Quizzes & Puzzles96 mins ago
David Laws statement excusing himself
Quote from David Laws 'justifying my dishonest actions' statement
"At no point did I consider myself to be in breach of the rules which in 2009 defined partner as "one of a couple ... who although not married to each-other or civil partners are living together and treat each-other as spouses".
"Although we were living together we did not treat each other as spouses - for example we do not share bank accounts and indeed have separate social lives
er hello liar, you live together as erm man and wife but don't class yourselves as a couple?.......if a 2 people live (and I presume sleep) together then just because they don't have a joint bank account or socialise together doesn't mean they are not co-habiting (only reason they didn't have joint bank account/socialise together was because he wanted to stay in the closet).......sorry but that bullsh1t statement doesn't wash........otherwise all unmarried benefit claimants could claim the same excuse and get more benefits
"At no point did I consider myself to be in breach of the rules which in 2009 defined partner as "one of a couple ... who although not married to each-other or civil partners are living together and treat each-other as spouses".
"Although we were living together we did not treat each other as spouses - for example we do not share bank accounts and indeed have separate social lives
er hello liar, you live together as erm man and wife but don't class yourselves as a couple?.......if a 2 people live (and I presume sleep) together then just because they don't have a joint bank account or socialise together doesn't mean they are not co-habiting (only reason they didn't have joint bank account/socialise together was because he wanted to stay in the closet).......sorry but that bullsh1t statement doesn't wash........otherwise all unmarried benefit claimants could claim the same excuse and get more benefits
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by joeluke. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
The difference is that he broke 'rules' they broke 'laws'.
I'm not sure quite what the specific charges against David Chaytor, et al, are..........and to add insult to injury these MP's have chosen to be tried in a court where they will be entitled to Legal Aid to fight the charges. I think this also seves as an indication of the greedy, cavalier and dismissive attitude these former MP's have and had towards the electorate............which thankfully DL doesn't seem to exhibit.
I'm not sure quite what the specific charges against David Chaytor, et al, are..........and to add insult to injury these MP's have chosen to be tried in a court where they will be entitled to Legal Aid to fight the charges. I think this also seves as an indication of the greedy, cavalier and dismissive attitude these former MP's have and had towards the electorate............which thankfully DL doesn't seem to exhibit.
This story is EVERYTHING to do with his sexuality, and my guess is that those who deny this obvious fact are not gay.
They have no idea what they're talking about. absolutely zero.
David Law is an idiot for continuing to claim, but he'd painted himself into an impossible corner.
I won't saddle up mu high horse to condemn him because I don't know the reasons why he felt he had to remain in the closet.
Furthermore, none of us are out of pocket. Had he declared his relationship, he could've claimed 50% of the flat's mortgage, which would've been considerably more than £750-£950 per month.
I hope to see him back in cabinet very soon.
They have no idea what they're talking about. absolutely zero.
David Law is an idiot for continuing to claim, but he'd painted himself into an impossible corner.
I won't saddle up mu high horse to condemn him because I don't know the reasons why he felt he had to remain in the closet.
Furthermore, none of us are out of pocket. Had he declared his relationship, he could've claimed 50% of the flat's mortgage, which would've been considerably more than £750-£950 per month.
I hope to see him back in cabinet very soon.
"none of us are out of pocket" ??????
Laws must be paying back tens of thousands of pounds out of the goodness of his heart, then?
"Had he declared his relationship...."
But he did not do so, he continued claiming fraudulently, i.e. committing a criminal offence.
His sexuality has been known for many years in his constituency and did not in any way stop him from gaining an increased majority last month. This is not about his well documented sexuality, it is about greed, wrongdoing and criminality.
Laws should either resign altogether as an MP or be thrown out.
Laws must be paying back tens of thousands of pounds out of the goodness of his heart, then?
"Had he declared his relationship...."
But he did not do so, he continued claiming fraudulently, i.e. committing a criminal offence.
His sexuality has been known for many years in his constituency and did not in any way stop him from gaining an increased majority last month. This is not about his well documented sexuality, it is about greed, wrongdoing and criminality.
Laws should either resign altogether as an MP or be thrown out.
OrcadianOil
Whether or not local gossips had 'known' about his sexuality is irrelevent. It's down to him whether he wants to come out.
I suspect he's paying back the funds as a political move. We are absolutelu NOT out of pocket. If he'd declared his relationship - he could've claimed more.
It's a GREAT pity that he didn't feel strong enough to come out years ago. Had he, then this story would never have happened.
The more comments I read slating him, the sorrier I feel for him. And his (ex) partner, who must be equally horrified at having his face plastered all over the papers.
There's a stink of schadenfreude attached to the way that people are jumping on this.
Whether or not local gossips had 'known' about his sexuality is irrelevent. It's down to him whether he wants to come out.
I suspect he's paying back the funds as a political move. We are absolutelu NOT out of pocket. If he'd declared his relationship - he could've claimed more.
It's a GREAT pity that he didn't feel strong enough to come out years ago. Had he, then this story would never have happened.
The more comments I read slating him, the sorrier I feel for him. And his (ex) partner, who must be equally horrified at having his face plastered all over the papers.
There's a stink of schadenfreude attached to the way that people are jumping on this.
I don't feel that I'm defending 'what' he did............I think I can understand more 'why' he did it. And I don't believe that he was motivated by the same 'snout-in-the-trough' mentality that the others were, which I feel is quite important.
Admittedly, the end result appears to be the same but I feel that there are enough differences in the circumstances to accept that his punishment has already been served.
Admittedly, the end result appears to be the same but I feel that there are enough differences in the circumstances to accept that his punishment has already been served.
joeluke
Nope...I don't feel a shred of sympathy for those MPs caught out for claiming for bird houses, moats etc.
I feel sorry for David Laws because he wasn't simply being greedy. I feel sorry for him because he felt he couldn't be honest with his constituency, his family and more importantly, himself.
If I were a member of his constituency - I would be very inclined to send him a letter of support (even though I'm not in any way, a Liberal supporter).
Nope...I don't feel a shred of sympathy for those MPs caught out for claiming for bird houses, moats etc.
I feel sorry for David Laws because he wasn't simply being greedy. I feel sorry for him because he felt he couldn't be honest with his constituency, his family and more importantly, himself.
If I were a member of his constituency - I would be very inclined to send him a letter of support (even though I'm not in any way, a Liberal supporter).
David Cameron vowed that, under a government led by him, people would be empowered to "sack" any wrongdoing MPs. I have yet to hear him reiterate his pledge in this instance. And no matter whichever way people try to dress this up, Laws has most certainly "done wrong" - bigtime.
He is a highly intelligent individual who gained a double first in economics at Oxbridge, therefore he can have no valid excuse for his crimes. He and his boyfriend have been together for nearly 10 years, co-habiting, they share his constituency home, as well as the London addresses, and the reason he gives for not wanting his sexuality to be exposed is at best extremely weak, and at worst a gross insult to his constituents who are not "local gossips", but are the very people who continued to vote for him regardless of his sexual preferences, and not because of his nefarious financial activities which amounted to fraudulently claiming of taxpayers' expenses.
Does any sane individual today believe that the fact that he is a male homosexual would have stopped knowing voters from having him re-elected? There are many male and female homosexuals in government/parliament as it is. Therefore, his reasoning has no credibility whatsoever. There may still be individuals who abhor homosexuality, but society is full of homosexuals in all walks of life, politics included, who have led successful careers, as should be the case in a free and democratic country.
But would those same voters have been so keen on him had they known about the vast amounts (£40,000 to me is lots of money) of our money he was persistently lining his boyfriend's pockets with? Not on your Nellie. And that's why he should do the honourable thing instead of dragging this sorry saga out.
A rising star has been extinguished because of fraudulent behaviour. I don't want him as my MP or as a government minister.
He is a highly intelligent individual who gained a double first in economics at Oxbridge, therefore he can have no valid excuse for his crimes. He and his boyfriend have been together for nearly 10 years, co-habiting, they share his constituency home, as well as the London addresses, and the reason he gives for not wanting his sexuality to be exposed is at best extremely weak, and at worst a gross insult to his constituents who are not "local gossips", but are the very people who continued to vote for him regardless of his sexual preferences, and not because of his nefarious financial activities which amounted to fraudulently claiming of taxpayers' expenses.
Does any sane individual today believe that the fact that he is a male homosexual would have stopped knowing voters from having him re-elected? There are many male and female homosexuals in government/parliament as it is. Therefore, his reasoning has no credibility whatsoever. There may still be individuals who abhor homosexuality, but society is full of homosexuals in all walks of life, politics included, who have led successful careers, as should be the case in a free and democratic country.
But would those same voters have been so keen on him had they known about the vast amounts (£40,000 to me is lots of money) of our money he was persistently lining his boyfriend's pockets with? Not on your Nellie. And that's why he should do the honourable thing instead of dragging this sorry saga out.
A rising star has been extinguished because of fraudulent behaviour. I don't want him as my MP or as a government minister.
OrcadianOil
I think you're assuming you know the reasons why Law wanted to keep his sexuality private. May have absolutely nothing to do with what his local constituents think. It may have something to do with what his dad thinks, or his grandmother...or it may be that he simply couldn't face the world knowing (which, looking at the wreakage of his private life now, is somewhat ironic).
Furhermore, there's something wrong with taking the line that he was lining his boyfriend's pockets with taxpayer money. What he did was line his boyfriend's pockets with less taxpayer money than he COULD have, had he come out years ago.
Once again...had he announced that he was cohabiting with his partner, he would've been able to claim the mortgage back on his London flat.
In the market in Kennington in the early 00s, that would've cost us a whole lot more than £750-£950 per calendar month.
I think you're assuming you know the reasons why Law wanted to keep his sexuality private. May have absolutely nothing to do with what his local constituents think. It may have something to do with what his dad thinks, or his grandmother...or it may be that he simply couldn't face the world knowing (which, looking at the wreakage of his private life now, is somewhat ironic).
Furhermore, there's something wrong with taking the line that he was lining his boyfriend's pockets with taxpayer money. What he did was line his boyfriend's pockets with less taxpayer money than he COULD have, had he come out years ago.
Once again...had he announced that he was cohabiting with his partner, he would've been able to claim the mortgage back on his London flat.
In the market in Kennington in the early 00s, that would've cost us a whole lot more than £750-£950 per calendar month.
Quotes from David Laws Lib Dem election leaflet
"Laws was recently given a clean bill of health over his expenses by the independent Legg enquiry and was not asked to pay back any money"
"David has consistently voted for more openness on MP's expenses"
He's obviously a blatant liar
Would you trust him if he was your MP?
He should have had the balls to step down as MP
They should have a re-vote in his constituency, it would be interesting to see how many votes he would get
"Laws was recently given a clean bill of health over his expenses by the independent Legg enquiry and was not asked to pay back any money"
"David has consistently voted for more openness on MP's expenses"
He's obviously a blatant liar
Would you trust him if he was your MP?
He should have had the balls to step down as MP
They should have a re-vote in his constituency, it would be interesting to see how many votes he would get
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles135 mins ago
Strands#265 Did You Hear That?
Quizzes & Puzzles166 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles171 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles280 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.