Wednesday 17 March 2010

Nothing To Hide, Nothing To Fear. Surely?

What could possibly be the problem here?

MPs' food and drink debts to be published

The move follows a Freedom of Information Act request by the Press Association which sparked six months of wrangling between Commons officials, MPs and lawyers over how to respond.

MPs objected and demanded further legal advice after being told last autumn that the details of their unpaid bills were set to be published.
Six months of stalling? Wriggling wildly to stop details of what they have been eating and drinking being publicised?

Could it, perhaps, expose some jaw-dropping hypocrisy from those who like to righteously dictate lifestyles to we poor proles?

The general election is expected on May 6, less than two months away, and disclosures before then would be unhelpful for MPs campaigning for re-election.
Hmmm. Whaddya think?


Spartan said...

Dick, do you honestly expect this info to be released before the election? ... unless none of the MPs are Labour of course!

subrosa said...

What do I think? Auch Dick, do you really want to know?

Possibly the same as you.

banned said...

Piggy behaviour like that, not paying your tab in the canteen, would get you drummed out of the Armed Services but these people know no shame.

JuliaM said...

Ooooh, someone's not been eating their five-a-day, I'll bet. Pound to a penny it'll be the Health Minister...

carbchick said...

They run up fodder debts and they even have a say in running the economy? For SHAME.

Just when you thought it wasn't possible to hate them with any more intensity ...

BTW, not so much 'proles' ... we are now 'the herd'. Yanno, the mindless ones who must be led by the nose to Righteousness.

Anonymous said...

Can't wait to see Prescotts !
Skip fulls ?

Letters From A Tory said...

Amazing. Surely they understand that the public will not tolerate deceit and concealment any longer?

Mr. A said...

Sorry, off-topic, but have you seen this nonsense? Apparently the "costs" of smoking are now miraculously £13.74 billion...???!!

Where the fuck did these numpties (Policy Exchange) get that number from? That surely deserves a FOI request.

Needless to say they're calling for a £1.29 per pack increase in the next year.

Lying, lying bastards.

Mr A said...

One Google search later...

Astonishingly Policy Exchange are a centre-right think tank that "supports the wider use of market forces and the promotion of individual responsibility."

Evem more amazingly, they say, "The think tank's mission is to develop and promote new policy ideas which will foster a free society based on strong communities and personal freedom."

What the fuckity fuck fuck!!!?????

Mr A said...

Just had a quick look on the Charity Commission website (for, as if you needed to be told, Policy Exchange are a "Charity") but there is no breakdown of where their sizeable funding comes from. I was of course expecting to see the usual big Pharma presence but it doesn't seem to go into that much detail.

Sorry again for the hijack but I though you'd like to see this guff.

Anonymous said...

@Mr A - truly miraculous: two days ago I saw in the national press Liam Donaldson quoted as saying the figure is £5+ billion (a figure which has magically doubled since January from £2+ billion).

They never, ever break these figures down so you can see how they've been arrived at and I think they're taking us for fools.

God, how I loathe them.


Uncle Marvo said...

@banned - spot on there.

Not paying your mess bill is pretty much the most heinous crime an officer can commit in the Armed Forces.

I'm looking forward to seeing this document though.

Anonymous said...

@Mr A: from the same article: "Lost productivity due to the deaths of smokers and passive smoking victims costs £4.8 billion"

Huh? Anyone else re-read that and still not get it?

Mr A said...

No, I didn't see that. And "passive smoking victims"? I'd love to know how they worked that out since no-one has ever had "Disease caused by passive smoking" put on their Death Certificate.

Are they really just putting ALL cancer and ALL heart disease etc down in the belief that you either get it from smoking or by being near a smoker? I really wouldn't be suprised.

The discrepancy is weird, though. Just goes to show that they pull these figures out of their arse.

Dick Puddlecote said...

No, the figures for loss of productivity due to passive smoking deaths are based on Jill Pell's 17% reduction in heart attacks study. I kid you not.

I've been looking at the report, you see? ;-)