So Jacqui Smith is embarrassed. I bet her constituents are a lot more embarrassed having her as their MP (and especially as she has a slim majority).
Though she is indeed cross at her husband for ‘”mistakenly” claiming the cost of two adult movies on Commons expenses’.
Oh, and the euphemistic language of ‘adult films’… Porn is porn. Laughable really especially considering Smith’s social authoritarian agenda.
Mistakenly…? Easily done, isn’t it, sticking a couple of DVDs on the tab and claiming it back, inadvertently
And is it correct to employ your nearest and dearest as your assistant?
A government limping pathetically to the next election, while sticking their greedy unaccountable snouts in the trough, fiddling their expenses while the economy burns……
Laugh it could not happen to a better pair.
But what makes me cringe I was told last month the government could not carry on paying a higher and higher welfare state, people with disabilities must take more interest in working or doing something within the community maybe prostitution.
What makes me smile is that MP’s can pay out of expenses the fee for Sky TV rental, but a porn Chanel is one step to far.
I would have thought perhaps all those cripples in this world getting £87 a week would enjoy just getting a simple sky Chanel free view.
Makes you wonder what the hell going on with this family, after the nonsense with Smith husband and the bribe about his mortgage, he was then made treasurer within labour and is now working for his wife as her assistant. money makes the world go around.
Robert, are you mixing up Jacqui Smith and Harriet Harman? Jack Dromey is Labour’s Treasurer and has been for some time.
I disagree on the issue of employing family members – if they are the best person who applies for the job they should get it and should not be excluded because they are a family member. The trouble is we have no way of telling whether they were the best person or not, but we should not rule out the possibility that they were.
In this case, it surely must have been a mistake. No-one is going to deliberately claim for a tenner’s worth of porn when they knew it would be public knowledge, surely…
To early in the morning clock altering , no sleep. yes of course I mixed them up.
But it’s easy to do they both come from the same school of New labour.
The picture of Mr Smiff on his own in front of the TV screen having a lonely onanistic episode … Or together with his lovely lady wife … “doing things” … Such sad suburban ennui. Cripes! Makes me want to sew mine up.
I’m more disturbed that he paid to watch Ocean’s Thirteen, not once but twice. But hold on, isn’t this the woman who wants to read all our emails?
She’s not only the women that wants to read all out own emails, but doesn’t want her expenses scrutinised. She was one of the MPs that voted against the expenses reform bill.
She was also responsible for this piece of legislati2on.
In January 2009 Section 62 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 will become law where it will be an offence for a person to be in possession of an extreme pornographic image.
Furthermore, subsection 6b:
An “extreme image” is an image which — is grossly offensive, disgusting or otherwise of an obscene character.”
“… is grossly offensive, disgusting or otherwise of an obscene character.”
Oh, yes. That’s nailed it. So. Clear as mud, then.
(Note to self: do not burp or do handstand in the shower when Loved One whips his camera out.)