February 24th, 2009

Spelman Should Pay Back the Nanny Cash

Whatever the Standards and Privileges Committee rule today (Guido has the whitewash removing solvents ready) Spelman should have to pay back the cash she fiddled from her parliamentary expenses to pay the nanny.

If, as Spelman has been spinning, the Lyon inquiry reports that there is no evidence of deliberate wrongdoing or a breach of Commons rules, this will infuriate many parents like Mr & Mrs Fawkes, who have to pay for childcare out of post-tax income. To pay a nanny costs middle-class parents some £40,000 a year in pre-tax income. We are expected to believe that Spelman’s nanny was actually her constituency secretary* thus paid for by the taxpayer and that in return for her childcare duties her only compensation was room and board. Who really believes that the money was not payment for her childcare duties? Unbelievable, it simply does not wash.

If anyone knows of a nanny willing to work for only room and board can you please let Mrs Fawkes know, because we have never heard of such a deal. This was a complete and utter p*ss-take out of the taxpayer. Here is the acid test – if it really was completely above board and as she claims – why did she stop the arrangement? This benefits fiddle was too much, Spelman should pay back the cash even if the Committee rules it was “not deliberate”.




Andrew Lansley Has Been Shot | Dan Hodges
Another Gay Gaffe From Ken | Standard
Pensioners Paying Price for Funny Money | Telegraph
Ken Penis Gaffe | Metro
Hague Photo Mystery | Guardian
The Iranian Model is Hitler | Lawrence J. Haas
No.10′s Andrew Cooper Should Look at this Poll | Douglas Carswell
Livingstone Has Form on Homophobia | ConservativeHome
Investors HBack Over RBS Meddling | CityAM
Riddled With It | Pink News
I Went Mad in the Seventies | Ken
Guy Newsroom Splits | Indy
Polly’s Voodoo Polling | UK Polling Report
Labour SpAd Backs the Bill | Mark Wallace
Guido Goes for the Lobby | Press Gazette

Previously Seen


Peter Botting


Max Clifford says…

“Most people want to read nasty things about people, not nice things.”



DisgustedOfMitcham2 says:

Maybe if they really wanted to “decontaminate the Labour brand” with business people, they shouldn’t have totally buggered up the economy?

Just a thought.


Tip off Guido
Web Guido's Archives








RSS


AddThis Feed Button
Archive


Labels
Guido Reads