A very good day for burying bad news
Whilst the rest of us were yesterday marking that benchmark moment in our democracy when an election is called, the House of Lords was the scene of an awful climax to their Lordships’ expenses scandal.
78-year-old Lord Clarke of Hampstead was being flogged at the yard arm. Hard to know whether to feel sorry or angry for Clarke, a former postman and trades unionist.
Once an election is called, journalists go into overdrive. It’s a genuinely exciting time – a voyage into the unknown whose ending will affect all our lives.
Hence it was not until I crawled into bed at 11.43pm last night and turned on Today in Parliament, that by chance I heard the miserable peer quite literally reduced to tears as he was forced to make a public and grovelling apology for over-claiming his expenses.
According to The Sunday Times, he had claimed some £18,000 a year for overnight stays in London when in fact he had driven home to St Albans – an hour away. It was a horrible sound, this poor old man – taken to the pinnacle of his powers in his sixties as Chairman of the Labour Party – was reduced to scattering his dignity all over the floor of the House.
And yet what he did, he has told The Times newspaper, was a consequence itself of ‘peer pressure’.
“I got the impression that if I didn’t do what people did, it could bring a bad light on someone else”, he told the paper last year.
The police and the CPS had the decency not to prosecute Clarke, for ‘lack of evidence’. That in itself represents a damning indictment of the entire Lords’ expenses system.
There was, quite simply no paper trail, because Lords expenses were quite simply un-receipted. There was, it seems, a help yourself to the taxpayers’ till attitude. At least a dozen peers have been identified as having charged – not the £18,000 a year that Clarke charged, but hundreds of thousands of pounds a year for years. Nothing will happen to them either.
The Lords Speaker Lady Hayman, herself listed as having charged for an out of town home as her place of residence whilst retaining another in London, has presided over a decision to regard visiting a home once a month, as enough proof of primary residence for expenses claims.
But no other peer has had to do what was demanded of Clarke. He’s the first peer to have to publicly confess. To hear a 78-year-old cry in the hallowed confines of the House of Lords is bad enough. Will he be the last?
Can it really be that after the abuse of a system that has cost tax payers millions of pounds, just one old man is to pay with his dignity? A good day for burying bad news?
Related posts:
- Nine Lords (and Ladies) a-leaping for joy!
- Who is checking the Lords' expenses?
- Lord's expenses: the flight to redaction
- Lords' expenses: it's a wonderful life
- Clash of the political titans. Not.
There are 45 comments on this post
It is a very sobering stroy, Jon. That people who are appointed to help make this country’s lws should make such obvious breaches to line their own pockets beggars belief. That they are not accountable in law, is mystifyig and cuts to the heart of what is wrong with parliament. Noble lords and honourable members – thieves and scoundrals more like.
The Lords must be reconstituted in a new form and until that happens there should be a complete freeze on new appointments. We don’t need another load of – sometimes dodgy – MPs jumping on the slush-filled supertrain with the power to block Lords reform.
Saltaire i agree totally , but i promise you i will disagree in future .A new government needs to kick this sorry lot of peers into the long grass , and elect a brand new house through proper elections with a proper constitution.Let the current peers keep their titles but nothing else.No rights , no expenses.By all means let them seek election if they want to stand
I reckon we could cope with a hung parliament, Adrian!
This is the second time of commenting.
The law is the law, but even speeding and drink driving were allowed before a sensible perspective overtook old perceptions.
I dislike the loss of dignity of anyone who has not only taken out but put into society.
Those who are victoriously drooling over their conquests in this respect ought to take a look in the mirror.
Businessmen , lawyers ,private firms in the 70′s used to openly discuss their fiddles.
All these sanctomonious folk, would they throw the first stone if it were their family
You must know some really dishonest people. In my business life, I have seen managers and staff at all levels, dismissed for ‘crimes’ significantly smaller than these. And yes, I would throw the first stone if a member of my family betrayed my trust.
So have I ,but did you see them in the 70′s which is the point.. The evolution of Law and Change of Perspective.
Having said that. no.. I would not betray the trust of my family for these old perceptions of law ,which was common practice and thirty years later call them criminals, reducing them to tears and huliliating them., nor would I do it to any one else.. this is called mercy.
Let the punishment fit the crime.
Sounds to me, like a Lord with really noble working backgroung, has had to standup to breakdown infront of his country and the world.
Apart from colonialism and the past and present royal families, I am proud of my british blood.
The U.K. needs to adopt a different way of leading its people. We are only led into capitalist consumerism and criminal selfishness day in day out.
adzmundo The Venus Project & CND
What really hurts me so much is that my profession has immaculate ethical stances about people. The staff it is true don’t always practice according to the codes of conduct.
We think that people should be proud to be human and consider every living human in an unbiased way. When we see suffering ,it is an instinct to stop the hurt and elevate this person to a place where the aggressors cannot touch this person .
We cannot be judgemental, we are intermediaries between the unfortunate sheep who have gone along with the people in their mindset ( as we all do, whether we think we are the shepperd or not) and the people with the axes.
I still agree with you adz, but look at all those people who are conned into being human bombs and those who have their heads cut off for looking at astrology.. these persons who judge are often worse.
Why should he not be prosecuted – it would appear there is evidence – from his own confession ?.. They have an unreciepted exs . system – so its think of a number time, and multiply by two . – The Head of The Lords says ” visit/ stay a house once a month ” and all is ok . – is this all some dreadful joke . He should be prosecuted – and imprisioned if necessarry – so he breaks down – so what – he has robbed- pure and simple – and should pay . Or can I rob at age 78 [ if I make that ] and get away with a fit of crying . Many , many have broken down as a result of the rampant Capitaklism that is our ruin – what happens to them . Does anyone know – does anyone care ?- apparently few in any parlaiment that I know of .
Off with his head!
The law deals with them… it is the gloaters… the hippocrites…. the ones who don’t understand the evolution of law and changing attitudes who need to address themselves.
Look at the bears!!!
Caught enough of Lady Hayman last night to decide I was not a fan. Sounded like your typical politician: self-regarding and brooking no dissent aside from defending the indefensible.
Sounds from your blog that Lord Clarke – a man who’s clearly done a proper day’s work – is being made the fall-guy for this corrupt and corrupting system. If prosecution had been pursued, seems likely the whole unelected presumptuous HoL – House of Lese-majeste – in danger of falling like the card variety. I hope that the elderly Lord Clarke of Hampstead has the courage to spill the beans and name some names.
On a related issue: bloggers are probably aware that Mandelson reported recently as intervening directly to block Jack Straw’s lords’ reform move to a wholly elected chamber (piece on Guardian website about two weeks ago; apologies to those interested but can’t recall date).
Mandelson’s intervention – to keep 26 bishops in HoL – was Guardian 26 March.
i believe anything of Mandelson .He is a slime ball who makes my skin creep every time i see and hear him
Sorry, snowbloggers, for linguistic error in above: ‘dissent aside from’, last line of para 1, should, of course, have read: ‘dissent; merely defending the indefensible’. Trust most of you got the drift. Will take greater care next time.
It may have escaped people’s notice, but under administrative law, Government’s owe a general duty of fiduciary care to the Tax-Payer.
If the thieves & fraudsters in Parliament are escaping punishment, the Head of the Civil Service should be the subject of dismissal without compensation because he carries the can for letting this happen.
China uses a bullet in the back of the head to deal with corruption.
Be careful Arthur ,these highly literate voters who thouroughly undersatnd English may take it to be that you advocate a bullet in the back of the head for all those that go 31 mph in
Be fair, a working class lad like Peter who has guacamole with his fish and chips, can’t be all bad. Can he?
(For those who don’t know the story, when Mandelson was campaigning in Hartlepool he pointed to mushy peas and said he’d have some guacamole as well. A moment to savour up there with John Redwood’s singing of the Welsh National Anthem)
Wasn’t Jon Redwood just the quirkiest guy on that stage.. I giggled all night and still have a mental picture of his head going from side to side and mouthing tracer words.
Bara brith to all those teacakes!!!
Lord Clarke = Tip of iceberg of “rotten to the core” establishment.
Evidence that the Old Boys’ network lives on.
Age suggests compassion. Remainder?Hang ‘em high!
I agree, he makes my skin crawl, too! Could he not be banned from news programmes – he’s not an elected official, you cannot believe a word he says and he never, ever answers a question! I have to switch channels or turn off when he’s on.
I really think that this bold admission of a wrong doing by Ms Howarth warrants police interrogation, exclusion from society and she definitely ought to take further studies in English Language..
It is difficult not to feel some sympathy for Lord Clarke but the truth is that he enjoys a privileged lifestyle way beyond that of the majority of ordinary people who pay his salary – and expenses. He admits he knew it was wrong. Whatever happened to integrity amongst those who deign to rule over us?
This man, old or not, is a thief. He`s lied to and cheated the institution of our supposedly democratic process of government, from a position of absolute privelege.
If he`s lied this year, it`s a good bet he`s lied last year and so on.
If a member of the not so protected public, had commited the same crime, they would have been prosecuted,and if found guilty ( in this case an admission of guilt) , would have been imprisoned.
But not a labour politician..they seem to enjoy charmed lives. A humiliating apology seems a small price to pay for this self confessed thief.
This government is a disgrace..a band of power mad hypocrits, utterly determined, at whatever cost, to retain their hold on power.
God help us if they are re-elected.
I fear Lord Clarke may indeed be the last to bend the knee of apparent contrition – the caravan has moved on and this sole and very aged fall-guy will probably bear the corporate stigma on behalf of his even-more-corrupt co-peers in perpetuity.
Reform is a must, not a nice-to-have. Whether the successful Commons election winner will choose to pursue it remains to be seen. But, with an ever-growing blogosphere sure to achieve a critical mass of influence over the coming Parliamentary term, maybe that election winner will not have a choice.
By nature a peaceful nation of debaters, there may come a point where the accumulation of democratic frustrations, co-ordinated by the new-found ‘people’s media’, will start to express itself in ways which demand effective action. Hope it’s not necessary, but many will be prepared to join in if it is.
Because it’s worth it.
I do think that it is disgraceful that all of these people are getting away with it. However that starts at the top. Gordon Brown was claiming for his Sky TV for goodness sake! On his salary?! Very few of the MPs (I think about 14) came out of this with no questions to answer/money to repay. I imagine that a similarly small number of Lords and Ladies were whiter than white. It is fraud pure and simple. That is what it would be in my line of work (public service just in case you wonder). I would be likely to face the sack. Fingers crossed that lots of the corrupt MPs get their comeuppance. However many are going with golden handshakes which are ill-deserved. The power of recall must be introduced. I think it is a shame that one Lord has been singled out in this manner. Shame on all of them.
A sacrificial lamb or a decoy for the bigger cheats like Lord Michael Ashcroft? I must say I wonder that as this and the M.P’s expenses scandals were allowed into the mostly commercially controlled news media, what was not allowed? I shudder!
If I shoplift from M&S; get caught; in my defense I say I was worried I’d be in trouble if I didn’t steel because all my mates were doing it I’d consider myself lucky to get off with just having to apologise. Age does not effect the lags code – if you can’t do the time don’t do the crime.
A man who felt true guilt would step down. It’s people like him that make you understand Stalin’s purges.
I quite agree , go tell that to all the earthquake victims as they are looting and make them realise that the law is inflexible.
I agree to abolishing the Lords as it is now. How about the USA system of senior people from each county in the UK being elected to the Senior Chamber? No Government Placemen!!
If someone fiddled £18000 of income support they would have a spell in jail. I don’t think crying and saying sorry would necessarily get them off. I think Jon should put this point to the politicians to see how they refuse to answer it.
It just shows we are not a decent society where the law applies to all, there is one law for the rich and a different one for the rest.
Were any other citizen of the UK public to commit this type of Fraud then we would find ourselves in court, found guility and either fined or both fined&imprisoned. It is often said that to ‘err is Human,’ and forgiveness is a natural human quality but when Fraud is abused and the abuse on a constant basis as it has via the Commons/Lords/Judiciary/government departments at both local and national level, often without remorse and apology then the Public have a right to request due process of the Crime/Law. These are the same public representatives who talk about Equality without practising it and whilst introducing levels to prevent it.
I too just happened to switch on to that House of Lords footage while this poor man was speaking, evidently making some public confession, and I could hardly believe my eyes. I was most uncomfortable as I stayed with him in spirit while he suffered in this way. Rich, poor, no matter – suffering is painful. I wished someone would go put their arm around him and make it stop. Show compassion. Read it for him! Can we play down this media circus?
Have I missed the point here? What exactly are we meant to be feeling compassion for? Yes suffering is painful but lets not forget that this was his own doing. He has been claiming more per ann then many people in this country earn per year and has been doing so for years on end. He knew what he was doing and was doing it without guilt and care for the society he was meant to be caring about. This blaming the system – yes, maybe, scape goat yes, undoubtedly, but lets not forget the element of personal individual choice and morals in this. It was hardly a choice between having food on the table and not having food, having shelter and not having shelter. Hundreds of thousands of pounds of our money which the country will never get back. And his punishment? Sorry this crying years down the line doesn’t cut it for me. What would of cut it would have been if he had stopped doing it and admitted to it years ago showing concern for the society he was meant to be protecting. Crying within the Ivory Tower – yer right – get these fraudsters out on the streets explaining this to the homeless and the families living on a minimum wage – let’s see if they cry then!
I like Mandy.. am one of those folks that likes most people except the violent ones…..trouble is. decisions are hard.
Am a wet left.
Margaret, a few more wet left would make the world a much better place
what choice do we have, they are all controlled by secret societies and freemasons, its like take your pick labour or tory, same thing they all work for the same man or should i say demons. the truth is we dont want none of them to rule us. get it, none of them.
It does seem that this man is being used as the fall-guy for many more unelected people to make dodgy claims in a system which has for years allowed such corruption to go un-noticed. Two questions seem to arise from this:
1. Why is it that we haven’t heard more about expensesdished out to members of the House of Lords?
2. Why is there far less fuss from the public about the huge bonuses being paid to bankers who have plunged us into recession?
The figures for bankers seem to me to make pale into insignificance the parliamentary expenses, but most of the media make much less out of the former with the result that people don’t get quite so upset about it. Need I say more?
You are quite right. Interesting that Lord Archer received 4 years in gaol for lying in Court. These people not only lied to us but also stole our money; and this in the highest court in the land!
These maybe unreceipted expenses, but surely we know where the cheques & transfer went to. An FOI request would be a good place to start. We don’t need account details, just the names and the amounts. We could easily benchmark what was a reasonable allowance £pa, and separate the responsible from the greedy. Just a thought.
Did I hear you right in this evenings apology for a news broadcast describing Brown as having a fierce intellect?. He is so clever he has ruined this country building up massive debt and destroying the futures of generations.
Brown is the man who destroyed the pensions of millions of people and sold off our gold reserves and you call that clever do you Jon?.
Where I come from they call that a man who is not all there.
You might as well start your news saying this is a party political broadcast on behalf of the labour party.
Pathetic you are as transparent as cling film but less useful.
Just stick to the news and leave the politics to someone else.
Lets just get real here. If I worked for an organisation that allowed me to claim money no questions asked. Would I… too bloody right I would and so would almost everyone else. They got their snouts in the trough and good luck to them, but now they have been caught out and put to shame. So change the system and lets put it behind us. Besides what they claim is peanuts to what the good folk on the board of Yorkshire Forward et al.. spend on their jollies.
A vivid picture. But what, I wonder, is the real significance of mentioning the peer’s age? To describe him as ‘this poor old man’ and focus on his age in such an emotive fashion is to imply that he is somehow an enfeebled human-being, simply because he is older than the average person in the House of Lords. This comment only serves to rob him of any remaining dignity.
I agree with your query on the significance of mentioning the peer’s age. All the media made a thing of his age. It was to lighten the load so that we, the public, would be more forgiving, feel sorry for him and let it pass more easily. And lets face it it did somewhat work. It was yet another deliberately constructed game within Westminister walls and the media fell right into it.