text:
Smith thought she'd be cleared
Jacqui Smith is now suffering from the triple whammy - sympathy, ridicule and outrage - which every politician fears.
The irony is that only last week she told friends that she expected to be cleared in the inquiry into the expense claims for her second home. The home secretary has been poring over her home, constituency and office diary to plot where she had spent each night in the past year.
She is confident that she has the proof that she's spent more nights in London than in her constituency and thus, under the Commons rules, could designate her family home as her "second home" and the flat she shares with her sister as her "main home". This, of course, allowed her to claim thousands of pounds from the ACA (Additional Costs Allowance) including that TV package with the "additional features".
Thus, she has gone from confidence that she would be cleared to what I imagine must be despair in the past day or two. She is not, after all, just a minister or an MP but the mother of two school age boys who may now come to hate the day their mum went into politics.
I've been arguing for weeks that it is the system of Commons expenses and the culture which surrounds it which has caused all the problems.
Allowances are treated as just that - allowances not expenses - which compensate MPs for the fact that governments of all colours routinely ignore independent recommendations to increase MPs' pay.
Commons officials have, until recently, encouraged MPs to claim the maximum and treated those that don't as if they're fools. The Speaker and the all-party committee which advises him vainly fought freedom of information requests at huge public expense without using the time that fight allowed them to clear up the system once and for all.
Nevertheless, someone always becomes the symbol of systems that have gone horribly wrong. It is unfortunate for Jacqui Smith that she is that someone.
To many MPs, she's a likeable working mum who didn't expect to be elected in '97; whose husband agreed to sacrifice his career to make hers possible; who works such long hours that she spends more days away from her family than with it and who knows that she's on course to lose her very marginal seat and thus, her job, income and allowances, at the next election.
To many voters she's a minister "on the take" who is not satisfied with a fat salary, a chauffeur and two homes but also claims more by employing her husband, calling her family home her second home and submitting bills for porn films.
The gap between the elected and those who elect them has rarely been wider. It is in all our interests that that gap is closed.
Comments Post your comment
Comment number 1.At 09:50 30th Mar 2009, StrongholdBarricades wrote:
Oh dear
That sounds like an obituary
Comment number 2.At 09:53 30th Mar 2009, oldrightie wrote:
"To many voters she's a minister "on the take" who is not satisfied with a fat salary, a chauffeur and two homes but also claims more by employing her husband, calling her family home her second home and submitting bills for porn films."
There is a well known saying about cream rising to the top. Labour, of course, do not "do" farming.
Comment number 3.At 09:54 30th Mar 2009, potkettle wrote:
OH the blessed irony of this.
10/10 for making a bit of a case for her Nick but as Labour were so fond of saying in 97 sleaze is sleaze.
Comment number 4.At 09:55 30th Mar 2009, skynine wrote:
Comment number 5.At 09:55 30th Mar 2009, mightyyangela wrote:
Comment number 6.At 10:00 30th Mar 2009, T A Griffin (TAG) wrote:
Comment number 7.At 10:02 30th Mar 2009, thedicey wrote:
sorry nick...she is the home secretary for goodness sake...she was claiming for plugs...88pence plugs....fiddling your expenses is all about being conscientous its that simple.
the majority of decent people just wouldnt do it...and those did it surely would expect to be sacked?
i have no sympathy for either of them...how can you with the amount of cash they have had out of this country?
if her husband spent more time doing his job that he got paid for instead of indulging himself with his additional features (pornography movies as you seemed scared to say it) they might not of got themselves in such a pickle.
common decency dictates she should resign but hey who said anything about common decency when it comes to this current goverment?
home secretary...dont make me laugh...how can anyone ever take her seriously again?
Comment number 8.At 10:04 30th Mar 2009, yellowbelly wrote:
"The irony is that only last week she told friends that she expected to be cleared in the inquiry into the expense claims for her second home."
Never mind the inquiry, what about the "court of public opinion"?
Comment number 9.At 10:04 30th Mar 2009, palacedim wrote:
"She is not, after all, just a minister or an MP but the mother of two school age boys who may now come to hate the day their mum went into politics. "
Err Nick, the confidence that she would be cleared comes from BOASTING she spends more time with her sister than her children. Yes, I expect it is only now, that they are regretting their mother's choices.
Do I detect a Cheriegate moment being pushed our way? Oh please, no mention of keeping all the balls in the air. Pass me the tissues... second thoughts, make it a sick bag.
Personally, I am affronted that it is only after it has all come on top that she is "poring through" the various diaries to establish where her main home was/is in any particualr month.
Surely this is what you do, before you whack the claim in?
As I speculated yesterday, the queen can only have been requesting that her picture be taken off of this tainted money that Gordon is now printing.
Comment number 10.At 10:09 30th Mar 2009, Paul Gibbons wrote:
This just goes to prove, once again, that all governments outlive their shelf life. Come on, Gordon, time to go and let the people decide.
Comment number 11.At 10:10 30th Mar 2009, Gthecelt wrote:
I fail to see how MPs are underpaid. They are all former lawyers in the main doing public service work. They should be paid a max of say £50k and have expenses and be able to justify every penny. Anything amiss then they should lose their rights to expenses for a period or better still face the sack and a by-election in their seat. It is only by being tough this will be solved.
As far as Jacqui Smith is concerned I feel a little sorry for her, however the £10 is not the issue, and neither is the porn, the issue is her flagrant lack of morals in this situation where she seems to think using one bedroom at her sister's is ok to feather her family nest. Well I'm sorry Jacqui but it just doesn't smell right to me!
Comment number 12.At 10:10 30th Mar 2009, yellowbelly wrote:
Snouts in the trough, the lot of them!
Eric Pickles hardly covered himself in glory on Question Time last Thursday either, trying to defend the indefensible.
Comment number 13.At 10:10 30th Mar 2009, Lazarus wrote:
She can quite easily avoid the ridicule and the outrage by resigning, standing down as an MP, and thus giving up all her expenses. Certainly seems the best solution for all, once she's paid us taxpayers back all that she's scammed already of course.
If she doesn't pay it back then it's a matter for the police, but I'm sure she can afford it.
One down, who's next?
Comment number 14.At 10:11 30th Mar 2009, Mangonuts wrote:
Why would you bother being a politician, my Google searches are enough to have me locked up ...... it looks like!
Comment number 15.At 10:12 30th Mar 2009, RobinJD wrote:
The conceit of this government is breathtaking.
The stench of sleaze after twelve years is now becoming unbearable.
Everything appears to be within the rules; everyone appears to be not guilty of any wrong doing.
But now one government minister after another is running inot the same trap. The old newlabour formula of cooking the books and massaging the message worked only so long as the books were vaguely solvent. The moment Gordon Brown started to step on the newlabour spending gas in 2000 was the moment it went wrong.
Oppostion parties have been quesitioning newlabour accounting for a decade; with billions off balance sheet but the message was massaged over and over again.
Now it's all coming home to roost as newlabour politicians personal finances are seen to be as inept and spendthrift as their public finances.
125% mortgages were within the rules and people taking them out were not guilty of any wrong doing; all newlabour spin language for turning a blind eye.
This is the culture that has ruined newlabour and is ruining and ridiculing the Home Secretary.
She is not to be pitied; she is risible in her instruction to her hsband to go out and explain himself in a written statement; there is nothing to explain except that she has taken the decision to resign for the sake of the good name of the country, the government and her party, in that order.
It is a disgrace she remains in office and a demonstration of the weakness of the government and Gordon Brown.
Who gives a fig if she is a nice person? She is the Home Secretary and a certain level of behaviour is expected form her and her own.
Why can anyone at the BBC not appreciate that?
Call an election.
Comment number 16.At 10:13 30th Mar 2009, dagemo wrote:
Far more concerning is the £40,000 of our money that Smith pays her husband to sit at home all day playing!
Comment number 17.At 10:14 30th Mar 2009, Ianmack wrote:
What everybody has to think about in this matter and all the problems related to expenses is this one simple fact.
If it had not been for the press we may well have not known about this matter and the truth will never have been revealed. The fact remains the claim was submitted by Mrs Smith, and as such she as the MP is the only person who should be responsible for the submission.
The claim should never have been submitted and mistake or not the fact remains it was done and could well have never been revealed without the press investigating. It is a form of dishonesty and family values. This is the MP responsible for Law and Order. The whole matter of what she and other MP's are claiming makes it look like as taxpayers we are being deceived and used by our MP's to make life as comfortable as possible just for them.
Comment number 18.At 10:17 30th Mar 2009, floodrob wrote:
Would it not be to MP's advatage to have accomadation (for instance an accomadation block in a military barracks)set aside specifically for MP's while they are in London away from thier consituancys, it would have the required security, dining facilities provided by the militay chefs and could have all they need while they are away from thier homes?? This would allow all MP's to have the required comfort to carry out thier jobs with out the need to claim for expenses, and they would all have equal facilities.
Comment number 19.At 10:17 30th Mar 2009, equality4profit wrote:
Yet another instance of how this government has squandered our money by not only adding more carriages to the gravy train but ensuring they are suitably furnished. Why do we insist on electing people who have no commercial instinct? Why do the very people who enter politics with the best intentions of hope and imagination get so bogged down inthe endless protocols that they succumb wearily to self profit at our expense?
Comment number 20.At 10:18 30th Mar 2009, ronreagan wrote:
No Nick - the system has not gone wrong - ZanuLabour sleaze is to blame -PLEASE roll on 2010 and goodbye to this corrupt, snouts in trough bunch of useless people.
Comment number 21.At 10:19 30th Mar 2009, trevsmith0060 wrote:
She should go now. This latest episode is just the last straw!
Comment number 22.At 10:19 30th Mar 2009, The_Oncoming_Storm wrote:
Nick I certainly feel sympathy for Jacqui Smith on a personal level. What her husband does in the privacy of his own home is his business but by keeping it on the expenses claim he has brought her into ridicule and I expect him to be sleeping on the couch for a while, if not worse. Coming on top of all the other trouble she's had I expect this will finish her politically as there will be a reshuffle after the expected Labour meltdown in the Euro and Shire elections and Smith will be the sacrifical lamb, Ed Miliband for the Home Office perhaps? She will then step down as an MP next year, sparing her further humiliation as Redditch goes blue by a considerable margin. And to think that after the speech she gave to Labour MP's over 42 days you were blogging about how Labour backbenchers thought she would be an excellent leader of the party! How times change Nick!
I heard Kevin Maguire of the Mirror made a good point this morning, he said he knew of a journo from "a posh paper" who submitted an expenses claim for a hotel stay which included a dodgy movie. The paper's accounts section struck the movie out of his claim and he had to pay for it himself. So why couldn't the Commons fees office have done likewise? The impression is that they are just a rubber stamp operation who just sign off expenses without proper scrutiny. That needs to change if people are to regain respect and trust in politicians.
Comment number 23.At 10:20 30th Mar 2009, maidstonerichard wrote:
I'm not a supporter of Jacqui Smith or the rest of the government and the sooner they go the better but I don have some sympathy with her. Most people in working life claims what expenses they are entitled to according to the company policies which can vary a lot and they are then signed off appropriately.
There is a problem that MPs are required to work peculiar hours often away from their families for what are in reality not huge salaries given the responsibilities and in comparisons with say the top people in industry or the professions. We must be careful that like the clamour regarding bankers salaries and bonuses that we don't discourage talent from wanting to go into politics. I can't see many successful people from other careers opting out to go into politics on the current basis and so we are left with the current crop of professional politicians (of all parties) with no experience of the real world or common sense.
I don't therefore have a particular problem with MPs or anyone claiming what the rules permit except that they make the rules! Surely it isn't difficult for all the brains in the House of Commons to produce a set of rules which are reasonable to both them and the "Court of Public Opinion." If they can't I'm sure some of the bloggers to this site could produce a pretty reasonable first draft.
There must be questions however about Ms Smith's judgement, even Ed Balls admitted this morning that in this climate he takes particular care of his expenses claims, why hasn't she - its just plain common-sense. As regards her husband he is her employee as well and again there's no reason why this can't work it works all over the place in industry and politics but as his ultimate paymaster we are entitled to ask what value we are getting out of the relationship and the rules changes need to allow for some kind of disciplinary action against all employees of MPs that don't result in a conflict of interest between husbands and wives. Blood is thicker and most of us would struggle to completely separate a working relationship and family life in this situation.
If I were Jacqui Smith I would say enough's enough and jump before being pushed by declaring that she won't be standing at the next general election.
Comment number 24.At 10:20 30th Mar 2009, cornishpasty1 wrote:
I think this comment should be removed:
She is not, after all, just a minister or an MP but the mother of two school age boys who may now come to hate the day their mum went into politics.
Not good to try and bring her children into this or guess the effect it will have upon them. Leave them alone and out of this.
Comment number 25.At 10:21 30th Mar 2009, ColonelDigby wrote:
"She is confident that she has the proof that she's spent more nights in London than in her constituency"
The proof being a lonely husband?
Comment number 26.At 10:23 30th Mar 2009, Prof John Locke wrote:
any moderators around today? or is this blog being censored?
the allowances were designed to allow mp's to do their jobs, this has now become a gravy train...When i was in business i was allowed to claim expenses when away from home, they were paid on production of receipts and were subject to limits like £20 maximum for dinner and can only stay in 3* hotel....why are mp's treated differently?
Comment number 27.At 10:27 30th Mar 2009, phoenixarisenq wrote:
I awoke this morning and staggering to my computer found the messages "debate closed". Is this censorship, I wondered. A last act of nannyism by the Queen of Nannies, Jacqui Smith? However, soon this new forum appeared. What I'd really like is to see this person fired or have the grace to resign. Since both scenarios are unlikely, can we cease venting our ire in debates on the blog which cannot affect her or Nu Labour. Perhaps we should march, with placards, through the streets, joining all the others this week in London. "Smith Must Go"!
Comment number 28.At 10:27 30th Mar 2009, Crowded Island wrote:
It is not just the films, it is the whole list of home improvements funded by the taxpayer - it reads like the prize list from the Generation Game. I am sorry, but this is totally illegitimate. Smith could have claimed expenses for staying at her sister's flat if she wished, or she could have stayed scott free at the Home Secretary's grace and favour residence in London. Instead, she chose to designate her main residence in Redditch as her "second home" so she could get it refurbished at our expense. As Home Secretary she is entitled to taxpayer funded security at her homes, but cookers, entertainment centres, fire places, sofabeds?
It is taking the proverbial, Smith has lost all credibility - Brown should dig out his moral compost and sack her!
Comment number 29.At 10:29 30th Mar 2009, MaxSceptic wrote:
Comment number 30.At 10:29 30th Mar 2009, CockedDice wrote:
Perhaps I'm alone in thinking that in certain cases the current media/joe public hysteria over MP's expenses has gone too far; in recent days on 5live I've heard people say that MP's should be on the minimum wage etc.
The current system is fatally flawed and needs reviewing but is the general public sensible enough to have a rational debate?
Part of the problem is that MP's are effectively classed as self employed and even basics such as stationery have be claimed for. It would seem more sensible for costs that are essential to an MP's role to be centrally budgeted coupled with proper oversight of expenditure to stop abuse.
I think a more concerning trend is that many parlimentary candidates seem to be party gonks with no experience outside politics. This not only means that they can relate less with the issues that matter to the public but are also less likely to believe that milking the system is wrong.
Comment number 31.At 10:30 30th Mar 2009, MaxSceptic wrote:
Perhaps she ought to resign from public life and spend more time with her hubby and kids.
(How will they all fit into her sister's house?)
Comment number 32.At 10:30 30th Mar 2009, Barbazenzero wrote:
Nick, you say that: "The home secretary has been poring over her home, constituency and office diary to plot where she had spent each night in the past year."
What a waste of time - why not just submit the timesheets of her security team, with their names blanked out?
Just demonstrates that the lady has no sense of priorities.
Oh, and why have all your older threads been closed to comments?
Post or reactive moderation for all except CBeebies, please!
Comment number 33.At 10:31 30th Mar 2009, dotsanddashes wrote:
I for one expect elected parliamentarians to have good judgement and integrity. I have opportunities to "play the system" in my working life but I choose not to because I believe it is wrong. I have been called "foolish" but to me having integrity and not doing things because they are wrong is not "foolish", it is the natural thing to do.
Politicians of any party who are claiming they have done nothing wrong because "the rules allow it" are not demonstrating their integrity, they are demonstrating their ability to play the game and make the most of it.
£10 or £100,000 the issue is still the same.
Comment number 34.At 10:32 30th Mar 2009, diddlydan wrote:
Sorry, you seem to be drumming up sympathy for Ms Smith. Nobody could be less deserving. Had she not treated the entire electorate with contempt, perhaps she would be due some. Also, I don't understand this "Poring over her diaries" bit either, her expense claims are already in are they not? Anyway, are you SERIOUSLY telling me that we don't know where our Home Secretary is, every hour of every day? Get the police protection service logs, job done. As the police are being paid to protect her, their hours must be logged.
Perhaps she is "Poring over her diaries" to try and make things fit.
Comment number 35.At 10:33 30th Mar 2009, phoenixarisenq wrote:
Comment number 36.At 10:33 30th Mar 2009, NOSIDA wrote:
Employs her husband, shares with her sister, pays for her husband to watch adult films. Come on, we are being asked to suspend reality here to believe all this is innocent or acceptable for the taxpayer.
The scarey thing is how many more MP's etc are up to these scams??
Comment number 37.At 10:33 30th Mar 2009, ColonelDigby wrote:
Home secretary
Two home secretary
Two home movies secretary
Comment number 38.At 10:34 30th Mar 2009, U13890319 wrote:
How can you possibly put forward any sort of defence for this disgraceful couple. The fact that she is desperately trying to show that she may have spent more nights at her sisters home does not detract from the fact that her main home is where her and her family live. As for the films, is somebody going to go back over her claims and look for more abuse. She is a minister, the Home Secretary, if she is not above this sort of behaviour then she must go before she gets voted out at the next election.
As Nicky Campbell summed it up radio five this morning:-
Jackie how could you? The SHAME of it, £550 on a kitchen sink!!
Comment number 39.At 10:34 30th Mar 2009, club65 wrote:
So, this might accelerate the time for us to see a reform to MPs' pay, allowances and expenses. Good - but let's not forget pensions. Most MPs benefit from a 1/40th final salary scheme for a 10% personal contribution. This means maximum benefits can be earned after 27 years rather than 40 years in the private sector. If the basic salary is going to be increased substantially it will place a huge ongoing extra burden on the taxpayer if it remains as a defined benefit scheme.
Let's take the opportunity to change it to a defined contribution scheme. This might set an example that could, step-by-step, be followed for the higher paid mandarins in the civil service - and then we might just begin to get private pensions legislation that would make sense for the rest of us.
Comment number 40.At 10:34 30th Mar 2009, Ged Sweeney wrote:
Claiming ACA for her family home in the Midlands because the sibling accommodation is her main home may be the kind of jiggery pokery that the officials in the Commons recommend MP's to take up.
The fact that it is not against the rules does not mean that Harriet Harman's Court of Public Opinion (or whatever it was called) would give it short shrift and it is one indication of how out of touch with the electorate those MP's who make these claims really are
Comment number 41.At 10:35 30th Mar 2009, Freeman wrote:
Comment number 42.At 10:37 30th Mar 2009, mjkalba wrote:
Jacqui Smith and Tony McNulty both serve to magnificently illustrate the gaping flaws in the current system. They may prove to be correct in their assertion that their claims are fully in accordance with the letter of the rules, but in their heart of hearts I am sure that both realise that that is not sufficient to make it right. Their claims both fail the test of common sense and reasonableness which is sorely lacking from the rules under which the system of MP's allowances works.
MP's should be paid receipted expenses, with a specified maximum per day, for expenses necessarily incurred as a result of their attendance in Parliament, or, if they choose to live in London, for their attendance in their constituency. (The rules should treat MPs with constituencies within 50 miles of Westminster as a special case, scaling down what may be claimed accordingly.)
Whether this means staying in hotels or flats should be left up to them, but in no cases should a capital gain be permissible if they were to buy a flat and subsequently sell it.
Ministers should not be allowed to claim accommodation expenses if they do not use official accommodation to which they are entitled. It might be appropriate for the Commons authorities to provide overnight accomodation for out-of-London MPs, where their security is assured and they could be provided with appropriate services which would help them to perform their jobs. I am sure the Government must have a ferw spare building in London which could be put to good use.
This is not rocket science. It should not be difficult to come up with a manifestly reasonable rules which would have the support of the general public and which would reflect common practice in industry when it comes to the payment of expenses.
And finally, MP's pay and allowances should not be set by MPs, but linked to an appropriate civil service grade. MP's staff should be paid directly by the Commons authorities, according to defined pay scales, which would help to reduce allegations of impropriety when employing family members.
Comment number 43.At 10:38 30th Mar 2009, Hastings wrote:
I am confused about this entire story. This outrageous misuse of sixty five quid.
I assume the reason it got mistakenly claimed was that it was on the same bill as the broadband, so rather an easy mistake to make. So no real interest there.
The fact that two of the films were 18 certificate (these were not some horrible, hard core porn, but available through Virgin), is not my taste, but neither is it any of mine or the BBC's or the press' business.
The most IMPORTANT fact however, the thing that the BBC is completely failing to mention, is that this bill must have been illegally obtained and that its publication is a GROSS invasion of privacy.
While the expenses claim should not have been made, the fact that someone publishes a document to which they have no legal right whatsoever, and the fact that the BBC re-publishes this document is at the minimum gross misconduct and quite probably an offence.
When it comes to public interest, that is FAR higher on my agenda than Jackie Smith's husband. The BBC is constantly arguing about invasion of privacy by the government and yet has absolutely no qualms about publishing what is quite probably a stolen document.
If the BBC and the media feel they have the moral high-ground, I am afraid they are very much mistaken.
Comment number 44.At 10:40 30th Mar 2009, saxmund wrote:
Whatever the rules say, even if JS spent slightly more nights in her sister's spare room than in Redditch, it is clearly a second residence. She should not be milking the system to make the taxpayer pay for her family home; the maximum we should be paying is a market rent for a room in someone else's house, and actually she should have been forced to take up the grace & favour home so we could pay nothing.
Your point about MPs not getting paid enough might just make sense for a London backbench MP, but not for Mr & Mrs Smith who make nearly £200K between them even before expenses are paid.
Comment number 45.At 10:40 30th Mar 2009, Lex Penn wrote:
Comment number 46.At 10:41 30th Mar 2009, digitalabingdonian wrote:
A bit slow out of the blocks weren't you nick?non political journalists have been complaining about the allowances system for longer than a few weeks.I'm even more suprised that you haven't metioned the new rules that come into force for claiming ACA where mysteriously the word "main" has disappeared to save any more red faces in parliament.
As you already seem to have cleared Smith of any wrong doing could you explain the term "you must ensure arrangenments for your ACA claims are above reproach and there can be no grounds for suggestion of misuse of public money"Smith fails on the existing rules regardless of what so called political reporters think.
Comment number 47.At 10:41 30th Mar 2009, c0r0nal wrote:
Whether or not Jacqui Smith (or any other MP, for that matter) will be found to have done anything against the rules with regard to their expenses claims, can I explore for a moment how these revelations are coming to light? There rarely seems to be a large number of these stories being published at the same time. Instead, one story after another drips out, week after week, concerning one MP or another. While the majority of these stories seem to involve government ministers (perhaps because these individuals are most newsworthy), more junior MPs from other parties have also been implicated.
What can one make of this? Is this a tit-for-tat campaign between the parties, each retaliating against another leak from the other? Or is there somebody among the administrative staff in the Commons gradually leaking these stories to the media? Whatever the case, and whichever side of the fence one stands on, this saga is hugely and corrosively damaging to politics as a whole. As Nick alludes to, the chances of turning a disillusioned electorate back on to politics (in the way Obama managed in the US) seem to be lower than ever here, which is deeply sad.
Comment number 48.At 10:41 30th Mar 2009, topchat wrote:
Comment number 49.At 10:42 30th Mar 2009, ColonelDigby wrote:
#18 floodrob
Animal House?
Comment number 50.At 10:42 30th Mar 2009, Ctesibius wrote:
What you have (possibly inadvertently) just quoted is absolutely incredible. Your story starts by saying: "she told friends that she expected to be cleared in the inquiry into the expense claims for her second home. The home secretary has been poring over her home, constituency and office diary to plot where she had spent each night in the past year".
If these "friends" are quoting her accurately, then they have told you that she made the claim WITHOUT REALISING WHETHER IT WAS TRUE OR NOT.
I think that is proof that this woman has to go now.
Comment number 51.At 10:46 30th Mar 2009, SRMatthews wrote:
Comment number 52.At 10:47 30th Mar 2009, sportingpunter wrote:
Claiming for an 88p plug should be grounds for dismissal alone as it shows such an incredible level of pettiness. We all know what is going here - they know most of them will be out of a job soon so they have to grab as much as they can now. The defence is always that it is within the rules - then the rules are the problem as the MP's cannot be trusted to behave in a moral way. The MEP's are far worse - our so-called democracy is being looted by politicians.
Comment number 53.At 10:48 30th Mar 2009, Econoce wrote:
Very similar to claiming expenses, where are we on the Brown case: subletting a contituency office against the rules by a very experienced MP. Getting rental income against the rules is similar to getting expenses reimbursed.
Comment number 54.At 10:49 30th Mar 2009, Econoce wrote:
Comment number 55.At 10:49 30th Mar 2009, brian g wrote:
Ms Smith is a person totally out of her depth. There have been enough cock ups in the Home Office to last a life time and yet she still survives in her job. Quite extraodinary.
Ms Smith`s explanation for all of this doesn`t really hold water. Broadband services,with Virgin Media, are billed by way of a monthly standard charge. Therefore it is quite a simple matter to spot anything out of the ordinary. She and her husband are either incompetent in the way they manage their family finances or deliberately over claimed on her parliamentary expenses.
I don`t understand why Brown continues to support her.Is it another example of his weakness as a leader or is he afraid that, putting another of the girls on the back benches, Ms Smith may join forces with Ms Harman and attempt to oust him before the next election?
This latest saga reflects very badly on this country at the time of the G20 meeting, the members of which must be having a good giggle at our expense. Forgive the pun! Nor does it reflect well on Parliament as a whole. All our MPs, in a number of instances quite undeservadly, have been tared with the same brush as being a load of fiddlers. No better in some cases than the benefit cheats who this government are anxious to clamp down on.
Gordon Brown`s decision to put off a review of Mps expenses, until heaven knowns when, is another sign of his poor leadership skills. A consensus is growing for MPs allowances to be done away with and for the pay of MPs to be siginificantly increased. Expenses like bath plugs and antique fireplaces coming out of their own pocket.
Since NuLabour came to power politics in this country have gone down hill and is it little wonder why more and more people are abstaing from voting. From the F1 debacle to the dodgy dossier, the list in endless. All this from a party who sneered at sleeze within the conservative party. Comparing the two, anything the conservatives did whilst in power now seems quite tame in comparison.
Comment number 56.At 10:50 30th Mar 2009, phoenixarisenq wrote:
#15 Robin JD
Who gives a fig if she is a nice person? She is the Home Secretary and a certain level of behaviour is expected form her and her own.
Why can anyone at the BBC not appreciate that?
You have hit the nail on the head.
Comment number 57.At 10:51 30th Mar 2009, Econoce wrote:
Generally, politicians should err on the side of caution when claiming expenses, not try to flex the rules and then get away sith saying sorry and paying back the money.
If you can not bring yourself to looking cleaner than clean you should not be a poltician and look for another job.
Comment number 58.At 10:52 30th Mar 2009, fairlopian_tubester wrote:
Rather than "arguing for weeks" you did raise the topic of allowances once before (in the context of increasing MPs' pay) and many of us responded that in all other walks of life HMRC apply the "wholly and exclusively" use tests to expenses - why should MPs' allowances be any different?
Odd isn't it that this minor, but salacious, "Alan Partridge" incident is grabbing our attention at this time? It's not that this country is at war or in the midst of a major economic crisis, is it?
If your profile of Ms Smith as a likeable mum, accidental MP and unintended cabinet minister is true, then I'm sure most of your correspondents will be very glad for her when she can extricate herself from this whole, horrible business and spend more time with her family.
Comment number 59.At 10:53 30th Mar 2009, asleigh123 wrote:
Firstly, why is she pouring over her diary for the second home enquiry when the police have foolproof and logged records of such things?
Secondly, a mixture of being bad at your job and abusing power is a certain path towards redundancy - Her position is completely untenable
Comment number 60.At 10:54 30th Mar 2009, riverside wrote:
Its the same problem as the 'bonuses' in banking. Lets use the english language in a very private interpretation. We'll call part of your salary bonuses even though we expect to pay it willynilly and you expect it to be paid by right. MPs - lets give you 'allowances or expenses' to pump up your income. But we will still expect you to collect them willynilly. Oh dear the public don't understand 'bonuses' are not bonuses as defined by the Oxford dictioanry, and that 'expenses' are not expenses as defined by the Oxford dictionary. And it is the taxpaying public who are being asked to pay the tab. What did you expect. As for closing the gap between voted and voters. The gap has always been the same, it just has not been on clear view. There has been no real attempt to tackle the issue. The main energy goes into trying to defend the indefensible.
Comment number 61.At 10:54 30th Mar 2009, LondonHarris wrote:
We now have a situation today whereby like in the repeating Case of the Home Secretary, for in that most part Politicans are treating their roles as any means to make as much money as possible with their Gravy Train of Expenses, for they are Claiming for things that the Poor in our Society can only dream of having for how many people on the misable payment of Income Support / JSA / Unemployment Benefit can afford to pay for and to watch Adult Entertainment let alone at all afford the cost of a Sky T.V.Package paid for out of their own pockets, while Politicans can Claim these same packages, and for many other Items at Public Exspense.
Most people now today feel that most Politician DON'T DO enought Work to warrant their CURRENT WAGES let alone being allowed to claim for additional Allowances to boost their overall Incomes.
The old Chestnut grunted by Politicians is that they MUST have a large Income plus Expenses, and Allowance otherwise they cannot afford to do the Job of an M.P.
However my advice to ALL M.P.'s is that your Game is now up with your forever Personal Claims for your own Social Benefit, and if you feel that you are being undervalued, and underpaid then Resign and GO, for there are many Unemployed people today, whom will I am sure will apply for a Job as an M.P. and Minister of State that doe's not require any forms of Job Qualifications, and anyone at worse can only bring the Country too a state of total Depression, and Deflation as it is currently being driven too by the current bunch of incumbent M.P.'s and State Ministers.
Comment number 62.At 10:55 30th Mar 2009, JohnGammon wrote:
I have a cable package that provides television, broadband and telephone for a flat fee. In the current parliamentary system, I'd have thought it was reasonable that an MP gets a cable package with these three items, but any extras be paid for by themselves, including movies and all home telephone calls. Assuming Jacqui Smith's household has a similar set-up, I can't see how this situation can be a "mistake" - every month there's a fixed and identical amount claimed for, everything else should be paid by the MP.
Comment number 63.At 10:55 30th Mar 2009, DukeJake wrote:
Jacqui Smith hold a senior cabinet position and for this she earns £120k. This is obviously a lot of money - but consider that Sharon Shoesmith was earning £100k and there are thousands of inept council box-tickers just like her giving themselves huge pay rises and putting a strain on the public finances. Jacqui Smith holds far more responsibility and is always in the public eye.
Increase MP's pay and cap allowances at £20k.
Comment number 64.At 10:56 30th Mar 2009, Econoce wrote:
A few other questions:
Why is no-one asking the obvious question? Was the claim for the TV part of Ms smith's Virgin media bill a one-off, or, as seems more likely, the entire bill was claimed every month, including pay-per-view films of whatever type?
And why anyway is she allowed to claim this when according to her it isn't her main home, her sister's house is?
Comment number 65.At 10:56 30th Mar 2009, alexinnorfolk wrote:
What a pathetic waste of time. The economy is in a complete mess and we focus on two £5.00 purchases of soft porn! All MP's from all parties are the same. The role as an MP should be a Job, nothing more and nothing less. The MP's work for us the public and the whole allowances issue should be looked at. We the voters should have the right to determine the pay and allowances of all MP's and not the MP's alone. What seems a rather trivial piece of news is blown out of all proportion by the media and obviously the opposition. This story will shortly be chip paper, so come on get real news on our screens and in the papers. I am sure there are mouch more important issues out there today.
Comment number 66.At 10:56 30th Mar 2009, naturaleconomist wrote:
For the first time I am truly appalled by your scribbling. No one can justify what she and others are doing. I find it abhorrent that you are trying to justify what she has done along with her husband who "sacrificed his own career" to take up a role as her secretary for £40k plus per year which also allows him to be at home to look after the kids…….
This is so totally biased and what about the other MP who has been claiming for a second home which turns out to be a holiday home or was it a caravan. He must have breathed a sigh of relief when our Dishonourable Member of Parliament topped his hand and pushed him back to page 3 of the mail or so I am told.
Come on and let us have a well balanced report and not one that is slanted one way or the other.
Comment number 67.At 10:56 30th Mar 2009, Eddie wrote:
There was clearly a great deal of care taken in the submission of the expenses.
An expenses claim that includes 88p for a bath plug demonstrates the care taken to ensure that every little possible item was accounted for and claimed for.
It begs the question therefore as to how a disallowed item, of perhaps 15 times the value, managed to slip through... unless at the time of claiming, it was thought reasonable.
In passing I must comment on the quality of the fence and Gate Mr Timney appeared from. The fence appears to be oak, all screws plugged, and the gate is nicely jointed. I wonder who paid for that quality craftsmanship on what is only a second home?
Comment number 68.At 10:58 30th Mar 2009, millreef wrote:
I presume that if the Home Secretary's husband had watched the adult movies at the House of Commons rather than at home, this would not have infringed regulations on MP's expenses. Please clarify.
Comment number 69.At 10:59 30th Mar 2009, shrek1895 wrote:
Smith seems to be wanting to push the blame onto her husband when by her own admission she spends more nights with her sister than him. Shouldn't see him "on the seatee" for to many nights of the week at least!
However, I've not seen anyone query yet, just what sort of process is there that allowed for the claim to be processed all the way through the system and the claim be paid by the authorities.
Unless of course, free porn is one of the perks of the job for Home Secretary and as such it went un-noticed when processed as it was nothing out of the ordinary.
Comment number 70.At 11:03 30th Mar 2009, SRMatthews wrote:
Its about time heads roled in this bungling government.
I have had enough of this shambolic New Labour joke.
Smith & Mcnulty should be sacked. They should be gone by 6.00pm today, like the fuel increases of 20 years ago, not left to be forgotten about for 6 months.
A very good journalist & exceptional DG of the BBC resigned over the dodgy dossier.
Where are the weapons Blair & Campbell???
Alistair Campbell mislead a whole nation with his sexed up dossier. Only for the BBC to be proven right. He was a non elected person who lied to the country & took us to war.
Now we have non elected, back hander Mandleson running round, supposedly trying to help with the economy. I think we can all guess where the country will end up now!!
Comment number 71.At 11:03 30th Mar 2009, dwwonthew wrote:
"The irony is that only last week she told friends that she expected to be cleared in the inquiry into the expense claims for her second home."
Really? She sounds as though she is joining Gordon Brown in the -out-of-touch-with-reality camp. Surely, nobody in the real world can believe that a woman who is married, with two young children and whose home in Redditch - presumably - pre-dates her election to Parliament can be justified in claiming her "main" home is a room in her sister's house. To those of us in that real world it looks as though she chose to designate it as such so that she could claim the maximum possible amount of money for her "second" home.
We can only hope that at the next election the good people of Redditch will turf her out of her seat, and so put her husband out of work as well.
And if to many MPs she is "a likeable working Mum ...." etc it shows just how out of touch they are too. Just who are those "many MPs"?
Comment number 72.At 11:06 30th Mar 2009, mutebuttondelight wrote:
As a working woman with family I find the comments, "She is not, after all, just a minister or an MP but the mother of two school age boys.." a tad patronising. Does being a working mother excuse her from making sure her expense/allowance claims are legitimate? Of course not. There are millions of working mothers out here in the real world, away from the Westminster village, who are not paid anywhere near as much as she is and who would not be fiddling expenses; even if accidentally. She is yet another sign of just how far removed political figures have moved from what they should be about: serving the country first, not serving themselves. As a taxpayer I have no problem at all with politicians claiming expenses for items legitimately required to enable them to carry out their duties properly, but this is not what is happening is it? What is happening is that the entire system seems to be geared towards politicians lining their pockets rather than simply being able to do the job effectively.
Comment number 73.At 11:08 30th Mar 2009, valdan70 wrote:
Of course David Cameron didn't want to lean too hard on her. His comment that he tells his MPs if what they claim is not defensible, then don't do it was obviously not heeded by Chris Grayling, the Shadow Home Secretary. He obviously thinks it is defensible to claim £103k for his London flat, when his family home is only 17 miles from Westminster. These facts have only come to light thanks to Labour's Freedom of Information Act, without which all this would still be treated as confidential. Now that all expense claims are going to be made available for public scrutiny, we will see who has claimed what, and who is continuing to claim in the future. There is likely to be a huge reduction in expense claims from now on.
David Cameron claimed for his light bulbs, imagine that!
Comment number 74.At 11:12 30th Mar 2009, obangobang wrote:
My heart bleeds.
Comment number 75.At 11:13 30th Mar 2009, Tony North West wrote:
My only observation is is that this is not 'whiter than white' - which we were sort of promised ?
Comment number 76.At 11:15 30th Mar 2009, Trixster3000 wrote:
The sub-plot to all this is that our beloved MP's think they're worth a pay rise. There was a guy on last week's Question Time (the one with a squirming Mr Pickles) who said that if the MP's didn't feel they were being paid enough, then they should move on and give their job to someone else!
Comment number 77.At 11:16 30th Mar 2009, Econoce wrote:
Let's hope the inland revenue thoroughly checks the tax returns of Ms Smith's sister, Mr McNulty's parents and Gordon Brown.
Comment number 78.At 11:16 30th Mar 2009, Trixster3000 wrote:
Looks like the BBC's clock needs moving forward one hour.
Comment number 79.At 11:18 30th Mar 2009, meninwhitecoats wrote:
Whilst I am not particularly outraged about the latest incident - the ridicule and embarrassment are punishment enough - the second home issue still grates.
Nick's defence of the Home Scretary however is nauseating - she should not have gone into Parliament if she was not prepared to put in the hours and could always move her family up to London, as her husband could easily relocate in his capacity ss her paid researcher possibly earning more than he did in the career he "sacrificed".
Presumably when she loses her seat she will receive compensation and will have accrued pension rights, my heart bleeds for her!
Comment number 80.At 11:19 30th Mar 2009, ngodinhdiem wrote:
"Allowances are treated as just that - allowances not expenses - which compensate MPs for the fact that governments of all colours routinely ignore independent recommendations to increase MPs' pay."
I'm sorry Nick, but you have clearly gone native. Or have you forgotten that a backbench MP earns £67,000 p.a. before expenses and or allowances. Hardly a subsidence salary - is it? And that's before we get to the Gold plated pension etc… So please Nick, no more sob stories on behalf of your friends! We the license-fee and taxpayers of this country, pay your salary and we expect you to stand up for us, the ordinary man and woman on the street, not the political elite.
"I've been arguing for weeks that it is the system of Commons expenses and the culture which surrounds it which has caused all the problems.2
No Nick, you haven't – like most of your BBC colleagues, you have been largely ignoring this issue in the vain hope that it will just go away. Well the public won't let it. We are sick and tired of being taken for mugs by our political masters.
As for Ms. Smith – a couple of points you seem to have overlooked (yet, again)….
1) You suggest: "The home secretary has been poring over her home, constituency and office diary to plot where she had spent each night in the PAST YEAR. She is confident that she has the proof that she's spent more nights in London than in her constituency and thus, under the Commons rules, could designate her family home as her "second home" and the flat she shares with her sister as her "main home". [Emphasis Added]
If true, this would indeed put her in the clear for last year, but she hasn't just claimed ACA for last year has she? What about those earlier years when she wasn't Home Secretary? Are we supposed to believe that she was also living in London during the long parliamentary recess when she was a back-bencher and GVN whip, i.e. when she had no GVN Department to run? Pull the other one.
2) You have forgotten to mention that as Home Secretary, Ms Smith has the option of a very comfortable grace and favour home in central London. By turning down this rent free accommodation, she has maximized her expense claims…. Why should we be paying for her coffee table, sofa bed, kitchen sink, plug, internet connection, TV subscription at her family home? As Home Secretary she earns in excess of £100,000, throw in the pension, the memoirs and the near guaranteed seat in the House of Lords (once she leaves the Commons) + her husband's £40,000 p.a. from the taxpayer and don't you think she could afford to pay for these items herself?
More general points include…
a) Most MP's have not turned down promising careers elsewhere for the greater public good. Like most of her colleagues, Jacqui got a considerable pay-rise when she became an MP.
b) MP's knew the pay-scale when they decided to stand for office. So how and why should they be allowed to fiddle their expenses now?
c) Throughout this piece, you have deployed the concentration camp guard argument – 'Our MP's were only doing what they were told'… nobody forced Ms Smith or Mr McNulty to put in a fraudulent expense claims. No-one was putting a gun to their head. This just won't wash – they chose to make the claim, and they must take the pain if it turns out to be fraudulent….
So Nick, get a grip and stop falling for the Westminster spin. MP's get a good salary as it is, they do not need to engage in dodgy expense claims to get by, so start reporting it like it is, or frankly get out and let someone-else have a go…..
Comment number 81.At 11:19 30th Mar 2009, tollpuddle wrote:
Its like watching a sharks convention,viewing the tory hypocrisy on here.............How can these tory propogandists possibly take on a selfrightous OTT air when they have people like the ultra greedy Winterons,Spelman and Conway in their party..more blinkers than a Newmarket trainer
Comment number 82.At 11:20 30th Mar 2009, anthonygh wrote:
So...slap in the expenses and doctor the diary later to prove them? Snouts in the trough, the lot of them.
I have to m/cycle 37 mile each way all year round to my teaching job just minutes from Westminster but can't claim a penny...but MP's living a third of that distance away can claim for a second home!!! I pay for my travel out of taxed income and my taxes pay for these people to have free houses!!!
It is actually quite sickening...I can't think of any other word for it. I despise these people more than the bankers...at least bankers don't pretend to be public servants!
Comment number 83.At 11:21 30th Mar 2009, saga mix wrote:
poor Jacqui, I feel sorry for her - she should resign, though, because her credibility is shot to pieces - so should McNult
but what's more interesting is to look at who first put in place this ridiculous expenses set up involving second homes, the John Lewis list, all the rest of it - it was Margaret Thatcher
what a big surprise
Comment number 84.At 11:22 30th Mar 2009, Hanny wrote:
Nick, your blog should have slowly-playing, mournful violins as its soundtrack. POOR Jacqui Smith and her POOR boys....what a shame...she works so hard.
She took the job on, knowing full well what she was getting herself and her family into. She also submitted her expenses - either with the extra "in error" or in full knowledge of them. She is therefore either incompetent and not thorough, or she is fraudulant. Either of the two merits her resignation or dismissal.
However, since when has this government ever worried about sleaze? Or incompetance for that matter? Gordon Brown is not contemplating resigning even after all his disasterous judgements and the failures they produced. They used to go on about Tory sleaze, even though I don't like the Tories they seem beacons of respectability compared with this lot.
Comment number 85.At 11:22 30th Mar 2009, Freeman wrote:
Comment number 86.At 11:24 30th Mar 2009, shellingout wrote:
To many MPs, she's a likeable working mum who didn't expect to be elected in '97; whose husband agreed to sacrifice his career to make hers possible; who works such long hours that she spends more days away from her family than with it and who knows that she's on course to lose her very marginal seat and thus, her job, income and allowances, at the next election.
To say I'm furious about this is an understatement.
Jacqui Smith knew full well what the job entailed before she stood for election. If she spends more days away from her family than with it, then it is in her power to do something about it. If she loses her seat, her job, income and allowances at the next election, she will have been lucky to have stayed where she is for so long in the light of recent events.
Her husband gave up his job because he knew he would earn more money working for Jacqui. That was his choice.
As for her "poring over her home, constituancy and office diaries", I find it astonishing that you even printed this. If any one of Joe Public was found to be claiming a tax allowance to which they may not be entitled, I'm sure that the powers that be would get somebody from the tax office to "pore through" all his/her records and make sure every penny was repaid. Why should Ms. Smith be any different?
And as for her desperation, I really don't care one iota if she has to go. You reap what you sow in this country. She employed her husband and the responsibility lies with her to make him fully aware of the terms and conditions of his, and her position. If she has already done that, he is obviously not up to the job.
I have absolutely no sympathy for these people (and that includes MP's on all sides of the House) and if they choose to appear as though they are "on the take", then they deserve everything they get.
I believe that this episode with Jacqui Smith is just the tip of the iceberg. Dig a bit deeper (please Nick) and expose the rest of this shower who keep telling us they only have our best interests at heart while behind our backs, they are busy lining their own pockets at our expense!
It seems to me, that the reason MP's ignore independent recommendations to increase their pay, is that they know they will be a lot worse off. These allowances should be stopped as soon as possible. Let them do the job because they want to, and not because of the financial trappings it brings. There should also be an independent body to deal with their expenses and this should be monitored closely. MP's should be asked to produce all receipts, like the rest of us. I thought that's what their Parliamentary Secretaries were paid for. Apparently, I'm wrong.
To add to that, MP's have suggested we pay them an extra £40,000 a year, for which they will surrender some of their allowances, but details of which allowances have not been disclosed. At a time when the whole country is pulling in its belt, the very last thing these people should be asking for, or given, is such a large increase in pay!
It really does beggar belief.
Comment number 87.At 11:24 30th Mar 2009, StrongholdBarricades wrote:
37. At 09:33am on 30 Mar 2009, ColonelDigby wrote:
Home secretary
Two home secretary
Two home movies secretary
I think you missed out Home Alone, otherwise excellent
Comment number 88.At 11:25 30th Mar 2009, Jackojudd wrote:
Comment number 89.At 11:25 30th Mar 2009, SSnotbanned wrote:
Comment number 90.At 11:28 30th Mar 2009, roylejohnw wrote:
So....we the taxpayers pay Ms J Smiths husband to manage her affairs and complete her expense claims at the taxpayers expense . Can this be right , or fair or sensible or indeed good business practice ?.Or is this just another snout in the taxpayers trough ?
Comment number 91.At 11:28 30th Mar 2009, fairlyopenmind wrote:
What gets me is these people simply saying "It's within the rules" - as though there were some logic in those rules.
Smith counts the number of nights spent at her sisters and says it is more than the number of nights spent at the family home. Let's assume she's a caring mother, who quite enjoys seeing her children.
She's saying her sister's pad is her "first home", so we can pay the mortgage on the family home...
Balls and Cooper live WITH their children in London. The children go to school there. Let's assume they are caring parents, so don't drive back from the constituency house every schoolday Monday morning. So that would make it a minimum 5 nights a week in London. Can they really spend more nights at the constituency house?
So Balls and Cooper consider the constintuency house as the "First home", so we can pay the mortgage on an expensive house in London...
That's really consistent, isn't it?
The rules simply allow MPs to designate whichever house they choose in order to optimise "allowances".
But, if they decide to sell up, they can tell HMRC exactly the opposite, to avoid any capital gains tax...
Forget Labour/Tory/LibDEM or whatever. The system just stinks.
Comment number 92.At 11:30 30th Mar 2009, Disgustedwimbledon wrote:
Can we be clear about "Mr" Jacqui Smith's role. As her Parliamentary aide he is a public employee and thus,presumably,accountable directly. How does he perform his Parliamentary duties from her "second" home, some distance from London while also having family responsibilities ?
Also, is the tax status on the 'second' home clear ? As it's not her main residence can we have a clear assurance that there will be no claim for capital gains tax relief when it is sold. And can Ms Smith's sister confirm the tax payments she has made on the rental to her sister ?
Comment number 93.At 11:32 30th Mar 2009, diddlydan wrote:
The small flaw in Gurubears 0938 comment is that the minister responsible for ensuring that such documents are kept secure is................THE HOME SECRETARY!
Comment number 94.At 11:33 30th Mar 2009, solpugid wrote:
If Jacqui Smith had had political successes to her name in her time at the Home Office, then things might be different, but conspicuously she has not. But then to have a partner cosily on the payroll, and both an allegedly dodgy claim for accommodation expenses and acute red-top embarrassment from the aforesaid lucky partner with the ink still wet, cannot be compatible with office in a government with any kind of sense of its own seriousness.
I have been looking back in my earlier posts to find the date on which I first predicted her early removal from office, around the time of the fuss about Damien Green. Many will have been surprised that she even survived what might otherwise have been a robust reshuffle, unless as a sign of Brown's own weakened position at the time.
But that prediction was premature. If Paw Broon has not totally nodded off, it can surely not be premature now. So let's try again: I give it a week.
Comment number 95.At 11:34 30th Mar 2009, midori_no_saru wrote:
Apologists can equivocate about "allowances" versus "expenses," but surely the allowance was for a home she was supposed to own, not for her to live in someone else's and pocket the difference?
It's the duty of you, Nick, and other journalists, to do some digging and find out what the wording of these "rules" are and report them. Please don't let us hear that they are unwritten, like our "constitution."
Comment number 96.At 11:35 30th Mar 2009, MojoWarriors wrote:
This was a "personal issue" until I paid her for it !!!
Comment number 97.At 11:36 30th Mar 2009, roylejohnw wrote:
Why are we , the humble British taxpayers paying for Ms J Smiths husband to watch porn films ?
Comment number 98.At 11:39 30th Mar 2009, MonkeyBot 5000 wrote:
"Also, I don't understand this "Poring over her diaries" bit either, her expense claims are already in are they not? Anyway, are you SERIOUSLY telling me that we don't know where our Home Secretary is, every hour of every day?"
A better question is why this task wasn't given to her husband who is getting £40k a year of our money from her staffing allowance to sit around watching porn - probably 3rd rate porn as well if it's on cable.
Comment number 99.At 11:39 30th Mar 2009, TheWalrus123 wrote:
The rule about second homes are clearly not intended to allow an MP to designate their family home as the second home, and claim allowances for it.
Why claim allowances on the family home at all?
Its disgusting that an MP can get away with this breach of the spirit of the rules by claiming that it is within the letter of the rule.
This is corruption and she should be ashmamed.
If Jacqui Smith cannot see this then I would argue that she is incapable of common sense judgements and a liability in her role.
Comment number 100.At 11:41 30th Mar 2009, RobinJD wrote:
Why does Gordon Brown's moral compass desert him every time there is an issue of newlabour sleaze?
We have been given Jacqui with her waccy baccy, her expenses and her adult video husband.
We had Peter Hain and his unlawful deputy leadership fund raising.
We have Paul Myners, City Minister and his offshore tax evasion.
We have Fred Goodwin and his doubled up pension pot.
We had Hattie Harman and the enquiry into her deputy leadership funding.
All of the above given the full support of Gordon Brown. Was his moral compass buried at the time? Has his moral compass lost the ability to find true north? Do compasses north of the border have a different morality to the rest of us?
The moral compass of Gordon Brown appears to have all the moral authority of drunk in a brewery.
At the moment Gordon Brown is a victim of the old adage that these are my rules and I say who lives by them; apparently none of his mates or cabinet ministers.
Once a govenrment descends into this kind of anarchy; one rule for us and another for the masses, it is very near to the end of its natural life.
This one reached that point a year ago with its inability to accept its role in the financial collapse.
Gordon Brown is now up to his neck in sleaze and appears to believe jumping on a plane will amke it go away.
Welcome home Mr Prime Minister to a country where you are in office but no longer in power; undermined by your own sovereign, governor of the bank of England, chancellor and people.
The people are tired of this sleaze and you no longer have the requisite authority to do anything about it.
Call an election


text:
27 results for: "LANG, Carl"
The list below shows all the assets in our website that may meet the word combination on your search. For a more restricted set of results, you may use the filters included in the left side of the list.
live-prelive photos
Images (27)
MEP Carl LANG, Bruno GOLLNISCH at the European Parliament in Strasbourg
News - 17-10-2014
Show all Images only

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Scientists Warn of Increased Nuclear Radiation Risks
Integrative physician Isaac Eliaz, M.D., L.Ac., is a leading researcher and expert on safe detoxification and protection from radioactive isotopes and heavy metals. Here, Dr. Eliaz outlines a strategic plan for combating potential radiation exposure, using natural detoxifiers, trace minerals, antioxidants, and immune boosters. "This approach will help to remove potential radiation from the body, protect cells, tissues and DNA, and strengthen vitality and immunity. The beauty of this strategy is that while these solutions help remove radiation, they also enhance overall health with numerous additional benefits," says Dr. Eliaz.


text:
Just Horses 2009 Desk Calendar
Just Horses Desk Calendar: The grace, power, and majesty of horses are captured by renowned photographer Bob Langrish in this popular full-color daily calendar. Over 320 photographs depict the beauty and stature of horses in action. It's the next best thing to being in the saddle!
Horse Calendars, Horse Collection Calendars
|Click Here to Read More...


text:
'Sharenting' – "What is that?" might be the thought for many of us…it was the same thought for me too and soon I was researching more and more into the topic…here are a few of my findings and thoughts…
Social media personalities:
As discussed in another post, all of us have different social media personalities when we are online. While some of us feel comfortable sharing only our achievements online, many of us share a whole lot of other personal things and there are yet others who totally shun social media! All of us have different takes and views on sharing information online. While there is no perfect right or wrong here and each person is entitled to share what they want,just knowing the risks empowers us.
The "star" subject:
These days there are videos for every type of content….
"You need to bake a cake?" "Just go to YouTube" might be a popular retort…
"You want to paint?" "Just head to YouTube too"…
"You want to learn Java?" "Head to YouTube – there are plenty of live coding examples that make coding much more easier to learn….."
While the subject in the above example is "cake","paint brush" and "code", there are numerous videos where the subject is "children". Children growing, talking about everyday activities with children, children,children and more children…most of the times the author talks about their own children in great detail. Not only videos, there are blog posts and other means of sharing which feature one's own children.
Some times, some children's digital identities are fixed from the time they are in their mother's wombs!!
The more information we share about them – the more views, likes, shares and subscribers we get. We think we are helping other people out there in the same boat(and we might be helping somebody I am sure) -but I am not sure if that is always the case…in the corner of my mind there comes a faint thought if we are exploiting the children in any way because they cannot say anything…
This is "sharenting" which is talking excessively about them and recording every minute detail in full public view….
I admit I am also guilty of a few posts about my grown children as well! 🙂 But all my posts are reviewed by the star of the post – as all of them are old enough to make that decision. Some times, they are amused and sometimes they are not so amused but I hit "publish" only after the final assent by them!
I think most of us do not have that luxury as most of our child subjects are too young. We assume that we do not have to take their permission and yes, if they are too young – we cannot and we do not have to….
But apart from the privacy thought,the multi-million dollar sharenting question is what will the child think of all this sharing and "sharenting" when they grow up?
As you might be knowing, children grow up fast and it will be just be another 4-5 years before they assert their online identity.
Will they say "Stop, mom and dad, why did you have to record me so much?"or will they share your happiness in all the recording and sharing? Only time will tell…
So, where are you on the "sharenting" spectrum? Do you share a little about your kids or do you share a lot about them? What do you think they will think of this in the future?
What is my final take on "sharenting"? Take "sharenting" with care and balance – let us not embarass our future social media citizens!! 🙂
All thanks to Cybermum_India and Cybermum_AU for this thought that transformed into a complete blog post! 🙂
This is an interesting post. I have read a lot about it and studies that prove that high amount of sharenting can have detrimental effects on child's psychology when he grows up. So i refrain from sharing stories about him on social media. i just write about him.. 😉
I admit I was not aware of this term, thanks for sharing this post.
Sharenting or sharing kids info or pic without permission is not ok.
Agree we are mothers but that doesn't give us right to post there pics without asking.
I do show my posts to my kids, they are my best critic and share pics which they approve of, else no face share.


text:
After a wet and wild week most parts of the country should see some respite over the weekend with at least a sunny Sunday on the cards.
Today a series of fronts were moving up the South Island, bringing heavy rain to the West Coast and parts of the North Island from this afternoon, MetService meteorologist David Miller said.
Many areas were in for above average temperatures for this time of year.
Auckland was in for mild day with a high of 17C and just some light showers from this evening.
Westland, Buller and northwest Nelson were under heavy rain watches, with up to 80mm of rain expected by this evening.
The was also a moderate risk of thunderstorms through these areas in the afternoon and early evening, and over Taranaki and Waitomo at night.
These thunderstorms could produce heavy rain of 10 to 20mm per hour, small hail, and for Taranaki and Waitomo possible strong wind gusts of 90km/h.
There was also a risk of thunderstorms across the lower South Island in the afternoon and evening, due to unstable northwesterlies.
Tomorrow these fronts would clear the country, ahead of a southerly change on Friday pushing another bout of rain up the South Island.
That southerly change would bring rain to parts of the lower North Island and to Taranaki early Saturday.
By the time it reached Auckland in the evening it would have weakened, and fully cleared the island overnight leaving a ridge of high pressure.
"Sunday will be the day of the weekend across the country," Miller said.
The ridge would move slowly east on Sunday as a complex trough approached the South Island from the Tasman Sea.
The trough was expected to move over New Zealand on Monday, bringing rain to the western and northern areas of the country, and preceded by strong northwesterlies.
Today's weather
Mainly fine, chance evening shower. Westerly winds. 18C high, 12C overnight.
Partly cloudy. A few showers, mainly this evening. Westerly winds. 17C high, 12C overnight.
Cloudy at times. Showers developing this afternoon. Northwest winds. 16C high, 10C overnight.
Fine, then a few showers at night. Westerlies. 17C high, 11C overnight.
New Plymouth Becoming cloudy. Showers developing this afternoon, frequent this evening and possible thunderstorms. Northwesterlies. 15C high, 11C overnight.
Napier Fine. High cloud by evening. Northwesterlies developing afternoon. 18C high, 11C overnight.
Wellington Becoming cloudy. Showers developing afternoon, chance heavy from evening. Northerly becoming strong this afternoon. 14C high, 11C overnight.
Nelson Becoming cloudy. Some rain from afternoon. Northerlies from late morning. 15C high, 5C overnight.
Christchurch High cloud. Northeasterlies, dying out this evening. 16C high, 4C overnight.
Dunedin Cloudy periods. Some light rain this morning. Northeast, dying out this afternoon. 16C high, 5C overnight.


text:
It's still too much money at $399 - 10% at $370 which is what I will be losing from the small amount I wanted to charge in order to be able to build a customer base. I would like to be able to purchase extra licenses for a lot less than the base price.
I also don't have localhost. I'm installing it on a subdomain of my domain for testing purposes. So later on I would be taking it off from there and reinstalling on another website, so I would like that license usage removed from this particular domain and refreshed or renewed so that I can use on the real live site. Is that going to be a problem once I've used the license once? or will you be able to clear it for me so that I can re use it?
And finally, can you tell me why I would be better off using PowerStore over OSCommerce which is open source?
actually, I'll add one more set of questions. Will I be able to get the 50% off if I later on buy 5 more licenses? Does it mean 6 x $399 = $2,394 - 50% - $1197? So just to be very specific, if I already paid $399 will you sell me the next 5 for $798? However, if I purchased it with an offer of 25% off, does that mean I would be able to get the 6 for $897? and once again, will my first purchase be taken into consideration if I later on saw the discount and wanted 5 more licenses?
thank you.


text:
It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
joind on: May, 22 2003
last visit: Aug, 22 2017
applause received: 10
member posts: 3,430
member threads: 390
member flags: 86
member stars: 283,126
ave. flags per thread: 0.22
ave. stars per post: 82.54
ave. threads per day: 0.07
ave. posts per day: 0.66
WATS score: 1658
member karma: 1238


text:
10 November 2015, Writing Ideas - New Novel, part 579, Language Complexity Q and A
Announcement: Delay, my new novels can be seen on the internet, but the publisher has delayed all their fiction output due to the economy. I'll keep you informed. More information can be found at www.ancientlight.com. Check out my novels--I think you'll really enjoy them.
Introduction: I wrote the novel Aksinya: Enchantment and the Daemon. This was my 21st novel and through this blog, I gave you the entire novel in installments that included commentary on the writing. In the commentary, in addition to other general information on writing, I explained, how the novel was constructed, the metaphors and symbols in it, the writing techniques and tricks I used, and the way I built the scenes. You can look back through this blog and read the entire novel beginning with http://www.pilotlion.blogspot.com/2010/10/new-novel-part-3-girl-and-demon.html.
I'm using this novel as an example of how I produce, market, and eventually (we hope) get a novel published. I'll keep you informed along the way.
Today's Blog: To see the steps in the publication process, visit my writing website http://www.ldalford.com/ and select "production schedule," you will be sent to http://www.sisteroflight.com/.
The four plus one basic rules I employ when writing:
1. Don't confuse your readers.
2. Entertain your readers.
3. Ground your readers in the writing.
4. Don't show (or tell) everything.
5. Immerse yourself in the world of your writing.
All novels have five discrete parts:
1. The initial scene (the beginning)
2. The rising action
3. The climax
4. The falling action
5. The dénouement
The theme statement of my 26th novel, working title, Shape, is this: Mrs. Lyons captures a shape-shifting girl in her pantry and rehabilitates her.
Here is the cover proposal for Escape from Freedom. Escape is my 25th novel.
The most important scene in any novel is the initial scene, but eventually, you have to move to the rising action. I'm on my first editing run-through of Shape.
I'm an advocate of using the/a scene input/output method to drive the rising action--in fact, to write any novel.
Scene development:
1. Scene input (easy)
2. Scene output (a little harder)
3. Scene setting (basic stuff)
4. Creativity (creative elements of the scene)
5. Tension (development of creative elements to build excitement)
6. Release (climax of creative elements)
I can immediately discern three ways to invoke creativity:
1. Historical extrapolation
2. Technological extrapolation
3. Intellectual extrapolation
Creativity is like an extrapolation of what has been. It is a reflection of something new created with ties to the history, science, and logic (the intellect). Creativity requires consuming, thinking, and producing.
One of my blog readers posed these questions. I'll use the next few weeks to answer them.
9. Complexity
10. Type of grammar
11. Diction
12. Field of reference or allusion
13. Tone - how tone is created through diction, rhythm, sentence construction, sound effects, images created by similes, syntax/re-arrangement of words in sentence, the inflections of the silent or spoken voice, etc.
14. Mannerism suggest by speech
15. Style
16. Distinct manner of writing or speaking you employ, and why (like Pinter's style includes gaps, silences, non-sequitors, and fragments while Chekhov's includes 'apparent' inconclusiveness).
Moving on to 9. 9. Complexity
Short digression: I'm in Paris on a short world tour. Stepped around Paris for the day. I forgot how complicated the Metro is here.
Complexity is related to the value of the unstated or the intentionally understated. Complexity comes out of tension and release.
What is complexity?
The first level of complexity is the theme. I discussed theme complexity earlier.
The second level of complexity is the plot. What makes a complex plot? In addition to the interweaving of the storylines, the tension and release cycle of the plot itself is directly related to the climax. This leads to the third level of complexity.
The third level of complexity is the integration of the tension and release into the climax and the revelation of the characters. That leads to the individual scenes.
The fourth level of complexity is the integration of language into the tension and release of the scenes. We are talking about figures of speech here. If you want a good study of figures of speech, go review my Zen of Scenes Wordpress blog. Figures of speech are the entire world of the writer. If you don't fully understand or know what I'm writing about, you need to study up. I won't take the time here to go back through a year's worth of blogging on figures of speech, but I will try to hit the high points for you.
First, no author says, "pun not intended." If a pun is not intended, it means you were either too stupid to think it up, or you didn't realize it was a pun until you said it. Of course the pun was intended—if it wasn't why write at all. Puns are a type of figure of speech. In a very simplistic equation, the more the figures of speech, the greater the complexity. This is an absolute reality anyone who has read Shakespeare knows implicitly. Shakespeare is filled, deluged, indulged, covered with figures of speech. He has more figures of speech than a plum pudding has plums. His writing is filled with allegory, puns, sayings, idioms, double entendre, quotes, etc. There are more than 100 types of figures of speech—just do a google search for figures of speech and see what you get. You don't need to know what all the types of figures of speech are, but you do need to know when you are using one and how to use them. They are not taught at all in your usual institution of learning or not learning.
Figures of speech are to writing what grammar is to language.
The fifth level of complexity is the integration of literature and culture into the tension and release of the scenes.
More tomorrow.
For more information, you can visit my author site http://www.ldalford.com/, and my individual novel websites:
For more information, you can visit my author site http://www.ldalford.com/, and my individual novel websites:
http://www.ancientlight.com/fiction, theme, plot, story, storyline, character development, scene, setting, conversation, novel, book, writing, information, study, marketing, tension, release, creative, idea, logic


text:
Splitting Nails
Lip Feathering
Top 10 Anti-Aging Foods
Fish Oil Health Benefits
Do You Have Cognitive Disability?
What Is Acai Berry ?
Grown in clusters on the Acai Palm Tree, the Acai berry is really a little, dark-colored purple berry, the size of a little grape, and it is native to tropical South and Central america....


text:
MLS Fantasy Manager 2016 week 24
MLS Fantasy Manager Picks Week 24
Didier Drogba, Montreal Impact, $11.8
Didier Drogba has an amazing strike rate considering how little he has actually played this season. Drogba has missed more than 1/3 of the Impact's games this season with injuries or just not wanting to play on turf fields. Drogba still has the ability to play the full-90 and is one of the best goal scorers in the league so I think he'll have a great game against the Chicago Fire. The Fire still have yet to win on the road and they're goals against average is not the worst in the league but it's bad enough that Drogba should find the back of the net multiple times. He's a great choice for captain this weekend going up against such a week team.
Clint Dempsey, Seattle Sounders, $10.8
Clint Dempsey is another league star who is having a bad year compared to years past. Some of this has to do with the Sounders losing Obafemi Martins in the offseason but most of it has to do with his time spent away from the club from injuries and international duty. Also, the Sounders have just been horrible this year. The Sounders are fighting desperately to stay in the playoff hunt and they'd love nothing more than to come away from a conference match against their rivals with a win. The Cascadia Cup matches against Portland always light a fire for Dempsey and the rest of the club especially when they play at home so I expect him to have a 10-plus point match even if he doesn't score.
Chris Wondolowski, San José Earthquakes, $10.7
Chris Wondolowski is slumping with only two goals since week eight but a home match against the horrid Houston Dynamo should boost his numbers and confidence this weekend. Wondolowski had a couple good matches in the past month so he's slowly coming out of it and I think that means this match against the conference's worst team will end with at least one goal, maybe an assist, and some passing bonuses. The Earthquakes play great at home, even with their overall record lacking, so they should have no problem against a team that can't do anything away from their stadium.
Nicolas Lodeiro, Seattle Sounders, $11.8
Nicolas Lodeiro is the talented, big name signing that the Sounders have been after since Obafemi Martins left during the winter transfer window. Lodeiro has one goal and three assists in his first two games, both victories, with his new squad. Lodeiro is the shot in the arm the Sounders need to get back into the playoff hunt and this is the perfect weekend for Lodeiro to make a name for himself with the Seattle faithful. He should be able to come away with more assists with help from Dempsey and Morris with the distinct possibility to snag a goal. He's another good candidate to make team captain this weekend.
Ignacio Piatti, Montreal Impact, $11.4
Ignacio Piatti continues to have an amazing season for Montreal. He has consistently posted great numbers all season and I don't see that changing this weekend against the lowly Chicago Fire. Great teams have a hard time keeping Piatti under control so I don't see anyway that the Fire can keep him from running all over them. He should pick up an assist with Drogba playing up top but I think he could easily get a goal himself against the far inferior midfield he will be lining up against. This game has the makings of a shellacking for the Fire and Piatti will be the one leading the beat-down.
Frank Lampard, New York City F.C., $10.7
I'm going to be honest, I didn't think that Frank Lampard had such a great season in him. He spent the first 11 weeks on the disabled list and didn't start getting significant playing time until week 14. Lampard has managed to put together a season better than some midfielders who have had significant playing time since the season started. He's finally playing with the quality that his price tag warranted and he has a chance to have a great game against the Los Angeles Galaxy this weekend. The Galaxy are a strong opponent but they don't play as well away from home and definitely play bad on a small field like Yankee Stadium. Lampard's amazing form should continue this weekend with plenty of passing bonuses, probably an assist, and possibly a goal.
Laurent Ciman, Montreal Impact, $8.8
Laurent Ciman is on my short list for defender of the year. He's one of my favorite defenders to watch and could be the best this league has seen in a long time. His numbers don't show it only because of the attacking style that the Impact play. Ciman should have no problems with the lack of Chicago attack this weekend and a clean sheet is likely. The Fire could pull a goal back but I don't think they'll score more than one. Ciman should also pick up bonuses for defending and his passing for a great game.
Marc Burch, Colorado Rapids, $5.6
(Photo by AAron Ontiveroz/The Denver Post)
Marc Burch and the Colorado Rapids defense is the best in the league with only 20 goals scored against them this season. A good defense can contribute to the attack with passing out of the back and by being targets on set pieces. A great defense doesn't worry about any of that and just keeps teams from scoring. The Colorado defense is just great now. Marc Burch is my pick from their bunch this week because he comes in at a decent price for his defensive capabilities. He's gained most of his points this year from clean sheets but that's not a bad thing when your team has had so many. Burch should pick up big points this weekend from an Orlando City side that just can't seem to take it to the next level when they need to.
Je-Vaughn Watson, New England Revolution, $7.2
Je-Vaughn Watson is one of the best attacking defenders in the league and can play on both sides of the ball with ease. He's a great passer, amazing at breaking up plays, and can keep pace with any winger in the league. Watson is great for fantasy managers if not for actual teams because of his attacking style. I think he'll have a great game against the Columbus Crew this weekend because they have yet to win a road game this season and I doubt they'll be able to start doing so in New England. I think he'll get the clean sheet bonus but Watson should also be able to pick up bonuses from passing, attacking, and maybe an assist.
David Bingham, San José Earthquakes, $6.2
This was a tough week to pick because two of the worst teams are playing on the road against strong opponents but I'm going with David Bingham. I think he's a better goalkeeper than Evan Bush and if it comes down to a one-on-one with an attacker, Bingham is the better shot stopper. His defense also has a slightly better home record than the Montreal Impact have. I wouldn't be surprised if both the Earthquakes and Impact have clean sheets by the end of the weekend but Bingham will be the goalkeeper that makes more stops and more defensive plays.
Cesar Gutierrez
Latest posts by Cesar Gutierrez (see all)
- MLS Fantasy Manager 2017 week 16 - June 17, 2017
- MLS Fantasy Manager 2017 week 14 - June 1, 2017
- MLS Fantasy Manager 2017 week 13 - May 25, 2017


text:
Only gathering data and not processing it intelligently is a futile exercise. Below are two major steps after the information is gathered.
• First that the gathered information is organized and analyzed in a systematic manner with various methods or theories.
• Second ,after the data is systematically arranged and analyzed, it needs enhancement.
Enhancement of data is a very crucial as without doing so, the data becomes irrelevant and obsolete after a point of time. Therefore, only collecting data is not enough. We, here, at iSN are very proactive and efficient in data maintenance.
The first part is organizing and analysis of data gathered. Once the data is gathered it is organized and then arranged in the order of relevance. There are applications used,to analyze the data,as per the customer need. Once the data is analyzed then our experts further do a review of the analysis and give their special observation on the data. The observation depends on the customer need and requirement.
The second part of enhancement of data is the crucial part. The data once analyzed cannot be kept untouched after that. Continuous enhancement of data is done and recorded in our systems. To enhance the data an enhancement tool is used which is automated. So, less time is consumed on the same. The customers also at times make a demand of the enhancement for a particular duration. Example the corporate actions happening on a particular stock for a year. These kind of data needs enhancements as per the market move.
Financial documents come in various formats. Again, different countries follow different standards. It is important that these documents provide the accurate information to analysts referring them.
Our Financial Document Enhancement services include Document Conversion, Bookmarking, Indexing, Table Extraction and XML tagging. The primary objective of the Indexing process is to Index financial documents of leading companies from US, Europe and Emerging markets which are listed on top notch Stock Exchanges. The filings of these companies are in the form of Annual reports, Interim, Bonds, RNS, SEC debt/equity prospectuses and Merger Acquisition documents which can be accessed from the online application.
The Document conversion process transforms a document file into the desired File format, adds level styles to the document and creates a Table of Content (TOC). The Bookmarking process adds bookmarks and tagging codes to the bookmarks and creates links to the notes which help to increase the accessibility of the PDF document.
The Financial Document Enhancement services helps improve productivity by quickly providing accurate and relevant information from financial documents to financial analysts and all other users of these documents.
Therefore, if you want your data to be organized, analyzed and enhanced then ISN is the right contact.Your data is safe with us.


text:
And you remain invincible #FridayFotoFiction
I've often wondered what it was about you that inspired men to wage bloody wars. Were you made of metal so precious that made human life worthless?
Over the centuries you watched several fierce battles waged to possess you . Battles fought with bows and arrows and fire power.
Men said that owning you would protect their the low lying lands from marauding tribesmen who came year after year with the melting snow.
But did you really protect those who fought for you?
Ultimately though, you had the last laugh. You remained still, firm, unchanging , invincible and unconquerable for all eternity.
I'm linking this with Tina Basu's #FridayFotoFiction


text:
The pay rise would affect two million public sector workers, and cost an estimated £2 billion, according to The Times. The workers affected by the pay rise is said to include police officers, soldiers, and teachers, and see them be given an above-inflation pay rise. According to the publication, The Treasury is set to unveil the news, which would be the biggest public sector pay rise in six years , on Monday – as one of Theresa May's final acts as Prime Minister. Police officers will reportedly receive a 2.5 per cent pay rise across the board, while soldiers would see a 2.9 per cent increase.
The newspaper reports that teachers and other school staff could expect to see a 2.75 per cent increase.
Dentists and consultants are said to face see a 2.5 per cent rise, and senior civil servants two per cent.
It is thought that the pay rises will have to be funded from existing budgets – except for some extra funding for schools.
Public sector pay was frozen for two years back in 2010 – except for those earning less than £21,000 per year.
Rises were later capped at one per cent, below the rate of inflation, in 2013.
In June 2019, the 12-month inflation rate was 1.9 per cent, the Office for National Statistics said.
According to The Times, the rises do not apply to other public sector staff such as more junior civil servants and nurses, whose pay is dealt with separately.
Elsewhere this week, the government has announced plans to remedy the policy across all main public pension schemes.
It comes after a court ruling found that changes made to judges' and firefighters' pensions in 2015 to be discriminatory.
In a written statement, Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Elizabeth Truss, said that as "transitional protection" was offered to members of all the main public service pension schemes, the remedy would apply to all of these retirement plans – including for those in the NHS, civil service, local government, and for teachers.
It will also apply to schemes for the police, armed forces, judiciary, and fire and rescue workers.
Today, Prime Minister Theresa May has launched a consultation calling for views on parental leave entitlements in order to ensure they better reflect modern society and allow for more equal sharing of childcare.
Prime Minister Theresa May said: "The experience of parenting has changed almost beyond recognition over the past 40 years, with fathers wanting to share caring responsibilities more equally from the outset.
"In introducing shared parental leave, we have taken significant steps to support parents to do this, but all too often it is still mothers, not fathers, who shoulder the burden of childcare. It is clear that we need to do more and that's why today we have launched a consultation calling for views on how we can improve the current system.
"We also want to look at further specific support for parents who are already dealing with the unimaginable stress of their babies needing special neonatal care. Parents have more than enough on their plates without worrying about their parental leave running out and having to return to work before their precious newborn comes home.
"That's not fair and it's not right. So we're also proposing a new Neonatal Leave and Pay entitlement to make this time a bit easier for parents whose babies need to spend a prolonged period in neonatal care."


text:
Job Coach
- Apply Now
- Judge Rotenberg Center
Canton, MA, 02021
Type of position
Posted onDec 10 2019
Judge Rotenberg Center is hiring for a Job Coach job in Canton,MA
Job Coach
Special Ed. School in Canton, MA (www.judgerc.org)
Looking for a Full-time individual to assist students obtaining employment. Responsibilities include traveling to local companies to inquire about openings, handling employment paperwork, hiring procedures etc. Individuals should be highly motivated and organized. Salary negotiable, Excellent Benefits. Send resume to Justin at; firstname.lastname@example.com or fax (781) 828-7547.EOE/AA
- Bachelor's Degree preferred and experience working with students/clients
Click the 'Apply Now' button to apply today!
JRC is an Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity Employer (EOE/AA). We consider applicants for all positions without regard to age, race, color, religious creed, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, age, criminal record, mental illness, handicap/disability, or any other legally protected status pursuant to Massachusetts Fair Employment Practices Act, and other relevant federal, state, and local laws.
- Contact Information :
- ,
- ,


text:
A female passenger has been filmed doing a headstand in her seat while a man next to her slept on a flight in the US.
Fellow traveller Raad Mobrem was travelling on the Los Angeles to Cabo San Lucas flight on August 26 when a nearby passenger launched herself into a sequence of yoga poses.
"It was pretty bizarre but it was also incredible at the same time," Mr Mobrem, the co-founder of WeDo.com told Inside Edition.
As he secretly filmed the woman, she moved through seated stretching exercises before standing on her head with her legs half elevated in the air.
"She was doing it for about 20 minutes and then the flight attendant asked her to stop and she did for a second, went to the bathroom for a long time and then came back and started doing it all over again," he said.
"In all fairness to her, she's really good at what she does and she was able to do it without waking the guy up next to her. So that's pretty funny."
Following the flight, Mr Mobrem posted the footage to Twitter.


text:
Nissan Primera
1990-1992 of release
Repair and car operation
Nissan Primera
+ Nissan Primera brand Cars
+ Current leaving and service
+ Engine
+ cooling and heating Systems
+ the Power supply system and production of the fulfilled gases
+ System of electric equipment of the engine
+ Manual transmission, differential and main transfer
+ Automatic transmission
+ Coupling and power shafts
+ Brake system
- Suspension bracket and steering
+ Forward suspension bracket
+ Back suspension bracket
+ the Steering without the hydraulic booster
+ the Steering with the hydraulic booster (servoupravleniye)
+ Body
+ Onboard electric equipment
+ Appendices
Suspension bracket and steering
General parameters
Forward suspension bracket
Back suspension bracket
Efforts of a tightening of carving connections
The moments of an inhaling of fixture are given in the text of Head and on some иллюстрациях*.
*vydelenny in the text a bold print the moments of an inhaling are subject to exact observance; the efforts not allocated with a bold print are given only roughly.
Forward suspension bracket
Back suspension bracket


text:
Catch date:7/3/2017 10:03:00 AM
Story date:7/3/2017 8:53:00 PM
Location:Chesapeake Bay MD
So while moving on to new fishing ground my boat suddenly lost compression and started bogging in and out almost leaving us dead in the water. Luckily captain Jimmy jumped into action and got us crawling back to the docks safely. Despite boat issues it was still a great day on the bay with my good buddy Jimmy.
The Cranksta
Stay Connected
Like Us on Facebook
Follow Us on Twitter
Follow @StackFishDotCom
Invite A Buddy
Invite your friends to follow your fishing on Stackfish!
Send Invite