The Professors passion for "The Science of Deceit" started here...

Employed by the Ministry (in a covert capacity) to help introduce the law ending dishonest politics, you can see his hand all over the posts of past.

Current political circumstances have forced him to reveal himself and as we speak, MPs are signing up to re-introduce The Elected Representatives (Prohibition of Deception) Bill for debate with over 80,000 voters supporting them.

Posts before Jan '08 are purely for the record (with hindsight they make fascinating reading). Posts after May 13th mark the Professor's return.


Meet the Professor

Showing posts with label MPs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label MPs. Show all posts

Thursday, November 12, 2009

MPs table motion - no retrospective expense claim repayments

For some reason, it seems some MPs are a little concerned about what the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA) will demand of them in the way of re-paying expenses and tabled a motion to the house, led by Graham Allen MP.


“This House notes the appointment of Sir Ian Kennedy as Chair of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA) and hopes he carries out his duties in line with natural justice, including adherence to the concepts of reasonableness and proportionality, and without retrospectivity.”

The punchline - "without retrospectivity" is of particular interest. The honourable Mr Allen came joint 1st in 06/07 and 02/03 league table for Aditional Costs allowance claims. Better still, in 07/08, despite spending £800 more than his 1st place for 06/07, 200 MPs managed to spend more than him, resulting in a disappointing 201st place. Despite this, he still managed a very respectable joint 13th place last year for overall costs.

Monday, November 09, 2009

Westminster Cocks confirmed

Yesterday, we discovered for ourselves what the architect of Parliament really thought of it's members.



If ever you're feeling down over the state of politics today... take comfort with a stroll across Westminster Bridge... On the right kind of glorious sun-filled morning you can bathe in the warm, delicious glow of knowledge that for years, our MPs have been branded by sunlight as cocks 'n balls. Better still, there's nothing they can do about it.



As the sun moves round, the cocks elongate, fatten and contract in a graceful arc next to the Palace of Westminster. Day in, day out.

It is, without doubt, the best middle finger ever given to the establishment. Don't think for a moment it wasn't deliberate. Though the bridge is credited as being designed by Thomas Page it's an often overlooked fact that it's architectural ironmongery (including the genius shadow-casting ballistrade) was designed by Charles Barry - the architect of the Palace of Westminster. The House of Lords was finished in 1847, Commons chamber in 1852. Barry died in 1860, but not before he'd finished his part of the designs for Westminster Bridge - which opened in 1862.

Tuesday, May 22, 2007

Restriction of Information Act, Chapter 17

Imagine refusing to show your employer copies of your business correspondence. Try it tomorrow and see if you’ve still got a job at 6pm.

One day after Gordon Brown told us his style of government would be more open and honest than the incumbent Blair, the House of Commons voted to exempt themselves from Freedom of Information requests where correspondence contains the personal data of constituents.

Essentially, it asserts there’s an obligation of confidence and a constituent may not have consented to the disclosure of personal details.

Aside from the fact that this is already covered by the Data Protection Act, there are no examples of this actually happening or of any complaints. It’s as if there aren’t enough get-out clauses for Government.

At the moment, there are 36 exemptions to disclosure under the FOI, and a further 300 statutes (not including the Official Secrets Act) that prohibit disclosure.

Of the 60+ thousand requests made since Jan 1st 2005 under the FOI, only 26,000 have been granted. Seven government departments have refused to give answers to more than half the requests they received.

There’s a legitimate argument for preventing personal details being released under FOI requests, but if they were halfway sincere in dealing with the issue, instead of giving Parliament the right to refuse a request - why not simply make it unlawful to disclose the relevant particulars without consent ? Better still, enforce the existing law.

Abso-fucking-lutely extra-ordinary. Here's a list of the gormless twats who actually voted for it. You'l notice a very poor attendance. That's 'cos 1) it's a Friday (constituency day) and 2) Gordon and his "new style of government" didn't deem it worthy of the whip.

And if you’re not convinced of their idiocy, check out the transcript of the debate in the house. We’ve said it before – it’d be hilarious if they weren’t running the fucking country.

Monday, March 05, 2007

MPs and the Ministry of Truth



Doing the rounds in search of an MP to support and propose the Misrepresentation of the People Act has got us on first name terms with the staff on reception at 1 Parliament St/Portcullis House ("Hi" to Gary & co) but so far it's hard to tell if it's got us much else.

Suprisingly few, "Get out of my office you time-wasters !", though there have been a couple - we'll be bringing you the highlights (once we've run it by the lawyers).

To date, most seem sane, rational, charming and dedicated individuals who've never really contemplated (conveniently or otherwise) the fact that there's no law enabling us to hold our elected representatives to account for misrepresenting facts/making misleading statements etc. in the same way we can with most companies, businesses and individuals.

However, "sounds interesting" is a far cry from a commitment - and a whole lot faster off the tongue when you're staring into a camera.

Time to remind ourselves of what former MP Martin Bell had to say...