From The TimesMay 29, 2009
Julie Kirkbride stands down to joy of Bromsgrove constituents
Kaya Burgess
Julie Kirkbride was not in her constituency to hear the three cheers that rang out down Bromsgrove High Street when residents heard that she was stepping down.
The man leading the cry was credited with orchestrating Ms Kirkbride’s downfall with the “Julie Must Go” campaign. Mark Anthony France, 46, was still a member of George Galloway’s Respect party when he helped to start a petition calling on Ms Kirkbride to resign and trigger a by-election.
“It felt like there was an attempt to smear our campaign as a revolutionary movement led by Respect,” he told The Times. “We were tipped off by people close to the Tories that it would be their tactic to create a ‘red scare’, so my wife and I resigned from the Respect party to protect the campaign’s credibility. I’m happy that she’s standing down. We want an MP who is not involved in these sorts of dealings.”
Constituents outside the empty offices of the Bromsgrove Conservative Association jostled and punched the air as they heard the news. The window that was smashed when the scandal over expenses broke had still not been fixed.
Related Links
Cameron: MP Cash faces serious questions
MPs to quit over expenses scandal
Kirkbride: only herself to blame, says Currie
Residents continued to flock to a makeshift desk in the main shopping district to add their names to the petition sheets calling for Ms Kirkbride to step down immediately rather than wait until the next election. The petition was signed by a further 750 people yesterday, bringing the total figure to 5,000.
Louise Marnell, 43, the chairwoman of the campaign, dismissed claims that the petition was motivated by party politics. “This is not a witch-hunt or a mob,” she said. “People were asking if we were in with the political opposition and I told them — I was just a normal housewife who wants to see a bit of decency and honesty. It’s been astonishing the amount of support we’ve received. And respect to Julie for listening to the people.”
Ms Kirkbride was once a popular MP but she will have to face angry constituents when she next sets foot in Bromsgrove. “I think it’s excellent she’s going to resign — what she did was scandalous,” Sheila Warner, 54, a psychologist, said. “It might have been within the rules, but there is no moral justification.”
Last week the local party chairman, Alan Dent, said that he was “totally supportive” of Ms Kirkbride. Yesterday there was no response from the constituency office and Mr Dent, who arrived home in the evening, did not answer his front door.
Have your say
Well , I'm from Canada and George Galloway was recently refused entry here-however good for him and the Respect Party in forcing this parasite out-although I see she is still hanging on for more taxpayer dough. How about picketing her house and taking a look at the extension you taxpayers bought!
bobbath, Toronto,
It's good to note that the local party chairman Mr Bent was so supportive of this non-talent of a politician.
Now that she's gone, perhaps it's time for him to consider his position too or is that too much to ask of someone whose judgement of suitability has been seriously challenged?
Begone.
Derek Dean, London,
Now its time for Cash to stabd down.This gets worse with every day. No wonder these people wanted to prevent the public finding out what was going on.The Fees office have hardly covered themselves in glory either. Sack the head now.
Ray George, Bristol , UK
So George Galloway's Respect Party had the initiative to get the ball rolling and clear out the garbage that has been festering in our political system My Congratulations to all that worked to get things moving perhaps Galloway should be the speaker now the job is vacant, His expenses claim was ZERO
iron, London, UK
Well, the RESPECT party (an oxymoron there, surely) has zero credibility in this regard. George Galloway has been "helping police with their enquiries" on a number of issues! Let's have an expose of "Gorgeous George", now that his people are so keen at exposing less than honourable dealings.
JohNW, Manchester, UK
This MP deserves to lose her seat. However, enough of the sanctimonious claptrap. The very well orchestrated campaign stank of political intrigue. The confirmation that the organiser is a member of George Galloway's party is no surprise at all.
Pete, Lincoln, United Kingdom
Use your democratic rights and you and your freinds phone, write, email, visit your MP at his weekly surgery. tell him you demand an election. Frighten the horses and start demanding things. Stop aquiesing to cortruption both in Britain and in the EU which ias the elephant in the room.
Jas, Camberley, UK
I hope the good people of Bromsgrove now get the MP they deserve after the way they have behaived..
Martin Briggs, Old Basing, England
British apathy over this? What stereotyping, and how out of touch with or just misunderstanding of what is happening. As my old dad says of his fellow parishioners — robbed, conned, cheated at every turn by bankers and politicians. Where isn't all this not being discussed? Public anger is tangible.
Pete, London, United Kingdom
More makeshift desks are needed a lot more.
Jack Doyle, Belfast, N: Ireland
listen up people,
start talking of mass protests and plod will have the ringleaders locked up under anti-terrorism laws before they get their shoe laces tied.
There is nothing you can do until the next election, Brown will hang on as we all know until May 2010, then bye, bye Gormless!
Sam Simmonite, Bath, U .K.
Is there anyone left in this country who has the stature and who commands enough public respect to call for and coordinate a full-scale protest - a march on parliament or maybe even a general strike. Surely the time for British stoicism and apathy is over.
Jonathan, Oswestry,
A [all of a sudden] ex member of George Galloway’s Respect party ?SO NOT POLITICAL IN ANY WAY THEN ? just a concerned resident? this story is being to be being turned only on to the torys with less and less scrutiny of labour and non of the liberals
hmmm ?.
mat, holyhead, wales
This is not finished until ALL the money has been repaid to the taxpayer - Cameron please note !
OZ, Perth, Australia
The only way to get her sacked, (without a 'golden handshake'),before the next Election is for a public MASS PROTEST MARCH to the House of Commons.It would be even better if eveyone came dressed as Guy Fawkes and carried a burning torch.
Frank, Bristol, UK
Show fewer comments
Have your say
Saturday, 30 May 2009
Friday, 29 May 2009
“Workers Liberty” links “Bethnal Green and Bow” “MP” Galloway with “Muslims” as 'evidence’ of Galloway’s ‘mistake’.
EAST LONDON PRESS observing another WANKERS' Liberty!
“Workers Liberty” links “Bethnal Green and Bow” “MP” Galloway with “Muslims” as “evidence’ of Galloway’s ‘mistake’. “Fighting racism”, it ‘argues’ demands disengaging from ‘Muslims’!
WANKERS' Liberty indeed!
___________________________________
Euro-poll: racist vote on the rise. Build a Socialist Alliance to fight back!
Submitted on 28 May, 2009 - 02:57 Anti-Fascism Anti-Racism Solidarity 3/152, 28 May 2009
Author: Gerry Bates
On 24 May, a crowd of five hundred rioted in Luton city centre, seeking out and terrorising people whom they thought were Muslims and attacking Asian-owned businesses. We carry a report in the centre pages of Solidarity 3/152.
The European Parliament election results will come out after this paper has gone to press. The fascist BNP may win a Euro-MP. If it doesn’t, it may well be only because it been gazumped by the richer UK Independence Party, which has run a high-profile campaign focused heavily on agitation against immigration.
The economic crisis, the failure of the mainstream parties' policies to protect much other than bankers’ bonuses from the crisis, and the scandal about MPs’ expenses, are all creating fertile ground for demagogues with spurious “simple” answers — look after “our own”, blame the immigrants. The Luton riot shows where that leads.
Some postal workers have given a lead in fighting back, by refusing to deliver BNP leaflets. Left-wing activists have been out campaigning against the BNP in the Euro-elections. But, in most areas, there have not been enough of us, and the leaflets have not been ones dealing with the social issues which the BNP and UKIP feed on. They just say “use your vote to stop the BNP”.
The aim is explicitly to mobilise votes for any of the mainstream parties, regardless of politics, in order to reduce the BNP's percentage of the turnout. The leaflets must tend to come across as “stay with the status quo rather than going BNP” — a message which backhandedly strengthens the spurious image that BNP are trying to build for themselves as a radical alternative.
Other left-wingers have been out seeking support for a “No2EU” slate which denounces what it calls “so-called freedom of movement of labour in the EU” — actually, the real, and welcome, freedom of workers to cross borders in the EU — by calling it “social dumping”.
Instead, socialists need to unite our efforts round a positive answer to the social issues which the fascists and the racists feed on.
Instead, we should be looking to rebuild something like the Socialist Alliance — a coalition of all the main activist-left groups, which was able to get across a socialist message in 98 constituencies in the 2001 general election.
That Socialist Alliance was broken up by the Socialist Party seceding on the pretext of disagreements of detail on how the alliance should be organised, and the Socialist Workers' Party seceding to set up “Respect” with the tainted ex-Labour MP George Galloway and start campaigning on communalist lines as the best “fighters for Muslims”.
That was a mistake. We should unite again; and unite not just, or even mainly, for electioneering.
We should unite in day-to-day activity to support actions like the postal workers', and put forward basic working-class answers to the crisis: jobs for all workers; open the books; nationalisation under workers' control of firms cutting jobs; full nationalisation and democratic control of the banks and finance system.
If unity is not possible at national level, we should form local coalitions and unite in local working-class campaigns.
The economic crisis creates tremendous pressures towards protectionism and the raising of economic barriers between countries. The governments want to resist those pressures in the sense that each capitalist government wants every other capitalist government not to raise barriers; but how far they will hold the line remains to be seen.
To deal with this crisis, workers need unity, across borders and across differences of origin. And to promote workers' unity, we need unity of the socialists — a new socialist alliance.
“Workers Liberty” links “Bethnal Green and Bow” “MP” Galloway with “Muslims” as “evidence’ of Galloway’s ‘mistake’. “Fighting racism”, it ‘argues’ demands disengaging from ‘Muslims’!
WANKERS' Liberty indeed!
___________________________________
Euro-poll: racist vote on the rise. Build a Socialist Alliance to fight back!
Submitted on 28 May, 2009 - 02:57 Anti-Fascism Anti-Racism Solidarity 3/152, 28 May 2009
Author: Gerry Bates
On 24 May, a crowd of five hundred rioted in Luton city centre, seeking out and terrorising people whom they thought were Muslims and attacking Asian-owned businesses. We carry a report in the centre pages of Solidarity 3/152.
The European Parliament election results will come out after this paper has gone to press. The fascist BNP may win a Euro-MP. If it doesn’t, it may well be only because it been gazumped by the richer UK Independence Party, which has run a high-profile campaign focused heavily on agitation against immigration.
The economic crisis, the failure of the mainstream parties' policies to protect much other than bankers’ bonuses from the crisis, and the scandal about MPs’ expenses, are all creating fertile ground for demagogues with spurious “simple” answers — look after “our own”, blame the immigrants. The Luton riot shows where that leads.
Some postal workers have given a lead in fighting back, by refusing to deliver BNP leaflets. Left-wing activists have been out campaigning against the BNP in the Euro-elections. But, in most areas, there have not been enough of us, and the leaflets have not been ones dealing with the social issues which the BNP and UKIP feed on. They just say “use your vote to stop the BNP”.
The aim is explicitly to mobilise votes for any of the mainstream parties, regardless of politics, in order to reduce the BNP's percentage of the turnout. The leaflets must tend to come across as “stay with the status quo rather than going BNP” — a message which backhandedly strengthens the spurious image that BNP are trying to build for themselves as a radical alternative.
Other left-wingers have been out seeking support for a “No2EU” slate which denounces what it calls “so-called freedom of movement of labour in the EU” — actually, the real, and welcome, freedom of workers to cross borders in the EU — by calling it “social dumping”.
Instead, socialists need to unite our efforts round a positive answer to the social issues which the fascists and the racists feed on.
Instead, we should be looking to rebuild something like the Socialist Alliance — a coalition of all the main activist-left groups, which was able to get across a socialist message in 98 constituencies in the 2001 general election.
That Socialist Alliance was broken up by the Socialist Party seceding on the pretext of disagreements of detail on how the alliance should be organised, and the Socialist Workers' Party seceding to set up “Respect” with the tainted ex-Labour MP George Galloway and start campaigning on communalist lines as the best “fighters for Muslims”.
That was a mistake. We should unite again; and unite not just, or even mainly, for electioneering.
We should unite in day-to-day activity to support actions like the postal workers', and put forward basic working-class answers to the crisis: jobs for all workers; open the books; nationalisation under workers' control of firms cutting jobs; full nationalisation and democratic control of the banks and finance system.
If unity is not possible at national level, we should form local coalitions and unite in local working-class campaigns.
The economic crisis creates tremendous pressures towards protectionism and the raising of economic barriers between countries. The governments want to resist those pressures in the sense that each capitalist government wants every other capitalist government not to raise barriers; but how far they will hold the line remains to be seen.
To deal with this crisis, workers need unity, across borders and across differences of origin. And to promote workers' unity, we need unity of the socialists — a new socialist alliance.
Wednesday, 27 May 2009
Toy town Tower Hamlets: tales of the Baroness and the Del Man: building palaces in far off places by fleecing the folk in the East End
EAST LONDON PRESS report
2020 Hrs GMT
London Wednesday 27 May 2009
Toy town Tower Hamlets: tales of the Baroness and the Del Man: building palaces in far off places by fleecing the folk in the East End
How does Tower Hamlets Council enrich cheats and fraudsters?
We put that question a few minutes ago.
Easily.
That is the answer. As one East Ender says.
But you have to stretch your imagination considerably.
Why?
Because the things that go on in Tower Hamlets are not easy to relate to normal life.
Here goes:
Fasten your seat belts.
We are off to Delhi. India.
New Delhi.
Del, for short.
Once upon a time there was a Del man.
He was all smiles. Particularly as he smelt money.
And he saw loads of it on the pavements of the East End of London.
Del Man couldn't believe his eyes. And he had no sympathy for the locals. Stupid. Stupid. Stupid. That’s what they were.
Except Michael.
Michael would make Del a load of money.
Michael is in the Housing. Council Housing. He is counting cash. Big time cash. Cash to land on his lap. And on Del Man’s lap.
Cash that Tower Hamlets Council will let them have. Cash that Del Man will then use to build him a palace. Not far from Delhi. New Delhi.
2020 Hrs GMT
London Wednesday 27 May 2009
Toy town Tower Hamlets: tales of the Baroness and the Del Man: building palaces in far off places by fleecing the folk in the East End
How does Tower Hamlets Council enrich cheats and fraudsters?
We put that question a few minutes ago.
Easily.
That is the answer. As one East Ender says.
But you have to stretch your imagination considerably.
Why?
Because the things that go on in Tower Hamlets are not easy to relate to normal life.
Here goes:
Fasten your seat belts.
We are off to Delhi. India.
New Delhi.
Del, for short.
Once upon a time there was a Del man.
He was all smiles. Particularly as he smelt money.
And he saw loads of it on the pavements of the East End of London.
Del Man couldn't believe his eyes. And he had no sympathy for the locals. Stupid. Stupid. Stupid. That’s what they were.
Except Michael.
Michael would make Del a load of money.
Michael is in the Housing. Council Housing. He is counting cash. Big time cash. Cash to land on his lap. And on Del Man’s lap.
Cash that Tower Hamlets Council will let them have. Cash that Del Man will then use to build him a palace. Not far from Delhi. New Delhi.
Can any East Ender prove how Tower Hamlets Council enriches thieves and crooks? Too strong words?
EAST LONDON PRESS on the RICH LIST
Can any East Ender prove how Tower Hamlets Council enriches thieves and crooks? Too strong words? Okay. We will accept a lower key tag. How about cheats and fraudsters? If there is any proof, we want to know. Contact us in the usual way. And the odd fiver will not follow..
Can any East Ender prove how Tower Hamlets Council enriches thieves and crooks? Too strong words? Okay. We will accept a lower key tag. How about cheats and fraudsters? If there is any proof, we want to know. Contact us in the usual way. And the odd fiver will not follow..
'East London' 'MP' Mr George Galloway makes a sort of appearance on the West Midlands political scene, as reported by the DAILY TELEGRAPH
EAST LONDON PRESS report
1920 Hrs GMT
London Wednesday 27 May 2009
The "Bethnal Green and Bow constituency" "MP" Mr George Galloway has 'returned' to the DAILY TELEGRAPH.
In an indirect sort of way.
The last time he was featured on that publication was before his career-saving libel action against them, caused by their proximity with Tony Blair's crusader agenda..
Crusader as in a wanton war against the Arabs and the Muslim Arabs in particular.
This time, it is via Julie Kirkbride. Another DAILY TELEGRAPH EX!
Ms Kirkbride is of course the target of the increasingly angry Mrs Louise Marnell. She has told the DAILY TELEGRAPH that she has never voted in a general election. She is just an angry housewife in Bromsgrove.
EAST LONDOIN PRESS is unable to bring any direct comment from Louise Marnell. Not yet. We shall be doing so later.
For now, she is confident that she is almost there. Forcing Julie Kirkbride to quit that is.
It would be interesting to find out what Louise Marnell does next.
We can say that she will herself attract determined Conservative Party attempts at painting her as not so honest after all. They have suggested that she is being used by ‘George Galloway’ and the ‘Respect’ party.
If events turnout in a way that proves the Tories’ currently denied claim that Louise Marnell is a stooge for any party or group then that would undermine the ethics of the campaign against Julie Kirkbride. And those of other campaigns against other discredited MPs.
If events show that there was any relevant link between Louise Marnell and the ‘Bethnal Green and Bow’ constituency ‘MP’ George Galloway then that would be also a significant 'development'.
For there is no independently verifiable indication in the East End of London today of any public activity by any grouping, including by George Galloway, about the British MPs’ corruption and sleaze.
We publish below the texts of ANDREW PIERCE as posted on the DAILY TELEGRAPH web site in the past 40 minutes::
MPs' expenses: Revenge before reform
While the talk at Westminster is of changing the political system, many voters are demanding something more brutal, observes Andrew Pierce.
By Andrew Pierce
Last Updated: 7:31PM BST 27 May 2009
Comments 1 | Comment on this article
It was in Bromsgrove in 1605 that some of the Gunpowder Plotters unsuccessfully sought sanctuary, after their audacious plan to blow up the Houses of Parliament was discovered. Some four centuries later, the usually sedate Worcestershire town is again at the centre of an extraordinary campaign, albeit by more peaceable means, to bring down MPs who have brought the Palace of Westminster into disrepute.
The modern equivalent of a peasants' revolt is being conducted against Julie Kirkbride, Bromsgrove's Tory MP, by Louise Marnell, a housewife, from a battered trestle table in the high street.
Related Articles
MPs' expenses: Gordon Brown proposes constitutional changes in wake of scandal
MPs expenses: Reform can wait; what the people want now is an election
MPs' expenses: radical reform of discredited Commons system
MPs' expenses: David Cameron calls for dissolution of Parliament
Commons Speaker Michael Martin faces MPs' expenses revolt
Local Tories insist that Mrs Marnell is a stooge for the Respect Party, whose best known MP is George Galloway, a charge that she denies. "I have never voted in a general election," she says. "I'm just an angry housewife." Mrs Marnell has collected 3,500 signatures in an unprecedented campaign to remove a sitting MP a year before the next general election has to be called.
In the space of a week, Miss Kirkbride, 48, has gone from popular local MP to a pariah figure after the publication in The Daily Telegraph of the evidence that she and her husband, the Tory MP Andrew MacKay, claimed £170,000 between them in second home allowances over four years. He claimed for their joint flat in Westminster, while she claimed for their family home in her constituency.
At the weekend, Mr MacKay was humiliated at a bad-tempered public meeting in his Bracknell constituency, where he was heckled and branded a "thieving toad", amid demands to "give it all back". He was humiliated again when David Cameron ordered him to stand down, having heard a recording of the meeting.
In truth, Mr Cameron hoped that by offering up one sacrificial lamb he would be able to save the neck of the telegenic Miss Kirkbride, who would almost certainly have been offered a ministerial post if the Tories were to win the next election.
But it is clear that the demand for blood has not been sated. Across the country, the outpouring of public anger is reminiscent of the wave of revulsion that swept the white-suited Martin Bell to victory against the Tory Neil Hamilton in Tatton on an anti-sleaze bandwagon.
If, and it is a very big if, Miss Kirkbride is still the Tory candidate at the general election, she will almost certainly face a Martin Bell-style figure. Only yesterday, a poll on the Conservativehome website showed that 81 per cent of more than 1,100 party members wanted her out.
The ripples from Mr MacKay's Bracknell constituency, and now from Bromsgrove, are being felt across the country. In Redditch, which adjoins Bromsgrove, there is talk of an internet campaign against Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary, who triggered the expenses row with the designation of her sister's back bedroom as her main residence.
In Scunthorpe, an ElliotMustGo.com website has been set up after the Labour MP Elliot Morley claimed £16,000 for a mortgage which had been paid off 19 months earlier. The site has attracted almost 1,000 signatories in a matter of days. A similar site has been set up on Facebook, the social networking site.
The Morley website says: "We feel very strongly that a moral and professional line has been crossed in terms of the behaviour and standards expected of an MP. We call for Mr Morley's immediate resignation and a by-election to be called to find a suitable candidate to represent Scunthorpe's interests.
"We are not a political party or positioning a candidate for election, we are simply constituents who are disgusted at the conduct of our MP. The hard-working people of Scunthorpe are very let down by this and are seeking support for a public meeting to demand that he resign with immediate effect and that a
by-election is held.
"Remember though – if writing to Mr Morley, please be polite and to the point, there's no need to be rude or offensive, Mr Morley has served the town for many years and deserves our respect for that. The internet is a wonderful thing for giving yourself a voice so tell your friends on social network sites, and look for Elliot Must Go Groups – if there isn't one on your social network – set one up!"
Feelings are running so high in the town that community police officers have been stationed outside Mr Morley's home. Motorists have slowed down to shout abuse. "Pay it all back," is the most familiar refrain. There are signs of more trouble for the Gosport Tory MP Sir Peter Viggers, who was ordered by the party high command to stand down at the next election after he claimed £1,600 for a house for his ducks on his country estate. Some local people have been in touch with the Bromsgrove group for advice on a campaign. A similar story is emerging in the Mid-Worcestershire constituency of the Tory MP Peter Luff after public revulsion at his spending on furnishings, including a £1,300 rug and £600 china set. Readers' messages posted on the website of Worcester News give a flavour of how his constituents feel. One said: "The public need an opportunity to express their anger, concerns, disappointment, disgust." Another demanded that Mr Luff should go before a public meeting to answer the following question: "I would not have been able to carry out my work as an MP if I had not claimed taxpayers' money to pay for a £600+ china set becausee_SLps"
In Bromsgrove, public anger boiled over when a missile was thrown through the window of the Conservative Party offices. The siege mentality was confirmed when a reporter from BBC's Newsnight tried to gain access. The constituency secretary refused to open the door and could be seen repeatedly mouthing the words: "No comment."
A message has been put up on the party website asking for support. "Never before in Bromsgrove has it been more important for us all to unite behind our MP Julie Kirkbride. She is, as you all know, an extremely compassionate hard-working person who has used her talents to assist so many people in our community and for the benefit of Bromsgrove."
Significantly, the local party did not mention the word expenses in its defence of its MP. Mrs Marnell was contemptuous. "I have never met the woman and I am sure she is very nice," she says. "But when people are losing their jobs, struggling to pay mortgages, there is a real sense of anger at all this money she has had with her MP husband. The phone never stops ringing with people saying they want to sign the petition."
In Scunthorpe, the campaign is being led by Michael Taylor, 38, an IT specialist, who has lived in the town all his life. "My father was a steelworker," Mr Taylor says, "so we have never been affluent. I went to the local comprehensive. This town has always been poor with high unemployment. It really hurts local people to think that their MP, someone they would usually look up to, was claiming for a mortgage which had been paid off."
In the last few days, Labour and the Tories have been engaged in an increasingly frantic race to try win credit for reforming the political system, with proposals for fixed-term parliaments and voting reform.
But such talk has cut little ice with voters whose most pressing demand is the removal of their MP. "I am sure electoral reform is important," Mr Taylor says, "but to people in places like Scunthorpe, we want a chance now to vote out our MP who claims more in expenses than most people here earn in two years. We are not content with him being deselected by the next election, which gives him another 12 pay cheques. We want a by-election now."
Earlier this year, as the Commons debated the publication of MPs' expenses, it was Julie Kirkbride who spoke the loudest in opposing making public MPs' addresses. Miss Kirkbride, who last year was voted the second most attractive MP in an internet poll, feared unwanted attention from "fixated" male admirers. Public feeling against her today is such that only her most diehard supporters are willing to believe that was her real reason.
As the revelations over expenses continue, it looks likely that more campaigns will begin against MPs who hope to limp through to next May in order to preserve the pension entitlements and pay-offs which are automatic at general elections.
These protests are not, as some MPs claim, media driven. They are spontaneous, grass-roots rebellions against dishonest behaviour by our elected representatives.
Bromsgrove was once the world centre for nail making. Those nails are now being collected by opponents of Miss Kirkbride to hammer into her political coffin if, and when, she is forced to step down by Mr Cameron.
Text Size Email this article
Print this article
Share this article
delicious
Digg
Facebook
Fark
Google
Newsvine
Reddit
StumbleUpon
Yahoo! Buzz
Mixx
Twitter
What are these?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/5395803/MPs-expenses-Revenge-before-reform.html
MPs' expenses Get feed updatesComment Get feed updatesPersonal View Get feed updatesAndrew Pierce Get feed updatesPolitics Get feed updates
More on
MPs' expenses Get feed updatesComment Get feed updatesPersonal View Get feed updatesAndrew Pierce Get feed updatesPolitics Get feed updatesComments: 1
I think it is about time that Gordon Brown realised that the voters are not going to have the wool pulled over their eyes again and called a general election. Who can you trust and also what elese is hiding in the dirty linen.One other thing I would be interested to know do the MP's claim a car allowance and if so do they pay tax like anyone else has to whether they are reps or management
Maureen Stone
on May 27, 2009
at 07:49 PM
Report this comment
1920 Hrs GMT
London Wednesday 27 May 2009
The "Bethnal Green and Bow constituency" "MP" Mr George Galloway has 'returned' to the DAILY TELEGRAPH.
In an indirect sort of way.
The last time he was featured on that publication was before his career-saving libel action against them, caused by their proximity with Tony Blair's crusader agenda..
Crusader as in a wanton war against the Arabs and the Muslim Arabs in particular.
This time, it is via Julie Kirkbride. Another DAILY TELEGRAPH EX!
Ms Kirkbride is of course the target of the increasingly angry Mrs Louise Marnell. She has told the DAILY TELEGRAPH that she has never voted in a general election. She is just an angry housewife in Bromsgrove.
EAST LONDOIN PRESS is unable to bring any direct comment from Louise Marnell. Not yet. We shall be doing so later.
For now, she is confident that she is almost there. Forcing Julie Kirkbride to quit that is.
It would be interesting to find out what Louise Marnell does next.
We can say that she will herself attract determined Conservative Party attempts at painting her as not so honest after all. They have suggested that she is being used by ‘George Galloway’ and the ‘Respect’ party.
If events turnout in a way that proves the Tories’ currently denied claim that Louise Marnell is a stooge for any party or group then that would undermine the ethics of the campaign against Julie Kirkbride. And those of other campaigns against other discredited MPs.
If events show that there was any relevant link between Louise Marnell and the ‘Bethnal Green and Bow’ constituency ‘MP’ George Galloway then that would be also a significant 'development'.
For there is no independently verifiable indication in the East End of London today of any public activity by any grouping, including by George Galloway, about the British MPs’ corruption and sleaze.
We publish below the texts of ANDREW PIERCE as posted on the DAILY TELEGRAPH web site in the past 40 minutes::
MPs' expenses: Revenge before reform
While the talk at Westminster is of changing the political system, many voters are demanding something more brutal, observes Andrew Pierce.
By Andrew Pierce
Last Updated: 7:31PM BST 27 May 2009
Comments 1 | Comment on this article
It was in Bromsgrove in 1605 that some of the Gunpowder Plotters unsuccessfully sought sanctuary, after their audacious plan to blow up the Houses of Parliament was discovered. Some four centuries later, the usually sedate Worcestershire town is again at the centre of an extraordinary campaign, albeit by more peaceable means, to bring down MPs who have brought the Palace of Westminster into disrepute.
The modern equivalent of a peasants' revolt is being conducted against Julie Kirkbride, Bromsgrove's Tory MP, by Louise Marnell, a housewife, from a battered trestle table in the high street.
Related Articles
MPs' expenses: Gordon Brown proposes constitutional changes in wake of scandal
MPs expenses: Reform can wait; what the people want now is an election
MPs' expenses: radical reform of discredited Commons system
MPs' expenses: David Cameron calls for dissolution of Parliament
Commons Speaker Michael Martin faces MPs' expenses revolt
Local Tories insist that Mrs Marnell is a stooge for the Respect Party, whose best known MP is George Galloway, a charge that she denies. "I have never voted in a general election," she says. "I'm just an angry housewife." Mrs Marnell has collected 3,500 signatures in an unprecedented campaign to remove a sitting MP a year before the next general election has to be called.
In the space of a week, Miss Kirkbride, 48, has gone from popular local MP to a pariah figure after the publication in The Daily Telegraph of the evidence that she and her husband, the Tory MP Andrew MacKay, claimed £170,000 between them in second home allowances over four years. He claimed for their joint flat in Westminster, while she claimed for their family home in her constituency.
At the weekend, Mr MacKay was humiliated at a bad-tempered public meeting in his Bracknell constituency, where he was heckled and branded a "thieving toad", amid demands to "give it all back". He was humiliated again when David Cameron ordered him to stand down, having heard a recording of the meeting.
In truth, Mr Cameron hoped that by offering up one sacrificial lamb he would be able to save the neck of the telegenic Miss Kirkbride, who would almost certainly have been offered a ministerial post if the Tories were to win the next election.
But it is clear that the demand for blood has not been sated. Across the country, the outpouring of public anger is reminiscent of the wave of revulsion that swept the white-suited Martin Bell to victory against the Tory Neil Hamilton in Tatton on an anti-sleaze bandwagon.
If, and it is a very big if, Miss Kirkbride is still the Tory candidate at the general election, she will almost certainly face a Martin Bell-style figure. Only yesterday, a poll on the Conservativehome website showed that 81 per cent of more than 1,100 party members wanted her out.
The ripples from Mr MacKay's Bracknell constituency, and now from Bromsgrove, are being felt across the country. In Redditch, which adjoins Bromsgrove, there is talk of an internet campaign against Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary, who triggered the expenses row with the designation of her sister's back bedroom as her main residence.
In Scunthorpe, an ElliotMustGo.com website has been set up after the Labour MP Elliot Morley claimed £16,000 for a mortgage which had been paid off 19 months earlier. The site has attracted almost 1,000 signatories in a matter of days. A similar site has been set up on Facebook, the social networking site.
The Morley website says: "We feel very strongly that a moral and professional line has been crossed in terms of the behaviour and standards expected of an MP. We call for Mr Morley's immediate resignation and a by-election to be called to find a suitable candidate to represent Scunthorpe's interests.
"We are not a political party or positioning a candidate for election, we are simply constituents who are disgusted at the conduct of our MP. The hard-working people of Scunthorpe are very let down by this and are seeking support for a public meeting to demand that he resign with immediate effect and that a
by-election is held.
"Remember though – if writing to Mr Morley, please be polite and to the point, there's no need to be rude or offensive, Mr Morley has served the town for many years and deserves our respect for that. The internet is a wonderful thing for giving yourself a voice so tell your friends on social network sites, and look for Elliot Must Go Groups – if there isn't one on your social network – set one up!"
Feelings are running so high in the town that community police officers have been stationed outside Mr Morley's home. Motorists have slowed down to shout abuse. "Pay it all back," is the most familiar refrain. There are signs of more trouble for the Gosport Tory MP Sir Peter Viggers, who was ordered by the party high command to stand down at the next election after he claimed £1,600 for a house for his ducks on his country estate. Some local people have been in touch with the Bromsgrove group for advice on a campaign. A similar story is emerging in the Mid-Worcestershire constituency of the Tory MP Peter Luff after public revulsion at his spending on furnishings, including a £1,300 rug and £600 china set. Readers' messages posted on the website of Worcester News give a flavour of how his constituents feel. One said: "The public need an opportunity to express their anger, concerns, disappointment, disgust." Another demanded that Mr Luff should go before a public meeting to answer the following question: "I would not have been able to carry out my work as an MP if I had not claimed taxpayers' money to pay for a £600+ china set becausee_SLps"
In Bromsgrove, public anger boiled over when a missile was thrown through the window of the Conservative Party offices. The siege mentality was confirmed when a reporter from BBC's Newsnight tried to gain access. The constituency secretary refused to open the door and could be seen repeatedly mouthing the words: "No comment."
A message has been put up on the party website asking for support. "Never before in Bromsgrove has it been more important for us all to unite behind our MP Julie Kirkbride. She is, as you all know, an extremely compassionate hard-working person who has used her talents to assist so many people in our community and for the benefit of Bromsgrove."
Significantly, the local party did not mention the word expenses in its defence of its MP. Mrs Marnell was contemptuous. "I have never met the woman and I am sure she is very nice," she says. "But when people are losing their jobs, struggling to pay mortgages, there is a real sense of anger at all this money she has had with her MP husband. The phone never stops ringing with people saying they want to sign the petition."
In Scunthorpe, the campaign is being led by Michael Taylor, 38, an IT specialist, who has lived in the town all his life. "My father was a steelworker," Mr Taylor says, "so we have never been affluent. I went to the local comprehensive. This town has always been poor with high unemployment. It really hurts local people to think that their MP, someone they would usually look up to, was claiming for a mortgage which had been paid off."
In the last few days, Labour and the Tories have been engaged in an increasingly frantic race to try win credit for reforming the political system, with proposals for fixed-term parliaments and voting reform.
But such talk has cut little ice with voters whose most pressing demand is the removal of their MP. "I am sure electoral reform is important," Mr Taylor says, "but to people in places like Scunthorpe, we want a chance now to vote out our MP who claims more in expenses than most people here earn in two years. We are not content with him being deselected by the next election, which gives him another 12 pay cheques. We want a by-election now."
Earlier this year, as the Commons debated the publication of MPs' expenses, it was Julie Kirkbride who spoke the loudest in opposing making public MPs' addresses. Miss Kirkbride, who last year was voted the second most attractive MP in an internet poll, feared unwanted attention from "fixated" male admirers. Public feeling against her today is such that only her most diehard supporters are willing to believe that was her real reason.
As the revelations over expenses continue, it looks likely that more campaigns will begin against MPs who hope to limp through to next May in order to preserve the pension entitlements and pay-offs which are automatic at general elections.
These protests are not, as some MPs claim, media driven. They are spontaneous, grass-roots rebellions against dishonest behaviour by our elected representatives.
Bromsgrove was once the world centre for nail making. Those nails are now being collected by opponents of Miss Kirkbride to hammer into her political coffin if, and when, she is forced to step down by Mr Cameron.
Text Size Email this article
Print this article
Share this article
delicious
Digg
Fark
Newsvine
StumbleUpon
Yahoo! Buzz
Mixx
What are these?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/5395803/MPs-expenses-Revenge-before-reform.html
MPs' expenses Get feed updatesComment Get feed updatesPersonal View Get feed updatesAndrew Pierce Get feed updatesPolitics Get feed updates
More on
MPs' expenses Get feed updatesComment Get feed updatesPersonal View Get feed updatesAndrew Pierce Get feed updatesPolitics Get feed updatesComments: 1
I think it is about time that Gordon Brown realised that the voters are not going to have the wool pulled over their eyes again and called a general election. Who can you trust and also what elese is hiding in the dirty linen.One other thing I would be interested to know do the MP's claim a car allowance and if so do they pay tax like anyone else has to whether they are reps or management
Maureen Stone
on May 27, 2009
at 07:49 PM
Report this comment
Bangladesh-media in Dhaka promote “Baroness of Bethnal Green” to a fully fledged Member of Parliament. To an MP !
EAST LONDON PRESS brings you another exclusive investigation report
London 1818 GMT
Wednesday 27 May 2009
Bangladesh-media in Dhaka promote “Baroness of Bethnal Green” to a fully fledged Member of Parliament. To an MP! Not only that, she was busy speaking and meeting like any old British Government minister while on a grand tour in Bangladesh!
"Published On: 2008-02-11
National
Bangladesh-born British MP visits Sharankhola
Unb, Bagerhat
Visiting Bangladesh-born British MP Baroness Pola Manzila Uddin yesterday visited two Sidr-hit villages in Sharankhola upazila.
Pola, the first Bangladeshi in the House of Lords, during her visit in Bagi and Tapalbari villages, assured the Sidr-affected people of all-out cooperation from her government.
Later, she inaugurated a programme, organised by local NGO Rupantar for distributing sanitary materials among 6,000 Sidr-affected families at Tapalbari village.
Pola, who arrived Bangladesh on Saturday, is scheduled to meet Chief Adviser Fakhruddin Ahmed and Foreign Adviser Iftekhar Ahmed Chowdhury on Monday."
London 1818 GMT
Wednesday 27 May 2009
Bangladesh-media in Dhaka promote “Baroness of Bethnal Green” to a fully fledged Member of Parliament. To an MP! Not only that, she was busy speaking and meeting like any old British Government minister while on a grand tour in Bangladesh!
"Published On: 2008-02-11
National
Bangladesh-born British MP visits Sharankhola
Unb, Bagerhat
Visiting Bangladesh-born British MP Baroness Pola Manzila Uddin yesterday visited two Sidr-hit villages in Sharankhola upazila.
Pola, the first Bangladeshi in the House of Lords, during her visit in Bagi and Tapalbari villages, assured the Sidr-affected people of all-out cooperation from her government.
Later, she inaugurated a programme, organised by local NGO Rupantar for distributing sanitary materials among 6,000 Sidr-affected families at Tapalbari village.
Pola, who arrived Bangladesh on Saturday, is scheduled to meet Chief Adviser Fakhruddin Ahmed and Foreign Adviser Iftekhar Ahmed Chowdhury on Monday."
DHAKA 21 May 2009: “Bangladesh-origin Baroness Pola Uddin” involved in allowance scandal
BANGLADESH newspaper web site THE NATION 21 May 2009:
Baroness Pola Uddin involved in allowance scandal
Baroness Pola Uddin
Agency, London
Bangladesh-origi Baroness Pola Uddin and two MPs who promised support for the victims of the collapsed First Solution money transfer company in 2007 are embroiled in the allowances scandal.
Baroness Pola Uddin claimed allowances for a property in Maidstone which, neighbours say she does not live in. The Daily Mail last week also claimed she is a social housing tenant in Wapping, East London. A parliamentary investigation has been launched.
Government minister Kitty Ussher is said to have asked the parliamentary fees office "to pay what you are able to" of a bill for £20,000 to update her London home.
Luton MP Margaret Moran is said to have received £22,500 to treat dry rot in a property which is neither near Westminster nor in her constituency.
Baroness Uddin, Kitty Ussher MP and Margaret Moran MP have all denied any wrongdoing. Tellingly though, Kitty Ussher and Margaret Moran both voted against full disclosure of expenses and allowances in a House fo Commons vote in July 2008
In June 2007 a money transfer company, First Solution, used by members of the Bangladeshi community, collapsed owing an estimated £1.7 million to up to 2,000 victims. The victims were some of the poorest people in Britain seeking to transfer small amounts of money to Bangladesh to help some of the poorest people in the world
In a debate in the House of Commons a debate initiated by George Galloway MP, in whose constituency many of the victims fell and who had helped to expose the scandal in the first place, Minister Kitty Ussher refused to provide government money to assist the victims on the grounds of "moral Hazard".
However Baroness Uddin, amidst a flurry of publicity, set up a fund to assist victims. Ussher promised government support for the Uddin fund. Margaret Moran, in that same debate, emerged as a member of the ad hoc advisory group for the fund. Both Ussher and Moran heaped praise on Baroness Uddin for setting up the fund.
However, the fund was closed just two months later with only one hundred pounds in the account.
Baroness Pola Uddin involved in allowance scandal
Baroness Pola Uddin
Agency, London
Bangladesh-origi Baroness Pola Uddin and two MPs who promised support for the victims of the collapsed First Solution money transfer company in 2007 are embroiled in the allowances scandal.
Baroness Pola Uddin claimed allowances for a property in Maidstone which, neighbours say she does not live in. The Daily Mail last week also claimed she is a social housing tenant in Wapping, East London. A parliamentary investigation has been launched.
Government minister Kitty Ussher is said to have asked the parliamentary fees office "to pay what you are able to" of a bill for £20,000 to update her London home.
Luton MP Margaret Moran is said to have received £22,500 to treat dry rot in a property which is neither near Westminster nor in her constituency.
Baroness Uddin, Kitty Ussher MP and Margaret Moran MP have all denied any wrongdoing. Tellingly though, Kitty Ussher and Margaret Moran both voted against full disclosure of expenses and allowances in a House fo Commons vote in July 2008
In June 2007 a money transfer company, First Solution, used by members of the Bangladeshi community, collapsed owing an estimated £1.7 million to up to 2,000 victims. The victims were some of the poorest people in Britain seeking to transfer small amounts of money to Bangladesh to help some of the poorest people in the world
In a debate in the House of Commons a debate initiated by George Galloway MP, in whose constituency many of the victims fell and who had helped to expose the scandal in the first place, Minister Kitty Ussher refused to provide government money to assist the victims on the grounds of "moral Hazard".
However Baroness Uddin, amidst a flurry of publicity, set up a fund to assist victims. Ussher promised government support for the Uddin fund. Margaret Moran, in that same debate, emerged as a member of the ad hoc advisory group for the fund. Both Ussher and Moran heaped praise on Baroness Uddin for setting up the fund.
However, the fund was closed just two months later with only one hundred pounds in the account.
'Pola Uddin should be arrested for fraud '
The Muslim Money Grabbing Peer Who Rips Taxpayers off £100000 for ...
4 May 2009 by asgard14
A Bangladeshi-born Muslim woman who was made a member of the House of Lords by the Labour Party has been revealed as ripping off taxpayers to the tune of £100000 for an empty flat, claiming it as her “housing allowance” as part of her ...
Romanian National Vanguard News Agency - http://news.ronatvan.com/
4 May 2009 by asgard14
A Bangladeshi-born Muslim woman who was made a member of the House of Lords by the Labour Party has been revealed as ripping off taxpayers to the tune of £100000 for an empty flat, claiming it as her “housing allowance” as part of her ...
Romanian National Vanguard News Agency - http://news.ronatvan.com/
The 'East London Advertiser' joins 'rivals' Tower Hamlets Council in the 'vital rescue operation' for 'Baroness Uddin'
The 'East London Advertiser' joins 'rivals' Tower Hamlets Council in the 'vital rescue operation' for 'Baroness Uddin'
Watch this space
Watch this space
THE "SUN" SAYS Not guilty of fiddling? Pull the Uddin one
SHANAHAN
Not guilty of fiddling? Pull the Uddin one
Published: 05 May 2009
IT'S a while since he rode a winner, but the legendary Lester Piggott was still a star attraction handing out trophies at Newmarket races.
Lester, of course, was lost to the racing scene for a year after being jailed for tax fraud.
And when he came out he was further humiliated by being stripped of his OBE.
More medals may soon be making a return journey as claims of Army heroism in Afghanistan are investigated.
If porkies have been told, those involved will rightly lose their awards.
So why can't we apply this rule to the House of Lords?
It's a disgrace that men and women can keep the titles Lord and Lady for life regardless of what they do.
Home Secretary ... Jacqui Smith
Look at Labour's Baroness Uddin and the £100,000 she's claimed on an empty flat.
She was a local councillor and Tony Blair crony whom he put in the Lords after she failed to be picked as a Labour candidate.
She lives in a taxpayer-subsidised east London house while claiming her main home is a flat in Kent.
Except that until rumbled by The Sunday Times she appears never to have lived in the Kent property.
But by registering her main home as outside London, she qualifies for lavish Lords allowances. When she realised reporters were on her tail, she dashed over to the Kent property - where neighbours had never once set eyes on her - and furniture and workmen started arriving in a frenzy of activity.
"Lady" Uddin makes £29,000 a year like this. Along with other goodies like free food and free travel, she's had £359,000 from us between 2001 and this year.
She swans around the deprived streets of Tower Hamlets - one of Britain's poorest boroughs - in a flash BMW 4x4 for which the list price new is almost £60,000.
These allowances are a gigantic scam. How do Labour expect to stop benefit fraud on poor estates when their own representatives are up to their ermined ears in fraud?
If it is a crime for a jobless brickie to fiddle housing benefit, then it should be an even greater crime for a Lord or Lady to be chiselling the taxpayer. Labour don't realise the extent of public anger over the Westminster gravy train. Tell you what, "Lady" Uddin. You insist the Kent address is your main home even though nobody has ever seen you there.
Advertisement
Prove it by letting us see your utility and council tax bills from that address. And if it's your main home, how come you aren't registered to vote there?
Her "Ladyship" is not alone in her ducking and diving. It's par for the course at Westminster. We need a House of Lords to keep the Commons in check. Those in it ought to command respect.
But Labour have stuffed it with duds and crawlers who see their titles as official permission to rob the taxpayer.
I bet you once Labour lose the election, we'll see "Lady" Jacqui Smith and "Lord" Prescott lapping up the cream.
Fraud has become so institutionalised under Labour that peers and ministers don't see these scams as a crime, just their "entitlement".
A police and Parliamentary investigation has been demanded into "Lady" Uddin's allowances.
If it turns out that the Kent address has not been her main home she should hand the money back and suffer the same indignity as Lester Piggott by losing her title and paying the price in prison.
But I fear it's a racing certainty that won't happen.
DO you agree with Fergus? Have your say below.
Share this article What is this? Digg it! del.icio.us MySpace Facebook Fark Reddit NowPublic
E-MAIL THIS PAGE TO A FRIEND PRINT THIS PAGE
HAVE YOUR SAY
Tell us what you think of this story
whilst speaking the truth is admirable we all know nothing will change these alledged fraudsters - t...
posted by: PabloHemingway
she'll either play the race card or say that its against her human rights to pay it back! typical we...
posted by: garythesaint
How many Politicians have been SACKED or PUNISHED for dipping into the Public Purse? Probably about ...
posted by: vor
ALL COMMENTS [15]
Not guilty of fiddling? Pull the Uddin one
Published: 05 May 2009
IT'S a while since he rode a winner, but the legendary Lester Piggott was still a star attraction handing out trophies at Newmarket races.
Lester, of course, was lost to the racing scene for a year after being jailed for tax fraud.
And when he came out he was further humiliated by being stripped of his OBE.
More medals may soon be making a return journey as claims of Army heroism in Afghanistan are investigated.
If porkies have been told, those involved will rightly lose their awards.
So why can't we apply this rule to the House of Lords?
It's a disgrace that men and women can keep the titles Lord and Lady for life regardless of what they do.
Home Secretary ... Jacqui Smith
Look at Labour's Baroness Uddin and the £100,000 she's claimed on an empty flat.
She was a local councillor and Tony Blair crony whom he put in the Lords after she failed to be picked as a Labour candidate.
She lives in a taxpayer-subsidised east London house while claiming her main home is a flat in Kent.
Except that until rumbled by The Sunday Times she appears never to have lived in the Kent property.
But by registering her main home as outside London, she qualifies for lavish Lords allowances. When she realised reporters were on her tail, she dashed over to the Kent property - where neighbours had never once set eyes on her - and furniture and workmen started arriving in a frenzy of activity.
"Lady" Uddin makes £29,000 a year like this. Along with other goodies like free food and free travel, she's had £359,000 from us between 2001 and this year.
She swans around the deprived streets of Tower Hamlets - one of Britain's poorest boroughs - in a flash BMW 4x4 for which the list price new is almost £60,000.
These allowances are a gigantic scam. How do Labour expect to stop benefit fraud on poor estates when their own representatives are up to their ermined ears in fraud?
If it is a crime for a jobless brickie to fiddle housing benefit, then it should be an even greater crime for a Lord or Lady to be chiselling the taxpayer. Labour don't realise the extent of public anger over the Westminster gravy train. Tell you what, "Lady" Uddin. You insist the Kent address is your main home even though nobody has ever seen you there.
Advertisement
Prove it by letting us see your utility and council tax bills from that address. And if it's your main home, how come you aren't registered to vote there?
Her "Ladyship" is not alone in her ducking and diving. It's par for the course at Westminster. We need a House of Lords to keep the Commons in check. Those in it ought to command respect.
But Labour have stuffed it with duds and crawlers who see their titles as official permission to rob the taxpayer.
I bet you once Labour lose the election, we'll see "Lady" Jacqui Smith and "Lord" Prescott lapping up the cream.
Fraud has become so institutionalised under Labour that peers and ministers don't see these scams as a crime, just their "entitlement".
A police and Parliamentary investigation has been demanded into "Lady" Uddin's allowances.
If it turns out that the Kent address has not been her main home she should hand the money back and suffer the same indignity as Lester Piggott by losing her title and paying the price in prison.
But I fear it's a racing certainty that won't happen.
DO you agree with Fergus? Have your say below.
Share this article What is this? Digg it! del.icio.us MySpace Facebook Fark Reddit NowPublic
E-MAIL THIS PAGE TO A FRIEND PRINT THIS PAGE
HAVE YOUR SAY
Tell us what you think of this story
whilst speaking the truth is admirable we all know nothing will change these alledged fraudsters - t...
posted by: PabloHemingway
she'll either play the race card or say that its against her human rights to pay it back! typical we...
posted by: garythesaint
How many Politicians have been SACKED or PUNISHED for dipping into the Public Purse? Probably about ...
posted by: vor
ALL COMMENTS [15]
Saturday, 23 May 2009
Coming here next: Another world exclusive on the Toytown Council
About the Toytown Council:
It is the Council of mendicants, persons who resemble toys. They could easily inhabit the world of made up local council. They are not real. they are only ever to be found in the Toytown Borough in London
It is the Council of mendicants, persons who resemble toys. They could easily inhabit the world of made up local council. They are not real. they are only ever to be found in the Toytown Borough in London
'East London MP' George Galloway continuing his world stage activities
http://radarsite.blogspot.com/2009/05/my-email-to-george-galloway-cat-man.html
Thursday, 21 May 2009
Has 'an MP' George Galloway signed up as an extension of the 'East London Advertiser' trade 'war' on Tower Hamlets Council?
EAST LONDON PRESS report
1045 Hrs London Thursday 21 May 2009
Is Mr George Galloway signed up to be an extension of the 'East London Advertiser' trade 'war' on Tower Hamlets Council?
"
MP’s fury over council freesheet ‘blagging’ Royal pass
20 May 2009
By Victoria Huntley
AN MP has today called for a full inquiry into attempts by a Town Hall weekly newspaper subsidised from council tax to get a pass to cover a royal visit by claiming to be part of Mirror group newspapers.
A reporter from 'East End Life' applied to the Newspaper Society, which represents the local and regional press and administers the Royal rota, to ask to cover Prince William's visit to London's East End.
But the society smelt a rat when reporter Shalina Hussain claimed in an email that 'East End Life,' owned and run by Tower Hamlets council, was part of Trinity Mirror.
Council media bosses trying to downplay the fiasco called it "a cock up rather than a conspiracy" and insisted it was "a mistake" by a "junior" member of staff.
MISLEAD
But George Galloway, MP for Bethnal Green & Bow which is in Tower Hamlets, would have none of it.
He slammed 'East End Life' which he said tried to "mislead the Royal authorities."
Galloway added: "It beggars belief that this was just an 'honest mistake' by a naive young reporter.
"This is scandalous and all the more reason this freesheet should be investigated by the Office of Fair Trading and by the Audit Commission."
The Newspaper Society gave the 'royal rota' pass instead to the long-established East London Advertiser for Prince William's visit to the Whitechapel Gallery on May 11.
FIASCO
The fiasco has rumbled on this week with Opposition councillors at the Town Hall drawing blood.
Liberal Democrat group leader Stephanie Eaton says the deception took 'East End Life' to a new low level.
She added: "The council should apologise to the East London Advertiser and its journalists for trying to cover local news by blagging their way into the visit of Prince William."
And Deputy Tory group leader Tim Archer is raising a formal complaint with the council.
The Newspaper Society campaigns against council-run freesheets paid for by the taxpayer which divert revenue from established newspapers and threaten local democracy in the process.
"
1045 Hrs London Thursday 21 May 2009
Is Mr George Galloway signed up to be an extension of the 'East London Advertiser' trade 'war' on Tower Hamlets Council?
"
MP’s fury over council freesheet ‘blagging’ Royal pass
20 May 2009
By Victoria Huntley
AN MP has today called for a full inquiry into attempts by a Town Hall weekly newspaper subsidised from council tax to get a pass to cover a royal visit by claiming to be part of Mirror group newspapers.
A reporter from 'East End Life' applied to the Newspaper Society, which represents the local and regional press and administers the Royal rota, to ask to cover Prince William's visit to London's East End.
But the society smelt a rat when reporter Shalina Hussain claimed in an email that 'East End Life,' owned and run by Tower Hamlets council, was part of Trinity Mirror.
Council media bosses trying to downplay the fiasco called it "a cock up rather than a conspiracy" and insisted it was "a mistake" by a "junior" member of staff.
MISLEAD
But George Galloway, MP for Bethnal Green & Bow which is in Tower Hamlets, would have none of it.
He slammed 'East End Life' which he said tried to "mislead the Royal authorities."
Galloway added: "It beggars belief that this was just an 'honest mistake' by a naive young reporter.
"This is scandalous and all the more reason this freesheet should be investigated by the Office of Fair Trading and by the Audit Commission."
The Newspaper Society gave the 'royal rota' pass instead to the long-established East London Advertiser for Prince William's visit to the Whitechapel Gallery on May 11.
FIASCO
The fiasco has rumbled on this week with Opposition councillors at the Town Hall drawing blood.
Liberal Democrat group leader Stephanie Eaton says the deception took 'East End Life' to a new low level.
She added: "The council should apologise to the East London Advertiser and its journalists for trying to cover local news by blagging their way into the visit of Prince William."
And Deputy Tory group leader Tim Archer is raising a formal complaint with the council.
The Newspaper Society campaigns against council-run freesheets paid for by the taxpayer which divert revenue from established newspapers and threaten local democracy in the process.
"
Saturday, 16 May 2009
EAST LONDON PRESS is launching a community forum about the "Baroness of Bethnal Green" in the 'news'.
EAST LONDON PRESS report
1255 Hrs London Saturday 16 May 2009
EAST LONDON PRESS is doing this to draw attention to the fact that the various allegations against the "Baroness" have been linked in the media to the "Baroness" being allegedly a representative of the Bangladeshi community in Tower Hamlets.
We have noticed that the Tower Hamlets Council and the East London Advertiser have not published anything about the "Baroness", except reluctantly repeating in the sketchiest way possible, parts only of what had appeared in the Sunday Times and subsequently in some other parts of the media.
EAST LONDON PRESS is of the view that the 'news' events surrounding the alleged Baroness are far too important for the whole community, Bangladeshi and other, in the East End to be allowed to 'fade away’.
1255 Hrs London Saturday 16 May 2009
EAST LONDON PRESS is doing this to draw attention to the fact that the various allegations against the "Baroness" have been linked in the media to the "Baroness" being allegedly a representative of the Bangladeshi community in Tower Hamlets.
We have noticed that the Tower Hamlets Council and the East London Advertiser have not published anything about the "Baroness", except reluctantly repeating in the sketchiest way possible, parts only of what had appeared in the Sunday Times and subsequently in some other parts of the media.
EAST LONDON PRESS is of the view that the 'news' events surrounding the alleged Baroness are far too important for the whole community, Bangladeshi and other, in the East End to be allowed to 'fade away’.
The strange and loudly telling silence of the sleazed ethnic post-holders - Keith Vaz, "Baroness of Bethnal Green" Pola Uddin and Shahid Malik - 1
The strange and loudly telling silence of the sleazed ethnic post-holders - Keith Vaz, "Baroness of Bethnal Green" Pola Uddin and Shahid Malik - Part
EAST LONDON PRESS
0910 Hrs
London Saturday 16 May 2009
Baroness of Bethnal Green is very silent this weekend. Not even agreeing a prepared script to be put on the BBC in her name! Unlike 8 years ago when she did exactly that.
To aid Keith Vaz.
She said he was a victim of racist press coverage.
Why?
Because the press was reporting on Keith Vaz and his very own sleaze.
And how did ‘Baroness of Bethnal Green’ get involved with Keith Vaz?
What was he to her?
How had they met?
They could not have met by natural circumstances.
Those must have been arranged for them.
Both belong to the same British party. Both owed their presence in the British Parliament to their claims that they were approved ethnics.
And the rest as they say, is sleaze.
But how many ethnic people have any real say on what their alleged representatives in Britain get up to?
Clearly the ‘baroness’ - or Keith Vaz for that matter - and other tokens of ethnic ‘fulfillment and achievement ‘keeping themselves very quiet this weekend.
Not even the very remarkable departure from office of Shahid Malik yesterday [Friday 15 May 2009] produced a single byte of sound from either ‘Baroness Uddin’ of Keith Vaz.
But then would they ever have done?
Would any of them have really solidarised with Shahid Malik at the hour of his personal need?
And would Shahidf Malik himself have solidarised with any other allegedly fellow ethnic feeling the pressure of racist prejudice?
Who would have answered Shahid Malik’s double-edged question - ‘why are the media outside my house?’ he put to Carrie Gracie of BBC News where he was treated to the full interview not long before he was forced to ‘stand aside’?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/5332099/Shahid-Maliks-fate-sealed-by-growing-dismay-in-Downing-St-MPs-expenses.html
Shahid Malik’s fate sealed by growing dismay in Downing St : MPs' expenses
The fate of Shahid Malik was sealed just after 10pm on Thursday night. That was when officials in Downing Street started digesting, via the Telegraph website, the full allegations levelled at the Justice Minister.
By Andrew Porter, Political Editor
Last Updated: 9:36PM BST 15 May 2009
In the words of one of those present: “The alarm bells started ringing immediately.”
Television screens in Downing Street were showing the late evening news bulletins, which were detailing the demise of two senior politicians.
Related Articles
Shahid Malik steps down as Brown orders inquiry into his rent
Shahid Malik, his house and the slum landlord
MPs' expenses investigation in full
MPs' expenses: the story that changed politics
MPs' expenses: Now we can start again - with a clean House
MPs? expenses: Shahid Malik stands down as Justice Minister over rental arrangements
The expenses investigation had claimed its first scalps in former Labour minister Elliot Morley and Andrew Mackay, a close aide to David Cameron.
But the latest revelations were to eclipse them both. Mr Malik, the MP for Dewsbury, was about to become the first ministerial casualty of The Daily Telegraph’s exhaustive investigation into MPs’ expenses.
The problem lay with the three-bedroom house in Dewsbury which Mr Malik, who is Jack Straw’s deputy at the Ministry of Justice, had designated as his main home.
By claiming that his main home was in his constituency he was able to nominate his London home as his second home, allowing him to use expenses – the maximum of £66,827 over the three years he has been an MP – to furnish and keep it. Among the items that he had claimed for was a £2,600 home cinema system, including a 40-inch flat screen television. The Commons fees office agreed to pay half. He also claimed for a £730 massage chair.
Meanwhile, he was renting the Dewsbury house from Tahir Zaman, a businessman who lived next door, and who had in 2005 been convicted of renting out a building to a family of five which was “uninhabitable.” He was fined £450 and ordered to pay costs.
There was another problem obvious to most people in Number 10, but clearly not Mr Malik. The landlord had told The Telegraph that Mr Malik paid a discounted rent, understood to be under £100 a week.
It meant that while the taxpayer was funding his London existence with payments of £443 a week, the minister was paying a minimal amount for his rent, risking a breach of the ministerial code, which states that no minister should accept “gifts or hospitality” which could place them under an “obligation” to someone else. Before Gordon Brown went to bed he was alerted to the latest problem. One person who was not going to bed was Mr Malik. He had been contacted by Sky News and was asked for a reaction to the revelations. This was to be the start of an astonishing round of television appearances in which he would defend vigorously his expenses claims. Mr Malik told Sky News that he had acted within the rules and denied that his job was on the line.
He added: “I think this is a bit of a non-story to be honest.”
Labour Party sources had also – prematurely and seemingly without reference to Downing Street – let it be known that they did not think there was a problem. This must have emboldened Mr Malik as he went to bed. He had agreed to allow the Sky cameras into his home first thing in the morning to further defend his position. In the Cabinet Office at 7am Sir Gus O’Donnell, the Cabinet Secretary, and the most powerful civil servant in the land, was starting to immerse himself in the Malik case.
By 8am he had spoken to the Prime Minister and given his initial thoughts on Mr Malik’s position. It was not positive. Meanwhile, Mr Straw had also spoken to Mr Malik, as had the Permanent Secretary at the Ministry of Justice. The ministerial code was the issue.
Some in Number 10 were aghast when they saw Mr Malik popping up on the morning’s various television news channels. He told Sky, the BBC and GMTV that he was innocent. He said: “I’m going one million per cent by the book. It’s a non-story in the sense that I could have been one of 500 MPs. I don’t know why the Telegraph focused on me. Of course I feel that my reputation is tarnished, but my integrity is intact. I’m not in it to make money, I’m here to make a difference.”
And what of the “£800 massage chair?” How did that fit in, he was politely asked by an interviewer. He replied: “You see, I’d have more respect for you if you were honest about the figures. You know full well it is £730.”
But his career prospects were getting bleaker by the minute.
Sir Gus told the Prime Minister that it was serious enough to ask Sir Philip Mawer, the independent adviser on the ministerial code, to rule on a possible breach.
Mr Malik was told that he would have to stand down until the inquiry reached its conclusions. Last night no one in Number 10 expected him to return as a Justice Minister.
EAST LONDON PRESS
0910 Hrs
London Saturday 16 May 2009
Baroness of Bethnal Green is very silent this weekend. Not even agreeing a prepared script to be put on the BBC in her name! Unlike 8 years ago when she did exactly that.
To aid Keith Vaz.
She said he was a victim of racist press coverage.
Why?
Because the press was reporting on Keith Vaz and his very own sleaze.
And how did ‘Baroness of Bethnal Green’ get involved with Keith Vaz?
What was he to her?
How had they met?
They could not have met by natural circumstances.
Those must have been arranged for them.
Both belong to the same British party. Both owed their presence in the British Parliament to their claims that they were approved ethnics.
And the rest as they say, is sleaze.
But how many ethnic people have any real say on what their alleged representatives in Britain get up to?
Clearly the ‘baroness’ - or Keith Vaz for that matter - and other tokens of ethnic ‘fulfillment and achievement ‘keeping themselves very quiet this weekend.
Not even the very remarkable departure from office of Shahid Malik yesterday [Friday 15 May 2009] produced a single byte of sound from either ‘Baroness Uddin’ of Keith Vaz.
But then would they ever have done?
Would any of them have really solidarised with Shahid Malik at the hour of his personal need?
And would Shahidf Malik himself have solidarised with any other allegedly fellow ethnic feeling the pressure of racist prejudice?
Who would have answered Shahid Malik’s double-edged question - ‘why are the media outside my house?’ he put to Carrie Gracie of BBC News where he was treated to the full interview not long before he was forced to ‘stand aside’?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/5332099/Shahid-Maliks-fate-sealed-by-growing-dismay-in-Downing-St-MPs-expenses.html
Shahid Malik’s fate sealed by growing dismay in Downing St : MPs' expenses
The fate of Shahid Malik was sealed just after 10pm on Thursday night. That was when officials in Downing Street started digesting, via the Telegraph website, the full allegations levelled at the Justice Minister.
By Andrew Porter, Political Editor
Last Updated: 9:36PM BST 15 May 2009
In the words of one of those present: “The alarm bells started ringing immediately.”
Television screens in Downing Street were showing the late evening news bulletins, which were detailing the demise of two senior politicians.
Related Articles
Shahid Malik steps down as Brown orders inquiry into his rent
Shahid Malik, his house and the slum landlord
MPs' expenses investigation in full
MPs' expenses: the story that changed politics
MPs' expenses: Now we can start again - with a clean House
MPs? expenses: Shahid Malik stands down as Justice Minister over rental arrangements
The expenses investigation had claimed its first scalps in former Labour minister Elliot Morley and Andrew Mackay, a close aide to David Cameron.
But the latest revelations were to eclipse them both. Mr Malik, the MP for Dewsbury, was about to become the first ministerial casualty of The Daily Telegraph’s exhaustive investigation into MPs’ expenses.
The problem lay with the three-bedroom house in Dewsbury which Mr Malik, who is Jack Straw’s deputy at the Ministry of Justice, had designated as his main home.
By claiming that his main home was in his constituency he was able to nominate his London home as his second home, allowing him to use expenses – the maximum of £66,827 over the three years he has been an MP – to furnish and keep it. Among the items that he had claimed for was a £2,600 home cinema system, including a 40-inch flat screen television. The Commons fees office agreed to pay half. He also claimed for a £730 massage chair.
Meanwhile, he was renting the Dewsbury house from Tahir Zaman, a businessman who lived next door, and who had in 2005 been convicted of renting out a building to a family of five which was “uninhabitable.” He was fined £450 and ordered to pay costs.
There was another problem obvious to most people in Number 10, but clearly not Mr Malik. The landlord had told The Telegraph that Mr Malik paid a discounted rent, understood to be under £100 a week.
It meant that while the taxpayer was funding his London existence with payments of £443 a week, the minister was paying a minimal amount for his rent, risking a breach of the ministerial code, which states that no minister should accept “gifts or hospitality” which could place them under an “obligation” to someone else. Before Gordon Brown went to bed he was alerted to the latest problem. One person who was not going to bed was Mr Malik. He had been contacted by Sky News and was asked for a reaction to the revelations. This was to be the start of an astonishing round of television appearances in which he would defend vigorously his expenses claims. Mr Malik told Sky News that he had acted within the rules and denied that his job was on the line.
He added: “I think this is a bit of a non-story to be honest.”
Labour Party sources had also – prematurely and seemingly without reference to Downing Street – let it be known that they did not think there was a problem. This must have emboldened Mr Malik as he went to bed. He had agreed to allow the Sky cameras into his home first thing in the morning to further defend his position. In the Cabinet Office at 7am Sir Gus O’Donnell, the Cabinet Secretary, and the most powerful civil servant in the land, was starting to immerse himself in the Malik case.
By 8am he had spoken to the Prime Minister and given his initial thoughts on Mr Malik’s position. It was not positive. Meanwhile, Mr Straw had also spoken to Mr Malik, as had the Permanent Secretary at the Ministry of Justice. The ministerial code was the issue.
Some in Number 10 were aghast when they saw Mr Malik popping up on the morning’s various television news channels. He told Sky, the BBC and GMTV that he was innocent. He said: “I’m going one million per cent by the book. It’s a non-story in the sense that I could have been one of 500 MPs. I don’t know why the Telegraph focused on me. Of course I feel that my reputation is tarnished, but my integrity is intact. I’m not in it to make money, I’m here to make a difference.”
And what of the “£800 massage chair?” How did that fit in, he was politely asked by an interviewer. He replied: “You see, I’d have more respect for you if you were honest about the figures. You know full well it is £730.”
But his career prospects were getting bleaker by the minute.
Sir Gus told the Prime Minister that it was serious enough to ask Sir Philip Mawer, the independent adviser on the ministerial code, to rule on a possible breach.
Mr Malik was told that he would have to stand down until the inquiry reached its conclusions. Last night no one in Number 10 expected him to return as a Justice Minister.
Sunday, 10 May 2009
"Baroness of Bethnal Green": a 'nephew' was reportedly employed by the Sunday Times.
"Baroness of Bethnal Green": a 'nephew' was reportedly employed by the Sunday Times.
Friday, 8 May 2009
An EASTENDER comment about Spitalfields Housing Association is published by INSIDE HOUSING
0750 Hrs Friday 8 May 2009
An EASTENDER comment about Spitalfields Housing Association is published by INSIDE HOUSING
Housing association probes Baroness Uddin’s second home status
Labour peer faces eviction
08/05/2009 | By Clara Story
Print
Email
Share
Comments (1)
Save
A Labour peer is being investigated and could face eviction after naming her housing association property as her second home.
Baroness Uddin, a tenant of Spitalfields Housing Association in east London, claimed in her House of Lords expenses for 2007/08 that her main residence was a flat in Kent.
She claimed £29,675 a year for overnight subsistence - the allowance for residency at a second home in London - in the same year.
But legally a tenant with an assured or secure tenancy must live in the social home as their ‘only or principal home’, meaning she could have breached her tenancy. Baroness Uddin is understood to share a joint tenancy on the home with her husband.
Although last year’s claim was the first in which she named the location of her main residence, Baroness Uddin has been claiming between £15,000 and £24,000 each year for overnight subsistence since 2001.
Asked whether Baroness Uddin faced eviction Omar Mapara, chief executive of Spitalfields Housing Association, said the association ‘is investigating this matter which it takes very seriously’.
‘We have written to her requesting that she confirms that she and her husband continue to occupy our property as their only or principal home and we await a response,’ he added.
Avril Smith, senior lawyer at Lawrence Graham, said: ‘If she maintains that the Maidstone property is her principal residence, she could fall into difficulty with her tenancy.’
Ms Smith confirmed the ultimate sanction available for the breach of a tenancy agreement could be the loss of the tenancy.
If the tenancy is joint with her husband, she could claim it was his main residence only, which could comply with the rules, Ms Smith added.
The baroness became the first Muslim woman life peer in 1998. She is named as a company director of business and management consultancy Manzil Associates.
Baroness Uddin said she welcomed the review of her expenses that will be carried out by the clerk of Parliament. She said she had not broken the rules of the House of Lords and would not comment further until the review was finished.
Readers' comments (1)
EastEnder | Fri, 8 May 2009 05:50 GMT
Your headline does not match the contents. From what you quote of the statement by the Spitalfields Housing Association it is not clear what codes of conduct that organisation itself has in place. Also, you do not suggest anything about the Spitalfields Housing Association itself. Did they in any way aid the behaviour by the particular individual? What is the record of the Housing Association in these matters. Has the media bothered to report on this and other so-called social landlords? What has been their role? And how if any are the management personnel of the Spitalfields Housing Association related to the Baroness of Bethnal Green politically?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
An EASTENDER comment about Spitalfields Housing Association is published by INSIDE HOUSING
Housing association probes Baroness Uddin’s second home status
Labour peer faces eviction
08/05/2009 | By Clara Story
Share
Comments (1)
Save
A Labour peer is being investigated and could face eviction after naming her housing association property as her second home.
Baroness Uddin, a tenant of Spitalfields Housing Association in east London, claimed in her House of Lords expenses for 2007/08 that her main residence was a flat in Kent.
She claimed £29,675 a year for overnight subsistence - the allowance for residency at a second home in London - in the same year.
But legally a tenant with an assured or secure tenancy must live in the social home as their ‘only or principal home’, meaning she could have breached her tenancy. Baroness Uddin is understood to share a joint tenancy on the home with her husband.
Although last year’s claim was the first in which she named the location of her main residence, Baroness Uddin has been claiming between £15,000 and £24,000 each year for overnight subsistence since 2001.
Asked whether Baroness Uddin faced eviction Omar Mapara, chief executive of Spitalfields Housing Association, said the association ‘is investigating this matter which it takes very seriously’.
‘We have written to her requesting that she confirms that she and her husband continue to occupy our property as their only or principal home and we await a response,’ he added.
Avril Smith, senior lawyer at Lawrence Graham, said: ‘If she maintains that the Maidstone property is her principal residence, she could fall into difficulty with her tenancy.’
Ms Smith confirmed the ultimate sanction available for the breach of a tenancy agreement could be the loss of the tenancy.
If the tenancy is joint with her husband, she could claim it was his main residence only, which could comply with the rules, Ms Smith added.
The baroness became the first Muslim woman life peer in 1998. She is named as a company director of business and management consultancy Manzil Associates.
Baroness Uddin said she welcomed the review of her expenses that will be carried out by the clerk of Parliament. She said she had not broken the rules of the House of Lords and would not comment further until the review was finished.
Readers' comments (1)
EastEnder | Fri, 8 May 2009 05:50 GMT
Your headline does not match the contents. From what you quote of the statement by the Spitalfields Housing Association it is not clear what codes of conduct that organisation itself has in place. Also, you do not suggest anything about the Spitalfields Housing Association itself. Did they in any way aid the behaviour by the particular individual? What is the record of the Housing Association in these matters. Has the media bothered to report on this and other so-called social landlords? What has been their role? And how if any are the management personnel of the Spitalfields Housing Association related to the Baroness of Bethnal Green politically?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
"Baroness of Bethnal Green" is featured in a new report published by the Times newspaper HERE
0620 Hrs UK London Friday 8 May 2009
EAST LONDON PRESS report
An EASTENDER has just posted a commnet on the web site of INSIDE HOUSING concerning their report about the Spitalfieds Hosusing Association:
Your headline does not match the contents. From what you quote of the statement by the Spitalfields Housing Association it is not clear what codes of conduct that organisation itself has in place. Also, you do not suggest anything about the Spitalfields Housing Association itself. Did they in any way aid the behaviour by the particular individual? What is the record of the Housing Association in these matters. Has the media bothered to report on this and other so-called social landlords? What has been their role? And how if any are the management personnel of the Spitalfields Housing Association related to the Baroness of Bethnal Green politically?
EAST LONDON PRESS report
An EASTENDER has just posted a commnet on the web site of INSIDE HOUSING concerning their report about the Spitalfieds Hosusing Association:
Your headline does not match the contents. From what you quote of the statement by the Spitalfields Housing Association it is not clear what codes of conduct that organisation itself has in place. Also, you do not suggest anything about the Spitalfields Housing Association itself. Did they in any way aid the behaviour by the particular individual? What is the record of the Housing Association in these matters. Has the media bothered to report on this and other so-called social landlords? What has been their role? And how if any are the management personnel of the Spitalfields Housing Association related to the Baroness of Bethnal Green politically?
EAST LONDON PRESS launches THE FRIDAY LECTURE 8 May 2009
EAST LONDON PRESS launches THE FRIDAY LECTURE 8 May 2009
Why a Friday lecture?
Because in East London, Friday is observed by significant numbers of people at congregational prayers held at mosques.
One main part of the prayers is the Friday Sermon delivered inside the mosques and before the full formal congregational prayers are said on Friday at lunchtimes.
The EAST LONDON PRESS is launching the Friday lecture to report on the implications of those sermons on the people in East London.
One question we shall be seeking to find answers to is this:
What is really going on in East London today?
Do the people know what is going on?
We intend to help the people get to find out what is going on about their community.
Their estates. Their streets. And about their lives.
Things that may be of relevance to all in East London.
Of course people know what they see and feel.
But how much is there to know that is of so much relevance to our lives that we don’t know.
About the mosques themselves, for instance.
Why are the mosques so much in the Govt. news?
Why do the Police keep talking about the mosques so much?
Do the Police know something about the mosques that we don’t know?
And if so, what is that they do know and have not told us?
How about the other religious sections in the population and their places of prayers and worship?
What are they doing for the community?
Why are the Govt. and the Police silent about the churches, the synagogues and the temples
Why a Friday lecture?
Because in East London, Friday is observed by significant numbers of people at congregational prayers held at mosques.
One main part of the prayers is the Friday Sermon delivered inside the mosques and before the full formal congregational prayers are said on Friday at lunchtimes.
The EAST LONDON PRESS is launching the Friday lecture to report on the implications of those sermons on the people in East London.
One question we shall be seeking to find answers to is this:
What is really going on in East London today?
Do the people know what is going on?
We intend to help the people get to find out what is going on about their community.
Their estates. Their streets. And about their lives.
Things that may be of relevance to all in East London.
Of course people know what they see and feel.
But how much is there to know that is of so much relevance to our lives that we don’t know.
About the mosques themselves, for instance.
Why are the mosques so much in the Govt. news?
Why do the Police keep talking about the mosques so much?
Do the Police know something about the mosques that we don’t know?
And if so, what is that they do know and have not told us?
How about the other religious sections in the population and their places of prayers and worship?
What are they doing for the community?
Why are the Govt. and the Police silent about the churches, the synagogues and the temples
"Baroness of Bethnal Green" is helped by the useful prevarication of the 'Spitalfields Housing Association'
0525 UK London Friday 8 May 2009
The following headline [“Labour peer faces eviction”] to a story published this week by INSIDE HOUSING is inaccurate. A read of the contents exposes the truth.
That the Spitalfields Housing Association that owns the Wapping House is not all that bothered about any of the 'deeds' of Pola Uddin.
We produce the item as a reference here and we promise to answer all the questions that have arisen about Pola Uddin's achievements.
Labour peer faces eviction
Labour peer faces eviction
08/05/2009 | By Clara Story
Print
Email
Share
Save
Housing association probes Baroness Uddin’s second home status over possible breach of tenancy
A Labour peer is being investigated and could face eviction after naming her housing association property as her second home.
Baroness Uddin, a tenant of Spitalfields Housing Association in east London, claimed in her House of Lords expenses for 2007/08 that her main residence was a flat in Kent.
She claimed £29,675 a year for overnight subsistence - the allowance for residency at a second home in London - in the same year.
But legally a tenant with an assured or secure tenancy must live in the social home as their ‘only or principal home’, meaning she could have breached her tenancy. Baroness Uddin is understood to share a joint tenancy on the home with her husband.
Although last year’s claim was the first in which she named the location of her main residence, Baroness Uddin has been claiming between £15,000 and £24,000 each year for overnight subsistence since 2001.
Asked whether Baroness Uddin faced eviction Omar Mapara, chief executive of Spitalfields Housing Association, said the association ‘is investigating this matter which it takes very seriously’.
‘We have written to her requesting that she confirms that she and her husband continue to occupy our property as their only or principal home and we await a response,’ he added.
Avril Smith, senior lawyer at Lawrence Graham, said: ‘If she maintains that the Maidstone property is her principal residence, she could fall into difficulty with her tenancy.’
Ms Smith confirmed the ultimate sanction available for the breach of a tenancy agreement could be the loss of the tenancy.
If the tenancy is joint with her husband, she could claim it was his main residence only, which could comply with the rules, Ms Smith added.
The baroness became the first Muslim woman life peer in 1998. She is named as a company director of business and management consultancy Manzil Associates.
Baroness Uddin said she welcomed the review of her expenses that will be carried out by the clerk of Parliament. She said she had not broken the rules of the House of Lords and would not comment further until the review was finished.
Have your say
Required fields | Terms and conditions
Please do not complete the following form field for security reasons.
Name
E-mail
Comment
Your name will display with your comment, but feel free to use a pseudonym. Email addresses are not displayed.
Comments are moderated before they appear on the site, so there may be a delay between a comment being posted and it going live.
I have read and agree to the terms and conditions
Print
Email
Share
The following headline [“Labour peer faces eviction”] to a story published this week by INSIDE HOUSING is inaccurate. A read of the contents exposes the truth.
That the Spitalfields Housing Association that owns the Wapping House is not all that bothered about any of the 'deeds' of Pola Uddin.
We produce the item as a reference here and we promise to answer all the questions that have arisen about Pola Uddin's achievements.
Labour peer faces eviction
Labour peer faces eviction
08/05/2009 | By Clara Story
Share
Save
Housing association probes Baroness Uddin’s second home status over possible breach of tenancy
A Labour peer is being investigated and could face eviction after naming her housing association property as her second home.
Baroness Uddin, a tenant of Spitalfields Housing Association in east London, claimed in her House of Lords expenses for 2007/08 that her main residence was a flat in Kent.
She claimed £29,675 a year for overnight subsistence - the allowance for residency at a second home in London - in the same year.
But legally a tenant with an assured or secure tenancy must live in the social home as their ‘only or principal home’, meaning she could have breached her tenancy. Baroness Uddin is understood to share a joint tenancy on the home with her husband.
Although last year’s claim was the first in which she named the location of her main residence, Baroness Uddin has been claiming between £15,000 and £24,000 each year for overnight subsistence since 2001.
Asked whether Baroness Uddin faced eviction Omar Mapara, chief executive of Spitalfields Housing Association, said the association ‘is investigating this matter which it takes very seriously’.
‘We have written to her requesting that she confirms that she and her husband continue to occupy our property as their only or principal home and we await a response,’ he added.
Avril Smith, senior lawyer at Lawrence Graham, said: ‘If she maintains that the Maidstone property is her principal residence, she could fall into difficulty with her tenancy.’
Ms Smith confirmed the ultimate sanction available for the breach of a tenancy agreement could be the loss of the tenancy.
If the tenancy is joint with her husband, she could claim it was his main residence only, which could comply with the rules, Ms Smith added.
The baroness became the first Muslim woman life peer in 1998. She is named as a company director of business and management consultancy Manzil Associates.
Baroness Uddin said she welcomed the review of her expenses that will be carried out by the clerk of Parliament. She said she had not broken the rules of the House of Lords and would not comment further until the review was finished.
Have your say
Required fields | Terms and conditions
Please do not complete the following form field for security reasons.
Name
Comment
Your name will display with your comment, but feel free to use a pseudonym. Email addresses are not displayed.
Comments are moderated before they appear on the site, so there may be a delay between a comment being posted and it going live.
I have read and agree to the terms and conditions
Share
"Baroness of Bethnal Green" continues to “contribute her very own role and conduct" to aid the flames of hatred against "Muslim” community in the UK
"Baroness of Bethnal Green" continues to “contribute her very own role and conduct" to aid the flames of hatred against "Muslim” community in the UK
EAST LONDON PRESS report
0525 UK Time
London Friday 8 May 2009
The "Baroness of Bethnal Green" has now become so famous that the plain Pola Uddin will no longer be able to claim that she was not being given media attention.
EAST LONDON PRESS report
0525 UK Time
London Friday 8 May 2009
The "Baroness of Bethnal Green" has now become so famous that the plain Pola Uddin will no longer be able to claim that she was not being given media attention.
Thursday, 7 May 2009
Parliamentary Matron Caught Looting the Coffer American Style
http://www.glossynews.com/artman/publish/baroness-uddin-inquiry-financial-scandal-1647.shtml
Parliamentary Matron Caught Looting the Coffer American Style
By Rusty
May 6, 2009, 10:45
Email This Article
Printer friendly page
Bangladeshi skimming sensation Uddin seen here at a press conference with her formal microphone.
A New Labour Muslim peer, who lives in the predominantly Shylock populated East End of London, has claimed in excess of £100,000 in parliamentary expenses on a derelict flat in Kent that neighbours say has been unoccupied since the Dawn of Time.
Baroness Uddin, a Bangladeshi immigrant who worked closely with the money-grasping Bliars when they occupied 10 Downing Street, has been claiming allowances intended for peers living outside London although she resides only a couple of short miles from the House of Lords.
Inquiries by The Sunday Shitraker have established that Baroness Sleeza Udders bought a two-bedroom flat at Skidrow Hamlets on Asbo Avenue in 2005 and has named it as her main home to claim almost £30,000 a year in accommodation expenses from the House of Lords.
The baroness, who became Britain’s first Muslim woman peer in 1998, has actually lived with her family in a house in Wopping (Little Bangladesh) east London, since the early 1990’s – with neighbours telling reporters she is a daily
fixture there - both morning and night.
Residents from the five other flats in the same block as Udder’s property are all ready to swear under oath that they have never seen her – or anyone else - at the flat, with investigating journalists able to see through the windows that the two-bedroom property was totally unfurnished.
Rita Skank, a recouperating rhubarb addict, who has lived next door to Udder’s flat for ten years told reporters after being shown a photo of the Baroness “I ain’t never seen any fat little Paki’ sluts like ‘er round ‘ere. In fact no cunt lives there.”
Ms. Skank further revealed that until recently, there were piles of leaves on the balcony harbouring a nest of rats - and sheets of newspaper stuck over the crap-encrusted bedroom windows.
Last weekend, hours after The Sunday Shitraker had challenged Udders about her “main residence” and felonious expense claims, the Baroness’s gas-guzzling BMW 4x4 Chelsea tractor was spotted at the Skidrow Hamlets flat and members of her extended family arrived and moved in like a troop of conveniently-timed squatters.
Cracow Pete, the local Polish plumber who went into the flat to bodge up a broken GCH boiler said: “The entire place is a shithole – crap and dust everywhere, and they told me they were just moving in.”
By Sunday night, curtains covered the windows, a light was on in the hall, a mat was placed outside the front door, Mohammed and the Meercats new album was on the stereo and belting out sitar music at full volume - and the entire place stank of mutton vindaloo.
The Sunday Shitraker has also challenged Udders about a further £83,000 worth of expense claims she made before she bought the Skidrow Hamlets flat in September 2005.
She claims that her main residence has been outside the capital since 2001 but evasively refuses to say where, despite repeated questions and rumours it might actually be in Bangladesh.
Last night Angus McTwat, the leader in Westminster of the Scottish Men in Skirts party, which has campaigned for a bigger share of Parliamentary financial perks, said he wanted two inquiries into the baroness’s expense claims. “I will be writing to the police, and to the House of Lords authorities, asking them to investigate this report of blatant criminal activity.”
Lord Shitshott, a Liberal Democrat frontbencher, said: “An empty property can’t be a peer’s main residence. The Lords authorities must check the facts of this case and investigate – even a thick public school twit like me knows that much.”
“This cow Udders is milking the system tits up and back again – and lying through her NHS dentures.”
Insisting she had done nothing wrong, the stony-faced Udders told the press: “Should the House of Lords authorities wish to investigate the matter I will, of course, cooperate fully.”
She further stated that “A lot of people are homeless and have to rough it – that’s why I keep the flat unfurnished and sleep on the floor so I can empathise with their suffering myself.”
Hence, one might well posture, in light of the recent scandals involving New Labour politicians and their fabricated expense claims, would Diogenes question if a single honest man belongs to their disgraced party (or woman viz Jacqui Smith / Sleeza Udders).
Is it simply base human nature that compels one to take pecuniary advantage of a lax expenses system and fiddle it for all it is worth - or is it that governments – past and present - only elevate larcenous scumbags to these perk-bestowed positions and titled ranks?
Rusty appears courtesy of The Satire Stall.
Parliamentary Matron Caught Looting the Coffer American Style
By Rusty
May 6, 2009, 10:45
Email This Article
Printer friendly page
Bangladeshi skimming sensation Uddin seen here at a press conference with her formal microphone.
A New Labour Muslim peer, who lives in the predominantly Shylock populated East End of London, has claimed in excess of £100,000 in parliamentary expenses on a derelict flat in Kent that neighbours say has been unoccupied since the Dawn of Time.
Baroness Uddin, a Bangladeshi immigrant who worked closely with the money-grasping Bliars when they occupied 10 Downing Street, has been claiming allowances intended for peers living outside London although she resides only a couple of short miles from the House of Lords.
Inquiries by The Sunday Shitraker have established that Baroness Sleeza Udders bought a two-bedroom flat at Skidrow Hamlets on Asbo Avenue in 2005 and has named it as her main home to claim almost £30,000 a year in accommodation expenses from the House of Lords.
The baroness, who became Britain’s first Muslim woman peer in 1998, has actually lived with her family in a house in Wopping (Little Bangladesh) east London, since the early 1990’s – with neighbours telling reporters she is a daily
fixture there - both morning and night.
Residents from the five other flats in the same block as Udder’s property are all ready to swear under oath that they have never seen her – or anyone else - at the flat, with investigating journalists able to see through the windows that the two-bedroom property was totally unfurnished.
Rita Skank, a recouperating rhubarb addict, who has lived next door to Udder’s flat for ten years told reporters after being shown a photo of the Baroness “I ain’t never seen any fat little Paki’ sluts like ‘er round ‘ere. In fact no cunt lives there.”
Ms. Skank further revealed that until recently, there were piles of leaves on the balcony harbouring a nest of rats - and sheets of newspaper stuck over the crap-encrusted bedroom windows.
Last weekend, hours after The Sunday Shitraker had challenged Udders about her “main residence” and felonious expense claims, the Baroness’s gas-guzzling BMW 4x4 Chelsea tractor was spotted at the Skidrow Hamlets flat and members of her extended family arrived and moved in like a troop of conveniently-timed squatters.
Cracow Pete, the local Polish plumber who went into the flat to bodge up a broken GCH boiler said: “The entire place is a shithole – crap and dust everywhere, and they told me they were just moving in.”
By Sunday night, curtains covered the windows, a light was on in the hall, a mat was placed outside the front door, Mohammed and the Meercats new album was on the stereo and belting out sitar music at full volume - and the entire place stank of mutton vindaloo.
The Sunday Shitraker has also challenged Udders about a further £83,000 worth of expense claims she made before she bought the Skidrow Hamlets flat in September 2005.
She claims that her main residence has been outside the capital since 2001 but evasively refuses to say where, despite repeated questions and rumours it might actually be in Bangladesh.
Last night Angus McTwat, the leader in Westminster of the Scottish Men in Skirts party, which has campaigned for a bigger share of Parliamentary financial perks, said he wanted two inquiries into the baroness’s expense claims. “I will be writing to the police, and to the House of Lords authorities, asking them to investigate this report of blatant criminal activity.”
Lord Shitshott, a Liberal Democrat frontbencher, said: “An empty property can’t be a peer’s main residence. The Lords authorities must check the facts of this case and investigate – even a thick public school twit like me knows that much.”
“This cow Udders is milking the system tits up and back again – and lying through her NHS dentures.”
Insisting she had done nothing wrong, the stony-faced Udders told the press: “Should the House of Lords authorities wish to investigate the matter I will, of course, cooperate fully.”
She further stated that “A lot of people are homeless and have to rough it – that’s why I keep the flat unfurnished and sleep on the floor so I can empathise with their suffering myself.”
Hence, one might well posture, in light of the recent scandals involving New Labour politicians and their fabricated expense claims, would Diogenes question if a single honest man belongs to their disgraced party (or woman viz Jacqui Smith / Sleeza Udders).
Is it simply base human nature that compels one to take pecuniary advantage of a lax expenses system and fiddle it for all it is worth - or is it that governments – past and present - only elevate larcenous scumbags to these perk-bestowed positions and titled ranks?
Rusty appears courtesy of The Satire Stall.
Tuesday, 5 May 2009
EAST LONDON PRESS investigation brings up to date the silence by the 'East London Advertiser' on the 'Baroness of Bethnal Green..' ‘news’ so far
7 PM
Tuesday
5 May 2009
EAST LONDON PRESS continuing the investigation into the ‘baroness of Bethnal Green, Wapping and Maidstone’ news and the supporting role to her career as played by the ‘East London Advertiser’ to date
East London Press reporting on the odd absence of any news on the East London Advertiser 'web site' about the 'Baroness of Bethnal Green’.
The ‘East London Advertiser’ was not this coy in the past. However!
Just under 10 years ago, as the then embattled Keith Vaz was struggling against allegations concerning misleading claims he had made and allegations of abuse of his positions as a Minister and as an MP, the ‘East London Advertiser’ treated Keith Vaz with manifest sympathy!
Very very odd.
Vaz is not an MP from Tower Hamlets. Not even from London. But the ‘East London Advertiser’ found it possible to treat him as if he were one!
How was that done?
By the ‘East London Advertiser’ imposing its own designation of the ‘Asian community’ in Tower Hamlets that the facts did not support.
The ‘Asian community’ never supported ANY of the Keith Vaz sleaze. Nor would it if a vote were taken.
But the ‘East London Advertiser’ made that claim regardless.
And in effect the ‘East London Advertiser’ put on its record a lie that collectively defamed the entire community by associating the community with the sleazy behaviour as being then alleged against Keith Vaz.
And who was involved in that ‘campaign for the ‘protection of the honour’ of the sleaze row MP from Leicester?
Why Baroness Pola Uddin of ‘Bethnal Green’, Wapping and Maidstone, of course. Neitehr Wapping nor Maidstone had yet caught the imagination of the INSIGHT Team down the road off the Wapping Highway at the Sunday Times.
And the odd, temporary ‘colleague’ picked up from the then active ranks of the ‘Asian community’ ‘councillors’ installed on the Blair-leaning Tower Hamlets Council joined ‘the Baroness’ in her ‘Asian duty’ to inform the ‘local media’ that the Leicester East MP Keith Vaz was not a sleazy person at all.
And that all the allegations that were being made against Keith Vaz had been got up by racist elements .
The ‘East London Advertiser’ did Pola Uddin’s bidding. A little while later, here was nothing in the ‘East London Advertiser’ when Keith Vaz in fact himself resigned as a Blair Minister carrying the Euro baggages and the very full bags of unresolved allegations..
Th question is: Is there any point in the ‘East London Advertiser’ being kept in ‘circulation’ by Archant?
By all ACCOUNTS the ‘East London Advertiser’ is experiencing consistently diminishing circulation.
In all senses of that term.
But who would have thought that they would also curtail the circulation of the residues of the truth that survived in the issues they allegedly covered?
COVERED UP, more like.
Tuesday
5 May 2009
EAST LONDON PRESS continuing the investigation into the ‘baroness of Bethnal Green, Wapping and Maidstone’ news and the supporting role to her career as played by the ‘East London Advertiser’ to date
East London Press reporting on the odd absence of any news on the East London Advertiser 'web site' about the 'Baroness of Bethnal Green’.
The ‘East London Advertiser’ was not this coy in the past. However!
Just under 10 years ago, as the then embattled Keith Vaz was struggling against allegations concerning misleading claims he had made and allegations of abuse of his positions as a Minister and as an MP, the ‘East London Advertiser’ treated Keith Vaz with manifest sympathy!
Very very odd.
Vaz is not an MP from Tower Hamlets. Not even from London. But the ‘East London Advertiser’ found it possible to treat him as if he were one!
How was that done?
By the ‘East London Advertiser’ imposing its own designation of the ‘Asian community’ in Tower Hamlets that the facts did not support.
The ‘Asian community’ never supported ANY of the Keith Vaz sleaze. Nor would it if a vote were taken.
But the ‘East London Advertiser’ made that claim regardless.
And in effect the ‘East London Advertiser’ put on its record a lie that collectively defamed the entire community by associating the community with the sleazy behaviour as being then alleged against Keith Vaz.
And who was involved in that ‘campaign for the ‘protection of the honour’ of the sleaze row MP from Leicester?
Why Baroness Pola Uddin of ‘Bethnal Green’, Wapping and Maidstone, of course. Neitehr Wapping nor Maidstone had yet caught the imagination of the INSIGHT Team down the road off the Wapping Highway at the Sunday Times.
And the odd, temporary ‘colleague’ picked up from the then active ranks of the ‘Asian community’ ‘councillors’ installed on the Blair-leaning Tower Hamlets Council joined ‘the Baroness’ in her ‘Asian duty’ to inform the ‘local media’ that the Leicester East MP Keith Vaz was not a sleazy person at all.
And that all the allegations that were being made against Keith Vaz had been got up by racist elements .
The ‘East London Advertiser’ did Pola Uddin’s bidding. A little while later, here was nothing in the ‘East London Advertiser’ when Keith Vaz in fact himself resigned as a Blair Minister carrying the Euro baggages and the very full bags of unresolved allegations..
Th question is: Is there any point in the ‘East London Advertiser’ being kept in ‘circulation’ by Archant?
By all ACCOUNTS the ‘East London Advertiser’ is experiencing consistently diminishing circulation.
In all senses of that term.
But who would have thought that they would also curtail the circulation of the residues of the truth that survived in the issues they allegedly covered?
COVERED UP, more like.
EAST LONDON PRESS bringing on real insight in following up SUNDAY TIMES insight piece on ‘Baroness Uddin of Bethnal Green’, Wapping and Maidstone!
0740 Hrs London Tuesday 5 May 2009
EAST LONDON PRESS bringing on the real insight in following up the SUNDAY TIMES insight piece on ‘Baroness Pola Uddin of Bethnal Green’, Wapping and may be even Maidstone.
"Baroness of Bethnal Green" was feted and hyped by London Evening Standard in 1998. The Standard had not checked its facts.
The REASON why the word Bangladeshis is preferred to bengali is to do with the fact that the UK Bangladeshi population is not Bengali. It is from the Sylheti speaking regions in Bangladesh. NOT Bengali.
The EVENING STANDARD also swallowed the lie that Pola Uddin was the first bengali woman to sit on a local Authority.
How could the EVENING STANDARD publish such a lie?
The EVENING STANDARD had at least two regular staff members attending the former County Hall. Mostly to cover the former GLC.
Mike King, who is no longer on the staff. And the recent Transport Editor Dick Murray.
The Inner London Education Authority was based there. The ILEA had a community-elected part that it described as ‘the Ethnic Minorities Section’. On that section was a Bengali woman with a Ph D who was also a Councillor on a South London Council.
That was more than ten years before Tony Blair made Pola Uddin a baroness.
And almost a decade before Pola Uddin got anywhere near Tower Hamlets Council as a member.
"
Baroness Pola Uddin
The Evening Standard (09.09.98) has a feature article on high-achieving female Londoners. One of those included is Baroness Uddin (see BMMS for June and August 1998), of whom it says: "The first Muslim to sit in the House of Lords, 38-year-old Baroness Uddin is a committed campaigner for the rights of oppressed Bengali women in London’s East End. Married with five children, she became the first Bengali woman to sit on a local authority in Britain when she was elected a Labour councillor in 1990, and became deputy council leader from 1994-1996. Currently equality manager at the London Borough of Newham, she was made a working peer this summer." [BMMS September 1998 Vol. VI, No. 9, p. 7]
EAST LONDON PRESS bringing on the real insight in following up the SUNDAY TIMES insight piece on ‘Baroness Pola Uddin of Bethnal Green’, Wapping and may be even Maidstone.
"Baroness of Bethnal Green" was feted and hyped by London Evening Standard in 1998. The Standard had not checked its facts.
The REASON why the word Bangladeshis is preferred to bengali is to do with the fact that the UK Bangladeshi population is not Bengali. It is from the Sylheti speaking regions in Bangladesh. NOT Bengali.
The EVENING STANDARD also swallowed the lie that Pola Uddin was the first bengali woman to sit on a local Authority.
How could the EVENING STANDARD publish such a lie?
The EVENING STANDARD had at least two regular staff members attending the former County Hall. Mostly to cover the former GLC.
Mike King, who is no longer on the staff. And the recent Transport Editor Dick Murray.
The Inner London Education Authority was based there. The ILEA had a community-elected part that it described as ‘the Ethnic Minorities Section’. On that section was a Bengali woman with a Ph D who was also a Councillor on a South London Council.
That was more than ten years before Tony Blair made Pola Uddin a baroness.
And almost a decade before Pola Uddin got anywhere near Tower Hamlets Council as a member.
"
Baroness Pola Uddin
The Evening Standard (09.09.98) has a feature article on high-achieving female Londoners. One of those included is Baroness Uddin (see BMMS for June and August 1998), of whom it says: "The first Muslim to sit in the House of Lords, 38-year-old Baroness Uddin is a committed campaigner for the rights of oppressed Bengali women in London’s East End. Married with five children, she became the first Bengali woman to sit on a local authority in Britain when she was elected a Labour councillor in 1990, and became deputy council leader from 1994-1996. Currently equality manager at the London Borough of Newham, she was made a working peer this summer." [BMMS September 1998 Vol. VI, No. 9, p. 7]
"Baroness of Bethnal Green" has provoked some very racist comments. The racists are targetting the Bangladeshis in Britain
"Baroness of Bethnal Green" has provoked some very racist comments. The racists are targetting the Bangladeshis in Britain
EAST LONDON PRESS report
The “Baroness of Bethnal Green” has been receiving some very strange ‘backing’. Her ‘backers’ are calling the SUNDAY TIMES insight report as the work of a ‘right wing British media’. Next they will say that the ‘Baroness was on the verge of solving the global economic crisis’ but for this crude interruption by the jealous; British media’.
In fact the ‘Baroness’ has a record of confusing her ‘home’ address.
We reveal here that ten years ago, the self same ‘Baroness of Bethnal green” was desperate about the media.
She was very cross indeed.
Why?
Because the ungrateful BBC of all the media., failed to recognise her talents. They gave space instead to some very insignificant people. Those even from Brick Lane Bangladeshi community.
How dare the BBC do such a thing? And ignore the ‘baroness’ who claimed to be living in the Brick Lane area!
Inquiries produced evidence that she was not living in Brick Lane at all.
And that she was living not far from Wapping!
Even in 1999!
And the occasion for the ‘Baroness of Bethnal Green’ being so annoyed with the media?
Why the nail bombing outrage, What else!
And how did she think that she had anything to contribute?
That Pola Uddin was allowed to become a ‘baroness’ is a remarkable example of just how irresponsible Tony Blair was.
Nobody in Bethnal Green would have voted for Pola Uddin to become ‘baroness’!
Whatever for?
To get blamed for her behavior?
Behaviour that ordinary people find so hard to understand.
How could Pola Uddin even go to Carter-Ruck the solicitors?
What reputation was she imagining she was defending on the facts?
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6211535.ece
From The Sunday Times
May 3, 2009
The deserted Kent flat that earned baroness £100,000
A ‘main home’ outside London meant Lady Uddin could claim £29,000 a year, but the neighbours tell Insight that nobody lived there
Insight
THE small two-bedroom apartment in a quiet corner of Maidstone had been a mystery to its neighbours for years.
As far as they could see, it had been vacant and unfurnished since the day it was bought. Nobody had ever attempted to let it. However, after darkness fell last Sunday night a BMW 4x4 entered the gated apartment block and parked outside the flat.
A neighbour saw four people, including two women in saris, apparently carrying something into the house. “They were there for about half an hour,” said a postman who lives next door but one to the flat. “They did take in something: it was either a television or a computer screen.” By the next morning thick curtains protected the two bedrooms that had been visible from the street, a light was on in the hallway and a striped mat had been placed outside the flat’s front door.
“I thought, ‘There’s a mat. Someone must have moved in’,” said Yvonne Adams, whose own front door is a few feet across the corridor. “No one’s been living there.”
RELATED LINKS
Tory buys flat round corner on expenses
Home Secretary faces inquiry over expenses
Geoff Hoon caught up in row over second home
What the neighbours did not know was that the property is owned by Baroness Uddin, 49, a Labour peer. She has designated the flat as her “main address” so she can claim almost £30,000 in accommodation expenses a year from the House of Lords while continuing to live in her London home.
The flurry of activity in the flat on Sunday night came after The Sunday Times had asked the baroness questions about her “main address” the previous day. Neighbours also report a brief visit by the same car the previous night.
Yesterday MPs and a peer called for a full investigation into the baroness’s expenses claims. She has received more than £100,000 (this figure includes an estimate for last year) since buying the Maidstone flat. She also claimed a further £83,000 for the same allowance from 2001, four years before she bought the flat.
Despite repeated questions, she has declined to discuss whether she actually owned or rented a main home outside London during this period.
Angus Robertson, the SNP’s leader in the Commons, said: “I will be writing to the House of Lords authorities and the police and asking them to investigate this report.”
Lord Oakeshott, the Liberal Democrat Treasury spokesman, said: “The system stinks. Peers should get a simple taxable daily rate instead of these allowances. An empty property can’t be a peer’s main residence. The Lords authorities must investigate.”
Born in Bangladesh, Manzila Pola Uddin came to Britain as a teenager and went on to become a community worker and social services officer while pursuing a political career that saw her rise to be deputy leader of Tower Hamlets borough council in the early 1990s.
She was made a peer by Tony Blair in 1998 and took the title “Baroness Uddin of Bethnal Green in our London Borough of Tower Hamlets”. Aged 38, she was the youngest woman in the Lords.
As a campaigner on women’s and ethnic minority issues she has become part of the new Labour establishment, befriending Cherie Blair. Her Facebook friends include the cabinet ministers Harriet Harman, Hazel Blears and David Miliband and Alastair Campbell, the former spin doctor.
However, she has never forgotten her roots. Her Facebook entry lists London as her home town and she has continued to work and live there. She and her family have resided in the same three-bedroom house in Wapping since the early 1990s.
A page entitled “my back-yard” on her personal website says: “I have a great sense of belonging to the East End which has been my home for over 30 years . . . it is where my professional and political career has taken shape, where my children have grown up, and also where I served as a local councillor for eight years.”
Yet she designated the family house in Tower Hamlets – where her children lived and went to school – as a “second home” and this allowed her to claim the cost of overnight accommodation in London.
The purpose of the allowance is explained in a House of Lords guidance note that says: “A member whose main residence is outside greater London and who maintains a residence in London for the purpose of attending sittings of the House may claim this allowance towards the cost of maintaining such a residence.”
In the Commons a “main residence” is considered to be the home where an MP spends most nights, but in the Lords there is no fixed definition. Mary Morgan, director of public information at the Lords, says: “A member will know what his main residence is. It’s where they live . . . For the purpose of claiming expenses, it’s where they travel to and from. There is no official definition.”
The Sunday Times began looking into Uddin’s expenses claims as part of an inquiry into peers who clock in to the House of Lords chamber briefly so as to claim overnight allowances. We photographed her going into the Lords through the peers’ entrance, saw her appear in the chamber for less than a minute and then leave the building. The whole visit took just three minutes.
In the latest published list (the year to March 2008) she claimed £29,600 from the Lords for overnight subsistence – one of the highest sums for any peer. She gave the location of her main residence as Kent.
This was curious because there appear to be no public documents linking the baroness to the county. The only reference is a speech to the Lords in 2006 which she began with the words “I am a resident of Maidstone borough council”. She is listed on the electoral roll at the Wapping address from 1996 to the present.
She has been a director of seven companies in the past 10 years and each time has said she lives at her Wapping home. The Companies Act says directors must give their “usual” address.
Uddin has a brother, Rousseau Khan, who lives in Bromley, south London. Khan owns the house and a neighbour said Uddin did not live there.
When a reporter rang her London home, her husband Komar picked up the telephone. He appeared confused about his wife’s “main residence” in Kent.
Reporter: “Have you lived there [the Tower Hamlets family home] for a long time?”
Husband: “Yeah, We came here in ’93.”
Reporter: “Ninety-three, I see. Am I also right in thinking you have a place down in Kent?”
Husband: “Sorry?” Reporter: “Do you have a place in Kent?”
Husband: “Kent?” Reporter: “Kent, as in the county Kent? No?”
Husband: “No.”
Minutes later the reporter spoke to Uddin about her three-minute visit to the House of Lords that day. She said she had been working on Lords business outside the building and had gone to the chamber but left quickly after realising she had another meeting.
The reporter attempted to broach the subject of her overnight expenses claim but she put the phone down. That evening she instructed Carter-Ruck, the libel lawyers, to speak on her behalf.
At the same time a reporter went to her London home. It is a three-storey building in a block of about a dozen flats built by Spitalfields Housing Association. The association’s housing stock is for people requiring affordable housing and the average rent for one of the association’s three-bedroom houses is £500 a month. The baroness is claiming more than £2,000 a month for running and maintaining a house in London.
Neighbours confirmed that the baroness shares the home with Komar, two of her sons and a daughter. Komar was outside the house smoking a cigarette.
When asked where his home was, he said, “I live here”, apparently surprised by the obvious question. When reminded about the home in Kent, he added: “I live in both places.” Later Carter-Ruck said that he had initially answered “no” when asked on the telephone whether he had a property in Kent because it belonged to his wife.
Fozlu Miah, 28, lives next to the Uddins in the same building, having moved in with his parents in the early 1990s, about the same time as the baroness. “As far as I know she lives here,” said Miah. “I see her most days through the window, coming in and going out. I sometimes talk to her . . . I call her auntie.”
Rafique Uddin (no relation), another neighbour, has known the family for years: “We all moved in at the same time. I don’t know anything about a house in Kent. I’m surprised to hear that because almost every day when I’m parking my car I can see their car. The mum [baroness] is going in and out. They are continuously living here as far as I know.”
Her daughter Masuma Siddiqah, 17, is best friends with the baroness’s daughter. She said: “[The baroness] is always there. I hear her beep her car every day when she gets home.” Siddiqah added that Uddin’s daughter had never told her anything about the family having a home in Kent.
In a statement last Saturday, Carter-Ruck confirmed the baroness owned a property in Maidstone which is registered as her main address with the House of Lords. The solicitors also offered to disclose the Kent address if The Sunday Times undertook not to publish details or approach members of the baroness’s family at the address. We declined.
Where was it? Overlooking a nature reserve on the fringes of Maidstone’s central shopping area lies a block of apartments built in 2005. Land registry searches confirmed that Uddin owns a street-level flat there.
She bought it for £155,000 in September 2005, nine months after peers’ expenses claims for overnight subsistence were made public for the first time. There is a mortgage on it.
It has two small bedrooms on the roadside and a lounge incorporating a kitchen area at the back. It is part of a group of six apartments that all share the same main entrance.
The Sunday Times has interviewed residents from all five of the other flats and others living nearby. They all said they had never seen Uddin, who cuts a distinctive figure, at the property. The neighbours said the property had been left empty since it had been bought. Three remembered peering into the two bedroom windows at the front and noting the rooms were unfurnished.
The windows now have thick curtains drawn across them after last weekend’s visit. The postman said some of the people who entered the flat on Sunday had arrived in a BMW four-wheel-drive. His description of the vehicle, including two letters from its registration plate, match Uddin’s car.
He said: “Nobody has ever lived in there. If you’d have come down a week ago you could have peered in and said nobody lives there.”
Adams has lived across the corridor from the baroness’s flat for three years. “I can’t emphasise enough how no one has lived there. I know that for a fact,” she said.
“There was a time when they had a sheet or something at the window which had fallen down and the security light was coming on, just shining into a completely empty flat . . . No, there has never been a stick of furniture in there.”
Matthew Hollis, whose flat is directly above the baroness’s property, confirmed there had been no furniture in the bedrooms. When initially asked about the flat, he responded: “I don’t think anyone does live there. I’ve never seen anyone in there . . .”
Stuart Brown and his girlfriend Gemma Fox lived directly below Uddin’s flat for three years before leaving recently. He said: “We never had anyone living above.”
The other ground-floor neighbour, who requested her name be withheld, said: “I thought it was empty, too. I posted a note through there about two months ago because my friend was interested in renting.”
A woman in a house that looks directly onto the back of the flat said she often saw people on the balconies above and below the baroness’s flat. “That sweater has been hanging over that middle flat balcony probably since the end of last summer,” she said.
“Every few months some people would just visit, but you are talking 10 minutes max,” Adams said.
On Friday evening the baroness issued a solicitors’ statement saying: “I do not believe that I have done anything wrong or breached any House of Lords rules. Should the relevant House of Lords authorities wish to investigate the matter I will, of course, co-operate fully.
“The Wapping house is rented, while I own the property in Maidstone. The Maidstone property is furnished and I strongly deny that I have never lived there. Indeed I have stayed there regularly since buying it.”
Yesterday evening a reporter spoke to Mark Ryan, a plumber who had entered the flat last weekend to fix the boiler. He described how the property was covered in dust and sparsely furnished.
“I’ve been in more flats than I care to remember, but this place looked like someone had left it ages ago,” he said. “It was very dusty. There were odds and sods of furniture around. There was an old mattress on the floor of one bedroom. It wasn’t made up. There was a fold-up clothes dryer in the other bedroom.
“It didn’t look lived-in. It certainly didn’t look like a family home.They told me they were just moving in.”
Insight: Jonathan Calvert, Claire Newell, Kevin Dowling, Solvej Krause
BARONESS UDDIN
— Born Bangladesh 1959
— Arrives in east London 1973
— Begins working for Newham social services 1988
— Deputy leader of Tower Hamlets 1994-6
— Fails to become Labour parliamentary candidate for Bethnal Green 1997
— Made Labour life peer 1998
— Starts Jagonari Centre to train and educate Asian women 1999
— Meets Blair as part of delegation to tackle Islamic extremism 2005
— Made chairwoman of ethnic minority women’s taskforce 2008
Main address
Maidstone
Two bedroom flat
Bought three years ago
Neighbours have never seen her there and say flat was "empty" and "unfurnished"
Not registered to vote
Second address
Wapping
Three bedroom house
Lived there for 15 years
Children went to school in the area
Neighbours see her regularly
Registered to vote at address
HAVE YOUR SAY
Hope that something is finally done about this level of abuse. If the allegations are correct and were made in a corporate environment, the individual would be guilty of gross misconduct and sacked. However no doubt Labour needs every peer it can get - regardless of integrity...
Hamish T, Dollar, Clackmannanshire
Very sad to see that the person who got the rare opportunity to behave and act as role model for the BME community of Great Britain, failed so badly.
Dr. Hasanat Husain, London, UK
As a foreigner, I would say, Tony Blair was a professional politician.
He already knew this woman’s maturity, mentality, attitude, philosophy and morality when he appointed her 11 years ago. He appointed her because he cares for people and the nation more than his party.
Gunmo Gu, Newcastle, Uk
The full extent of Blair's debasement of the Constitution is now becoming apparent. This apparently corrupt and thieving woman was ennobled only because she failed to win a seat in the Commons. Hereditary Peers may have been 'privileged,' but they were never dishonest or fraudulent. Bring them back!
Bill, Suzhou, China
This is blatantFRAUD.Utility bills will show the full story,plus the many statements by neighbours,so it will be easy to get at the truth, however much she lies.Also-what about the 3 bed flat for deprived people in Tower hamlets for £500 per month?
ROBBERY.Serving the community? I think NOT!
Liz Roberts, Northwich, Cheshire
Disgusting! She should be made to pay back what she illegally claimed (with interest) and pay a fine to help the British economy, the taxpayer who she has robbed!
Harpreet, Leeds,
Ccha! Don't you people know that a peer simply HAS to have a place in the country? How DARE we question that?
I've lived in Tower Hamlets for years and never heard of this lady before; no evidence of emancipation of Asian ladies or seen reduction of fundamentalism. We've been milked AGAIN.
Helen, London, England
Utter disgrace - she should be made to return all the funds claimed - this belongs to the taxpayer not her !!
Philip Low, London, UK
I cannot wait for July, IF the list of all financial 'expenses' and abuses is published. All those guilty of abuse should be made to repay and chucked out of the government. Labour can NEVER survive this. Those with titles should have them taken away. What a mockery.
alice hudson, quimper, france
We need to have a major investigation into Parliament from an independent authority. It would then be possible to draw up a list of the names of every member of the House of Lords and Commons who has abused the system. Those people should then be removed for fraud and we could hold bye-elections.
Alexander Clark, Wokingham, United Kingdom
Investigate, prosecute and send her to jail. While the hardworking taxpayer struggle to keep up mortgage repayments and families are having their homes repossesed to due extreme taxing and general incompetance by the government, we are paying for this thief to line her pockets. What a farce.
Paul, London,
Just how many more Peers and MPs are there with their snouts in the trough? This is not sleaze, this is pure dishonesty and those practising it should be criminally prosecuted for it, like anybody else. How dare they show such arrogance and contempt for the taxpaying public they serve!
Dave, Holmer Green,
Yet another case of public service (questionable in this instance) for personal gain!
Great investigative journalism - please keep it up until the expenses and allowances of our political 'masters' are properly documented, supported, audited and totally transparent.
Bill Basham, Marmaris, Turkey
Disgusting,criminal behaviour .This woman should be in prison for theft.
What will happen? NOTHING.
She is in a minority group (well maybe ) and is well connected
So nothing will happen.
Gormless knows it goes on and B LIAR actively encouraged it! Nothing will change and nothing will happen!
charles holmes, chester, U.K.
It's the same trough and the majority look like they are browsing..
Andy Bond, London, uk
Dave H, Alexandria, USA - Apart from violence, we can do nothing. Believe me, most of us hate the government, ministers, MPs and the Lords. These 'lords & ladies' are not voted in they are friends of the PM - we are powerless. And membership of the EU has made us even weaker. The UK is finished.
Anthony Farrar, Worthing, UK
Seems lords and ladies are above the law.
twas ever thus.
ronnie, Bridego Bridge, UK
A number of the MPs claims exposed so far have been morally dubious, but "within the rules". However, this one sounds like outright fraud.
Stephen Lee, St Albans, Hertfordshire
These people sicken me. If it is not actiual corruption then it is so close as to make no difference morally. Strip "Lady" Uddin of her title (awarded for what?) & let her go back to whatever form of 'work' sustained her and her like before she decided sponging off taxpayers was the thing to do.
Phil, London,
'Lady' Udin should be stripped of her title and jailed for theft, how can these disgusting political worms claim to represent the people? They're theives, plain and simple, stealing from taxpayers, they must be made an example of. This level of rampant corruption cannot be tolerated.
Howard, London, united kingdom
THey should throw this woman out of the Lords IMMEDIATELY - take her to court, send her to prison as is comensurate with her crime, fine her and remind her with a smile that she will have a criminal record to her name for the rest of her life.
Welcome to the real world Labour cronies.
Drew, Nottingham,
Can someone explain how Stephen Hawking has still not been knighted or been made a lord yet this woman with her impressive 2 years as deputy leader Tower Hamlets manages it within one year of FAILING to become a labour candidate. It's not like it's a particularly high bar to jump.
Dave M, Bristol, UK
I assume sometime next week Baroness Uddin will be visited by the police and asked to explain the possible case of fraud and theft. Just in this story there is enough for the police to start an investigation. I suppose now it just needs someone to make a formal complaint.
Stephen, St. Ives, England
What a fantastic article! Beautifully written! As the excuses got worse, the evidence got better!! What a savage piece of journalism. We need more of this. Take these fraudsters away.
Mike, Ipswich, UK
This looks like a simple case of fraud: it should be reported to the police and investigated thoroughly.
Jocelyn Wood, Arequipa,
Another absolute disgrace!
Andy, Glos,
Is this newsworthy ?
I'm not shocked and not surprised... It's exactly what you would expect ! Poor woman is so inept she is well and truly caught.
It's so unusual for an associate of Blair !!!
Next episode will see her exhonerated !
There is so much of this... and it will continue to increase.
Stuart, Tiverton, UK
On the make and on the take. Politicans then wonder why the public think that most of the occupants of the Palace of Westminster are in it for themselves. The fact that MP's/Lords have the audacity to say we haven't broken the rules merely the spirit of them shows how corrupted the lot of them are.
Rupert, London, UK
How on earth does someone become a lord (lady) for being a social services officer and deputy leader of tower hamlets council? We go from admiral LORD Nelson to former prime ministers, to this woman, this fraudster, who is only there because of tony blairs desire to fill the lords with his croonies!
will, grimsby, uk
Please, please, please - find one honest MP or peer and report on them just for a change. I really am beginning to think there isn't one.....
charles, Congleton,
How many more? I did not know peers could claim ALA as well as MPs. These people takes us for fools. Great piece of investigative journalism. Thanks
Ian, Newtownabbey, N. Ireland
Why don't you Brits get angry at the thievery of your politicians?? I don't get it......you should be hanging your political leadership from the lampposts that light up the Thames river. Why do you suffer in silence?? Are you all sheep?
Dave H, Alexandria, USA
A very interesting & detailed piece of investigative journalism there, well done, keep it up.
Tim, Hillsborough, Great Britain
She should lose her title,job and be made to pay back every penny if these facts are true. yet another politician abusing the system
paul, clayton, staffs
Raping the taxpayer. Can we send her and her brood back from whence they came. And let her cheat her own countrymen rather than leeching from the UK Taxpayer. And by the by, what exactly has this person done / achieved to be honoured with a peerage. Oh, forgot she was a community worker..
Oliver Corning, Tunbridge , UK (Used to be Great Britain)
Greed and more greed. Throw them all in Jail I say.
This system needs to stop. If she is found to have not lived in this place and just used it to claim expenses she should be stripped of her position and slung in Jail. Disgusting.
Anthony Stewart, Chicago, USA
This is very naughty by the looks of things - I do hope she will be required to repay the 100,000 pounds she has received as a result of not knowing where she lives.
Joe, Kiev, Ukraine
I despair.
Remind me again why I pay huge amounts of tax?
And remind me further - are these allowances, which our "peers" and MPs receive, taxable (snort)?
Diana, London, UK
I wonder what the response to the Sunday Times investigation will be?
Will you be accused of racism, sexism, or both?
Fred Kite, Notts,
A greedy cheat abusing a position of authority...how surprising!
Kevin, San Francisco,
Show fewer comments
HAVE YOUR SAY
EAST LONDON PRESS report
The “Baroness of Bethnal Green” has been receiving some very strange ‘backing’. Her ‘backers’ are calling the SUNDAY TIMES insight report as the work of a ‘right wing British media’. Next they will say that the ‘Baroness was on the verge of solving the global economic crisis’ but for this crude interruption by the jealous; British media’.
In fact the ‘Baroness’ has a record of confusing her ‘home’ address.
We reveal here that ten years ago, the self same ‘Baroness of Bethnal green” was desperate about the media.
She was very cross indeed.
Why?
Because the ungrateful BBC of all the media., failed to recognise her talents. They gave space instead to some very insignificant people. Those even from Brick Lane Bangladeshi community.
How dare the BBC do such a thing? And ignore the ‘baroness’ who claimed to be living in the Brick Lane area!
Inquiries produced evidence that she was not living in Brick Lane at all.
And that she was living not far from Wapping!
Even in 1999!
And the occasion for the ‘Baroness of Bethnal Green’ being so annoyed with the media?
Why the nail bombing outrage, What else!
And how did she think that she had anything to contribute?
That Pola Uddin was allowed to become a ‘baroness’ is a remarkable example of just how irresponsible Tony Blair was.
Nobody in Bethnal Green would have voted for Pola Uddin to become ‘baroness’!
Whatever for?
To get blamed for her behavior?
Behaviour that ordinary people find so hard to understand.
How could Pola Uddin even go to Carter-Ruck the solicitors?
What reputation was she imagining she was defending on the facts?
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6211535.ece
From The Sunday Times
May 3, 2009
The deserted Kent flat that earned baroness £100,000
A ‘main home’ outside London meant Lady Uddin could claim £29,000 a year, but the neighbours tell Insight that nobody lived there
Insight
THE small two-bedroom apartment in a quiet corner of Maidstone had been a mystery to its neighbours for years.
As far as they could see, it had been vacant and unfurnished since the day it was bought. Nobody had ever attempted to let it. However, after darkness fell last Sunday night a BMW 4x4 entered the gated apartment block and parked outside the flat.
A neighbour saw four people, including two women in saris, apparently carrying something into the house. “They were there for about half an hour,” said a postman who lives next door but one to the flat. “They did take in something: it was either a television or a computer screen.” By the next morning thick curtains protected the two bedrooms that had been visible from the street, a light was on in the hallway and a striped mat had been placed outside the flat’s front door.
“I thought, ‘There’s a mat. Someone must have moved in’,” said Yvonne Adams, whose own front door is a few feet across the corridor. “No one’s been living there.”
RELATED LINKS
Tory buys flat round corner on expenses
Home Secretary faces inquiry over expenses
Geoff Hoon caught up in row over second home
What the neighbours did not know was that the property is owned by Baroness Uddin, 49, a Labour peer. She has designated the flat as her “main address” so she can claim almost £30,000 in accommodation expenses a year from the House of Lords while continuing to live in her London home.
The flurry of activity in the flat on Sunday night came after The Sunday Times had asked the baroness questions about her “main address” the previous day. Neighbours also report a brief visit by the same car the previous night.
Yesterday MPs and a peer called for a full investigation into the baroness’s expenses claims. She has received more than £100,000 (this figure includes an estimate for last year) since buying the Maidstone flat. She also claimed a further £83,000 for the same allowance from 2001, four years before she bought the flat.
Despite repeated questions, she has declined to discuss whether she actually owned or rented a main home outside London during this period.
Angus Robertson, the SNP’s leader in the Commons, said: “I will be writing to the House of Lords authorities and the police and asking them to investigate this report.”
Lord Oakeshott, the Liberal Democrat Treasury spokesman, said: “The system stinks. Peers should get a simple taxable daily rate instead of these allowances. An empty property can’t be a peer’s main residence. The Lords authorities must investigate.”
Born in Bangladesh, Manzila Pola Uddin came to Britain as a teenager and went on to become a community worker and social services officer while pursuing a political career that saw her rise to be deputy leader of Tower Hamlets borough council in the early 1990s.
She was made a peer by Tony Blair in 1998 and took the title “Baroness Uddin of Bethnal Green in our London Borough of Tower Hamlets”. Aged 38, she was the youngest woman in the Lords.
As a campaigner on women’s and ethnic minority issues she has become part of the new Labour establishment, befriending Cherie Blair. Her Facebook friends include the cabinet ministers Harriet Harman, Hazel Blears and David Miliband and Alastair Campbell, the former spin doctor.
However, she has never forgotten her roots. Her Facebook entry lists London as her home town and she has continued to work and live there. She and her family have resided in the same three-bedroom house in Wapping since the early 1990s.
A page entitled “my back-yard” on her personal website says: “I have a great sense of belonging to the East End which has been my home for over 30 years . . . it is where my professional and political career has taken shape, where my children have grown up, and also where I served as a local councillor for eight years.”
Yet she designated the family house in Tower Hamlets – where her children lived and went to school – as a “second home” and this allowed her to claim the cost of overnight accommodation in London.
The purpose of the allowance is explained in a House of Lords guidance note that says: “A member whose main residence is outside greater London and who maintains a residence in London for the purpose of attending sittings of the House may claim this allowance towards the cost of maintaining such a residence.”
In the Commons a “main residence” is considered to be the home where an MP spends most nights, but in the Lords there is no fixed definition. Mary Morgan, director of public information at the Lords, says: “A member will know what his main residence is. It’s where they live . . . For the purpose of claiming expenses, it’s where they travel to and from. There is no official definition.”
The Sunday Times began looking into Uddin’s expenses claims as part of an inquiry into peers who clock in to the House of Lords chamber briefly so as to claim overnight allowances. We photographed her going into the Lords through the peers’ entrance, saw her appear in the chamber for less than a minute and then leave the building. The whole visit took just three minutes.
In the latest published list (the year to March 2008) she claimed £29,600 from the Lords for overnight subsistence – one of the highest sums for any peer. She gave the location of her main residence as Kent.
This was curious because there appear to be no public documents linking the baroness to the county. The only reference is a speech to the Lords in 2006 which she began with the words “I am a resident of Maidstone borough council”. She is listed on the electoral roll at the Wapping address from 1996 to the present.
She has been a director of seven companies in the past 10 years and each time has said she lives at her Wapping home. The Companies Act says directors must give their “usual” address.
Uddin has a brother, Rousseau Khan, who lives in Bromley, south London. Khan owns the house and a neighbour said Uddin did not live there.
When a reporter rang her London home, her husband Komar picked up the telephone. He appeared confused about his wife’s “main residence” in Kent.
Reporter: “Have you lived there [the Tower Hamlets family home] for a long time?”
Husband: “Yeah, We came here in ’93.”
Reporter: “Ninety-three, I see. Am I also right in thinking you have a place down in Kent?”
Husband: “Sorry?” Reporter: “Do you have a place in Kent?”
Husband: “Kent?” Reporter: “Kent, as in the county Kent? No?”
Husband: “No.”
Minutes later the reporter spoke to Uddin about her three-minute visit to the House of Lords that day. She said she had been working on Lords business outside the building and had gone to the chamber but left quickly after realising she had another meeting.
The reporter attempted to broach the subject of her overnight expenses claim but she put the phone down. That evening she instructed Carter-Ruck, the libel lawyers, to speak on her behalf.
At the same time a reporter went to her London home. It is a three-storey building in a block of about a dozen flats built by Spitalfields Housing Association. The association’s housing stock is for people requiring affordable housing and the average rent for one of the association’s three-bedroom houses is £500 a month. The baroness is claiming more than £2,000 a month for running and maintaining a house in London.
Neighbours confirmed that the baroness shares the home with Komar, two of her sons and a daughter. Komar was outside the house smoking a cigarette.
When asked where his home was, he said, “I live here”, apparently surprised by the obvious question. When reminded about the home in Kent, he added: “I live in both places.” Later Carter-Ruck said that he had initially answered “no” when asked on the telephone whether he had a property in Kent because it belonged to his wife.
Fozlu Miah, 28, lives next to the Uddins in the same building, having moved in with his parents in the early 1990s, about the same time as the baroness. “As far as I know she lives here,” said Miah. “I see her most days through the window, coming in and going out. I sometimes talk to her . . . I call her auntie.”
Rafique Uddin (no relation), another neighbour, has known the family for years: “We all moved in at the same time. I don’t know anything about a house in Kent. I’m surprised to hear that because almost every day when I’m parking my car I can see their car. The mum [baroness] is going in and out. They are continuously living here as far as I know.”
Her daughter Masuma Siddiqah, 17, is best friends with the baroness’s daughter. She said: “[The baroness] is always there. I hear her beep her car every day when she gets home.” Siddiqah added that Uddin’s daughter had never told her anything about the family having a home in Kent.
In a statement last Saturday, Carter-Ruck confirmed the baroness owned a property in Maidstone which is registered as her main address with the House of Lords. The solicitors also offered to disclose the Kent address if The Sunday Times undertook not to publish details or approach members of the baroness’s family at the address. We declined.
Where was it? Overlooking a nature reserve on the fringes of Maidstone’s central shopping area lies a block of apartments built in 2005. Land registry searches confirmed that Uddin owns a street-level flat there.
She bought it for £155,000 in September 2005, nine months after peers’ expenses claims for overnight subsistence were made public for the first time. There is a mortgage on it.
It has two small bedrooms on the roadside and a lounge incorporating a kitchen area at the back. It is part of a group of six apartments that all share the same main entrance.
The Sunday Times has interviewed residents from all five of the other flats and others living nearby. They all said they had never seen Uddin, who cuts a distinctive figure, at the property. The neighbours said the property had been left empty since it had been bought. Three remembered peering into the two bedroom windows at the front and noting the rooms were unfurnished.
The windows now have thick curtains drawn across them after last weekend’s visit. The postman said some of the people who entered the flat on Sunday had arrived in a BMW four-wheel-drive. His description of the vehicle, including two letters from its registration plate, match Uddin’s car.
He said: “Nobody has ever lived in there. If you’d have come down a week ago you could have peered in and said nobody lives there.”
Adams has lived across the corridor from the baroness’s flat for three years. “I can’t emphasise enough how no one has lived there. I know that for a fact,” she said.
“There was a time when they had a sheet or something at the window which had fallen down and the security light was coming on, just shining into a completely empty flat . . . No, there has never been a stick of furniture in there.”
Matthew Hollis, whose flat is directly above the baroness’s property, confirmed there had been no furniture in the bedrooms. When initially asked about the flat, he responded: “I don’t think anyone does live there. I’ve never seen anyone in there . . .”
Stuart Brown and his girlfriend Gemma Fox lived directly below Uddin’s flat for three years before leaving recently. He said: “We never had anyone living above.”
The other ground-floor neighbour, who requested her name be withheld, said: “I thought it was empty, too. I posted a note through there about two months ago because my friend was interested in renting.”
A woman in a house that looks directly onto the back of the flat said she often saw people on the balconies above and below the baroness’s flat. “That sweater has been hanging over that middle flat balcony probably since the end of last summer,” she said.
“Every few months some people would just visit, but you are talking 10 minutes max,” Adams said.
On Friday evening the baroness issued a solicitors’ statement saying: “I do not believe that I have done anything wrong or breached any House of Lords rules. Should the relevant House of Lords authorities wish to investigate the matter I will, of course, co-operate fully.
“The Wapping house is rented, while I own the property in Maidstone. The Maidstone property is furnished and I strongly deny that I have never lived there. Indeed I have stayed there regularly since buying it.”
Yesterday evening a reporter spoke to Mark Ryan, a plumber who had entered the flat last weekend to fix the boiler. He described how the property was covered in dust and sparsely furnished.
“I’ve been in more flats than I care to remember, but this place looked like someone had left it ages ago,” he said. “It was very dusty. There were odds and sods of furniture around. There was an old mattress on the floor of one bedroom. It wasn’t made up. There was a fold-up clothes dryer in the other bedroom.
“It didn’t look lived-in. It certainly didn’t look like a family home.They told me they were just moving in.”
Insight: Jonathan Calvert, Claire Newell, Kevin Dowling, Solvej Krause
BARONESS UDDIN
— Born Bangladesh 1959
— Arrives in east London 1973
— Begins working for Newham social services 1988
— Deputy leader of Tower Hamlets 1994-6
— Fails to become Labour parliamentary candidate for Bethnal Green 1997
— Made Labour life peer 1998
— Starts Jagonari Centre to train and educate Asian women 1999
— Meets Blair as part of delegation to tackle Islamic extremism 2005
— Made chairwoman of ethnic minority women’s taskforce 2008
Main address
Maidstone
Two bedroom flat
Bought three years ago
Neighbours have never seen her there and say flat was "empty" and "unfurnished"
Not registered to vote
Second address
Wapping
Three bedroom house
Lived there for 15 years
Children went to school in the area
Neighbours see her regularly
Registered to vote at address
HAVE YOUR SAY
Hope that something is finally done about this level of abuse. If the allegations are correct and were made in a corporate environment, the individual would be guilty of gross misconduct and sacked. However no doubt Labour needs every peer it can get - regardless of integrity...
Hamish T, Dollar, Clackmannanshire
Very sad to see that the person who got the rare opportunity to behave and act as role model for the BME community of Great Britain, failed so badly.
Dr. Hasanat Husain, London, UK
As a foreigner, I would say, Tony Blair was a professional politician.
He already knew this woman’s maturity, mentality, attitude, philosophy and morality when he appointed her 11 years ago. He appointed her because he cares for people and the nation more than his party.
Gunmo Gu, Newcastle, Uk
The full extent of Blair's debasement of the Constitution is now becoming apparent. This apparently corrupt and thieving woman was ennobled only because she failed to win a seat in the Commons. Hereditary Peers may have been 'privileged,' but they were never dishonest or fraudulent. Bring them back!
Bill, Suzhou, China
This is blatantFRAUD.Utility bills will show the full story,plus the many statements by neighbours,so it will be easy to get at the truth, however much she lies.Also-what about the 3 bed flat for deprived people in Tower hamlets for £500 per month?
ROBBERY.Serving the community? I think NOT!
Liz Roberts, Northwich, Cheshire
Disgusting! She should be made to pay back what she illegally claimed (with interest) and pay a fine to help the British economy, the taxpayer who she has robbed!
Harpreet, Leeds,
Ccha! Don't you people know that a peer simply HAS to have a place in the country? How DARE we question that?
I've lived in Tower Hamlets for years and never heard of this lady before; no evidence of emancipation of Asian ladies or seen reduction of fundamentalism. We've been milked AGAIN.
Helen, London, England
Utter disgrace - she should be made to return all the funds claimed - this belongs to the taxpayer not her !!
Philip Low, London, UK
I cannot wait for July, IF the list of all financial 'expenses' and abuses is published. All those guilty of abuse should be made to repay and chucked out of the government. Labour can NEVER survive this. Those with titles should have them taken away. What a mockery.
alice hudson, quimper, france
We need to have a major investigation into Parliament from an independent authority. It would then be possible to draw up a list of the names of every member of the House of Lords and Commons who has abused the system. Those people should then be removed for fraud and we could hold bye-elections.
Alexander Clark, Wokingham, United Kingdom
Investigate, prosecute and send her to jail. While the hardworking taxpayer struggle to keep up mortgage repayments and families are having their homes repossesed to due extreme taxing and general incompetance by the government, we are paying for this thief to line her pockets. What a farce.
Paul, London,
Just how many more Peers and MPs are there with their snouts in the trough? This is not sleaze, this is pure dishonesty and those practising it should be criminally prosecuted for it, like anybody else. How dare they show such arrogance and contempt for the taxpaying public they serve!
Dave, Holmer Green,
Yet another case of public service (questionable in this instance) for personal gain!
Great investigative journalism - please keep it up until the expenses and allowances of our political 'masters' are properly documented, supported, audited and totally transparent.
Bill Basham, Marmaris, Turkey
Disgusting,criminal behaviour .This woman should be in prison for theft.
What will happen? NOTHING.
She is in a minority group (well maybe ) and is well connected
So nothing will happen.
Gormless knows it goes on and B LIAR actively encouraged it! Nothing will change and nothing will happen!
charles holmes, chester, U.K.
It's the same trough and the majority look like they are browsing..
Andy Bond, London, uk
Dave H, Alexandria, USA - Apart from violence, we can do nothing. Believe me, most of us hate the government, ministers, MPs and the Lords. These 'lords & ladies' are not voted in they are friends of the PM - we are powerless. And membership of the EU has made us even weaker. The UK is finished.
Anthony Farrar, Worthing, UK
Seems lords and ladies are above the law.
twas ever thus.
ronnie, Bridego Bridge, UK
A number of the MPs claims exposed so far have been morally dubious, but "within the rules". However, this one sounds like outright fraud.
Stephen Lee, St Albans, Hertfordshire
These people sicken me. If it is not actiual corruption then it is so close as to make no difference morally. Strip "Lady" Uddin of her title (awarded for what?) & let her go back to whatever form of 'work' sustained her and her like before she decided sponging off taxpayers was the thing to do.
Phil, London,
'Lady' Udin should be stripped of her title and jailed for theft, how can these disgusting political worms claim to represent the people? They're theives, plain and simple, stealing from taxpayers, they must be made an example of. This level of rampant corruption cannot be tolerated.
Howard, London, united kingdom
THey should throw this woman out of the Lords IMMEDIATELY - take her to court, send her to prison as is comensurate with her crime, fine her and remind her with a smile that she will have a criminal record to her name for the rest of her life.
Welcome to the real world Labour cronies.
Drew, Nottingham,
Can someone explain how Stephen Hawking has still not been knighted or been made a lord yet this woman with her impressive 2 years as deputy leader Tower Hamlets manages it within one year of FAILING to become a labour candidate. It's not like it's a particularly high bar to jump.
Dave M, Bristol, UK
I assume sometime next week Baroness Uddin will be visited by the police and asked to explain the possible case of fraud and theft. Just in this story there is enough for the police to start an investigation. I suppose now it just needs someone to make a formal complaint.
Stephen, St. Ives, England
What a fantastic article! Beautifully written! As the excuses got worse, the evidence got better!! What a savage piece of journalism. We need more of this. Take these fraudsters away.
Mike, Ipswich, UK
This looks like a simple case of fraud: it should be reported to the police and investigated thoroughly.
Jocelyn Wood, Arequipa,
Another absolute disgrace!
Andy, Glos,
Is this newsworthy ?
I'm not shocked and not surprised... It's exactly what you would expect ! Poor woman is so inept she is well and truly caught.
It's so unusual for an associate of Blair !!!
Next episode will see her exhonerated !
There is so much of this... and it will continue to increase.
Stuart, Tiverton, UK
On the make and on the take. Politicans then wonder why the public think that most of the occupants of the Palace of Westminster are in it for themselves. The fact that MP's/Lords have the audacity to say we haven't broken the rules merely the spirit of them shows how corrupted the lot of them are.
Rupert, London, UK
How on earth does someone become a lord (lady) for being a social services officer and deputy leader of tower hamlets council? We go from admiral LORD Nelson to former prime ministers, to this woman, this fraudster, who is only there because of tony blairs desire to fill the lords with his croonies!
will, grimsby, uk
Please, please, please - find one honest MP or peer and report on them just for a change. I really am beginning to think there isn't one.....
charles, Congleton,
How many more? I did not know peers could claim ALA as well as MPs. These people takes us for fools. Great piece of investigative journalism. Thanks
Ian, Newtownabbey, N. Ireland
Why don't you Brits get angry at the thievery of your politicians?? I don't get it......you should be hanging your political leadership from the lampposts that light up the Thames river. Why do you suffer in silence?? Are you all sheep?
Dave H, Alexandria, USA
A very interesting & detailed piece of investigative journalism there, well done, keep it up.
Tim, Hillsborough, Great Britain
She should lose her title,job and be made to pay back every penny if these facts are true. yet another politician abusing the system
paul, clayton, staffs
Raping the taxpayer. Can we send her and her brood back from whence they came. And let her cheat her own countrymen rather than leeching from the UK Taxpayer. And by the by, what exactly has this person done / achieved to be honoured with a peerage. Oh, forgot she was a community worker..
Oliver Corning, Tunbridge , UK (Used to be Great Britain)
Greed and more greed. Throw them all in Jail I say.
This system needs to stop. If she is found to have not lived in this place and just used it to claim expenses she should be stripped of her position and slung in Jail. Disgusting.
Anthony Stewart, Chicago, USA
This is very naughty by the looks of things - I do hope she will be required to repay the 100,000 pounds she has received as a result of not knowing where she lives.
Joe, Kiev, Ukraine
I despair.
Remind me again why I pay huge amounts of tax?
And remind me further - are these allowances, which our "peers" and MPs receive, taxable (snort)?
Diana, London, UK
I wonder what the response to the Sunday Times investigation will be?
Will you be accused of racism, sexism, or both?
Fred Kite, Notts,
A greedy cheat abusing a position of authority...how surprising!
Kevin, San Francisco,
Show fewer comments
HAVE YOUR SAY
Monday, 4 May 2009
"Baronness of Bethnal Green" - The Guardian has scant coverage.
News
Politics
MPs' expenses
Labour peer Baroness Uddin under fire over 'vacant' home
Ben Quinn
The Observer, Sunday 3 May 2009
Article history
A Labour member of the House of Lords has become the latest politician to be challenged over expenses amid suggestions that she has not been living in a flat outside London for which she has claimed an estimated £100,000.
Baroness Uddin, 49, claims that the two-bedroom property in Maidstone, Kent, is her "main address". But neighbours believe that the flat has been vacant for years and that the peer has continued to live in London.
She has designated a family house in Tower Hamlets, where her children went to school, as a "second home", according to the Sunday Times, allowing her to claim the cost of overnight accommodation in London.
Politics
MPs' expenses
Labour peer Baroness Uddin under fire over 'vacant' home
Ben Quinn
The Observer, Sunday 3 May 2009
Article history
A Labour member of the House of Lords has become the latest politician to be challenged over expenses amid suggestions that she has not been living in a flat outside London for which she has claimed an estimated £100,000.
Baroness Uddin, 49, claims that the two-bedroom property in Maidstone, Kent, is her "main address". But neighbours believe that the flat has been vacant for years and that the peer has continued to live in London.
She has designated a family house in Tower Hamlets, where her children went to school, as a "second home", according to the Sunday Times, allowing her to claim the cost of overnight accommodation in London.
Whatever did we do to deserve Baroness Uddin?"
1505 Hrs London Monday 4 May 2009
"Whatever did we do to deserve Baroness Uddin?"
The comment from the DAILY TELEGRAPH web site as published on Monday 4 May 2009
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/james_delingpole/blog/2009/05/04/whatever_did_we_do_to_deserve_baroness_uddin
"Whatever did we do to deserve Baroness Uddin?"
The comment from the DAILY TELEGRAPH web site as published on Monday 4 May 2009
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/james_delingpole/blog/2009/05/04/whatever_did_we_do_to_deserve_baroness_uddin
The "Baroness of Bethnal Green" - a comment from the Daily Telegraph web site
1450 Hrs London 4 May 2009
EAST LONDON PRESS noting that the 'East London Advertiser' has still not published anything about the matter.
We shall keepo vuers and svsitors posted on the cointining lack of jouralsm by the 'East L:onon advesrtir'.
In the mranti,e the follwoing comment is being produecd here dfrom the extetal web site mentoiend below. This is porely fpor reference. We are not staying any views on the matter to which they have linekd the 'baroness of Bethnal green' to.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/james_delingpole/blog/2009/05/04/whatever_did_we_do_to_deserve_baroness_uddin
Whatever did we do to deserve Baroness Uddin?
Posted By: James Delingpole at May 4, 2009 at 13:28:34 [General]
Posted in:
Tags:
Baroness Uddin, fluent in multi-culti, second homes, Tower Hamlets
Until this weekend's story broke about her expenses irregularities you'd probably never heard of Britain's first Muslim peer Baroness Uddin. I had, though, because a couple of years ago, I remember being particularly incensed while driving along listening to a Radio 4 programme about the disasters of multiculturalism.
On one side of the debate was an intelligent, articulate, well-spoken Muslim doctor who was talking about the damage multi-culti pieties had done to social cohesion in East London's Pakistani and Bangladeshi communities. Particularly rubbish, he said, was the policy of PC councils of translating everything into languages like Urdu and Bengali - rather than encouraging immigrant communities to learn English. This, he explained, did bullying Muslim husbands' dirty work for them by enabling them to keep their non-English-speaking, often-imported brides in thrall, and away from the tainting influence of the kuffar.
Baroness Uddin was speaking opposite him and though I can't remember exactly what she said, I do recall being so struck by the unutterable idiocy of her half-baked and ill-expressed views that I stopped the car to jot down her name. "Christ on a bike," I thought to myself. "What kind of world do we inhabit that someone like this gets a peerage?"
I'm still searching for an answer. She can't be totally stupid, for her response when the story broke about her having allegedly claimed £100,000 for a "main home" she doesn't live in was impressively swift: round she came in her BMW 4 x 4 to put some curtains up and a mat by the front door. Iain Dale has lots more comedy dirt on this, such as the claim that the house she DOES live in is Housing Association property with a subsidised rent supposedly designed for low-income families. Principled socialism in action, eh, readers?
Here is a video of Baroness Uddin in action.
Was your immediate thought: here is a woman whose intelligence, rapier wit, wisdom, commonsense and mastery of the English language in all its nuance and complexity more than justifies her elevation to the Lords?
Me neither.
She was elevated to the peerage by Tony Blair (says it all really) in 1998, though for which particular service to the nation is not immediately apparent. She has been a Labour councillor, a liaison officer for Tower Hamlets social services and is described on her Wikipedia entry as a "community activist."
Hmm. Sounds like perfect MBE material to me.
But a peerage?
[ 3 comments ]
Comments
Just another Nu-Lab kleptocrat. What I want to know is which Labour MPs might top themselves if their fraudulent expenses are revealed, and if there is anything we can do to expedite this topping oneself process?
Sebber
May 04, 2009
01:50 PM GMT
"Was your immediate thought:...?"
My immediate thought was she should be in prison, but that was for the second home claim. I'm not sure my temper could stand the video.
Sheumais
May 04, 2009
01:57 PM GMT
Labour MP/peer/councillor/whatever is now synonymous with 'thief'.
Chav Dad & Minger Mam
May 04, 2009
02:25 PM GMT
RECENT BLOG POSTS
Whatever did we do to deserve Baroness Uddin?
Condi Rice sticks it to the Stanford bleeding hearts
David Cameron and Polly Toynbee: the affair is definitely over
What Maggie Thatcher did for us
Barack Obama already less popular than Nixon or Carter? Quelle Surprise! (Not)
BLOG CATEGORIES
General (38)
I BLOG ABOUT
Adrian Chiles Antrim barracks attack Arnie Schwarzenegger Baroness Warsi biggest tax rise in US history Binyam Mohamed cap and trade chippy climate change denial Damian McBride Dan Hannan David Morrissey David Peace Derek Draper Diana Mosley Dreaming spires eco-lunacy effortless superiority elitist first principles foxhunting G20 Gail Trimble golliwog jeopardy Keith Vaz Kevin Maguire Macpherson report Man U masochism MESSIAH Oswald Mosley Oxbridge rejects Paddy Considine PJ O'Rourke porno fantasy Rachael Jolly Radio Times Rebecca Hall Red Riding Russell Brand Sean Bean smear sore losers Tony Robinson Tories right wing after all torture porn University Challenge walnuts Wire In The Blood
BLOG ROLL
EAST LONDON PRESS noting that the 'East London Advertiser' has still not published anything about the matter.
We shall keepo vuers and svsitors posted on the cointining lack of jouralsm by the 'East L:onon advesrtir'.
In the mranti,e the follwoing comment is being produecd here dfrom the extetal web site mentoiend below. This is porely fpor reference. We are not staying any views on the matter to which they have linekd the 'baroness of Bethnal green' to.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/james_delingpole/blog/2009/05/04/whatever_did_we_do_to_deserve_baroness_uddin
Whatever did we do to deserve Baroness Uddin?
Posted By: James Delingpole at May 4, 2009 at 13:28:34 [General]
Posted in:
Tags:
Baroness Uddin, fluent in multi-culti, second homes, Tower Hamlets
Until this weekend's story broke about her expenses irregularities you'd probably never heard of Britain's first Muslim peer Baroness Uddin. I had, though, because a couple of years ago, I remember being particularly incensed while driving along listening to a Radio 4 programme about the disasters of multiculturalism.
On one side of the debate was an intelligent, articulate, well-spoken Muslim doctor who was talking about the damage multi-culti pieties had done to social cohesion in East London's Pakistani and Bangladeshi communities. Particularly rubbish, he said, was the policy of PC councils of translating everything into languages like Urdu and Bengali - rather than encouraging immigrant communities to learn English. This, he explained, did bullying Muslim husbands' dirty work for them by enabling them to keep their non-English-speaking, often-imported brides in thrall, and away from the tainting influence of the kuffar.
Baroness Uddin was speaking opposite him and though I can't remember exactly what she said, I do recall being so struck by the unutterable idiocy of her half-baked and ill-expressed views that I stopped the car to jot down her name. "Christ on a bike," I thought to myself. "What kind of world do we inhabit that someone like this gets a peerage?"
I'm still searching for an answer. She can't be totally stupid, for her response when the story broke about her having allegedly claimed £100,000 for a "main home" she doesn't live in was impressively swift: round she came in her BMW 4 x 4 to put some curtains up and a mat by the front door. Iain Dale has lots more comedy dirt on this, such as the claim that the house she DOES live in is Housing Association property with a subsidised rent supposedly designed for low-income families. Principled socialism in action, eh, readers?
Here is a video of Baroness Uddin in action.
Was your immediate thought: here is a woman whose intelligence, rapier wit, wisdom, commonsense and mastery of the English language in all its nuance and complexity more than justifies her elevation to the Lords?
Me neither.
She was elevated to the peerage by Tony Blair (says it all really) in 1998, though for which particular service to the nation is not immediately apparent. She has been a Labour councillor, a liaison officer for Tower Hamlets social services and is described on her Wikipedia entry as a "community activist."
Hmm. Sounds like perfect MBE material to me.
But a peerage?
[ 3 comments ]
Comments
Just another Nu-Lab kleptocrat. What I want to know is which Labour MPs might top themselves if their fraudulent expenses are revealed, and if there is anything we can do to expedite this topping oneself process?
Sebber
May 04, 2009
01:50 PM GMT
"Was your immediate thought:...?"
My immediate thought was she should be in prison, but that was for the second home claim. I'm not sure my temper could stand the video.
Sheumais
May 04, 2009
01:57 PM GMT
Labour MP/peer/councillor/whatever is now synonymous with 'thief'.
Chav Dad & Minger Mam
May 04, 2009
02:25 PM GMT
RECENT BLOG POSTS
Whatever did we do to deserve Baroness Uddin?
Condi Rice sticks it to the Stanford bleeding hearts
David Cameron and Polly Toynbee: the affair is definitely over
What Maggie Thatcher did for us
Barack Obama already less popular than Nixon or Carter? Quelle Surprise! (Not)
BLOG CATEGORIES
General (38)
I BLOG ABOUT
Adrian Chiles Antrim barracks attack Arnie Schwarzenegger Baroness Warsi biggest tax rise in US history Binyam Mohamed cap and trade chippy climate change denial Damian McBride Dan Hannan David Morrissey David Peace Derek Draper Diana Mosley Dreaming spires eco-lunacy effortless superiority elitist first principles foxhunting G20 Gail Trimble golliwog jeopardy Keith Vaz Kevin Maguire Macpherson report Man U masochism MESSIAH Oswald Mosley Oxbridge rejects Paddy Considine PJ O'Rourke porno fantasy Rachael Jolly Radio Times Rebecca Hall Red Riding Russell Brand Sean Bean smear sore losers Tony Robinson Tories right wing after all torture porn University Challenge walnuts Wire In The Blood
BLOG ROLL
EAST LONDON PRESS Update on UK 'Work and pensions' cabinet minister James Purnell joining as a character in the sleaze and fraud news reports
0245 Hrs London ['Bank Holiday'] Monday 4 May 2009:
EAST LONPON PRESS report
EAST LONDON PRESS Update on UK 'Work and pensions' cabinet minister James Purnell joining as a character in the sleaze and fraud news reports his various 'Party' colleagues. Including 'Bethnal Green Baroness' Pola Uddin.
PURNELL heads the DWP the UK Department for Work and Pensions. On its books about Tower Hamlets, a large majority of persons reporting low income or no income are from the section of the population that Pola Uddin says she identifies with.
At the time of writing, we could not finalise verification of several details that have emerged during the weekend.
One concerns Ian Dale's reference to the 'Housing Association' that allegedly owns the property in Wapping in which Pola Uddin actually lives.
Other aspects of Pola Uddin’s claimed ‘political and community life’ have caused outpourings of mirth in the East End
DAILY MAIL, updated file on Pola Uddin as at 0142 Hrs 4 may 2009
Labour peer 'claims £100,000 on vacant flat she said was her home'
By DAN NEWLING
Last updated at 1:42 AM on 04th May 2009
Comments (15)
Add to My Stories
Baroness Uddin has been claiming expenses on a 'unoccupied' flat in Kent
A Labour peer faces a possible police investigation for fraud after she claimed £100,000 in expenses for a flat she appears never to have lived in.
Baroness Uddin received the money by claiming that the apparently deserted flat in Maidstone, Kent, was her 'main home'.
This meant the Baroness, Britain's first female Muslim peer, was able to claim nearly £30,000 a year towards the cost of staying at a separate London address while she attended Parliament.
Members of the House of Lords are entitled to a daily allowance of up to £86.50 for 'meals and refreshments' and travel around Westminster, up to £174 for overnight accommodation in London and office costs of £75 a day.
They are also entitled to £116 per night accommodation maintenance allowance for a second home and 'additional office costs' up to £75 for up to 40 days.
The accommodation allowance is available to any peer 'whose main residence is outside greater London and who maintains a residence in London for the purpose of attending sittings of the House'.
'Main home': The flat in Maistone, Kent, which neighbours say has lain empty
There is no official definition of a 'main residence' in the rules, but Mary Morgan, director of public information at the Lords said: 'A member will know what his main residence is. It's where they live. For the purposes of claiming expenses it's where they travel to and from.' However, neighbours at the Baroness's ground floor flat in Maidstone say that since she bought the property in 2005, they have never seen her.
A plumber who entered the apartment last month described it as 'uninhabitable' - covered in dust with just an old mattress on the floor to sleep on.
By contrast, neighbours at her other property - a three- storey house in Wapping, East London - said she is regularly seen there.
The Wapping address is where the 49-year-old peer brought up her five children and is registered to vote.
Her personal website describes the East End as her 'backyard' and 'my home for over 30 years'.
Every time she has registered as a director of a company, she has given her London address, which is four miles from Parliament. However, the Baroness has told the Lords' expenses authorities that it is only her 'second address'.
In the financial year to March 2008 she claimed £29,600 in overnight accommodation allowance. If she has done the same every year since buying the Kent flat, she would have earned more than £100,000.
More...
MPs' secretaries threaten to strike as even they are caught up in expenses row
Yesterday LibDem frontbencher Lord Oakeshott said: 'An empty property can't be a peer's main residence. The Lords authorities must check the facts of this case and investigate.' Baroness Uddin denies any wrongdoing and has instructed libel lawyers to represent her.
When approached in Maidstone at the weekend, the Baroness refused to allow a journalist into the flat to check it was being lived in.
In a statement she said: 'The Wapping house is rented while I own the property in Maidstone. The Maidstone property is furnished and I strongly deny that I have never lived there. Indeed I have stayed there regularly since buying it.'
Print this article Read later Email to a friend
Share this article:
Digg itDel.icio.usRedditNewsvineNowpublicStumbleUponFacebookMySpaceFark
Add your comments Comments (15)
Here's what readers have had to say so far. Why not add your thoughts below, or debate this issue live on our message boards.
Newest
Oldest
Best rated
Worst rated
View all
its within the rule book so why not, everybody does it so why not the Baroness. in the words of the song "you gotta pick a pocket or two oo you gotta pick a pocket or two.
ken moody
sheffield
- ken moody, sheffield uk, 03/5/2009 17:15Click to rate Rating 278
Just shows the level that greed can plumb to... After all the cases of false expences claims one would have thought that the trough feeders would have had the common sense to realise that sooner or later they would be rumbled.
- Mac, New Town, 03/5/2009 17:13Click to rate Rating 287
Just check the utility bills for the period
- timothy timberlake, dorset, 03/5/2009 17:13Click to rate Rating 347
Are we really supposed to be suprised.?
- Paul, East London, 03/5/2009 17:08Click to rate Rating 281
The answer is simple. Get her to pay back all the spurious claims. But of course with Jackie Smitch on her side she'll claim it was all legal. Legal, perhaps. Thoroughly contemptible - certainly. Another nu lab peer completely discredited. Its not just Lord Mandy that gives the party a rotten name. They're all at it!!! Socialists to their last bottle of champagne...and blow the rest of us. Tony's Brave New World is crashing down all around us. Oh dear.
- Atrie, Oxford, 03/5/2009 17:02Click to rate Rating 287
It seems that most of them are rotten to the core!
- George Philips, SE London, 03/5/2009 17:00
EAST LONPON PRESS report
EAST LONDON PRESS Update on UK 'Work and pensions' cabinet minister James Purnell joining as a character in the sleaze and fraud news reports his various 'Party' colleagues. Including 'Bethnal Green Baroness' Pola Uddin.
PURNELL heads the DWP the UK Department for Work and Pensions. On its books about Tower Hamlets, a large majority of persons reporting low income or no income are from the section of the population that Pola Uddin says she identifies with.
At the time of writing, we could not finalise verification of several details that have emerged during the weekend.
One concerns Ian Dale's reference to the 'Housing Association' that allegedly owns the property in Wapping in which Pola Uddin actually lives.
Other aspects of Pola Uddin’s claimed ‘political and community life’ have caused outpourings of mirth in the East End
DAILY MAIL, updated file on Pola Uddin as at 0142 Hrs 4 may 2009
Labour peer 'claims £100,000 on vacant flat she said was her home'
By DAN NEWLING
Last updated at 1:42 AM on 04th May 2009
Comments (15)
Add to My Stories
Baroness Uddin has been claiming expenses on a 'unoccupied' flat in Kent
A Labour peer faces a possible police investigation for fraud after she claimed £100,000 in expenses for a flat she appears never to have lived in.
Baroness Uddin received the money by claiming that the apparently deserted flat in Maidstone, Kent, was her 'main home'.
This meant the Baroness, Britain's first female Muslim peer, was able to claim nearly £30,000 a year towards the cost of staying at a separate London address while she attended Parliament.
Members of the House of Lords are entitled to a daily allowance of up to £86.50 for 'meals and refreshments' and travel around Westminster, up to £174 for overnight accommodation in London and office costs of £75 a day.
They are also entitled to £116 per night accommodation maintenance allowance for a second home and 'additional office costs' up to £75 for up to 40 days.
The accommodation allowance is available to any peer 'whose main residence is outside greater London and who maintains a residence in London for the purpose of attending sittings of the House'.
'Main home': The flat in Maistone, Kent, which neighbours say has lain empty
There is no official definition of a 'main residence' in the rules, but Mary Morgan, director of public information at the Lords said: 'A member will know what his main residence is. It's where they live. For the purposes of claiming expenses it's where they travel to and from.' However, neighbours at the Baroness's ground floor flat in Maidstone say that since she bought the property in 2005, they have never seen her.
A plumber who entered the apartment last month described it as 'uninhabitable' - covered in dust with just an old mattress on the floor to sleep on.
By contrast, neighbours at her other property - a three- storey house in Wapping, East London - said she is regularly seen there.
The Wapping address is where the 49-year-old peer brought up her five children and is registered to vote.
Her personal website describes the East End as her 'backyard' and 'my home for over 30 years'.
Every time she has registered as a director of a company, she has given her London address, which is four miles from Parliament. However, the Baroness has told the Lords' expenses authorities that it is only her 'second address'.
In the financial year to March 2008 she claimed £29,600 in overnight accommodation allowance. If she has done the same every year since buying the Kent flat, she would have earned more than £100,000.
More...
MPs' secretaries threaten to strike as even they are caught up in expenses row
Yesterday LibDem frontbencher Lord Oakeshott said: 'An empty property can't be a peer's main residence. The Lords authorities must check the facts of this case and investigate.' Baroness Uddin denies any wrongdoing and has instructed libel lawyers to represent her.
When approached in Maidstone at the weekend, the Baroness refused to allow a journalist into the flat to check it was being lived in.
In a statement she said: 'The Wapping house is rented while I own the property in Maidstone. The Maidstone property is furnished and I strongly deny that I have never lived there. Indeed I have stayed there regularly since buying it.'
Print this article Read later Email to a friend
Share this article:
Digg itDel.icio.usRedditNewsvineNowpublicStumbleUponFacebookMySpaceFark
Add your comments Comments (15)
Here's what readers have had to say so far. Why not add your thoughts below, or debate this issue live on our message boards.
Newest
Oldest
Best rated
Worst rated
View all
its within the rule book so why not, everybody does it so why not the Baroness. in the words of the song "you gotta pick a pocket or two oo you gotta pick a pocket or two.
ken moody
sheffield
- ken moody, sheffield uk, 03/5/2009 17:15Click to rate Rating 278
Just shows the level that greed can plumb to... After all the cases of false expences claims one would have thought that the trough feeders would have had the common sense to realise that sooner or later they would be rumbled.
- Mac, New Town, 03/5/2009 17:13Click to rate Rating 287
Just check the utility bills for the period
- timothy timberlake, dorset, 03/5/2009 17:13Click to rate Rating 347
Are we really supposed to be suprised.?
- Paul, East London, 03/5/2009 17:08Click to rate Rating 281
The answer is simple. Get her to pay back all the spurious claims. But of course with Jackie Smitch on her side she'll claim it was all legal. Legal, perhaps. Thoroughly contemptible - certainly. Another nu lab peer completely discredited. Its not just Lord Mandy that gives the party a rotten name. They're all at it!!! Socialists to their last bottle of champagne...and blow the rest of us. Tony's Brave New World is crashing down all around us. Oh dear.
- Atrie, Oxford, 03/5/2009 17:02Click to rate Rating 287
It seems that most of them are rotten to the core!
- George Philips, SE London, 03/5/2009 17:00
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Poverty of the MPs is in the grotesque shamelessness... and petty greed
EAST LONDON PRESS says at 0510 Hrs on Tuesday 31 March 2009: It is not just Harry Cohen, the east London MP who used to flaunt a faker beard and spout strings of calculated socialistic confections... Having lost BOTH in order to stay on the bandwagon, Cohen seems to have also lost any sense of rationality. And dignity. How else could he be saying those things, comparing himself to Churchill in that way? There were indeed many flaws in Churchill’s life and character. But Harry Cohen is not remotely convincing as a comparable Member of Parliament...Or as a member of society... What Cohen’s banal boast tells us about him is that he belongs to a parliament of political, mental, moral pigmies with no evident shame...
