http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8499590.stm

Only three! It should be a lot more than that. Duck houses and moat cleaning have absolutely nothing to do with running an office. It is out and out fraud, far more should be doing time.

Also why weren't they arrested. Their DNA needs to be on the database.

</rant> cos if I get started I doubt I'd ever stop.

the powers to be protecting the powers to be
unless some major ripples are placed within there nice little pond nothing will change …

Health and safety.. It would be a danger to those ducks


On a more serious note.. shoot all the bastards that had to pay any money back.

The problem is not that what all the others did wasn't wrong but that the CPS wasn't confident of a successful prosecution

If they're not likely to be convicted then why let them waste any more money?

This is going to hurt me to say this but.............

As the majority of the people having to pay money back are only having to do so because limits were dreamt up and retrospectively applied for the last 5 years.

An example would be the speed limit on a motor way is 70 so HMG decides that in fact 5 years ago it was changed to 60 and everybody since then that had been tracked by cameras doing over 60 would be retrospectively find............

On the other hand the thieving bar stewards have been lining their own pockets at our expense for years. So hang draw and quarter them

That has never stopped them before, the CPS that is.

Since each claim had to be accompanied by a declaration that it was for that would lead so many of those claims put in as frivolous and unwarrented.

Phew for a moment there I though you were actually going to defend them

If the government can dream up retrospective tax legislation then the limits on their expenses can be retrospective. Serves the thieving [LIFTED] right.

\\\\\\\\it cost us the taxpayer 1.6 million to recoverr 1 million, nd that's if they all pay up.

no point wastin money of prosecutions that may fail, just bar them from holding public office or public sector jobs and let them spend their own money fighting it if they feel hard done by

They really should be held to the same level of defence as the rest of us. If you £10 behind with your TV license you can be sent to prison. We need far more independents running for office. We also need far fewer ministerial posts so that the chances of being minister are really slim, which would make back benchers more effective.

Ah yes, because with privacy concerns the way they are, throwing out the (rather fundamental) concept of innocent until proven guilty (you know, in a court of law and everything) is a stunningly good idea.