They never did for the expenses scandal only those that were caught (I was reading it earlier) whilst Lab set up its own internal review board to investigate the issue.
In my constituency, Julia Goldsworthy went from an almost 2,000 majority to losing her seat by 66 votes in 2010. To this day, any mention of her is usually met with references to the expensive rocking chair that she ended up repaying the cost of.
Yeah for some reason she's not listed on wikipedia I think its because it only lists Lab/Con apart from Laws due to being a government ministers at the time.
Despite having lived here for all that time, I can't offer much insight. The Camborne / Redruth area is one of the poorest in Western Europe, so not exactly what you would imagine as true blue. Conventional wisdom would have said that the loss of Falmouth from the constituency would have resulted in a decrease in Conservative vote share. The only reason I can see for the Conservative success is a very high elderly population. Other than Julia Goldsworthy (with her tarnished reputation), there hasn't been a strong candidate who has contested Eustace's seat.
Woodstock never ended
Bit of a non story tbh... His friend let him stay in his villa and didn't charge him for it?And further more:
Goldsmith family funded Boris Johnson’s Marbella holiday
Update to register of ministerial interests does not specify how much near week-long break last month was worthwww.theguardian.com
No cronyism in this Government whatsoever.
The peerage is worth a few bob, surely?
Haha he justified his entire peerage with the Lord Adonis confrontation in my eyes lol.The peerage is worth a few bob, surely?
For ordinary folk, that is a taxable Non-cash benefit in kind (tax and NIC consequences) but for Bojo and Co just a perk of the job
, in exchange for a peerage. This on top of the cash for curtains as well. So, not just a "friend" as you say and nothing to see here. Perception is everything here, especially for a PM, who tried to change the system to get Paterson off the hook, otherwise such cronyism/sleeze just becomes normalised, which it has under his Government. But all ok because it's been declared in register of members' interest - which must be the sleeziest register in the country.
You add the "in exchange for a peerage" but there is 0 suggestion that is the case, you've just straight up ignored the most probable explanation - that this was a friend letting another friend stay at his house, to make up a narrative that suits you...For ordinary folk, that is a taxable Non-cash benefit in kind (tax and NIC consequences) but for Bojo and Co just a perk of the job
And people wonder why they mistrust and cynicism of politicians is so high and that there is one rule for one and one rule for another. Standards, what standards?
This is where I agree with sock, the villa is a possible back scratching intangible benefit. CfC on the other hand could be constituted as actual impropriety in accepting barred funds by a private individual for potential influence. Unlike Accurri (which really should of bought him down in normal times) he's still in the same office that misdemeanour occured. Add in the extra fact its because they didn't want the already completely intangible to most decor (or re-decor) is had abilitiy to strike a cord.
