Friday, December 18, 2009

Nuts in November: Nadine Dorries Mum-P "Uncooperative"? Never!

Having been the crowd sourcer who alerted the Guardian to Ms Nadine Bargery-Dorries Mum-P and inter-alia a terse note from the Fees Office it is with some chagrin that I see Sunny Hundal spilling the beans ahead of me on Liberal Conspiracy, as indeed have The Guardian. Never mind. I've been dragging my feet until I can hopefully reveal the whole "homes and gardens" magic that is Ms Bargery-Dorries Mum-P's speciality.

Here's their collected works:

What did Nadine Dorries MP spend £9000 on?

by Sunny H
December 18, 2009 at 9:32 am

The Guardian’s outsourcing of MP’s expenses to readers uncovered this gem:

When Tory MP Nadine Dorries, submitted a £9,000 claim last year, a House of Commons official wrote on the form: “Due to lack of cooperation by member, assumption that costs relate to (blanked out) address, as stated on ACA nomination”.
Another official added: “ok to proceed”. Dorries declined to explain what the note meant.

£9,000 is a significant amount of money. What was it for, any ideas readers?

It’s also significant the official wrote: ‘due to lack of cooperation by member‘, which suggests a degree of unwillingness by Nadine Dorries to be open about her expenses. Or perhaps we have this wrong and she declared it elsewhere?

Nevertheless, anyone know what this is for?

Also, odd that a sum that big wasn’t picked up by libertarian blogs that have so far tended to jump on big number expenses.

As Ms Nadine Bargery-Dorries Mum-P is my Mastermind specialist subject I am able to assist on this one:

This note is a reference to the fact that Nadine Dorries Mum-P has refused to co-operate and tell the Fees Office or anyone where her "main home" actually is. She just says it's "somewhere else". Usually with some formulation about protecting the privacy of her daughters, plural. And she might add her "ex" Paul David Dorries who is as we have revealed elsewhere in our Nuts in November series a man in demand. Albeit with a handy getaway car.

Although in her rather flustered and unintentionally revelatory response to Telegraph queries Ms Nadine Bargery-Dorries Mum-P claimed she had squared all this secrecy with the fees office. That was it seems a bit of a fib. Why on earth would they let one MP make themselves an exceptional case and not disclose confidentially to them where her main home was?

For the moment they have been going along with her assurance that this "main home" is "somewhere else". I'm 99% certain that I know the front running candidate for where this is, co-conspirators have even visited the address, though alas the cockbird had flown his nest. If I'm correct I can assure readers that Nadine Dorries scarcely spends any time there at all.

Even less now daughter 3 - Cassandra, named from the Greek Κασσάνδρα, "she who entangles men" and a great but accurséd to be unbelieved harbinger of disaster (wiki) - is based in Woburn.

Nadine Dorries Mum-P has of course admitted these factuals. Admitted that her main home for allowances purposes is NOT her main home for reality purposes. In fact whichever address she is imagining to be her "main home" is not one she spends any great length of time in at all. That her "second home" is by her own admission by far and away the one where she mainly spends her life.

LOL would be willing to wager, ooooh £5, that following proper pro-rata'ing as a "second home", and subtraction of any relevant state benefits that may have accrued, that this other address would produce a rather disappointing return compared to the Woburn address and its £18,000 per annum plus plus plus. Where the taxpayer are footing the entire lifestyle bill.

Potentially Ms Dorries has had several years of "second home" allowances when she does not have a "main home" that answers the tests for that status i.e. being her main home in any sense of the term. In which her "second home" however did and does fit the definitions for a genuine "main home". This is what the Telegraph were pushing at. This is what the Fees Office really ought to have been pushing at too.

Completely unacceptable lack of accountability.

The £9000 is I believe half a year's worth of in advance rent at her "second home" which is of course in Woburn, Mid Narnia.

Although Nadine hasn't flipped between "main" and "second" homes she and/or her connections have sold at least THREE UK properties since 2005. Some scope for playing with the tax treatment on those, but all a bit mysterious, business premises, charges from banks (still current according to Companies House), PR spin in the Times Property, sales way below her supposed asking price, some very wretched "improvements" including a huge uPVC and polycarbon conservatory on a supposedly 1340 house, and so on and so forth.

The family holiday home / investment in South Africa has fallen out of her declaration of late. Ands strictly speaking all three, certainly two, Chipping Camden homes should have probably been declared in that too. And at least one directorship (Co now struck off) probably also ought to have been in there. A property development company.

Time to continue with Nuts in November methinks. Do the property stuff today perhaps? And then move on to some of the visible and not so visible business activities.

I'll come back and questionise most of this and more when I'm back from dogging on the meadows, in the orchards and on the banks. I'll have my mobile with me fun seekers, co conspirators and Nadine well wishers. Meanwhile please do some revision on the story so far.

No comments: