MPs who are being investigated for expenses fraud are trying to argue a case that they are protected by the 300-year-old Bill of Rights that gives MPs Parliamentary privilege.
Elliot Morley, the former Labour minister, and David Chaytor a Labour MP, are being investigated for claiming expenses for mortgages that no longer existed. Lawyers for the MPs are looking at whether the 1689 act could protect them from prosecution. If the Commons rule book, which has for years governed the expenses claims of MPs, is found to be covered by privilege then it could severely hamper attempts by prosecutors to bring MPs to court.
1689 ACT? DON'T MESS ABOUT WITH THE BASTARDS! Drag them out of the Commons and STRING THE THIEVING FUCKERS UP FROM THE FIRST LAMPOST!
4 comments:
It seems to me there is an easy way around this problem. The Commons simply has to pass a law banning Morley, Chaytor and their ilk from receiving the pensions and other golden handshakes they were expecting to pick up.
If the greedy bastards complain, we can argume that this new law is protected by parliamentary privilege and can’t be challenged in Court.
If that doesn’t work, then your proposed method should do the trick but, like the Chinese, we should then send their families the bill for the rope!
Fred, excellent idea. But to be absolutely fair to the families we could use the rope twice and only charge them half each. Any subsequent hanging with the same rope we could send them out a discount until the rope got too sweaty and blood stained and it was impractible to use it any more.
If they insist on 300 year old laws then if they get found guilty does that mean they can be strung up and lose all their land and property ?
Historian, don't think I don't know you, David Starkey! I believe it was still legal, 300 years ago to hang, draw and quarter them and send the body parts to the extremes of the land, where they shall be devoured by winged dragons breathing fire. But I think that's probably too extreme. Hanging is fine by me.
Post a Comment