Britannia Radio

I am saddened by the public’s apparent willingness to treat what a bunch of associates of the disgraced Damian McBride write uncritically as the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Anyone who bothers to examine what they’ve said about MPs ‘ expenses, how  they’ve presented it and,  most importantly , what they’ve NOT said  cannot fail to detect a nasty smell and question their motives. 

The first thing to note is the background to all this.  MPs were presented with an expenses scheme of incredible complexity and despite the ‘shock-horror ’ headlines many of the  claims which on the face of it seem absurd were well within the daft rules.  The clear remedy for that is not retrospective breast-beating but a change in the rules (and the whole system)

MP after MP has said ‘I cleared this with the Fees Office first.’   What else should they have done ?  In business when you submit a claim you often ask ‘Is this OK?’   You’re told ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ and that’s the end of it.    The public, often doing exactly the same themselves, have gone all self-righteous and don’t bother to go beyond the lurid headlines.    What MPs in general - and I exclude those few who’ve broken the law -  is to behave in exactly the same way as (the BBC staff and) the public when faced with available funds.  They’ve said “Is there anything there for me?”  and made use of the allowances.  

The greatest shock-horror seems to have been reserved for people who have changed the nomination of their principal residence.  Ahem!  That’s a perfectly legal practice and all over the country there are non-MPs doing it routinely.  It is everyone’s right to minimise one’s tax burden within the law.     Individual cases where the ‘flipping’ can be seen to be unjustified are illegal if Capital Gains Tax is evaded and are subject to law, not a Telegraph kangaroo court.

This is where the Telegraph should come under scrutiny.  Their technique is to act as prosecuting counsel in their accusations using only those parts of the story that are the most defamatory.   They telephone their selected victims but rarely publish in full the account that is is given to them.  Another major point the Telegraph has omitted to tell anybody is that the rules were changed halfway the period investigated and many of their accusations relate to the earlier period when what the MPs claimed was perfectly within the rules.     

Michael Howard proved that every they said about him was wrong and they never ever withdrew what they’d written although they dropped their pursuit of him.     

Then the paper acts as jury, inevitably finding the victim guilty and sits as judge over the whole witch hunt.    Meanwhile circulation booms with obvious financial gain for the paper and - one must presume - for the operatives.  

I personally have followed one or two prominent cases who happen to be Tories.  But my impression is that they have smeared Labour MPs as unjustly as they have treated these Tories. 

But today is a good illustration of the Telegraph at work.  They have a lurid story story on the front page with a more measured account tucked away inside.  Take the case of Brian Binley.  On the front page they say  that Brian Binley "is to be investigated by the independent parliamentary watchdog".  "Oooh" the public will be saying in their sheeplike hypocritical way, "he must be a bad one"  What that nasty bunch in The Telegraph just conveniently forget to mention is that Binley HIMSELF referred his case to the Speaker under the old rules (he took nearly 3 years to decide), and now has appealed to the watchdog before all the scandal broke and it hasn't reported yet!  - NOT, you may notice, “to be investigated “ .    Long before all this row he said that if they said what he did was not permitted he would withdraw the claim.   What he did was in fact cheaper for the taxpayer than the alternative!   They give some - but not all - of the full story inside.  (p5) 

Then Bill Cash (p4)  has got so fed up with the whole witch hunt that - without admitting that he did anything wrong - he’s paid back the rent he claimed for renting part of a London flat belonging to his daughter.  You’d hope that those s***s in the Telegraph would applaud such family solidarity and that, in any case,  it cost the taxpayer less.  But the headline writers and general tone of reportage assume guilt.   

Then Nadine Dorries is probably the most worrying of all because before all this happened Damian McBride, the friend and drinking companion of the Telegraph group, had invented a completely fictitious story of her having had an affair with some at parliament.  He chose the wrong person!  She’s a feisty lady and reacted strongly . So much so that McBride lost his job as a result.    

It is a strange coincidence - or is it? - that she was one of the first MPs to be singled out in the expenses row.  They got it all wrong there too but far from apologising continue with the lies.  She is a divorced lady with two daughters growing up now.  She has a , except in the holidays  flat in her constituency, Bedford, and a cottage in the Cotswolds.  She rents both properties, so no ‘flipping’ can be involved!    When the children were younger they were at school in the Cotswolds where her ex-husband looked after them during the week.  This is her main home.  When schooling became an issue the girls went to school in Bedford so that the Cotswold home is less used.     She commutes daily to Westminster in the morning rush hour and returns late in the evening long after the commuters.    The Telegraph knows all this but has never had the grace to acknowledge the truth or correct their lies.   I find her attitude to her job exemplary  and a model for other MPs. But not the b*****ds in the Telegraph.  So the great British public show their appreciation for the Telegraph’s reports by going to her flat and trashing all the furniture on her veranda (not purchased on  expenses)  and leaving a sneering remark about their bravery on her website.    Such lovely people you find in the British lynch mob!

Not surprisingly while their blood is up they’ve leapt on the BBC now!   What angers the public - or did anyway - is the antics the Beeb gets up to with bias, J Ross and the rest.   But to go for the CEO for cutting short the holiday for himself and his family to come back in a crisis and charge the necessary air-fare is plain envious stupidity .  But that’s the British public egged on bt the media.  One expects  sensational rubbish from the tabloids  but many hoped for better things from the Telegraph.

But they’ve stirred up a vicious nasty envious streak in the population at large over MPs’ expenses and the spleen - much from people living in glass houses hurling rocks about - is covering the whole of society.  It’s British and disgusting.

I personally find it impossible to care what happens to Britain when the British behave like a mob.  Who cares if they’re ruled from Brussels?  Who cares if their liberties are stripped away? (They won’t notice).  Who cares if the country goes bankrupt /  It’s not worth saving.     Maybe I’ll just give up and look after me and mine.    

Christina Speight