Dear All
Remember the Great Escape and the Colditz Story?
Well the first ‘home run’ to escape justice is Labour Peer Baroness Uddin.
She will not face charges for fraudulently claiming living allowances because the House of Lords rules on claiming expenses are so vague.
The rules are so vague.
Baroness Uddin received £100,000 in “night subsistence” after designating an allegedly empty flat in Kent as her main home; this was repeatedly confirmed by the neighbours.
She stays in a council flat only four miles away from the Palace of Westminster for which she pays £500 a month.
She even says on her personal website that the East End has been "my home for over 30 years".
It is where she registered to vote.
And it gets better as no peer is likely to face charges for fraudulently claiming the allowance after a senior parliamentary official ruled that their “main house” might be a place they visit only once a month.
In other words, as long as Uddin travels to Kent once a month she can claim £174 a day from the taxpayer.
Effectively it is legalised fraud.
Keir Starmer, the Director of Public Prosecutions who is prosecuting 3 Labour MPs and a Tory Lord at present said that there was a “very real difficulty” in interpreting the definition of “only or main” residence for peers.
Michael Pownall, Clerk of the Parliaments, said in November last year;
“Ultimately it is up to members to designate an address as their main residence as they see fit.”
This is a loophole for criminal fraud legalised by an unaccountable group of people who answer to people with a vested self interest.
Starmer indicated the ruling made it impossible to bring charges for fraud against Peers as he deems it impossible to reach the criminal standard to secure a conviction.
Uddin said after she escaped prosecution;
“I am relived that this ordeal has finally come to an end.” I only wish now to say thank you to everyone who has supported me throughout this very difficult time. I now wish to turn back to my professional life and my duties – public duties and my family.”
Remember the Great Escape and the Colditz Story?
Well the first ‘home run’ to escape justice is Labour Peer Baroness Uddin.
She will not face charges for fraudulently claiming living allowances because the House of Lords rules on claiming expenses are so vague.
The rules are so vague.
Baroness Uddin received £100,000 in “night subsistence” after designating an allegedly empty flat in Kent as her main home; this was repeatedly confirmed by the neighbours.
She stays in a council flat only four miles away from the Palace of Westminster for which she pays £500 a month.
She even says on her personal website that the East End has been "my home for over 30 years".
It is where she registered to vote.
And it gets better as no peer is likely to face charges for fraudulently claiming the allowance after a senior parliamentary official ruled that their “main house” might be a place they visit only once a month.
In other words, as long as Uddin travels to Kent once a month she can claim £174 a day from the taxpayer.
Effectively it is legalised fraud.
Keir Starmer, the Director of Public Prosecutions who is prosecuting 3 Labour MPs and a Tory Lord at present said that there was a “very real difficulty” in interpreting the definition of “only or main” residence for peers.
Michael Pownall, Clerk of the Parliaments, said in November last year;
“Ultimately it is up to members to designate an address as their main residence as they see fit.”
This is a loophole for criminal fraud legalised by an unaccountable group of people who answer to people with a vested self interest.
Starmer indicated the ruling made it impossible to bring charges for fraud against Peers as he deems it impossible to reach the criminal standard to secure a conviction.
Uddin said after she escaped prosecution;
“I am relived that this ordeal has finally come to an end.” I only wish now to say thank you to everyone who has supported me throughout this very difficult time. I now wish to turn back to my professional life and my duties – public duties and my family.”
She should be stripped of her peerage.
I would say also that Keir Starmer, the Director of Public Prosecutions should have tried harder, much harder.
So, effectively for going on a day trip to Kent, she can still continue to claim £2,000 a month and stick two fingers up to the people.
Britain is a corrupt country.
Yours sincerely
George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
I would say also that Keir Starmer, the Director of Public Prosecutions should have tried harder, much harder.
So, effectively for going on a day trip to Kent, she can still continue to claim £2,000 a month and stick two fingers up to the people.
Britain is a corrupt country.
Yours sincerely
George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
No comments:
Post a Comment