Laws in the Commons: "My motivation was solely to protect my privacy."

Comments

[Graeme]

Crap - his motivation was to steal my tax money. Should be in jail not the commons.

[Edward Huxley]

Using his sexuality as an excuse just makes it worse. He should have apologised and left it at that.

[MartinW]

Laws did wrong, and should have apologised wihout excuse. In any case, there are no extenuating circumstances. Neither should he be offered a ministerial post.

[Commentator]

If protecting his privacy was the overriding priority, then he should not have claimed. Full stop. That excuse won't wash.

[Andrew Smith]

There are all sorts of motivations for dishonest activity. Some are just greed, others dare devil risks and others are rationalised by the offender into something other than pecuniary gain.

It doesn't matter what reasoning David Laws now uses to justify his actions.

I couldn't care less if he were to claim it was all a mistake and he was careless, as some other offenders have said.

The facts are that he repeatedly claimed money (not a passive act) and kept it. He knew it was wrong but he continued doing it. He didn't volunteer to repay but was caught.

Where's the old bill?

[john parkes]

One unsavoury aspect of all of this lies in memories of the self-righteous tone taken by his Party, who protested they were whiter-than-white during the election campaign and before, while denigrating the `two old Parties who were rotten to the core`.
Well it pays to be careful if there is any danger at all of being caught out in industrial-scale hypocrisy.

[Y Rhyfelwr Dewr]

If I'd embezzled £40,000 of my employer's money by falsely claiming expenses that I wasn't entitled to, I'd be in jail in no time, regardless of how good my sob story is. Sadly, our political elite is subject to a different class of laws than the hoi poloi.

[Captain Peacock]

Just another thief in the House of Crooks.

[Vincit Veritas]

There appears to be one law for Laws and another law for for us. Any non MP wouldhaver got three years and the magistrate wohuldhavr aqdded another and a rider to serve fullterm for hioe excuse. Of course the despicable Paddy Pants Down sees nothing. Remember John Profumo's very honourable performance by comparison?

I believe Laws is suspended for seven days, unfortunately not by the neck!

[david]

In Britain today the 'honourable gentleman' gets 7 days suspension from the H of C, while a dedicated station master gets the sack from his job for taking action to prevent a train accident.

[Ultimo Tiger]

"I believe Laws is suspended for seven days, unfortunately not by the neck!"

So you want to kill him for claiming money?

Wow, you're not a complete f****** at all Vince. Oh wait, yes you are.

[dorsetdumpling]

For whatever reason (excuse) given, David Laws actions were wrong, wrong, wrong. Seven days suspension will not be seen by the public to be sufficient punishment. I have heard it reported that he was not in breach of criminal law, just Parliamentary law. Errm.....for those people who are prosecuted for defrauding the tax payer by abusing the benefit system....will this wash? I think not. Mr Laws is indeed a talented politician; he has very valuable experience in the city/business sector; I liked his diffident, understated manner. However, sadly I believe it would be a mistake to bring him back into government - the LibDem image will suffer a further setback with claims of hypocrisy ringing ever louder. Now, how will Nick/Dave seek to justify his comeback?

[eugene]

Nasty crowd let out on ConHome (again) today.

The man has no intention to 'steal'. End of...

[robert]

It is very dangerous for politicians to have one rule for them and another rule for everybody else.
The MPs may think 7 days suspension from the House of Commons is severe but I am sure the general public do not.
In business or industry you would at least lose your job but on the contrary there are some politicians who would like Laws to the government when the dust has settled.
Surely David Cameron is not looking for criminals to make up the numbers in cabinet.

[Andrew Smith]

Just seen Cameron defending Laws because "he was very talented". So was Robert Maxwell.

[Andrew Smith]

What on earth is Eugene on about? He claimed money he was not entitled to claim, he signed the claim forms, he knew the rules, he was used to dealing with sophisticated transactions and understood what he was doing over 7 years.

He kept the money.

That is theft.

Taking money you know you are not entitled to with the intention of keeping it is theft.
Taking money you know you are not entitled to with the intention of keeping it is theft.
Taking money you know you are not entitled to with the intention of keeping it is theft.
Taking money you know you are not entitled to with the intention of keeping it is theft.

Laws should at least be required to write that out 200 times. It would be a more significant punishment than being deprived of the company of your LibDem party members for a week and spending more time with his partner.

[Malcolm Wood]

So - David Laws has been suspended from Parliament for a week, for fiddling more than £56,000 of his expenses!!

Wow! That will certainly teach those corrupt MPs a lesson won’t it? That draconian punishment will have them all shaking in their shoes......I DON’T THINK.

What a farce and what a footling little punishment. Grasping MPs are still trying desperately to hang on to their expenses fiddles and pathetic taps on the wrist like this will do nothing to discourage them.

[David Hollins]

... until I got found out.

So that's okay, next time Bandwagon Dave starts demanding standards in society and punishments of thieves and benefit claimants, we should all think "unless you are a Friend of dave, in which case we will make excuses and put you in a very responsible job".

The guy stole money from the public - he should go to jail.

[Edward Huxley]

Headline in the Telegraph today "Cameron and Clegg call for Laws to stay in public life". Well, they would, wouldn`t they? They are always right of course and we plebs should be ignored.

If Guido Fawkes is correct in his blog, they could have cause to combine to the defence of another colleague, Chris Huhne, who may get some unwelcome publicity very soon.

[Moncler Jacke]

So fun article is! I know more from it.