jumpy
11-04-11, 09:30 PM
That if you commit fraud, you can go back to your seat in the house of lords?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15594452
My reading of the article says so, the most of an imposition for these two convicted fraudsters is that their peers will suspend them from the house for the same length of time as their prison sentence for fraud, either after their sentence in prison is served, or to run from the date their sentence in prison started?
The committee said it would be "inappropriate" for either of the two to be able to resume their duties in the House "before the whole sentence imposed by the court has run its course".I fail to see why this is even relevant - both of them are guilty of misusing a public office. Neither of them should be allowed to serve the public in any further capacity.
Lord Taylor of Warwick
The Committee recommend that Lord Taylor of Warwick be suspended from the House for 12 months from 31 May 2011, the date on which he was sentenced at Southwark Crown Court. If this recommendation is accepted by the House of Lords, Lord Taylor of Warwick will not be able attend the House until the end of May 2012. The independent Lords Commissioner for Standards has found that Lord Taylor of Warwick wrongly claimed £24,311.70. He has repaid this amount in full.
Lord Hanningfield
The Committee recommend that Lord Hanningfield be suspended from the House for 9 months from 1 July 2011, the date on which he was sentenced at Maidstone Crown Court. If this recommendation is accepted by the House of Lords, Lord Hanningfield will not be able attend the House until April 2012. The independent Lords Commissioner for Standards had found that Lord Hanningfield wrongly claimed £30,254.50. He has previously repaid £1,800 and confirmed, in oral evidence to the Committee, that he planned to repay the full amount he wrongly claimed and would not return to the House until he had done so.
Well, I guess it's all right if you look all sheepish, say that you're "vewy vewy sowwy, but I paid it all back and 'ave thought about wot I dun and, cor-blimey, but it is such a privilege to serve the public so."
And here am I, stressing about the register of electors demands for their forms to be filled out, It's a thousand pound fine not to have my information to be given to credit reference agencies, don'tcha know.
There are some days when I have to look the other way in embarrassment when I think about my country.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15594452
My reading of the article says so, the most of an imposition for these two convicted fraudsters is that their peers will suspend them from the house for the same length of time as their prison sentence for fraud, either after their sentence in prison is served, or to run from the date their sentence in prison started?
The committee said it would be "inappropriate" for either of the two to be able to resume their duties in the House "before the whole sentence imposed by the court has run its course".I fail to see why this is even relevant - both of them are guilty of misusing a public office. Neither of them should be allowed to serve the public in any further capacity.
Lord Taylor of Warwick
The Committee recommend that Lord Taylor of Warwick be suspended from the House for 12 months from 31 May 2011, the date on which he was sentenced at Southwark Crown Court. If this recommendation is accepted by the House of Lords, Lord Taylor of Warwick will not be able attend the House until the end of May 2012. The independent Lords Commissioner for Standards has found that Lord Taylor of Warwick wrongly claimed £24,311.70. He has repaid this amount in full.
Lord Hanningfield
The Committee recommend that Lord Hanningfield be suspended from the House for 9 months from 1 July 2011, the date on which he was sentenced at Maidstone Crown Court. If this recommendation is accepted by the House of Lords, Lord Hanningfield will not be able attend the House until April 2012. The independent Lords Commissioner for Standards had found that Lord Hanningfield wrongly claimed £30,254.50. He has previously repaid £1,800 and confirmed, in oral evidence to the Committee, that he planned to repay the full amount he wrongly claimed and would not return to the House until he had done so.
Well, I guess it's all right if you look all sheepish, say that you're "vewy vewy sowwy, but I paid it all back and 'ave thought about wot I dun and, cor-blimey, but it is such a privilege to serve the public so."
And here am I, stressing about the register of electors demands for their forms to be filled out, It's a thousand pound fine not to have my information to be given to credit reference agencies, don'tcha know.
There are some days when I have to look the other way in embarrassment when I think about my country.