Key Political Issues

TURFCALL MESSAGE TO SIR GEORGE YOUNG BLOODHORSE ILLITERACY IS TRASHING BRITISH HORSERACING

2012-01-19T05:03:00.000-08:00

Dear Sir George

Join up link for your reference

http://www.turfcall2-racingpost.blogspot.com/

Kind regards, yours sincerely Margaret

LEADER OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS AND LORD PRIVY SEAL SIR GEORGE YOUNG Bt MP

2012-01-13T02:38:00.000-08:00

"SIR GEORGE YOUNG Bt MP was born in 1941 and was educated at Eton before attending Christ Church, Oxford and the University of Surrey where he gained a postgraduate degree

"First elected to Parliament in 1974, his early Ministerial career included spells at the Departments for Health, Environment and Housing. He served as Financial Secretary to the Treasury (1994-1995) and as Secretary of State for Transport between 1995 and 1997.

" Sir George was Shadow Leader of the House of Commons between 1998 and 2000 and 2009 and 2010, having been Shadow Defence Secretary from May 1997 until June 1998. Sir George previously served on the Modernisation of the House of Commons Committee (1998-2000) and between 2001 and 2009 was Chairman of the Select Committee on Standards and Privileges.

"Sir George was appointed Leader of the House of Commons and Lord Privy Seal in May 2010."

http://www.speakerscornertrust.org/about-us/who-we-are/scts-advisory-council/sir-george-young-mp/

http://www.commonsleader.gov.uk/output/Page937.

http://www.commonsleader.gov.uk/output/Page1.asp

ALEX SALMOND SMP SEEKING INDEPENDENCE FOR SCOTLAND

2012-01-13T01:59:00.000-08:00

www.turfcall.co.uk

ALEX SALMOND SMP SEEKING SCOTTISH INDEPENDENCE

http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/newsandmediacentre/31781.aspx

"This week’s show debated just when an independence referendum will take place, who will control it and how many questions will there be. Appearing for the SNP, Fiona McLeod MSP and for the Labour Party Richard Simpson MSP.

Right click download for a QuickTime compatible file. Download speeds will vary depending on speed of Internet Connection.

Date:
Duration: 23:28

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7CR5zFJm0s

MESSAGE TO SIR GEORGE YOUNG MP EXPRESSING CONCERNS OVER THE LACK OF POLITICAL INFORMATION PRESENTED TO THE VOTING PUBLIC

2012-01-06T23:48:00.000-08:00

Dear Sir George

CONCERNS WEEK 1. 2012

We see David Cameron out this week visiting hospitals, but where is Nick Clegg?

What has Nick's agenda been this week? Is anyone allowed to know?

What has your own agenda been Sir George over this last week, the very first week of 2012?

Listening to David Cameron out and about this week, brought to us live by BBC

Breakfast News, it seems "IN HOUSE COMPLAIN PROCEDURES" are on the way out .....

Is it possible to dare to hope that such methods of dealing with complaints is to change?

Or what? For the better, I am wondering .... Or for worse?

FOCUS PERSPECTIVE "IN HOUSE COMPLAIN PROCEDURES".

It is noted that ' In House ' Complaint Procedures do not work.

EG: to name only a few here:

All Hospitals use ' In House ' Complaint Procedures

British Legal Justice System use ' In House ' Complaint Procedures

Landlords from hell use ' In House ' Complaint Procedures

Housing Associations use ' In House ' Complaint Procedures

British Horseracing Authority don't allow any complaints of any sort,

either "In House" or "Out of the House" .

Financial Ombudsman use ' In House ' Complaint Procedures .

A multitude of 'Ombudsman Services' ..... use ' In House ' Complaint Procedures.

"In House" complaints to suit whom?

This whole country is run it appears by sweeping all complaints under the carpet using "In House" stumbling blocks.

In House Complaint Procedures to suit whom? One is left to gasp, in hospital on ones death bed .....

WHERE IS THE LIVE POLITICAL BROADCASTING CHANNEL?

When will Parliament be broadcasting LIVE all things "Political" for the "British People" to keep track of for themselves?

When will the British People be allowed Itemised Political Reviews?

When will the British People be allowed Itemised Political Previews.

When will the British People be allowed Itemised Political Present Issues in Hand.

When will the British People be allowed Monthly Itemised Preview Political Agenda's

When will the British People be allowed Monthly Itemised Reviews of Political Agenda Endeavours and or Failures?

Seasons Greetings http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Nv2RKGsSJE

With kind regards, yours sincerely Margaret

J. Margaret Clarke
for and on behalf of Turfcall

THE BRITISH LEGAL JUSTICE SYSTEM NO LAW FOR THE POOR OR THE BLOODHORSE LITERATE

2011-12-22T03:13:00.000-08:00

BLOODHORSE ILLITERATE BRITISH HORSERACING AUTHORITY REGULATORS (BHA)

http://www.racingpost.com/

THE BRITISH LEGAL JUSTICE SYSTEM IS FAILING THE VAST

MAJORITY OF PEOPLE IN THE UK EVERY DAY OF THE WEEK.

Quartet appeal against corruption penalties

By Peter Scargill 5:07PM 21 DEC 2011

MAURICE SINES and James Crickmore, who were both warned off for 14 years by the BHA last week at the end of an in-depth corruption inquiry, have lodged appeals against the punishments.

Sines, 48, and Crickmore, 31, were banned from British racing along with nine others after being labelled as the masterminds behind a conspiracy to lay horses to lose on betting exchanges during 2009.

Sines and Crickmore received the heftiest bans from the BHA for their role as ringleaders in a case that was described as unprecedented in its scale and complexity by BHA security director Paul Scotney.

Appeals have also been lodged by jockey Kirsty Milczarek, who was banned for two years for two rule breaches, and Nick and Peter Gold after they were banned for seven and five years.

J MARGARET CLARKE TURFCALL

BRITISH LAW OUT OF TUNE WITH THE BLOODHORSE LITERATE

THIS CANNOT GO ON ANY LONGER
A SHOCKING AND CRUEL IGNORANCE

WHAT SORT OF A WORLD ARE WE LEAVING BEHIND

FOR OUR CHILDREN TO GROW UP IN?

BRITISH LAW SHOULD BE AVAILABLE FOR ANYONE WHO HAS A PROBLEM THEY ARE NOT ABLE TO SOLVE BY THEMSELVES

BBC 1 BREAKFAST LIVE FRIDAY DECEMBER 16th 2011 THE MEDICAL PROFESSION

2011-12-16T00:23:00.000-08:00

MESSAGE SENT TO SIR GEORGE YOUNG MP FRIDAY DECEMBER 16th 2011

MEDICAL PROFESSION

BBC 1 Breakfast Friday December 16th focus on the daily care of frail elderly people struggling to attempt to live out their last days on this earth alone.

Calls into question the working practices of all local medics. Medics get paid each and every year for each and every person registered in their area whether they are ill or not .......

When elderly frail people living in their own home alone, attempting to manage alone, the help that can be expected from these medics is along the lines of one five minute call each morning, just to check the person is still alive, and has taken pills prescribed.

Most people would much rather continue to live in their own homes. So where are these local medics at exactly? Where are the local DHSS authorities at exactly? Why is there not a local network with working practices that do actually work ....? A huge beaurocratic mess. No compassion. No true care, nothing.

Comment J Margaret Clarke Turfcall

MESSAGE AS SENT TO RT HON SIR GEORGE YOUNG Bt MP ON SATURDAY DECEMBER 10th 2011

2011-12-10T10:56:00.000-08:00

Message Body

Dear Sir George

C4 Join Up with Cheltenham and Doncaster to bring us The Morning Line today

from 8am to 9am. C4 Guest Star this morning was PAUL STEWART. I bring this directly to your attention.

Please use this info link.

http://turfcallmorningline.blogspot.com/2011/12/c4-morning-line-saturday-december-10th.html

GUEST STAR ON THE MORNING LINE TODAY, PAUL STEWART has a runner this afternoon in the 2.30 Handicap Chase at Cheltenham trained by Paul Nicholls GHIZAO 7 11-2 partner RUBY WALSH an interesting runner ….. He will have the chance today to gain some more racing experience over the big fences …. how will he get on?

PAUL STEWART had broken his back after being caught in a freak avalanche while snowboarding in the Alps, and as his father researched the possible treatments available in this country and elsewhere, he became convinced that Britain is lagging behind.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/6574950/Millionaire-stockbroker-Andy-Stewart-campaigns-for-better-NHS-care-for-spinal-injuries.html

Sadly Britain is lagging behind in just about everything right across the board. Blighted by lack of caring, lack of respect, taking every one and every thing for granted. WHY AND HOW have you politicians got everything so dreadfully wrong? What do you propose to do about any of this? Nothing? When are you going to let us all know how you intend to start to set things to rights?

The British Legal Justice System within the mechanism of how the present working practices within court procedures are supposed to work are found to be disgusting, a shocking and unbelievable miscarrage of justice. Were barristers, solicitors and accountants are ripping off their clients taking hundreds of thousands of pounds off them for work they fail to carry out even. Taking years and years to do absolutely nothing at all. Worst of all taking full advantage of any and all who are legally illiterate. Hell on earth wouldn't even begin to describe it.

With kind regards, yours sincerely Margaret

J MARGARET CLARKE TURFCALL

J. Margaret Clarke
for and on behalf of Turfcall

GOVERNMENT HAPPINESS SURVEY LOUISE HANNAN AND PHIL GAYLE BOTH PSYCHOLOGISTS SET THE GOVERNMENT STRAIGHT

2011-12-02T03:21:00.000-08:00

Dear Sir George

BBC Breakfast Oxford this morning the 1st of December 2011 with Christmas

just around the corner ...

GOVERNMENT HAPPINESS SURVEY

Key interest this morning 7.50am We hear that Nick Clegg and David Cameron are asking people for their imput on a "Happiness Survey".

BBC Breakfast Guest Stars this morning Louise Hannan and Phil Gayle

two Psychologists in the studio. Giving a very brief, but interesting focus.

But JMC for one remain not sure that a "Happiness Survey" is the right title.

More of a misleading title perhaps .....

David Cameron who we see nearly every day on TV speaking whilst pointing his finger, and worse ... wagging his finger in anger ... telling the poor how to cope with the acute state of poverty he is leaving them to exist in, to be their lot, the lot that the gready bankers are responsible for burdening upon us all.

David Cameron does not live in poverty himself, however, he is a very rich young man, so he has absolutely no idea of what he is dictating and expecting other people to cope with. It could be said "mockery at its very worst."

Accountability as to the duty of politicians owed to the electorate in a far more respectful

way. Like a whole program to go out live eg: Once a month that we can all tune into. The here and now ... containing detailed current review, detailed currant preview, current aims achieved, current aims yet to achieve. Current aim failures.

To tackle "Rip off Britain" right across the board this attitude is contaminating the daily lives

of all of us.

With kind regards, yours sincerely Margaret

http://www.google.co.uk/#hl=en&cp=39&gs_id=6e&xhr=t&q=BBC+Breakfast+Psychologist+Dec+1st+2011&pf=p&sclient=psy-ab&source=hp&pbx=1&oq=BBC+Breakfast+Psychologist+Dec+1st+2011&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=&gs_upl=&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=584baa17945b3e44&biw=1280&bih=606

POLITICAL RIP-OFF OVER SALE OF THE TOTE 2000 - 2011

2011-11-23T22:00:00.000-08:00

POLITICAL RIP-OFF OVER SALE OF THE TOTE

RACING POST REPORT WEDNESDAY NOVEMBER 23rd 2011

JON LEES "AND THE WAIT GOES ON .... Racing has yet to see any of the £90m it was promised from tote sale. It could be as late as 2020 before the last instalment is finally
delivered. State-aid rules mean charities will be ones to benefit rather than prize-money."

"ROY STILL IN THE DARK OVER HOW RACING CAN USE TOTE PROCEEDS"

NEWS

TOTE SALE TIMELINE SINCE 2000
"Feb 2000 Labour government announces intention to sell Tote to racing.

"Late 2004 Bill passed to allow sale of Tote to racing.

"Sep 2006 Racing consortium's initial offer of £400 million is rejected.

"Mar 2008 Government commitment 'to make available to racing half the

net proceeds of any open market sale of the Tote."

"Oct 2009 Surprise announcement by prime minister Gordon Brown that Tote would figure in sale of government assets, forecast to raise £16 billion over next two years. Government sets March 2011 as completion date for sale.

"Sep 2010 Minister for gambling John Penrose says government now preparing to launch 'an open market process' to resolve future of Tote in late autumn and will update House of Commons "early in the new year."

"Jan 31, 2011 Government says 18 indicative proposals received, and 'selected number of parties' invited to advance to next stage.

"Mar 1, 2011 Penrose (below) tells Commons. "Given the current state of the national finances, I am afraid it will be extremely hard, or completely impossible , in my view, to argue that we should do more than a 50-50 split (of net proceeds between government and racing)."

"April 11, 2011 Race whittled down to two runners Betfred and Sports Investment Partners.

"June 3, 2011 Betfred win bid; £265m headline value, £180m net to be split 50-59 between Treasury and racing.

"Mar 2012 First instalment of the proceeds from the sale of the Tote promised to racing expected to have been paid

"2020 Final instalment of racing's £90m to be paid."

HORSERACING A UNIQUE AND REMARKABLE SPORT

POLITICAL RIP OFF OVER SALE OF THE TOTE ONGOING FROM 2000 - 2011

2011-11-23T21:07:00.000-08:00

Copy of Turfcall email to Sir George Young MP

Wednesday November 23rd 2011

Dear Sir George

Re: Tote and Racing Post, Howard Wright (18.11.2011) Turfcall's response:

Live link herewith for your file:

http://www.turfcall2-racingpost.blogspot.com/

CALLING for politician's to provide the electorate with an update to be shown live on

television once a week, so as all can get a grip on where you are at now. What you are working to achieve now. A review of the previous week. A preview of what you intend to do in the next four weeks ahead.

The electorate every single one of them deserve to be treated with far more respect and information than at present is the case.

Kind regards, yours sincerely Margaret

J Margaret Clarke Turfcall

ALL-PARTY RACING GROUP OF MP'S MEETING SET FOR TUESDAY NOVEMBER 1st 2011

2011-10-30T23:55:00.000-07:00

J MARGARET CLARKE TURFCALL

PLEASE NOTE THIS MEETING WAS CANCELLED

The Rt Hon Sir George Young BT MP Leader of the House of Commons since May 2010

Lord Privy Seal since May 2010

Dear Sir George

ALL- PARTY RACING GROUP OF MP'S MEETING SET FOR TUESDAY NOVEMBER 1st

Expressing deep concern herewith: If you politicians' within governments are expecting

to go on taking huge revenue out of horseracing then you need to make absolutely sure that
British Horseracing is being run properly.

THE RACING POST OCTOBER 2011

NEWS GRAHAM GREEN

"MP'S TO SUMMON LEADING FIGURES IN WHIP DISPUTE

"The controversy surrounding the new whip rules is set to enter the political arena next week,

when the All-Party Racing Group of MP's meet to discuss the crisis embroiling the sport.

"Yesterday leading jumps owner David Johnson added his voice to the criticism of the BHA hierarchy, already under pressure to make further concessions over the penalties that were revised last week.

"Johnson's comments come after JOHNNY MURTAGH'S decision to follow RUBY WALSH'S lead and limit his appearances in

Britain

in protest over the regulations that restrict the number of times the whip can be used, and impose heavy punishments on riders found in breach.

"With no sign of a resolution in the debate, the All-Party Racing Group will bring the parties

together on Tuesday (November 1st 2011) when debating the issues with senior figures from the warring factions.

"Also attending the meeting will be Kevin Darley, (A proven Bloodhorse Literate horseman

of the highest standing) chief executive of the Professional Jockeys Association, along with
BHA representative Jamie Stier, director of raceday operations and regulation, and Dr Tim

Morris, director of equine science and welfare." END

J MARGARET CLARKE TURFCALL

A SHOCKING SITUATION: SOMEONE NEEDS TO POINT THIS OUT:

Sir George, with respect neither Jamie Stier (Australian) nor Tim Morris (Veterinary) are

bloodhorse literate therefore they are not qualified to review issues or change rules relating

to British Whip Tactics in races, or the use of the whip used within licensed trainers teams

who prepare these horses to run throughout the

eg: If you have toothache, you do not go to a Farrier to get your tooth or teeth fixed.

FEMALE AGENDA

It was interesting that our own Queen Elizabeth whilst visiting

Australia

last week spoke up

confirming her beliefs regarding the female of the species. Legally now to be freed from some

gender predetermination, prejudices.

MONTY ROBERTS BLOODHORSE LITERATE HORSEMAN USA

Monty was invited to stay with our Queen at Windsor Castle in the early 1980's, what

followed is Historic legend, our Queen together with other members of the Royal family, not

only love horses but have achieved bloodhorse literacy themselves, hitting the headlines for

all the right reasons.

Whoever attends your meeting tomorrow needs to make absolutely sure that

KEVIN DARLEY is shown huge respect. This work he is attempting to achieve now is

paramount to the future of British horseracing and to horseracing around the world.

There will be no revenue for governments to help themselves to in the future if British

horseracing is going to be allowed to gather pace on a downhill run to destruction.

Kind regards, yours sincerely Margaret

J MARGARET CLARKE TURFCALL

FIGHTING FOR THE RIGHTS OF BLOODHORSE LITERACY

HORSERACING A UNIQUE AND REMARKABLE SPORT

THE Rt HON. DAVID CAMERON and THE Rt HON. NICK CLEGG PRIME MINISTER'S

2011-08-21T02:48:00.000-07:00

SUNDAY EXPRESS AUGUST 21^st 2011

Message by The Rt Hon. David Cameron Prime Minister

“ALMOST two weeks on from the riots, the clean-up continues. Communities all over the country have come together with brooms, mops and pots of paint to restore local pride.

“The Express Newspapers’ campaign Reclaim Our Streets, so generously backed by thousands of readers, shows how the best of Britain can overcome the worst.

“But what is clear in the aftermath of these riots is that we don’t just need to reclaim our streets, we need to reclaim our society. The greed and thuggery we saw during the riots did not come out of nowhere. There are deep problems in our society that have been growing for a long time: a decline in responsibility, a rise in selfishness, a growing sense that individual rights come before anything else.”

RESPONSE FROM J MARGARET CLARKE TURFCALL

MESSAGE:

TO THE Rt HON NICK CLEGG PRIME MINISTER and to the Rt HON. DAVID CAMERON PRIME MINISTER, BOTH.

We have been told for some time now by the supposedly great and the good that all the prison’s are full to overflowing .....

The British Legal Justice System is not set up to protect all those who find the only way to address their problem’s is by acting themselves due to the fact that they live in poverty, shut out by the power’s that be on financial grounds, to poor to pay the huge legal costs and the never ending delay tactics used by some legal professionals. THESE FACT ALONE are causing deep unrest on all fronts, and not only now.

BRITISH LAW needs to be available right across the board, for anyone and everyone when a problem is found too big for a single person or a group of people to attempt to deal with alone, not as now only available to the rich and privileged. British law has over decades been suiting itself. (Routed deeply in the shocking cruelty of the past) Now a total and completely NEW LEGAL JUSTICE SYSTEM STRUCTURE IS NEEDED to be available right across the board for all people. All those caught up with this present uprising, should themselves be supervised to clear up the mess that they have left in their wake. That is if thy were actually involved.

MURDOCH 'THE MOGUL WHO SCREWED THE NEWS C4 10pm WEDNESDAY JULY 27th 2011

2011-07-27T10:04:00.000-07:00

WATCH C4 WEDNESDAY JULY 27th at 10pm MURDOCH:

'the Mogul Who Screwed the News'

JACQUES PERETTI investigates how Rupert Murdoch built a media empire on stories of celebrity scandal. Speaking to everyone from anti-hacking campaigner Hugh Grant to those close to the tycoon, Perretti charts how in the wake of the News of the World scandal once supine politicians , celebrities and police turned against him."

DISPATCHES, HOW RUPERT MURDOCH RAN BRITAIN C4 MONDAY JULY 25th 8pm

2011-07-25T01:07:00.004-07:00

“THIS DOCUMENTARY INVESTIGATES the world, life and times of Rupert Murdoch and the influence and political power he wields in the UK . In light of the allegations about phone- hacking by News International – that led to the closure of the News of the world newspaper after 168 years in circulation – and Murdoch’s aborted bid to take over full membership of BSkyB, does the media mogul still wield the power he once did?”

WHY HAVE BT and others, enabled such as this to go on?

2011-07-25T01:07:00.002-07:00

C4 DESPATCHED 8pm MONDAY JULY 25th 2011. HOW MURDOCH RAN BRITAIN DOCUMENTARY

2011-07-25T01:07:00.000-07:00

THIS DOCUMENTARY INVESTIGATES THE WORLD, LIFE AND TIMES OF RUPERT MURDOCH'S EMPIRE AND THE INFLUENCE AND POLITICAL POWER

HE WIELDS IN BRITAIN .

IN LIGHT of the allegations about phone- hacking by News International, that led to the closure of the News of the World newspaper after 168 years in circulation, and Murdoch’s aborted bid to take over full membership of BSkyB, does the media mogul still wield the power he once did?”

THE CONVULSIONS in the British media that closed the News Of The World and torpedoed Rupert Murdoch's bid to take control of BSkyB were astonishing. In less than two weeks, amid an atmosphere of scandal, sanctimony and schadenfreude, the phone-hacking scandal that engulfed News International shattered MURDOCH’S relationship with some of the most important people in Westminster and pushed the Metropolitan Police into a very revealing spotlight.

WHY DO BT, AND OTHERS ALLOW ANY OF THIS TO GO ON?

TURFCALL MESSAGE TO SIR GEORGE YOUNG MP DANGEROUSLY UNBALANCED PRACTICE V THEORY

2011-06-23T23:17:00.000-07:00

Dear Sir George

Today's news (22,06.2011) gives us a quote from David Cameron, not from Nick Clegg:

"YOU DO THE FIGHTING, I'LL DO THE TALKING "

YET AGAIN ANOTHER TRASH STATEMENT FROM GOVERNMENT WITHIN THE PERSPECTIVE OF PRACTICE V THEORY.

CAUSE AND EFFECT

The very same perspective that is responsible for putting this country and all the people who live and work here into such a beaurocratic mess. (Theory) Blighting the daily lives of millions of people who live and work here.

Especially noticable within, what we are told is a multi billion pound horseracing industry. Where money is prevented from going to the people who earn it, the people who have achieved true professional bloodhorse literacy. The practical professional skills to carry out the work at the dangerous sharp end of horseracing where there is found such shocking contempt, injustice and grossly inadiquate regulation, dished out by the bloodhorse illiterate.

Naming only a few here, the frightening part of all this being the theory specialists are causing huge damage every day to all those who's work is in the practical mode, all those who go out to work each day, all those who shore up the medical profession, the dental profession, the farming profession, and the horseracing profession.

Cameron's attitude in making this statement shows exactly why this country is in such a shocking mess, right across the board, practical damage on a huge scale.

REVIEW

For instance where is this government's official written submission guide, agenda as to what they have achieved or failed to achieve over the past year, their first year in office?

PREVIEW

For instance where is this government's official written submission guide, agenda as to what they intend to tackle in this, their second year in office?

THE PEOPLE WHO VOTED THIS GOVERNMENT IN

Looks like all these people are considered to be of no further importance, of no further use to this government, they are all to be taken for granted until they are required to vote again?

There is nothing honest or fair about such a government attitude as this. No way is it competent or capable of leading this county with such an old hat regime as this.

PREVIEW OF THIS GOVERNMENTS SECOND YEAR TERM IN OFFICE

Where is this document? And why has it not been received through the post by all those who have the right to a vote?

Where is this written submission agenda? Or is it that government find it unecessary to provide such a document?

What is on this government's perspective agenda for this second year of their regulation is anyone allowed to know?

What are this government intending to improve in this the second year of their political stint ? More of the same?

POLITICIANS DOMAIN IN THEORY SCANT KNOWLEDGE IN PRACTICAL SKILLS CALLED INTO QUESTION

2011-05-30T23:49:00.000-07:00

Thursday, 14 April, 2011 8:58

FROM J. MARGARET CLARKE"

TO SIR GEORGE YOUNG MP

Dear Sir George

Politicians acting on issues that they have scant or absolutely no knowledge about at all

a sad and shocking statistic, blighting and burdening the daily lives of the vast majority of hard working people living in this county today, the stark reality caused by practical illiteracy.

BBC Breakfast this morning, relate to how the present financial downturn is effecting the poorest people, not only financially but practically as well, People who are baffled by beaurocratic forms. People who do not use the internet.

When my husband died, directly I was bombarded and subjected to huge beaurocratic forms to fill out to suit the rich and privilaged. I contacted the department in Basingstoke who had sent me the forms requesting that someone be sent out here to help me to fill their forms in, which they did. It took the person three and a half hours to do the job they were expecting me to do. 3 AND A HALF HOURS what sort of a con is this?

Politicians cannot go on being allowed to punish the poor in this way.

All the tax payers money used recently to bail out the RICH AND PRIVILAGED BANKERS, BEGGARS BELIEF. Political working practices as these are not fit for purpose. All the banks are there to serve the people not to rip the people off big time to suit only themselves.

Kind regards, yours sincerely margaret

TO:The Rt Hon Sir George Young Bt MP

Leader of the House of Commons

www.sirgeorgeyoung.org.uk

STIFFLING BEAUROCRACY CHOKES THE NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE

2011-05-30T23:33:00.000-07:00

Email to Sir George Young MP dated: Tuesday, 5 April, 2011 7:57

"SIR GEORGE YOUNG"

info@turfcall.co.uk

Dear Sir George

Thank you for your email. I await your further response as promised therein.

I am watching BBC Breakfast now, with Nick Clegg speaking on the National Health Service and the governments' aims for the future.

At present the National Health Service and it's stiffling beaurocracy are severly 'In Breach of their Duty of Care to all Sick People struggling to live through the Traumatic Experience of Poor Health.'

The really frightening side of all this is that people do not know what the word 'CARE' actually means even. Something that in her short lifetime Princess Diana attempted to show the true meaning of.

Princess Diana has left us with her two son's Prince William and Prince Harry. Prince William a rescue helicopter pilot, and shortly to marry.

Mainly all really sick people loose their apetite. So for starters this government can immediately save billions of pounds on the food front to stop the rampant chucking out of good food wasted.

When someone is very ill, they are put off by huge plates full of food placed before them. What they need is gentle food, more like the fruit corners and jellies on sale in the supermarkets. Jamie Oliver's imput on this may be your very best option for change and the right sort of change, on the National Health food front.

Kind regards, yours sincerely margaret

J Margaret Clarke

BBC BREAKFAST THIS MORNING GOVERNMENT IN BREACH OF DUTY OF CARE IN HOSPITALS

2011-05-26T14:03:00.000-07:00

COPY FOR YOUR REFERENCE SIR GEORGE, KIND REGARDS MARGARET

BBC Breakfast this morning, pick up on the shocking Breach of Duty of Care going on within the British Medical Profession and the National Health Security Strategy (NHSS)

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/concern-over-basic-hospital-care-elderly-024316748.html

Why and how has this NHSS service got so desperately uncaring and out of order? Is this whole issue a case of ‘Political Beaurocratic Theory’ insisting there is no need to bother about anything to do with the PRACTICAL SIDE? Politicians taking the view that Theory is enough, all that is needed, no need to BOTHER ABOUT ANYTHING PRACTICAL .... the same attitude as the regulation people holding the power within British horseracing .

In Farming the Foot and Mouth epidemic pops up now and again that the political parties have not a clue how to deal with; in the past causing huge distress to farmers, and to the actual animals themselves, who are left to suffer brutal and savage death’s, within an environment of death lying all around them.

Where are all you politicians at exactly? Why are these sharp practices going on at all? You politicians are failing miserably in serving the people who have voted you into power.

The present political set up has just reached its first birthday, due to have a further four Birthday’s before the British people will be called upon to vote again.. What exactly have these politicians achieved over this their first year in office? Why are there no political previews, and reviews on the television at least every three months to update the public as happened before the last election ? Surely the British people have a right to be informed acurately to know exactly what is going on? Or not going on as the case may be?

We see Nick Clegg pushed into the background whilst David Cameron forcefully takes centre stage. Why is this? Why are such bully tactics allowed to go on in the House of Commons? 'Rip Off Britain' tactics ..

Surely these MP’S owe the people who have turned out to to vote for them a fair and reasonable deal ... The present political situation in this country is not fit for purpose. There is a real need to keep the hard working people in this county informed and accurately informed, in a timely manner, this is just not happening. Why is this?

The true perspective principle of Duty of Care has reached an all time shocking, totally unacceptable low. Breach of Trust, cruelty on a mega scale in British Hospital’s being manned by people who have no idea what the word care actually means even.

The last time I had a short spell in hospital myself, I experienced an old lady in the bed opposite to mine, left crying out for help after midnight, and on throughout the early hours. No one came to her aid, not a sole. Eventually I got out of my bed and went across to talk to her, I was so weak I hardly managed to get to her bedside only a short distance away, I held her hand, realising that she was totally traumatized, and called a nurse requesting immediate medication to calm the trauma this lady was experiencing and suffering.

All hospital medical complaints are carried out ‘In House’ a grossly inadequate procedure, why is this Mr Cameron? Why is this Mr Clegg?
END

THE TOTE JON LEES FOR THE RACING POST TALKS TO SIR ERIC PARKER
“NEITHER BID IS GOOD FOR RACING” INSISTS PARKER.(13.05.2011)
“ FORMER TOTE BOARD MEMBER SIR ERIC PARKER yesterday warned that not having the Totes’s exclusive pool betting license would hurt racing for a long time and said neither Sir Martin Broughon’s bid nor that of Betfred were attractive propositions.

http://turfcallmorningline.blogspot.com/2011/05/c4-morning-line-755am-to-855am-every_21.html
THE TOTE. J. Margaret Clarke responds for Turfcall

GOVERNMENT BLOOD MONEY.
MONEY SNATCHED BY GOVERNMENTS off the backs of others skill and expertise. In this case snatched off all those who have achieved BLOODHORSE LITERACY over the last 83 years. This sharp practice has to be stopped, and stopped now for once and for all time.

‘THE TOTE’ belongs by absolute right to all those who have achieved ‘BLOODHORSE LITERACY’, because these are the people the government have been ripping off big time over the last 83 years. It could be said that the Tote has existed and has been bought over the last 83 years since 1928 time after time after time, by horseman who have achieved BLOODHORSE LITERACY.

DEMAND A JUDICIAL REVIEW
All licensed trainers to operate in tick over mode, no horses to go to any racecourses to run, for as long as it takes.

END

J. Margaret Clarke comment for and on behalf of Turfcall UK

Test

2011-04-12T04:59:00.000-07:00

http://www.number10.gov.uk/

BRITISH POLITICAL SYSTEM WELL PAST ITS SELL BY DATE

2010-07-20T03:50:00.001-07:00

BRITISH POLITICAL SYSTEM WELL PAST ITS SELL BY DATE
Nick Clegg for the LibDems is the only politician so far to offer real change.
To confirm that real change is indeed possible. That we can all help to make these changes to get Britain back on track, to understand exactly what the word FAIR and CARE does actually mean.

RIP OFF BRITAIN
The very fact that all politicians have had, and are having to attempt to cope with, such a huge overload of work, in the build up to this election, in itself
shows the glaring inadequacies’of the political foundation system/structures within Britain, structures which have been allowed to go on and on over
decades and decades, no matter what party is elected.. . Politicians present frantic quest for power no matter what the cost. How can this ever be right?

Thomas Arnold that famous headmaster of Rugby School in the earlier part of the 19th century, quote “There is nothing so unnatural and convulsive to society as the strain to keep things fixed when all the world is in eternal progress; and the cause of all the evils of the world may be traced to that most natural but most deadly error of human indolence and corruption that our business is to preserve and not improve”.

THE MOST SEVER WORLD WIDE RECESSIONS EVER.
We are all suffering one of the very worst world wide recessions ever .... so where is the money coming from to pay for this next General Election and the frantic build up to it?

Who is putting up the money for all this exactly?

Where is all the money coming from to pay for all this?

What will the final bill come to exactly is anyone allowed to know?

The vast majority of people in this country feel cut off and distant, remote, ignored, not needed in any way, recognised only as a number, not as a living
breathing human being by the supposed British Political System, inclusive of
the corruption and greed of the 'Rip off Banks, ‘Rip off Bureaucracy ‘Rip Off British Legal Justice System only available for the rich. ‘The Rip Off Medical Profession. All those quick to grab survival hand outs, whilst the rest are left to loose out big time.

This General Election will not stop or cure the blight that has been allowed to seep daily ongoing over decades into all the different social divisions within Britain going back over the last 60 years no matter what party wins. The key question has to be, will anyone bother to turn out to Vote?

THE NEW TELEVISED DEBATES
Surely these should be happening once a month following a General Election as well. For the purpose of allowing the British people to know what exactly is going on. What the key urgent objectives are exactly. A list would help for starters, with the most urgent at the top of the list.

Politicians are not connecting with the people. Sadly they remain out of touch, remote, unaware of the stark realities born by so many.

Only when a General Election is pending ... when the politicians want something from us .... to get our vote ..... otherwise nothing. All lost within the aura and grandeur that is the Houses of Parliament.

Politicians in every area inclusive of all parties are needed to attend to all the difficulties within that area that need urgent attention. Politicians closeted in grandeur up in London will never get anything done. Or be aware of what actually does need to be done in the first place.

ENDS

BRITISH MP'S BEHAVIOUR A SCANDAL

2010-07-20T03:48:00.000-07:00

WHAT SORT OF PEOPLE ARE ALL THESE MP'S?

MP’s, posing dishonestly cycling along, pushing a pram, or in hospital posing with sick children? There is nothing sound or decent in tactics as these.

It is noted that these MP’s continue on ranting and raging daily against each other. ... But is this acceptable behavior prior to the 2010 General Election?

Surely such behavior proves what scant regard these so called MP’s have for 95% of all British people, British people who are expected to vote, whilst their
hard earned cash is being used to bale out ‘Banker Millionaires’ insuring that they can then become ‘Banker Billionaires’ whilst at the same time refusing decent hard working people a business loan even.

Do the existing MP’s even know what is actually happening in Britain?

These MP’S show that they have no true concern about any of the real issues that need attending to so urgently in Britain. Welfare, care, life and death issues. There is nothing honest, no true information provided to each, and every person expected to turn out to vote. For what exactly are we all expected to vote for?

ENDS

TURFCALL FRIDAY, JANUARY 08, 2010
KEY POLITICAL QUESTIONS URGENTLY IN NEED OF ATTENTION RE: MALISCIOUS POLITICAL
IN FIGHTING PROVOKED AND STARTED THIS WEEK BY DAVID CAMERON.

Why do we need another election this year at all? When the whole world is suffering a recession?

Surely Britain cannot afford a General Election at this time?

Surely Britain cannot afford the time either that is needed to put the ancient wheels of a General Election in motion that such an ancient election procedure demands?

Is this also an area/political structure long past it’s sell by date upsides the School Curriculum inadequacies?

How can the British people be expected to vote with any confidence following the expenses scandal?

How can the present Old Hat British Political Structure actually be sound?

How can the British people ever accept that the truth is to be denied them?

How can the British people ever accept that their money is being used by the privileged to suit only the privileged, David Cameron in particular?

KEY POLITICAL QUESTIONS URGENTLY IN NEED OF ATTENTION:
RE: SCHOOL CURRICULUM

Is the present school curriculum denying the young ones a fair start in life?

Is the present school curriculum preparing the young ones properly for life in the real world?

Or is this present current school curriculum well beyond it’s sell by date?

Education needs to embrace careers of all sorts from the actual school environment.
But this is just not happening. Why is this?

It is most definitely not happening within the Multi Billion Pound British Horseracing Industry to date. Looks like this is the case right across the board.

ENDS

KEY POLITICAL QUESTIONS URGENTLY IN NEED OF ATTENTION

2010-07-20T03:47:00.000-07:00

KEY POLITICAL QUESTIONS URGENTLY IN NEED OF ATTENTION: RE: MALISCIOUS POLITICAL IN FIGHTING PROVOKED AND STARTED THIS WEEK BY DAVID CAMERON.

Why do we need another election this year at all? When the whole world is suffering a recession?

Surely Britain cannot afford a General Election at this time?

Surely Britain cannot afford the time either that is needed to put the ancient wheels of a General Election in motion that such an ancient election procedure demands?

Is this also an area/political structure long past it’s sell by date upsides the School Curriculum inadequacies?

How can the British people be expected to vote with any confidence following the expenses scandal?

How can the present Old Hat British Political Structure actually be sound?

How can the British people ever accept that the truth is to be denied them?

How can the British people ever accept that their money is being used by the privileged to suit only the privileged, David Cameron in particular?

KEY POLITICAL QUESTIONS URGENTLY IN NEED OF ATTENTION:
RE: SCHOOL CURRICULUM

Is the present school curriculum denying the young ones a fair start in life?

Is the present school curriculum preparing the young ones properly for life in the real world?

Or is this present current school curriculum well beyond it’s sell by date?

Education needs to embrace careers of all sorts from the actual school environment.
But this is just not happening. Why is this?

It is most definitely not happening within the Multi Billion Pound British Horseracing Industry to date. Looks like this is the case right across the board.

ENDS

BRITISH / UNITED KINGDOM MP'S PARLIAMENTARY EXPENSES SCANDAL

2010-07-20T03:45:00.000-07:00

MP'S Parliamentary Expenses Scandal: Appeals Fail.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search
See also: Salaries of Members of the United Kingdom Parliament and List of expenses claims in the United Kingdom Parliamentary expenses scandal.

The Palace of Westminster The United Kingdom Parliamentary expenses scandal is a major political scandal triggered by the publication of expense claims made by members of the United Kingdom Parliament over several years. Public outrage was caused by disclosure of widespread actual and alleged misuse of the permitted allowances and expenses claimed by Members of Parliament (MPs), following failed attempts by parliament to prevent disclosure under Freedom of Information legislation. The scandal aroused widespread anger among the UK public against MPs and a loss of confidence in politics. It resulted in a large number of resignations, sackings, de-selections and retirement announcements, together with public apologies and the repayment of expenses. It also created pressure for political reform extending well beyond the issue of expenses.

In the United Kingdom MPs can claim expenses, including the cost of accommodation, "wholly, exclusively and necessarily incurred for the performance of a Member’s parliamentary duties".[1] In February 2008 a request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 for the release of details of MPs' expenses claims was allowed by an Information Tribunal. The House of Commons Authorities challenged the decision on the grounds that it was "unlawfully intrusive".[2] In May 2008, the English High Court ruled in favour of releasing the details of MP's expenses claims.[3][4] and in April 2009 the House of Commons authorities announced that full publication of expenses would be made in July 2009,[5] with certain information, which they deemed sensitive, being withheld.[6]

However, The Daily Telegraph newspaper obtained a leaked full copy of the expenses records and began publishing details in daily instalments from 8 May 2009. These disclosures dominated the British media for weeks, with the findings being considered to show flagrant and sometimes gross misuse of the expenses system for personal gain by many MPs, including Government ministers, and across all parties.

On 18 June 2009 the details of all MPs' expenses and allowance claims that were approved during the period 2004 to 2008 were published on the official Parliament website. However items of detail such as addresses were blacked out (or "redacted"), and the publication excluded claims that were not approved for payment by the Commons authorities as well as any correspondence between MPs and the parliamentary fees office. These omissions resulted in further accusations of unnecessary secrecy.[7][8] Details of voluntary repayments by MPs amounting to almost £500,000 were also officially published.[9]

A panel was established to investigate all claims relating to the second homes allowance between 2004 and 2008. Headed by former civil servant Sir Thomas Legg, the panel published its findings on 12 October as MPs returned to Westminster following the summer recess. Each MP received a letter in which they were informed whether or not they would be required to repay any expenses they had claimed.

Contents [hide]
1 Background and legal proceedings
2 Pre-publication controversies
3 Information disclosed by The Daily Telegraph
3.1 Areas of abuse
3.2 Specific claims
4 Source of information
5 Media handling
6 Impact
6.1 Political response
6.2 Legal responses
6.3 Resignations and disciplinary action
6.3.1 Resignation of the Speaker
6.3.2 Cabinet and Ministerial resignations
6.3.3 Labour backbenchers
6.3.4 Conservatives
6.3.5 Peers
6.4 Creation of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority
6.5 Surge in independent candidates
6.6 Effect on MPs and on the political structure
6.7 Reform proposals
7 Police and tax authority responses
8 Independent audit
9 References
10 External links

[edit] Background and legal proceedings
In January 2005, the Freedom of Information Act 2000 came into force, allowing members of the public to request disclosure of information from public bodies. Two early requests came from the journalists Ben Leapman and Jon Ungoed-Thomas. Another request came from journalist and freedom of information campaigner Heather Brooke. All three asked for details of the expenses claimed by certain MPs to be released.[10] The requests were subsequently passed over to the Information Commissioner, who joined the three journalists' cases together and ordered the release of some information on 15 June 2007.[11] House of Commons authorities objected to this order in June 2007 and MPs had, in May 2007, voted in favour of the Freedom of Information (Amendment) Bill which sought to exempt MPs from the 2000 act. The House of Commons voted 96 to 25 in favour of the Exemption of the House of Commons amendment [12] but the bill was ultimately withdrawn prior to second reading in the House of Lords because peers were unwilling to sponsor the bill.[13][14]

In February 2008, after referral to an Information Tribunal, it was held that Commons authorities would release information on 14 MPs.[15] This decision was subsequently appealed against, delaying the release of information.[16][17]

In the tax year 2007-2008, MPs' costs of staying away from their main homes was limited to £23,083.[18]

In January 2009, Harriet Harman, Leader of the House of Commons, tabled a motion which would exempt MPs' expenses from being disclosed under a Freedom of Information request, in order to prevent any further disclosure of information.[19] Labour MPs were placed under a three line whip in order to force the motion through the Commons. However, opposition parties stated they would vote against the proposals, and large scale public opposition emerged. The proposals were ultimately dropped on 21 January 2009. The Commons authorities announced that full disclosure of all MPs’ expenses would be published on 1 July 2009.[14]

Ultimately the media disclosure made the legal appeal moot; the appeal was finally heard at the High Court, which ruled on 16 May 2008 in favour of releasing the information.[3] No appeal was lodged against the High Court ruling, and the requested details were made public on 23 May 2008.[20]

[edit] Pre-publication controversies
Main article: List of expenses claims in the United Kingdom Parliamentary expenses scandal
Prior to The Daily Telegraph's revelations in May and June 2009 and the official publication of expenses claims in June 2009, and during the Freedom of Information cases, there were a variety of exposés that covered the controversial John Lewis List (a list considered to indicate amounts that could be claimed without question) and individual MPs’ expenses claims.[14] Examples of items publicised prior to the May 2009 disclosures included:

Conservative Derek Conway was alleged in May 2007 to have employed and paid his son, a student at the time. The matter was forwarded to the House of Commons Standards and Privileges Committee. whose report dated 28 January 2008 concluded there was no record of such work. Conway was suspended for 10 days and ordered to repay £13,000.[21] Conway was also expelled from the party. A second case a year later found he had done the same with regard to his other son.[22]
Chairman of the Conservative Party Caroline Spelman was alleged in June 2008 to have paid for her nanny out of parliamentary expenses during her early years in Parliament, between 1997 and 1998[23] – an allegation that became known as "Nannygate". It was ruled that she had inadvertently "misapplied part of [her] parliamentary allowances", but calls for her sacking were rebutted since she might not have been aware of the rules governing the use or purpose of parliamentary allowances. The committee recommended that Spelman repay £9,600.[24]
Married couple and Labour Cabinet ministers, Ed Balls and Yvette Cooper were accused in September 2007 of exploiting the Commons' allowances system in order to pay for a £655,000 house in London.[25] The complaint, centering on the gain made by allocation of their "second house", was dismissed since it was held the couple had acted in accordance with parliamentary rules.[26]
Married Conservative MPs Sir Nicholas and Lady Winterton were accused in June 2008 of claiming back mortgage interest on a mortgage they had fully repaid, on a flat they owned in London, and then also placing the flat in trust and claiming for the rent on it.[27] It was held there had been a clear breach of the rules, but no repayment was ordered.[28]
Labour Home Secretary Jacqui Smith was stated to have claimed for her main home by designating it as a second home, while identifying as her main home a location she spent as little as 2 days a week, and despite also having access to a "grace and favour" home in Westminster. No investigation was held, however, the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards stating there was "not sufficient evidence for an inquiry".[29] A string of further claims came to light in 2009, including various domestic items[30] and a claim for two pornographic films viewed by her husband Richard Timney.[31]
Labour minister Tony McNulty admitted claiming expenses for a second home in Harrow, 8 miles from his main home in Hammersmith, and asserted they were appropriate, but ceased claiming the allowances.[32] Under continuing pressure, he apologised to the House for expenses abuses on 29 October 2009.
Conservative MP Eric Pickles likewise was identified as claiming for a second home 37 miles from his main home.[33]
[edit] Information disclosed by The Daily Telegraph
In May 2009, two months prior to the official disclosure of full expenses claims, The Daily Telegraph newspaper obtained a full copy of all expenses claims. The Telegraph began publishing in instalments from 8 May 2009, certain MPs' expenses.[34] The Telegraph justified the publication of the information because it contended that the official information due to be released would have omitted key information about re-designating of second-home nominations.[35]

The Telegraph has refused to disclose whether, and, if anything, how much it had paid for the information, which originated from the parliamentary fees office. The information had been offered to other newspaper organisations, for more than £150,000.[36][37] Shortly after the publication of the information, the House of Commons authorities asked the Metropolitan Police to investigate, a request that the Metropolitan Police declined, on the grounds that a prosecution would not be in the public interest.[35][38]

[edit] Areas of abuse
Alongside specific allegations of incorrect claims such as claims for the cost of mortgages which it transpired had already been repaid in full[39] the Telegraph alleged[40][41][42] that parliamentary “Green Book” expenses rules[43] gave wide scope for a number of abuses, especially those related to costs of maintaining two residences, one in the constituency and one in London. Areas of questionable claims highlighted by the Telegraph included (but were not limited to):

Nominating second homes: The Green Book states that "the location of your main home will normally be a matter of fact" MPs and peers were able to ensure that their second home was the one which enabled them to claim more expenses.[44][45][46] In at least one case (Margaret Moran) the nominated home was near neither constituency nor Westminster.[47]
Re-designating second homes: That MPs were able repeatedly to switch the designation of their second home, enabling them to claim for purchasing (e.g. Stamp Duty), renovating and furnishing more than one property.[48] This practice became widely-known as "flipping".[49]
Renting out homes: That MPs were able to claim for their “second home” while they were, in fact, renting other homes out. In most cases the rented homes were ‘third’ properties,[50][51] but in Elliott Morley’s case, a second home was rented to another MP, Ian Cawsey who was claiming the rent on expenses.[52]
Over-claiming for council tax on second home: By rounding up actual amounts due, claiming for 12 monthly installments where only 10 were due or by claiming up to £250.00 per month with no receipt required until those rules were changed. Over 50 MPs were alleged to have over-claimed council tax.[53]
Subsidising property development: That the Green Book rule that MPs could not claim for repairs "beyond making good dilapidations" was not enforced and consequently that MPs were able to add significantly to the value of a property.[54][55] By implication some “second homes” were effectively businesses (not homes) since they were renovated on expenses and then rapidly sold.[56]
Evading tax and inappropriate attempts at avoiding tax: That MPs either evaded tax, or inappropriately deemed themselves not required to pay tax on reimbursements when it was likely tax was due. This covered two areas:
Capital Gains tax: MPs were able to designate a property as their second home with the parliamentary fees office so as to claim the cost of renovating it on expenses, but a number of MPs had concurrently described a property as their second home to claim expenses, and to the UK tax authority HM Revenue and Customs as their primary residence in order to sell it without Capital Gains tax.[57] Some also designated a property as a primary or secondary residence for tax or expenses benefits which was apparently little if at all used by them in that role.
Income tax: A number of MPs were criticized for non-payment of income tax for benefits in kind or for reimbursed expenses considered under UK tax law to be of a personal nature. As of 31 May 2009, some 40 MPs had been identified as claiming for personal expenses such as preparation of their tax returns, despite UK tax law and ministerial guidance both of which had stated such expenses were not claimable for tax purposes;[58] of those claiming, only a minority paid tax on the benefit in kind.
Claiming expenses while living in grace and favour homes: That ministers with "grace and favour" homes in Westminster as well as their existing primary residence, were able to claim for a further "second home" in addition.[59]
Renovating and furnishing properties when standing down: That MPs were able to claim for renovations and furniture even when they had already announced their intention to resign from Parliament.[60][61]
Furnishing of other homes: That MPs were able to claim for items of furniture that were actually delivered somewhere other than their second home.[62][63][64]
Exploiting the 'no receipt' rule: That MPs submitted a large number of claims for just below £250, the ceiling under which they were not required to produce receipts, without being challenged as to their legitimacy.[65][66]
Over-claiming for food: That, under a rule permitting up to £400 for food each month (without receipts), MPs were simply able to claim the whole £400 every month, even when Parliament was not sitting.[67][68]
Overspending at the end of the financial year: That MPs were able to submit claims just before the end of the financial year, so as to use up allowances, without being challenged as to their legitimacy.[69][70]
[edit] Specific claims
Main article: List of expenses claims in the United Kingdom Parliamentary expenses scandal
The Telegraph firstly revealed expenses of the governing Labour Party, beginning with the Cabinet on 8 May 2009, before releasing details of the claims by junior ministers and Labour backbenchers. Further allegations were made on Thursday 14 May. The main allegations the newspaper made, alongside any responses to them from the various MPs, are shown in the related article.

On 11 and 12 May, publication focused on the frontbench of the Conservative Party.[71] followed by the claims of backbench Conservative MPs whom the newspaper dubbed "the grandees" of the party.[72] On 12 May, the Leader of the Opposition, David Cameron, announced that all questionable claims by the Shadow Cabinet would be repaid.[73]

The Liberal Democrats expenses were revealed last of the three main parties.[74] followed by Sinn Féin members' claims in which it was reported that the five Sinn Féin MPs together had claimed nearly £500,000 in second home allowances, despite never taking up their seats at Westminster due to the party's abstentionist policy.[75][76] Sinn Féin stated that its members often have to travel to London on parliamentary business.[76]

The claims published by The Daily Telegraph ultimately covered the entire gamut of Parliament — all major parties and several minor ones, ministers (including the Prime Minister Gordon Brown, the Chancellor, cabinet and shadow cabinet members) through to backbenchers, and members of both the House of Lords and the House of Commons. A number of members were expelled from their parties, or would not stand for re-election, some members repaid in part or whole, sums they had previously claimed. Expenses claims repaid to date have included several amounts from £10,000 up to £42,000, as well as payments to the UK tax authority for taxes on possible gains or income previously not paid.[77]

[edit] Source of information
Former SAS officer Major John Wick, the owner of a London based risk management company[78][79] has been named as the middle-man for an un-named whistleblower; he has spoken of the need to bring the information he had been given into the public domain.[80] Wick stated that:

The person on the end of the line told me he had a hard drive which contained details of every MP's expense claims over the past four years. Every receipt, every claim and every piece of correspondence between MPs and fees office staff was detailed – some four million separate pieces of information [...] those directly involved in processing the raw data were shocked and appalled by what they were seeing.[79]
I was also being told that critical information – particularly the removal of addresses from the files – would lead to many of the scams never being publicly exposed. The ultimate source was adamant that the key thing was that both the information and the way in which it was handled should be in the public domain and that its release was in the public interest [...] I was assured that the data was not stolen but that it was an unregistered copy that had been produced as a result of the lax and unprofessional security procedures.[79]
Wick went on to explain that following legal advice and review, and soul searching over loyalties, he had felt the matter was of sufficient concern to merit publication in a "serious newspaper", and following discussions with a number of papers, the Telegraph had been granted exclusive access to study the material for 10 days from 30 April 2009.[79]

There is an unresolved issue with the data itself, with different numbers being cited by different sources. The Telegraph stated that 4 million pieces of information existed; The Guardian states there were 2 million ("two million documents in all, including copies of expense claim forms, handwritten comments scrawled in margins, even attached sticky notes").[81]

[edit] Media handling
In May 2009, major national newspapers such as The Times described the resulting controversy as "Parliament's darkest day"[82] and a "full blown political crisis",[83] reporting upon cross-party firings and resignations, an exodus of shamed MPs,[82] the prospect of criminal[84] and tax evasion[85][86][87] charges, and a motion of no confidence being prepared against the Speaker.[88]

Public interest in the expenses debate led to the 14 May 2009 edition of the BBC political and current affairs television programme Question Time recording its highest viewing figures in its 30 year run, of 3.8 million, with audience members heckling guest panelist Margaret Beckett. This figure was a million more than usual, and surpassed the figure of 3.4 million recorded in 2003 just as the coalition declared war on Iraq.[89][90] The following week's edition on 21 May was brought forward for a special edition into the prime time slot of 9pm BST.

Nadine Dorries, a Conservative MP, criticised the Telegraph's handling, which she described as "picking off a few MPs each day, emailing at noon, giving five hours to reply, recording the conversation, not allowing them to speak, telling them they are going to publish anyway".[91] She stated that the stress felt by some MPs was akin to "torture". Her comment was rejected by senior Conservatives. (See also Effect on MPs and on the political structure below)

[edit] Impact
A widespread public reaction was heightened as a result of several factors: the incident broke in the face of an economic recession and financial crisis, under an already-unpopular government,[92][93] only weeks before the 2009 European Parliamentary elections.

[edit] Political response
Following the publication of expenses politicians from all parties responded to the controversy.

Gordon Brown, the Prime Minister, during a speech to the Royal College of Nursing Conference on Monday 11 May, apologised "on behalf of all politicians" for the expenses claims that had been made.[94]
David Cameron, the Leader of the Opposition, said that all MPs should apologise for the expenses scandal, shortly after the Telegraph published the claims of members of the Shadow Cabinet. Cameron also admitted that the existing system "was wrong and we're sorry about it".[95] The following day, Tuesday 12 May, Cameron said that some of the claims made were "unethical and wrong", and imposed new rules on what Conservative MPs could claim for in the future.[73]
Michael Martin, the Commons Speaker made a statement to MPs on 11 May, the first sitting of the Commons since the Daily Telegraph began publishing specific details of individual claims. Martin said that "serious change" was required in the future and that, in the present, MPs should not just work within the rules, an explanation that many accused MPs had given in their defence, but rather in "the spirit of what is right". The Speaker also announced that a new 'Operational Assurance Unit' would be set up to independently oversee all claims, and that the House of Commons Commission would meet that evening to discuss whether or not to bring forward the official expenses publication date from 1 July.[96]
In the aftermath of the Speaker's statement to MPs, questions were widely raised regarding Martin's future in the job,[96][97] largely due to his focusing on the actual leak of information, rather than the expenses themselves, and due to his response to the point of order raised by the Labour MP Kate Hoey, who suggested that the Speaker and Commons' decision to call in the police was "an awful waste of resources".[98] A Conservative MP, Douglas Carswell, subsequently announced that he planned to table a motion of no confidence in the Speaker, if he could garner sufficient support.[99]
Harriet Harman, the Leader of the House of Commons, asked Don Touhig, the Chairman of the Members' Allowance Committee, to devise a method for MPs to repay any excessive expenses.[100]
Ben Bradshaw, Minister of State in the Department of Health, raised the spectre of MPs being sent to prison for abusing the expenses system.[101]
William Hague, Shadow Foreign Secretary and a senior member of the Shadow Cabinet (Deputy to party leader David Cameron), also suggested that a number of MPs may face criminal prosecution after details of their claims were disclosed.[101]
Lord Tebbit, a Eurosceptic and former Chairman of the Conservative Party, urged voters to snub the main three political parties in the upcoming EU Parliament election. Tebbit, who in March 2009 revealed that he would vote for the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP), said "Local elections, the Great British public should just treat as normal" but suggested using the European election to send a message to the implicated parties. Tebbit pointed out that there were a series of smaller parties people could vote for in addition to UKIP, including the Green Party, but he urged against voting for the British National Party.[102]
Lord Foulkes, when being interviewed for BBC News by Carrie Gracie to defend Michael Martin, asked Gracie how much money she earned. When she said she earned £92,000, Foulkes said: "£92,000? So you're paid nearly twice as much as an MP to come on and talk this nonsense." Gracie defended herself by saying that she paid for all of her phone calls and "understood what public sector money is about".[103]
[edit] Legal responses
On 27 May, Lord Millett, a Privy Councillor and past Law Lord (1998 – 2004) and Lord Justice of Appeal (1994–1998), described as "astounding" the fact that the Chancellor of the Exchequer (the office responsible for the UK's entire taxation system) had himself claimed as expenses of his office, expenses that were of a personal nature under UK tax law (in this case tax return preparation costs).[104]

Guidance to ministers in 2005 had also stated that such expenses were not claimable for tax purposes;[58]

[edit] Resignations and disciplinary action
Wikinews has related news:
British House of Commons' Speaker addresses Parliament ahead of vote of no confidence
UK House of Commons' Speaker resigns

[edit] Resignation of the Speaker
The resignation of Michael Martin Speaker of the House of Commons followed after he was pressured to step down for approving the allowances system that MPs have manipulated with questionable claims of expenses. The pressure and viable threats of a proposed vote of no confidence in Martin,ultimately forced his resignation.[105] Michael Martin’s response to the handling of the expense crisis, was not well received by the majority of the House. He attacked MPs in Parliament who defended The Daily Telegraph for publishing details of expenses and allowances. Martin then concluded his part in the debate over how to handle the expense scandal, by announcing that the Commons clerk had referred the matter of the leaked information to the Metropolitan Police Commissioner. Overall, Martin appeared to be more concerned with the nature of the leak of the information, which led to The Daily Telegraph’s publishing details of MPs expenses and allowances, rather than offering an anticipated apology or explanation. The majority of the MPs felt Martin’s defensive approach and attacks on various MPs as whistleblowers and the backbenchers was a clear indication that Martin was no longer able to lead the House with the required impartiality. MPs from his own majority party, Labour and the minority opposition party, the Conservatives, felt he had lost the confidence of the public and the House, in general.[106][107][108] Martin was the first Speaker to be forced out of the office by a motion of no confidence since John Trevor in 1695.[109] Despite apologising to the public on behalf of the House of Commons on 18 May,[110] Michael Martin announced his resignation as Speaker of the House of Commons and as Member of Parliament for Glasgow North East the following day, both effective 21 June.[111]

[edit] Cabinet and Ministerial resignations
Shahid Malik stepped down as justice minister on 15 May to allow the prime minister's independent adviser on ministerial interests, Sir Philip Mawer, to investigate his financial arrangements. The investigation covered allegations that Malik had benefited from a preferential rent that he had failed to declare in the ministerial register; it did not relate to his expenses claims.[67] On 9 June, Malik rejoined the government as a junior communities minister after being cleared of breaching the ministerial code.[112]
Jacqui Smith announced that she would step down as Home Secretary after the European elections, but would contest her seat at the next election.[113]
Hazel Blears announced on 3 June that she would step down as Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government.[114]
Tony McNulty resigned from his position as Minister for Employment during the cabinet reshuffle on 5 June 2009.[115]
Geoff Hoon left his position as Secretary of State for Transport during the cabinet reshuffle on 5 June 2009, in order for him to spend more time on European and international issues with him being considered a possible candidate as the next British member of the European Commission.[116]
Kitty Ussher resigned as Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury on 17 June, after only 8 days in the position, following details of avoiding capital gains tax being published.[117]
[edit] Labour backbenchers
The Labour Party formed a three-person panel of its National Executive Committee (NEC) in order to investigate some of its MPs who were referred to it over expenses allegations, which quickly became known as the "Star Chamber" (a reference to the court of the same name employed by English monarchs to dispense summary justice in the 16th and 17th centuries).[118][119]

Ben Chapman announced on 21 May 2009 that he would stand down at the next election, while maintaining that he had done nothing wrong; he said he would resign because the story in the Daily Telegraph had been hurtful to his family, friends and local party members. He was the first Labour MP who announced he would stand down.[120]
Ian McCartney is to stand down at the next election on health grounds.[121]
Elliot Morley announced on 29 May that he would not stand for re-election,[122] and has also been barred from standing for Labour at the next general election by the NEC's "star chamber".[123]
David Chaytor announced that he would not stand for re-election,[124] and has also been barred from standing for Labour at the next general election.[123]
Ian Gibson was also barred from representing Labour at the next general election. He was said to be "deeply disappointed".[123] On 5 June, Gibson announced his resignation as an MP, forcing a by-election to be held in his Norwich North constituency on 23 July 2009, which Labour went on to lose to the Conservatives.[125]
Jim Devine was deselected on 16 June following a disciplinary hearing by the Labour party "star chamber".[123][126]
Margaret Moran also decided not to contest the next election,[127] and has also been barred from standing for Labour at the next general election.[123]
Harry Cohen announced he would not stand for re-election. He said the strain caused by the criticism over his expenses, and the formal investigation into his claims, were the main factors behind his departure.[128]
[edit] Conservatives
On 14 May, Andrew MacKay, the Conservative MP for Bracknell, resigned as Parliamentary aide to David Cameron over what he described as "unacceptable" expenses claims made by him. Subsequently he decided to stand down at the next Bracknell parliamentary election.[129] His wife, Julie Kirkbride who represents Bromsgrove, decided on 28 May 2009 that she too would not stand at the next general election.[130]
Douglas Hogg announced on 19 May that he would retire from Parliament at the next general election.[131]
Anthony Steen announced on 20 May that he would retire from Parliament at the next general election.[132]
Sir Peter Viggers announced on 20 May that he would retire from Parliament at the next general election.[133]
Husband and wife Conservative backbenchers Sir Nicholas and Lady Ann Winterton announced their intention to stand down at the next election.[134]
Christopher Fraser stated he would stand down to "care for his ill wife".[135]
Ian Taylor announced he would retire at the next general election. He had been claiming the maximum allowed for a second home allowance for a London home for four years between 2003 and 2008, even though his main residence was in Guildford – 40 minutes from Westminister.[136]
[edit] Peers
Baroness Uddin faces a police investigation for alleged fraud for claiming at least £180,000 in expenses by designating an empty flat, and previously an allegedly non existent property as her main residence.[137][138]
[edit] Creation of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority
On 20 May 2009 Harriet Harman announced the creation of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, intended to manage Members' expenses at an "arm's length" from the House, ending the historical self-policing by MPs of their expenses. The IPSA will be responsible for: paying MPs’ annual salaries; drawing up, reviewing, and administering an MPs’ allowances scheme; providing MPs with publicly available information relating to taxation issues; preparing the MPs’ code of conduct relating to financial interests; and determining the procedures for investigations and complaints relating to MPs. Henceforth, there will therefore be two codes of conduct for MPs to follow: a non-statutory code drawn up by the House of Commons itself; and a statutory code drawn up by the IPSA. The IPSA will take over some of the functions previously undertaken by the Fees Office. It will not, however, determine the level of MPs’ pay. That will remain a matter for the Senior Salaries Review Body which annually informs the Speaker of the House of Commons of the percentage increase to be awarded to MPs.

[edit] Surge in independent candidates
A surge in proposed independent candidates and enhanced profile of minority parties were noted in the press.[139] In various cases these candidates stood in recognition of the loss of public goodwill suffered by established MPs and parties, and proposed to stand on "clean slate" or anti-sleaze platforms.[140] In the immediate aftermath of the revelations, a Populus survey said that only 45% of people were committed to voting in the next general election (although 54% said they wanted an election as soon as possible), which had fallen by around a quarter since before the disclosures began. The Conservatives still maintained their lead over Labour, but support for the BNP was up.[141] The poll showed that 19% of voters were prepared to vote outside of the main three parties, with the British National Party, Green Party of England and Wales, and United Kingdom Independence Party also hoping to capitalize, and was particularly pertinent because of the subsequent European Parliament election.[142]

[edit] Effect on MPs and on the political structure
The expenses disclosures were published over an extended period of time, with the focus moving to different MPs daily. As a result there was significant pressure on MPs who did not know whether, and for what, they would be discussed, as well as a general deepening hostility that grew over a relatively long period.

On 22 May 2009 Nadine Dorries, the Conservative MP for Mid-Befordshire went on record in saying that many of her colleagues "feared a suicide" and that MPs were "beginning to crack". She likened the atmosphere in Westminster to that surrounding Senator Joseph McCarthy's "witch hunts" of suspected Communists during the 1950s.[143] The comment led to a forceful rebuke by Conservative leader David Cameron, who stated that the anger and mood were warranted and that MPs should be more concerned about what the public were thinking.[144][145]

On 23 May 2009 the Archbishop of Canterbury Dr. Rowan Williams warned about the potential effect of the controversy on the democratic process, and that "the continuing systematic humiliation of politicians itself threatens to carry a heavy price in terms of our ability to salvage some confidence in our democracy."[146] On the same day writing in The Times, columnist and former MP Matthew Parris reflected that "extravagance, genuine mistake, sly acquisitiveness and outright criminal fraud are now jumbled together in the national mind as though there were no moral differences"[147]

"I'd had four weeks of intense media pressure, the like of which I have never known, not just on me but on my husband, my dad, my family. At that point I'd had enough"
— Hazel Blears, speaking of her regret at the decisions she made when resigning from the Government
On 11 June 2009 ex-communities secretary Hazel Blears, who chose to resign from the government just before the English county council and European elections, said that she regretted the timing of her decision. She also stated that her decision to wear a brooch with the words 'rocking the boat' on the same day as the resignation was a "stupid thing to do". Speaking to the Manchester Evening News she said of the brooch "It was a brooch my husband had given me. I'd had four weeks of intense media pressure, the like of which I have never known, not just on me but on my husband, my dad, my family. At that point I'd had enough. It was a stupid thing to do but I think it was just trying to put a brave face on – not going out cowed on the basis of expenses claims that genuinely are not true."[148]

[edit] Reform proposals
On 25 May 2009, Health Secretary Alan Johnson (seen as a possible candidate for Labour leadership) stated that one response to the controversy should be a full review of the electoral and political system. He proposed as part of this, a referendum on changing the electoral system to Alternative Vote Plus.[149]

David Cameron, the Conservative Party leader of the opposition, set out his proposal for reform in The Guardian.[150] He proposed strengthening the power of backbenchers over the government, and other measures as part of 'a radical redistribution of power'. Writing in the Guardian on 27 May 2009, Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg suggested cancelling MPs holidays until 'the constitutional crisis sparked by the row over expenses is resolved'.[151] Setting out a week by week plan Clegg made wide ranging proposals from placing a cap on individual donations to political parties, to replacing the House of Lords with an elected Senate, to allowing a referendum on electoral reform.[152]

The major political parties and some minority parties (such as UKIP) have stated they will publicly disclose information on expenses claims by UK Members of the European Parliament. The proposed disclosures vary between parties.[153]

A study of the possible influence of the voting system on MPs behaviour concluded that those MPs with the safest seats were twice as likely as those with the most marginal seats to be involved in the expenses row.[154]

[edit] Police and tax authority responses
Wikinews has related news: U.K. MPs' expenses to be investigated by police
This section requires expansion.

The UK tax authority HM Revenue and Customs ("HMRC") has identified around 40 MPs, including the Chancellor of the Exchequer, as having claimed for their tax return costs. A minority of these have affirmed they paid tax on the sums involved;[155] HMRC have confirmed they are investigating Chancellor Alistair Darling's tax claims, along with those of others involved.[155]

They have also stated they have "repeatedly caught out" MPs attempting to claim such expenses and that spot checks of 25 MPs' tax forms each year have produced examples of MPs "apparently trying to cheat the system".[155]

The Economic and Specialist Crime branch of the Metropolitan Police Service have started investigating claims made by a few MPs.[156]

[edit] Independent audit
An independent panel chaired by former civil servant Sir Thomas Legg was established following the row, with a remit to examine all claims relating to the second homes allowance between 2004 and 2008.[157] The panel published its findings on 12 October as MPs returned to Westminster following the summer recess, with each MP receiving a letter in which they were informed whether or not they would be required to repay any expenses they had claimed. Among those who had to repay expenses were Prime Minister Gordon Brown who claimed £12,415 for cleaning and gardening costs and Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg who was asked to pay back £910 from a £3,900 claim he made for gardening between 2006 and 2009.[158] Conservative leader David Cameron repaid £218 and was asked to provide more information regarding excessive claims made in 2006 when he changed his mortgage.[158] Former Home Secretary Jacqui Smith apologised to the House of Commons after a separate investigation found that she had breached expenses rules over claims made on her second home.[158]

However, MPs from all main political parties expressed their anger at Legg's decision to apply the rules retrospectively, a decision which meant claims that had previously been regarded as legitimate were now considered to have breached the rules. Many senior MPs questioned Legg's authority and cast doubt on the legality of his findings.[159] It was reported that some MPs, including Tory Jonathan Djanogly would challenge the requests to repay their claims.[160] But both the Labour and Conservative leaders urged their party members to pay any overpaid expenses back. Gordon Brown said that MPs should "deal with" the retrospective rules,[161] while David Cameron warned that any member of the Conservative Party who was unwilling to comply with the rules would not be able to stand for the party at the next general election.[162]

BLOODHORSE ILLITERATE REGULATION AND DISCIPLINARY PARTIES ARE CHOKING THIS SPORT

2010-07-06T05:44:00.000-07:00

Imbalance 2000-2010.

This imbalance remains for the providers - all those who work at the dangerous sharp end - to include the horses. Their true rights and needs remain ignored.

It's WAR!

2010-07-06T05:35:00.000-07:00

Five year legal battle over data rights.

Paul Roy - Bloodhorse Illiterate Chairman of the British horseracing Authority

British Racing's rulers and Britain's biggest bookmaker at war in the High Court over five year legal battle over data rights.

British horseracing's financial future rests with three appeal court judges who were told on Tuesday June 28th 2005 by barrister Mark Platts-Mills QC
representing William Hill "This dispute is not about whether racing will go on or whether bookmakers will pay for it, but this dispute is about who controls it".

ENDS

FRIDAY 12TH JUNE 2009

2010-07-06T05:06:00.000-07:00

Your Voice is Heard

Submitted by Pippa Cuckson – Deadline to sign up by: 02 July 2009 – Signatures: 9,369 - Your voice is heard, 184,740 voices - which one is correct?

Thank you all for your efforts.

The number of signatures delivered to 10 Downing Street on Friday June 12th 2009 topped 184,740 - these people have now signed the petition on BBC cuts to live racing TV broadcasts. The petition was delivered by Frankie Dettori and Sir Peter O'Sullevan and others backing the Racing Post Campaign.

Now lets have more coverage plus more documentaries on the grass-root-teamwork behind the scenes without which the horseracing stage would be an empty one.

Our viewing would not be possible without the skilled expertize of all those who work daily behind the scenes at the dangerous sharp end of the multi billion pound British horseracing industry

View petitionsCreate a petitionAbout e-petitionsStep-by-Step GuideFAQsTerms and ConditionsPrivacy PolicyThis petition is now closed, as its deadline has passed.

We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to ask the BBC to retain its current levels of horseracing coverage, as befits a public service broadcaster, and to reinstate the 15 days that it currently proposes to scrap from 2010. More details

Submitted by Pippa Cuckson – Deadline to sign up by: 02 July 2009 – Signatures: 9,369

Petition update, 19 October 2009
You signed a petition asking the Prime Minister to "ask the BBC to retain its current levels of horseracing coverage, as befits a public service broadcaster, and to reinstate the 15 days that it currently proposes to scrap from 2010."

The Prime Minister's Office has responded to that petition and you can view it here:

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.number10.gov.uk/Page20987

MP's Expenses Fiasco

2010-07-06T04:59:00.000-07:00

"Nobody did this to you, you did this to yourselves"

The panel joined host David Dimbleby to discuss the political crisis sparked by the Daily Telegraph's MPs' expenses revelations and included the shadow foreign secretary, William Hague, the government minister Ben Bradshaw, the former independent MP Martin Bell, and UKIP's south-east candidate for the European elections, Marta Andreasen.

Martin Bell commented to the panel of MPs that "nobody did this to you, you did this to yourselves! "

JOANNA LUMLEY PUTTING THE GREAT BACK INTO BRITAIN

2010-07-06T04:46:00.000-07:00

Joanna Lumley dictates policy in the fight for Gurkhas’ rights

“JOANNA Lumley staged an extraordinary ambush on Gordon Brown’s hapless Immigrations Minister over the Gurkhas yesterday. In a bravura performance, the actress seized the initiative in her battle for soldiers’ rights and reduced Phil Woolas to an abject and humiliated figure.

“ Adopting the air of an angry schoolmistress, she sought him out at Westminster and frogmarched him to a live press conference for a very public dressing down.

“In the process, she effectively rewrote government policy. She was stung into action after two Falklands War heroes received letters suggesting they were being barred from Britain – less than 24 hours after Gordon Brown had assured her that he would take personal charge of the Gurkhas’ legal battle for citizenship rights.

“In extraordinary scenes Miss Lumley – the daughter of a British Gurkha officer – signalled she was about to denounce the Government for its betrayal of the veterans. The actress best – known as Patsy in the comedy Absolutely Fabulous, and the minister ended up shoulder – to – shoulder after she outflanked Mr Woolas on the steps of an entrance just before a meeting and confronted him publicly over the shambles.

“She pounced on the unwitting minister, announcing in her inimitable cut – glass tones: ‘I want to speak to you.’

“After emergency talks, the red – faced Immigrations Minister was forced to insist the verdict on the veterans was an ‘interim’ one – and to suggest they would be allowed to stay after all.

“The row centres on the immigration status of Gurkha veterans who retired before 1997. Rules introduced by Mr Woolas last month were fiercely criticised by campaigners, who warned they would place massive restrictions on the number of heroes admitted by the country they fought for.

ENDS

British General election - Hung Parliment Results 06/05/2010

2010-06-08T04:39:00.000-07:00

Rip off Britain

This time around, it is not the politician’s place to be tough on the British people, but the British peoples place to get tough on the politicians.

All British people need now to pay much closer attention to what these politicians are saying and doing in our name.

Key Political Issues

TURFCALL MESSAGE TO SIR GEORGE YOUNG BLOODHORSE ILLITERACY IS TRASHING BRITISH HORSERACING

LEADER OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS AND LORD PRIVY SEAL SIR GEORGE YOUNG Bt MP

ALEX SALMOND SMP SEEKING INDEPENDENCE FOR SCOTLAND

MESSAGE TO SIR GEORGE YOUNG MP EXPRESSING CONCERNS OVER THE LACK OF POLITICAL INFORMATION PRESENTED TO THE VOTING PUBLIC

THE BRITISH LEGAL JUSTICE SYSTEM NO LAW FOR THE POOR OR THE BLOODHORSE LITERATE

Quartet appeal against corruption penalties

BBC 1 BREAKFAST LIVE FRIDAY DECEMBER 16th 2011 THE MEDICAL PROFESSION

MESSAGE AS SENT TO RT HON SIR GEORGE YOUNG Bt MP ON SATURDAY DECEMBER 10th 2011

Message Body

GOVERNMENT HAPPINESS SURVEY LOUISE HANNAN AND PHIL GAYLE BOTH PSYCHOLOGISTS SET THE GOVERNMENT STRAIGHT

POLITICAL RIP-OFF OVER SALE OF THE TOTE 2000 - 2011

RACING POST REPORT WEDNESDAY NOVEMBER 23rd 2011

POLITICAL RIP OFF OVER SALE OF THE TOTE ONGOING FROM 2000 - 2011

ALL-PARTY RACING GROUP OF MP'S MEETING SET FOR TUESDAY NOVEMBER 1st 2011

THE Rt HON. DAVID CAMERON and THE Rt HON. NICK CLEGG PRIME MINISTER'S

SUNDAY EXPRESS AUGUST 21st 2011

Message by The Rt Hon. David Cameron Prime Minister

MURDOCH 'THE MOGUL WHO SCREWED THE NEWS C4 10pm WEDNESDAY JULY 27th 2011

DISPATCHES, HOW RUPERT MURDOCH RAN BRITAIN C4 MONDAY JULY 25th 8pm

C4 DESPATCHED 8pm MONDAY JULY 25th 2011. HOW MURDOCH RAN BRITAIN DOCUMENTARY

TURFCALL MESSAGE TO SIR GEORGE YOUNG MP DANGEROUSLY UNBALANCED PRACTICE V THEORY

POLITICIANS DOMAIN IN THEORY SCANT KNOWLEDGE IN PRACTICAL SKILLS CALLED INTO QUESTION

STIFFLING BEAUROCRACY CHOKES THE NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE

BBC BREAKFAST THIS MORNING GOVERNMENT IN BREACH OF DUTY OF CARE IN HOSPITALS

Test

BRITISH POLITICAL SYSTEM WELL PAST ITS SELL BY DATE

BRITISH MP'S BEHAVIOUR A SCANDAL

KEY POLITICAL QUESTIONS URGENTLY IN NEED OF ATTENTION

BRITISH / UNITED KINGDOM MP'S PARLIAMENTARY EXPENSES SCANDAL

BLOODHORSE ILLITERATE REGULATION AND DISCIPLINARY PARTIES ARE CHOKING THIS SPORT

It's WAR!

FRIDAY 12TH JUNE 2009

MP's Expenses Fiasco

JOANNA LUMLEY PUTTING THE GREAT BACK INTO BRITAIN

British General election - Hung Parliment Results 06/05/2010

SUNDAY EXPRESS AUGUST 21^st 2011