Blair & MP’s Expenses – a diversionary tactic?

(Am putting this in in draft form, as nobody else seems to have noticed this. JB)

I trust my good friend Vincent Cable, for verily he is an honest man. But the information about his expenses provides little information either way.

· 50% or more of it is blacked out

Also, there is information over-kill: 500 pages for Vince alone; over a million pages in total. I am reminded of Saddam Hussein’s ruse when he was obliged to provide full details of his WMD programme. The TV newsreels showed a room full of ring-binders and CDs. Saddam thought he was being extremely clever and so no doubt do our MPs, who have been largely put up to this by the retiring Speaker Michael Martin whose last weekend in pist this is. (Like George W Bush and many naughty boys, he leaves the next incumbent to clear up the mess.)

I am far more interested in Tony Blair Esquire, who is now so filthy rich that the MP’s pig-trough is probably too small for him to show an interest in. What can we learn about him from these revelations?

Very little, as it turns out.

The first entry runs to three pages. However, so much is blacked out that the only information of any value is as follows:

It is a handwritten invoice (no heading, no signature, no date), containing the following information:

“Goods supplied by D+J Jordan

[[Details deleted]]

From 8.8.06 to 29.6.07

Goods

£308.50”

Source: p.3 of http://mpsallowances.parliament.uk/mpslordsandoffices/hocallowances/allowances-by-mp/tony-blair/Tony_Blair_0708_IEP.pdf

There are other claims in the same handwriting

What use is this to anyone? We have no information about what ‘Goods’ were supplied, nor who D+J Jordan were (although a quick Google search reveals some off-licence premises at Trimdon in Blair’s district of Sedgefield – surely we are not paying for Tony’s booze?)

Source: http://greataycliffe.sedgefield.gov.uk/ccm/content/neighbourhood-services/environmental-services/environmental/licensing-section/premises-licences---off-licences.en;jsessionid=35C03B85B61F57FCAFC59CA62EA65615

The scanned pages fall into three main categories:

• "Additional Costs Allowance" - for costs incurred when staying overnight away from their main home
• "Incidental Expenses Provision" – costs for running the MP's office
• "Communications Allowance" - for MP communications with constituents.

According to the parliament sites, any editing is “to remove information which could cause serious security issues and breach the privacy of the MP, their staff and other third parties”.

There is also Tony’s claims from his “Winding up allowance”. These are payments “wholly, exclusively and necessarily incurred in winding up the parliamentary and constituency affairs or (sic!) the former Member of Parliament”

Source: p.3 of http://mpsallowances.parliament.uk/mpslordsandoffices/hocallowances/allowances-by-mp/tony-blair/Tony_Blair_0708_ACA.pdf

This document goes on for 53 pages, and quite honestly I don’t have time, energy or perseverance to read all of them. I know that Blair is a rogue. I know that fiddling expenses is very low on MP’s scales of roguishness. And quite honestly I think that the whole thing is a smokescreen to generate income for the Telegraph garner support for the Tories, and divert attention from managing the country which is what these guys and gals should be doing to earn their crust.

p.52 of the same document lists water and sewerage charges of “Mr C.L.Blair” (who he?) to cover the period up to 1^st April 2008. There’s also a Council Tax bill for the same period. (Tony ceased being MP for Sedgefield in June 2007)

On 25^th June 2007, Tony submitted a claim for £7659. This included a gas bill for £507 and one for £6990 for roof repairs and guttering. I wonder where and when this was done, as Tony had already resigned as MP before making this claim.

(Incidentally, am I the only one to have noticed that a large number of female Labour MPs seem to have come unstuck recently. Why is this - surely they can’t be more corrupt or inept than their male counterparts? I wonder what the true reason is. I haven’t noticed similar haemorrhaging where female Tories or Lib Dems are concerned.)

I assume this is legit, or the Fees Office would have spotted it. But what are their credentials for doing the job?

PS: I now find that according to The Times

“… some of Blair’s files covering claims for Myrobella, his constituency home, were destroyed by Commons officials” after they rejected an FOI request to see his claims.

(It is a criminal offence to destroy documents to prevent their disclosure under freedom of information (FOI) laws, but Blair’s people officials seem to have been unaware of this. Is this not odd, given that Blair headed the government that passed this legislation?)

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3953909.ece

It goes without saying that Blair, like all lawyers and bankers, is an honourable man.

Netanyahu's speech

Most leaders cannot be taken at face value, and Netanyahu least of all. But could a Palestinian group steal his thunder by saying something along the following lines ... ?

"Prime Minister Netanyahu's speech raised many detailed points with which we cannot agree. However in the spirit of peace and compromise proposed by Netanyahu, we wish to accept the following points.

• We accept the need for a solution in which Jews as well as others can live in security and without fear.
• We accept that massive wrongs have been done to the Jewish people, many of whom have strong and genuine religious beliefs relating to their rights over Palestine.
• We accept that Jewish refugees are entitled to compassionate support.
• We accept that historical realities have resulted in a Jewish state in the Middle East.
• We accept that compromise will be necessary on many areas, including borders, Jerusalem and refugees.

However we believe that compromise will be necessary on both sides equally and in this spirit we are prepared to enter negotiations with just one condition - that no further building should be done by either side which could threaten the security of the other side."

If this could be said, then Netanyahu could be caught on the wrong foot. "If a stranger greet you, then grasp him firmly by the hand. If he is sincere you will have greeted him. If he is insincere, then at least you will have him partly immobilised".