« Carry on dying | Main | Closing the M4 down »

March 26, 2008

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

paulflynn

Ash, there is no problem. Everything will be published - excepts the addresses, I hope.

Ash

Paul,
I fear that it is you who are being misled. The details of expenses (without adresses) could be published now without in any way pre-judging the court case. The HOC commision has refused to do so.
The simple reason for that is that the commision is NOT just challenging on that issue but on the entire question of the public's right to know.
Paul, from your previous posts I know you understand how deeply damaged politicians are by the current situation so why are you buying the excuse? This time the tabloids are right. Publish everything apart from the adresses. What's the problem?

paul Flynn

Cymro 88, Again you assume the worse.

You accept the view of the tabloids and not the true reason for the new delay, which is to avoid the publication of home addresses.

Cymro88

The only falsehood that exists is in the diversionary tactics MPs are employing to delay the inevitable publication of their systematic abuse of expeses - in this case, trying to stop their home addresses being published.

As you yourself testify, any self-respecting nutcase or terrorist could easily locate the address of any MP they wish.

And I sympathise that many MPs want everything declared to get the whole sorry episode over and done with. But there are the other Derek Conways of this world who would quite happily put it off fo as long as possible.

paul Flynn

The Editors of the tabloids are subject to readers' rage in the same that politicains are. One MP was attacked by a constituent armed with a sword. The constituent killed his researcher. Of there is case for not publishing MPs' home addresses.

It's irresponsible of editors to presnt a story about publishing addresses as though it was one about expenses. They appear to have got their falsehood across.

paul Flynn

Try reading again what I said. ITS ABOUT PUBLISHING ADDRESSES- not about publishing expenses. You have swallowed the tabloid lie.

All the cases mentioned were sitting in a small group inthe Commons te room at 12.00 today. They are not specially selected but typical. The other example was me as I made clear. In a book I wrote in 1997, I did a piece called 'How to hide your address' It made similar points.

The attempt to stop publication was made by a tiny number of MPs months ago. They have given up now. The majority of MPs would like the lot published as quickly as possible. All MPs have very strong arguments to stop our addresses being published.

Before you write again, try reading the blog you question

Oliver Arthurs

"Lead by example, editors of the Mail and Sun. Publish your home addresses tomorrow."

Associated Newspapers and News International are private sector companies, Mr Flynn. You are presumably au faix with the notion. They do not live on taxpayers' money. Give one good reason why they should have to publish their home addresses.

Cymro88

The "shameless" part of the whole expenses debacle is the continued effort by MPs from all parties - from the Speaker to the back benches - to cover up, smear and disguise the shifty accountancy that exists in Westminster.

The frankly amusing swipe taken by yourself and other MPs at lobby journalists' reporting of dodgy expenses further damages your image as "snouts in the trough" money-grabbing politicians.

Who cares what a tabloid hack gets - it's not from the public coffers. And besides, chances are media outlets (BBC inclusive) regulate their expenses claims far more effectively than the kangaroo system employed by the House of Commons.

The comments to this entry are closed.