Mr Laws claims nothing for his constituency home but for his second home in London he claims the modest sum of thirty five pounds a day,i accept he broke the rules which changed in 2006 but do not feel he justifies some of the comments posted,would you live or travel away from home and claim nothing in expenses.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
David Laws. Chief secretary to the treasury.
- Thread starter Leekbrookgull
- Start date
franks brother
Well-known member
An unelected, corrupt tory government. What more could democracy wish for.
Brilliant.
Brilliant.
Chicken Runner61
We stand where we want!
- May 20, 2007
- 4,609
You are missing the point.
Its because he didn't need to pay that rent (but he still did) that shows he was paying it for the wrong reasons.
He used taxpayers money to pay for whatever reward he felt he was getting fron his partner.
mejonaNO12 aka riskit
Well-known member
It doesn't matter if it was a 'modest sum'
it's taxpayers money being paid to a partner on a second home. Breaking the rules, he had to go.
it's taxpayers money being paid to a partner on a second home. Breaking the rules, he had to go.
Chicken Runner61
We stand where we want!
- May 20, 2007
- 4,609
Classic quote on the radio "its not homophobia its more like second homophobia"!
Still do not understand why because he is in a relationship he is not expected to pay his way.
Chicken Runner61
We stand where we want!
- May 20, 2007
- 4,609
Because in most relationships you don't pay someone £40k to stay at their house with them.*
Why didn't he use his own money?
He used taxpayers money to buy his friend their house - not to stay there
*unless they later divorce you lol
Skintagain 1983
And Smith Did Score!
Are we missing something here? A man doesn't want his family and friends to know he's gay.. So he moves in with his gay partner, takes a high public profile role, and then asks the taxpayer for £1000/month to give to his landlord (who is actually his partner) for rent. If a couple on state benefits 'pretended' to be landlord and tenant and claimed £1000/month in housing benefit, when they were found out they'd fraudulently claimed £40,000 of taxpayers money... they'd be repaying the full £40,000 and facing a custodial sentence (take note Ian Duncan-Smith) and the banshee screaming of the Daily Mail, Sun and Express. I can't see any difference in the crime here but the response is quite different. Clegg, Cameron and Ian Duncan-Smith queuing up to praise this crook and wish him well. Honest people don't hide behind wanting privacy to get away with a £40,000 fraud. They simply don't take taxpayers money to fund their partner's property portfolio.... And relax!
simonsimon
New member
- Dec 31, 2004
- 692
glasfryn
cleaning up cat sick
I mean who gives a toss ....so he is gay .....he can do the job .....pity he did'nt think that
one of many ,first in three weeks so on that calculation all out by the end of next year and this has left Osbourne out on a limb.
can anyone trust that man to even tie his shoe laces right
one of many ,first in three weeks so on that calculation all out by the end of next year and this has left Osbourne out on a limb.
can anyone trust that man to even tie his shoe laces right
Horton's halftime iceberg
Blooming Marvellous
Vote for Change 
Well said.
Leekbrookgull
Well-known member
- Thread starter
- #53
Waste of a good talent,cant see his sexualty should/is an issue ? Surely him going should be down to the expenses issue and that alone.