Tuesday, January 06, 2009

Nanny Spelman: Ripping Off Taxpayer "Not Deliberate", Just Stupid


The temporarily surprisingly fragrant Mister GuF is disgusted with The Standard's report that the tax-payer cheater Caroline Spelman will be cleared of any deliberate wrong doing.

The only logical conclusion from this decision - if it should come to pass - would be that Ms Spelman is INCREDIBLY STUPID.

She employed a nanny under an unusual interpretation of the rules. A mistake. Not the sea to drink. But so stupid was she that she concocted a cock and bull story instead of admitting her mistake and paying back money she could easily afford to reimburse.

And so stupid that her story was quite frankly incredible. So stupid that she had accidentally employed a completely unsuitable "constituency secretary". Using tax payers' money. So stupid that she employed her at a faraway, remote location. Still using tax payers' money. A bit of her home I think it was.

So very stupid that she allowed this woman to carry out an almost negligible workload of "constituency secretary" work. At tax payers' expense.

On the other hand Ms Spelman was also VERY FORTUNATE. Very fortunate that although this unqualified and unsuitable secretary did sweet FA in her main role. Taking the Michael. She was a dab hand at nappies and bottles and buggies and cots.

And - completely free of charge - she looked after Spelman's progeny. So the taxpayer got shafted as she was a terrible constituency secretary and that's what we were paying her for. But Ms Spelman did quite well out of it with a free nanny. Saving herself up to £40,000 per annum at today's prices. There should be a law against it.

Cameron can sack her for guilty as charged and call Sir Michael Lyons names for being so easily taken in by the scummy old sleazebag. Or he could sack her for being incredibly stupid. Or he could sack her because her luck must surely run out.

Turns out the Tories themselves are the source of the Standard story. This means there is a chance they have not retained all the details and nuances of a report that is a few weeks away from publication.

There is no news yet on whether nappy supplies or nursery decoration office fit out were whizzed through the stationery and accommodation account.

3 comments:

Everybody Hates Chris said...

If the reports are true that Spelman is about to be cleared of any wrongdoing, I would find that totally incomprehensible. Almost as baffling as the Hain verdict.

Chris Paul said...

Hain harmed no-one but himself, pocketed no money for himself, and came last-ish in the election (internal) he was pimping.

And he blew the whistle on himself and did declare everything, albeit late and in an administratively unimpressive way.

The Tories are spinning Spelman as "no deliberate wrong doing". Just accidental wrong doing then? Still requires a slap, a payback and a sacking. And certainly a concerted attack from anyone who wants to see the Tories festering in the polls.

Hain had to resign and he hadn't had 20,000-40,000 of taxpayers money or indeed anyone's money into his back pocket. He had simply wasted a load of union and private money on crappy adverts in the Sun and the like and not accounted for this piss poor campaigning in a timely or complete way.

Jimmy said...

There's no shade of grey here. She stole money by pretending her nanny was her constituency secretary. To compound matters when the press got hold she tried to concoct a cover story which fell apart after five minutes. In real life you don't just get sacked for this, you go to prison.

So, Cameron's party Chair is a thief and a liar. A no-brainer you would think. It's not so easy though. The whips knew about the theft ten years ago when her secretary (the real one) complained. They told her to stop, but otherwise did nothing. An apology and repayment at the time might have been forgiven. It's inconceivable that Cameron appointed her without a gander at the whips' file, so he has already condoned it. The only thing that's changed now is that the press got hold of it. Add to that Central Office's role in "helping" the nanny with her press statement and Ms. Spelman could be a gift that keeps on giving.