.
 
Bristol Lass
Spread Your Wings
 
User avatar

 

Lurking!

      
 
Posts: 23
Images: 1
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:17 pm
Gender: Female
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time

Re: Election 2010: The Results

Postby Taryn » Sat May 29, 2010 6:31 pm

Bristol Lass wrote:If I was on benefits and told everyone I was single and had someone staying overnight at my house the DHSS would class us as a couple even if we were not and I would be done for fraud, so why should this be any different, if he stayed overnight they were a couple. Does anyone honestly think this is not deception? He might not have actually broken the rules but he bent them (excuse the pun) to snapping point.


I agree with you there BL, I was just about to post something similar. Also saying they don't have a joint bank account in no way proves they are not a couple, many couples don't have a joint account but the DWP would not accept that as proof they were not "together" if they lived at the same address.
Image
 
Taryn
Spread Your Wings
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 79
Images: 4
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 10:03 am
Location: Miles away
Gender: Female
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: Election 2010: The Results

Postby Elessar » Sat May 29, 2010 6:53 pm

So would he have been alllowed to live with a mate?
What if he occasionally shagged him?

The law has to be drawn somewhere, and if it's not marriage/a civil union, it's financial interdependence. If one of them dropped dead without leaving a will, the other would have no rights to anything.
 
Elessar
I Want To Break Free
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 10392
Images: 0
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 7:35 pm
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 43 times
Been thanked: 158 times

Re: Election 2010: The Results

Postby Belle Leisha » Sun May 30, 2010 1:03 pm

Elessar wrote:Hmmm - in a recent interview he said he was single. And following this scandal, he said that although he lived with this man, he did not consider him to be his spouse.

Haha - I wonder what Jan Moir's interpretation of this would be?


I don't think this is a homophobic thing, like you said, at the moment their expenses need to be spotless. Really though if he wasn't doing anything wrong he had no reason to hide it. He said he wanted to keep his sexuality private and fair enough, in that case he would just have to put up with the fact he then couldn't rightly pay rent to a man he knew he was living with. I don't think he did anything wrong, objectively, but of course he couldn't stay on after that, certainly not at the moment.
But Eden is burning, either brace yourself for elimination
Or else your hearts must have the courage, of the changing of the guard


Image
 
Belle Leisha
Don't Stop Me Now
 
User avatar

 

I'm a Restless Kinda Girl, There's No Turning Back Now!

      
 
Posts: 4161
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 10:02 am
Location: Birmingham, UK
Gender: Female
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time

Re: Election 2010: The Results

Postby fairydandy » Sun May 30, 2010 2:16 pm

It's complete and utter nonsense that he is using this excuse. Ok, so he may not wanted to have 'come out', but he's just using it as an excuse now that he has been caught out. If he was that bothered about being found out as gay, he could have paid the money out of his own pocket and not claimed a penny from the taxpayer...that way, no one would have been any the wiser.

I don't really have a problem with the MP's claiming such things to be honest, because for me, they are underpaid anyway...but this is just nonsense.
 
fairydandy
Somebody To Love
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 8394
Images: 0
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 2:37 pm
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 420 times

Re: Election 2010: The Results

Postby Bristol Lass » Sun May 30, 2010 2:30 pm

Elessar wrote:So would he have been alllowed to live with a mate?
What if he occasionally shagged him?

The law has to be drawn somewhere, and if it's not marriage/a civil union, it's financial interdependence. If one of them dropped dead without leaving a will, the other would have no rights to anything.


The same as couples who live together and don't get married who are not MP's ,they are still classed as a couple in the eyes of the Social Security Gestapo, but have no rights if one of the partners dies.

Hubby and I have separate bank accounts does that make us less of a couple...

I think the using of his sexuality is a smokescreen, the fact he is gay has nothing to do with it, the fact he gave £40,000 of taxpayers money to a partner (whatever the sex of the partner) and thought it was OK is more of an issue,
would this have been so public if he hadn't been made a cabinet member and was just a backbencher, probably not.
 
Bristol Lass
Spread Your Wings
 
User avatar

 

Lurking!

      
 
Posts: 23
Images: 1
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:17 pm
Gender: Female
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time

Re: Election 2010: The Results

Postby Elessar » Sun May 30, 2010 3:49 pm

Bristol Lass wrote:
Elessar wrote:So would he have been alllowed to live with a mate?
What if he occasionally shagged him?

The law has to be drawn somewhere, and if it's not marriage/a civil union, it's financial interdependence. If one of them dropped dead without leaving a will, the other would have no rights to anything.


The same as couples who live together and don't get married who are not MP's ,they are still classed as a couple in the eyes of the Social Security Gestapo, but have no rights if one of the partners dies.

Hubby and I have separate bank accounts does that make us less of a couple...

I think the using of his sexuality is a smokescreen, the fact he is gay has nothing to do with it, the fact he gave £40,000 of taxpayers money to a partner (whatever the sex of the partner) and thought it was OK is more of an issue,
would this have been so public if he hadn't been made a cabinet member and was just a backbencher, probably not.


His boyfriend was renting out a room - why should he not be able to charge rent just because he happens to be having sex with the tenant?
 
Elessar
I Want To Break Free
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 10392
Images: 0
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 7:35 pm
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 43 times
Been thanked: 158 times

Re: Election 2010: The Results

Postby Elessar » Sun May 30, 2010 3:50 pm

Belle Leisha wrote:
Elessar wrote:Hmmm - in a recent interview he said he was single. And following this scandal, he said that although he lived with this man, he did not consider him to be his spouse.

Haha - I wonder what Jan Moir's interpretation of this would be?


I don't think this is a homophobic thing, like you said, at the moment their expenses need to be spotless. Really though if he wasn't doing anything wrong he had no reason to hide it. He said he wanted to keep his sexuality private and fair enough, in that case he would just have to put up with the fact he then couldn't rightly pay rent to a man he knew he was living with. I don't think he did anything wrong, objectively, but of course he couldn't stay on after that, certainly not at the moment.


What I meant is that Laws saying that he's single, but also that he has a boyfriend, but also he's not his spouse...Jan Moir would probably infer that it means that they're both promiscuous!
 
Elessar
I Want To Break Free
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 10392
Images: 0
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 7:35 pm
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 43 times
Been thanked: 158 times

Re: Election 2010: The Results

Postby Tero! » Sun May 30, 2010 5:03 pm

Elessar wrote:His boyfriend was renting out a room - why should he not be able to charge rent just because he happens to be having sex with the tenant?


The point in this rule is obviously not who you're having sex with, or have a joint bank account with (or it wouldn't list your family and business relations of your family), but the fact that public money is being channeled to private persons who have no way to prove they deserved it. Whether or not every possible variation is mentioned in the text of the rule (boyfriend, chilhood friend, blackmailer) doesn't change the fact that it's been put in place to tell the MPs that they cannot give the money to any old friend of theirs.

We don't know if the MP actually pays any rent for the apartment or if he's even living in the apartment. For all we know the roomt could be an exclusive swingers club with nobody actually living there. The intention of the rule is to tell the MP he shouldn't be renting a publicly funded room from somebody whose motives aren't open to public questioning.
< the above message is the author's personal opinion, and does not necessarily represent the opinion of every person on this message board >
 
Tero!
The Show Must Go On
 
User avatar

 

On holiday

      
 
Posts: 1130
Images: 17
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 7:58 am
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time

Re: Election 2010: The Results

Postby Bristol Lass » Sun May 30, 2010 5:38 pm

Elessar wrote:
His boyfriend was renting out a room - why should he not be able to charge rent just because he happens to be having sex with the tenant?



As they were partners as he now admits, they wouldn't have separate rooms so there was no need to rent one out to him other than to fiddle the expenses, sorry Elessar you are trying to defend the indefensible
 
Bristol Lass
Spread Your Wings
 
User avatar

 

Lurking!

      
 
Posts: 23
Images: 1
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:17 pm
Gender: Female
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time

Re: Election 2010: The Results

Postby Belle Leisha » Sun May 30, 2010 5:39 pm

Steve wrote:It's complete and utter nonsense that he is using this excuse. Ok, so he may not wanted to have 'come out', but he's just using it as an excuse now that he has been caught out. If he was that bothered about being found out as gay, he could have paid the money out of his own pocket and not claimed a penny from the taxpayer...that way, no one would have been any the wiser.

I don't really have a problem with the MP's claiming such things to be honest, because for me, they are underpaid anyway...but this is just nonsense.


Yeah I agree, it's a pretty bad excuse even if it was his genuine motivation. He can't possibly not have known that had he been caught out he would lose his job.

I don't think they're underpaid though, they have very few expenses and are paid way, way way above the national average wage, as people meant to represent a constuency.
But Eden is burning, either brace yourself for elimination
Or else your hearts must have the courage, of the changing of the guard


Image
 
Belle Leisha
Don't Stop Me Now
 
User avatar

 

I'm a Restless Kinda Girl, There's No Turning Back Now!

      
 
Posts: 4161
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 10:02 am
Location: Birmingham, UK
Gender: Female
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time

Re: Election 2010: The Results

Postby Elessar » Sun May 30, 2010 5:40 pm

Tero! wrote:
Elessar wrote:His boyfriend was renting out a room - why should he not be able to charge rent just because he happens to be having sex with the tenant?


The point in this rule is obviously not who you're having sex with, or have a joint bank account with (or it wouldn't list your family and business relations of your family), but the fact that public money is being channeled to private persons who have no way to prove they deserved it. Whether or not every possible variation is mentioned in the text of the rule (boyfriend, chilhood friend, blackmailer) doesn't change the fact that it's been put in place to tell the MPs that they cannot give the money to any old friend of theirs.

We don't know if the MP actually pays any rent for the apartment or if he's even living in the apartment. For all we know the roomt could be an exclusive swingers club with nobody actually living there. The intention of the rule is to tell the MP he shouldn't be renting a publicly funded room from somebody whose motives aren't open to public questioning.


But there is no rule against paying rent to a friend. The rules ban paying money to a husband/wife, spouse or business associate. And they do use the word 'spouse', not 'partner', and usually 'spouse' requires something a bit more concrete than just a boyfriend/girlfriend relationship.
 
Elessar
I Want To Break Free
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 10392
Images: 0
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 7:35 pm
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 43 times
Been thanked: 158 times

Re: Election 2010: The Results

Postby Elessar » Sun May 30, 2010 5:42 pm

Anyway, he's considering resigning his seat in Yeovil now as well.

The man made a fortune in the City earlier in his life, so he's set up for life. I think if I was a multimillionaire and had decided to take on a very difficult job for the benefit of the public, and then the public treated me like this, I'd probably tell them to fuck off and retire to the Caribbean.
 
Elessar
I Want To Break Free
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 10392
Images: 0
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 7:35 pm
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 43 times
Been thanked: 158 times

Re: Election 2010: The Results

Postby Belle Leisha » Sun May 30, 2010 5:44 pm

There's no way around it though, if he wasn't doing anything wrong according to the rules there was no need to keep it secret and if he did just want to keep his private life private then he would need to ensure that he was justified in doing so by not having anything which might raise eyebrows in terms of expenses. As he didn't do that you can assume he knew what he was doing and what it would mean if he got caught. Bad luck for him that he did as it's not a major scandal or terrible immoral use of tax payers money or anything, but it's certainly pushing the rules beyond acceptable boundaries.
But Eden is burning, either brace yourself for elimination
Or else your hearts must have the courage, of the changing of the guard


Image
 
Belle Leisha
Don't Stop Me Now
 
User avatar

 

I'm a Restless Kinda Girl, There's No Turning Back Now!

      
 
Posts: 4161
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 10:02 am
Location: Birmingham, UK
Gender: Female
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time

Re: Election 2010: The Results

Postby Elessar » Sun May 30, 2010 6:00 pm

Bristol Lass wrote:
Elessar wrote:
His boyfriend was renting out a room - why should he not be able to charge rent just because he happens to be having sex with the tenant?



As they were partners as he now admits, they wouldn't have separate rooms so there was no need to rent one out to him other than to fiddle the expenses, sorry Elessar you are trying to defend the indefensible


I think the level of detail you're now going into shows exactly why he wanted to keep it private.
 
Elessar
I Want To Break Free
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 10392
Images: 0
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 7:35 pm
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 43 times
Been thanked: 158 times

PreviousNext

Return to Views Of The World

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests