It’s been revealed that Chief Secretary to the Treasury David Laws used taxpayers’ money to pay more than £40,000 in rent to his long-term partner.
New politics
New politics
The most predictable thing about this was that he would justify his actions by quoting the rules, and explaining in forensic detail the subtle ways in which he did not break them.
Above the Laws
This is almost a conditioned reflex amongst the nomenklatura. It betrays a total lack of interest in what is right and a belief that there is always a way out via the fine print.
But, as I said, it’s predictable. After all, you can’t blame a dog for barking.
Against the Laws
What is astonishing, however, is the following paragraph in the Daily Telegraph’s story:
The Daily Telegraph was not intending to disclose Mr Laws’s sexuality, but in a statement issued in response to questions from this newspaper, the minister chose to disclose this fact.
The more Laws, the less justice
But the whole story hinges on the fact that Laws was paying rent to a landlord who was also his long-standing lover.
But the whole story hinges on the fact that Laws was paying rent to a landlord who was also his long-standing lover.
Laws wasn’t exposed in the original expenses scandal because he didn’t tell the truth about this.
So how do you do the story without mentioning it?
And why should he get a pass?
Equal before the Laws
Would the Telegraph have been so ludicrously fastidious had Laws been paying rent to his female lover?
(That’s a rhetorical question, by the way. There are no prizes. Read the terms and conditions carefully, though, and…well, you never know…)