The rising star of the coalition government, Liberal Democrat David Laws, is in trouble over expenses, as disclosed by The Telegraph (and now reported throughout the national media). They were the ones who revealed the original batch of dubious expenses claims by MPs and Peers last year.
The odd thing about this new disclosure is that, as the newspaper had all the information provided last year, and the Laws business covers a period of several years so would have been in that info, why now?
This seems to have been something they have kept in their back pocket, so to speak. I cannot help but wonder how many more they are waiting to spring at the most damaging moment(s).
It's interesting to recall that there were very few Lib Dems "outed" last year, and it seemed at the time improbable – though of course not impossible – that there weren't more. The Telegraph has been acting very strangely for a while now, including taking on a batch of Left-wing journos (whose writings often jar with the traditional quality of the paper), so it is hard to read what their true agenda is nowadays.
Anyway, as far as David Laws is concerned, he has referred himself to the parliamentary authorities, which is the appropriate first step. The nation now awaits the outcome of that move, before we can learn whether or not he will have to leave his position as Chief Secretary to the Treasury (there is also a decent argument that he should be suspended from that position now, pending that outcome).
It would be a bit of a shame if that had to happen, but it looks distinctly possible. The situation isn't helped why the way Laws apparently tried to portray himself as "whiter than white" during the recent election campaign.
The silver lining to this tale is that perhaps it would then be a good opportunity to appoint John Redwood as Laws' successor. That would be a very shrewd move, especially (but not only) with the currently seemingly sidelined Right wing of the party. Redwood's sense, knowledge, experience and calm demeanour would be absolutely ideal for the position.
UPDATE at 1800 hrs: Laws has apparently just resigned from his position as Chief Secretary to the Treasury.
Here is Mr Laws' resignation letter, and video now added (above):
"Dear Prime Minister,The last 24 hours have been very difficult and distressing for me, and I have been thinking carefully about what action I should take in the interests of the Government, my constituents and - most important of all - those whom I love. I am grateful for the strong support which I have received from my friends, family, and from you, the Deputy Prime Minister and the Chancellor. This support has been incredibly important, but nonetheless, I have decided that it is right to tender my resignation as Chief Secretary to the Treasury. I have done so for three reasons.
Firstly, I do not see how I can carry on my crucial work on the Budget and Spending Review while I have to deal with the private and public implications of recent revelations.
At this important time the Chancellor needs, in my own view, a Chief Secretary who is not distracted by personal troubles. I hardly need say how much I regret having to leave such vital work, which I feel all my life has prepared me for.
Secondly, while my recent problems were caused by my desire to keep my sexuality secret, the public is entitled to expect politicians to act with a sense of responsibility. I cannot now escape the conclusion that what I have done was in some way wrong, even though I did not gain any financial benefit from keeping my relationship secret in this way.
Finally, and most importantly, I have an overriding responsibility to those I love most, and who I feel I have exposed to scrutiny in this way. I have pursued a political career because of my sense of public duty, but I have too often put this before the interests of those I love most. It is time to redress the balance. I want to apologise to my constituents for falling below the standards that they are entitled to expect from me. The job of being a constituency MP is no less important to me than my Cabinet responsibilities. I shall ensure that I co-operate fully with the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner in the review that I have requested. I intend to consider carefully over the period ahead how I can best serve the interests of my Yeovil constituency, which I care so passionately about.
It has been a great honour to serve however briefly in your Government and I will remain its strong supporter.
Yours sincerely,
David Laws"
The timing of the David Laws revelations seem to be a deliberate attempt to undermine the Coalition, rather than a genuine intention to clean up politics. This is all that David Cameron and Nick Clegg need to know, and this alone should dictate their joint response.
ReplyDeletehttp://cyberboris.wordpress.com/2010/05/29/we-need-david-laws/
ReplyDeleteJohn, I don't think he should resign. If society wasn't so hard on gay people, this would never have happened. Maybe all the people talking about the moral high ground would think about that, and the effect it has on peoples' families.
Lots of people who made mistakes over their expenses are still in their jobs, and for me, the reason that David Laws did this is understandable and forgiveable. As you point out, why did this come out now? Jealousy perhaps, because he has become such a star?
If David Laws stands down, it will be a huge shame, we desperately need him.
Thanks for both comments, folks, and the CyberBoris link.
ReplyDeleteIt is a truism that once one enters public life, especially in a high-profile position (or aiming toward one) one's life can become fully public and this has to be accepted. It goes with the territory.
I don't happen to agree with this, on principle; but my view doesn't change anything.
In this case, it was the expenses side of it that brought this to public attention.
Laws is a millionaire, and if he'd really been that keen to keep his private life out of the limelight, I'd have thought he simply wouldn't have done anything (including making expenses claims connected in any way to his domestic arrangements) that would risk that happening.
In a similar situation, I'd simply have not claimed in the first place; and that could be the perfectly valid argument that seals Laws' fate.
It is very unfortunate, but if that happens it will have been his own fault could so easily have been avoided.
I think it's a terribly sad thing to have happened, and very strange timing by the Telegraph especially as Campbell and the BBC had a go at him only a day ago. As you say, the timing is suspect.
ReplyDeleteIt must have been a horrible few hours for him, and also an awkward few years too - when he was trying to keep a deep personal secret. We're all different, and people saying, "Oh,it doesn't matter these days" is unreasonable, because they're not him and he's not them. He's unique and is also a talented politician who was, many think, right for the post he'd been given.
But, politics and secrets don't go well together and he would have been better to have the courage to ask the right questions a couple of years ago. He knew how unpopular some of the actions of some individuals in the last government, and should have taken more care to be "right", or to sort out his expenses when others were doing the same.
Let's hope things will settle. Danny Alexander isn't necessarily the right person for the job - I think he's too young and too inexperienced and shifting him from Scotland might aggravate the Scots because they'll say the coalition thinks the Scotland post is dispensable.
Thanks, Mrs Rigby, for your own thoughts, just as thoughtful and considered as the others here.
ReplyDeleteIt is one of those annoying situations that we out here in the country wouldn't have been expecting, and are now stuck with the fallout. The whole country will suffer as a result of losing Laws from the Treasury Team.
The Telegraph has its excuses ready, but it is still very strange that few Lib Dems were featured in last year's revelations, which now seems to have been fairly obviously (and deliberately) partisan.
BY linking what is coming out now with the entire record of what was disclosed then (and during the following several months) it becomes clear that there was a distinct agenda behind what the Telegraph's current owners got the paper to do.
This is consistent with other aspects of the Barclay Brothers' actions and influences that have come to occasional public notice...