Lording It Up
According to newspaper reports three peers of the realm face suspension from the House of Lords - over their expenses claims.
The 'noble' lords in question are Lord Paul and Baroness Uddin (both Labour peers) and Lord Bhatia Photo (a cross-bencher) - who has previously donated money to the Labour party.
Baroness Uddin is apparently set to be suspended for between a year and 18 months - and has agreed to pay back £125,000 in 'wrongly claimed' expenses - on an empty house, would you believe.
Lord Bhatia faces a ban of between six and 12 months - and is to repay voluntarily £27,000.
Lord Paul - a big friend of former PM Gordon Brown apparently - has been recommended for a suspension of between four and six months - and has agreed to pay back £40,000.
All three were investigated by the sub-committee on Lords' interests - Lord Paul and Lady Uddin were referred to the committee - after criminal investigations into their cases were dropped.
The investigation followed complaints over alleged abuses of the expenses system in the House of Lords.
The old system included an "overnight" allowance of £174 to cover the cost of staying in London - if a member's "main home" was outside the M25 - no receipts were required.
The bottom line is that the 'noble' lords were claiming these expenses without actually incurring any costs - and simply pocketed the money involved.
Does the punishment fit the crime?
Not in my book - having served their suspension these people will become legislators again - able to influence and pass laws that affect the rest of the us.
Instead of being allowed to return to the fawning and cosseted world of the House of Lords - they should be stripped of their peerages - and unceremoniously run out of town, metaphorically speaking at least.
The laugh is that the new expenses regime in the House of Lords will allow all peers to claim a lump payment of £300 a day - just for for 'clocking in' at Parliament.
The system is wide open to abuse because it offers no safeguards against peers simply 'signing in' - then and sloping off for the rest of the day - at public expense, of course.
The 'noble' lords in question are Lord Paul and Baroness Uddin (both Labour peers) and Lord Bhatia Photo (a cross-bencher) - who has previously donated money to the Labour party.
Baroness Uddin is apparently set to be suspended for between a year and 18 months - and has agreed to pay back £125,000 in 'wrongly claimed' expenses - on an empty house, would you believe.
Lord Bhatia faces a ban of between six and 12 months - and is to repay voluntarily £27,000.
Lord Paul - a big friend of former PM Gordon Brown apparently - has been recommended for a suspension of between four and six months - and has agreed to pay back £40,000.
All three were investigated by the sub-committee on Lords' interests - Lord Paul and Lady Uddin were referred to the committee - after criminal investigations into their cases were dropped.
The investigation followed complaints over alleged abuses of the expenses system in the House of Lords.
The old system included an "overnight" allowance of £174 to cover the cost of staying in London - if a member's "main home" was outside the M25 - no receipts were required.
The bottom line is that the 'noble' lords were claiming these expenses without actually incurring any costs - and simply pocketed the money involved.
Does the punishment fit the crime?
Not in my book - having served their suspension these people will become legislators again - able to influence and pass laws that affect the rest of the us.
Instead of being allowed to return to the fawning and cosseted world of the House of Lords - they should be stripped of their peerages - and unceremoniously run out of town, metaphorically speaking at least.
The laugh is that the new expenses regime in the House of Lords will allow all peers to claim a lump payment of £300 a day - just for for 'clocking in' at Parliament.
The system is wide open to abuse because it offers no safeguards against peers simply 'signing in' - then and sloping off for the rest of the day - at public expense, of course.
