|
It’s one rule for Hain, another for the rest of us THE
CONTROVERSY surrounding former Northern Ireland Minister Peter Hain and
the funding of his failed bid to become deputy leader of the Labour Party
lays bare the canker at the heart of Government in Britain.
The very fact that the man could lavish £200,000 in pursuit of such
a position says much about how Westminster and our elected representatives
operate.
Exactly what was this vast sum spent on? Salaries? Entertaining? Publicity?
And why did the people who donated the money believe it worthwhile to
bankroll someone’s bid to become the deputy leader of a political
party?
The charitable will say it was out of the goodness of their hearts. The
cynical will say it was because they expected some sort of payback in
terms of favours at a later date.
Even more damning — if that is at all possible — is that some
£50,000 of this money was channelled through a so-called think-tank
known as the Progressive Policy Forum.
This is a body which until recently hardly anyone had heard of, appears
to employ absolutely nobody and has published nothing since it was established.
Hain’s supporters say there is nothing illegal in this arrangement
and he has been guilty of nothing more than failing to inform the relevant
authorities within the appropriate time of his spending.
The man himself blames pressure of work for the oversight as his working
day was consumed with dealings over the future of the North of Ireland.
To the rest of us these smack of nothing else but pathetic excuses.
The simple fact is that Peter Hain is now Work and Pensions Secretary
in charge of a budget of £138billion a year and yet could not apparently
even adequately oversee his own accounts in a losing bid for a position
of power within the Labour Party.
His own department regularly prosecutes people in receipt of tax credits
or benefits for failing to declare income earned. Some 27,000 last year
alone.
It’s classed as a crime.
Pressure of work is usually not deemed by the courts to be a sufficient
defence.
Peter Hain’s own department’s heavy-handed advertising campaign
plainly states: “No ifs, no buts. Benefit fraud is a crime.”
Just to make it clear to the Minister it’s also a legal requirement
for politicians to declare all campaign donations within 30 days. No ifs,
no buts.
Peter Hain did not do this.
If he stays in his post are we then to assume it’s one rule for
him and another for the rest of us?
No round of political spin and hand-wringing apologies will make it appear
otherwise.
And if no action is taken over this scandal then those politicians who
still harbour some shred of decency should sit back and ponder one sobering
fact.
It is that they are now becoming so divorced from the ordinary men and
women who actually pay their wages as to be almost irrelevant to the vast
majority of the population. |
