A brief summary of Blind Pugh's recent sins

#1
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/mai...ml&sSheet=/portal/2004/12/15/ixportaltop.html

Blunkett: The claims and counter-claims
(Filed: 01/12/2004)

David Blunkett is facing a raft of allegations that he abused his position as Home Secretary during his relationship with former lover Kimberly Quinn.

But what are the claims and what has he said about them?

David Blunkett is fighting for his political life

The Filipina nanny's visa

The most serious allegation is whether Mr Blunkett fast-tracked a visa for Mrs Quinn's Filipina nanny to allow her to stay in Britain indefinitely.

It is alleged the Home Secretary sent his driver to pick up the nanny's passport and as a result of his influence it was returned several weeks later with the visa approved.

The ministerial code says ministers must ensure "no conflict arises or appears to arise" between their public duties and private interests.

Mr Blunkett would have to resign if it was shown he had abused his position to get the passport fast-tracked.

He has admitted checking the form was filled in properly. But he denies intervening to get it approved.

Letters from Home Office officials which Mr Blunkett has acknowledged are "authentic" show the nanny was granted residency in Britain just 19 days after she submitted her application.

It was later revealed that Austrian officials were looking into separate allegation that Mrs Quinn's nanny had a visa application fast-tracked via Mr Blunkett's office.

Alexander Christiani, the Austrian ambassador to Britain, ordered his consul-general to investigate the allegations that the Home Secretary intervened so that the nanny could visit her sister in Austria.

The Home Office admitted that Mrs Quinn spoke to Mr Blunkett about the Austria visa, but denied he had become involved in the case.

The denial was later backed by Dr Christiani who said checks showed there had been no intervention.

Bobby on the doorstep

Another allegation is that a policeman was ordered to stand outside Mrs Quinn's London home to safeguard her from May Day riots.

The Home Office has denied this.

The lover's son's passport

He is accused of putting pressure on the American embassy to issue a temporary passport for Mrs Quinn's son William so that Mrs Quinn and William could join him on holiday in France.

The ministerial code says ministers must not use their power to gain benefits for friends or family.

The Home Office says Mr Blunkett simply telephoned a contact at the US embassy to ask for the name of the person Mrs Quinn should contact.

'Chauffeur-driven' ride to Derbyshire

The rules state that a minister's partner may use the car, but only for official engagements.

The Spanish holiday

He is accused of taking Mrs Quinn to Spain for a friend's wedding accompanied by four security men and a driver, mainly at the taxpayers' expense.

The ministerial code says spouses or partners may occasionally be funded to accompany ministers on official trips overseas with Prime Ministerial approval.

The Home Office says Mr Blunkett was also in Madrid on official business, to meet Spanish ministers, which he combined with the personal engagement.

As Home Secretary he would be accompanied by bodyguards. Mrs Quinn paid her own travel costs. The question is whether any of her expenses were paid out of the public purse.

New York airport security tip-off

Mr Blunkett is accused of passing on confidential security information, including advising Mrs Quinn's parents to avoid Newark Airport in New Jersey because of a security alert.

The Home Office acknowledges Mr Blunkett gave Mrs Quinn's parents the advice. But it says he did not reveal anything that was not already in the public domain.

Mr Blunkett and the first class rail tickets

MPs' spouses are entitled to 15 return journeys a year between London and their constituency or home. Unmarried partners do not qualify.

Mr Blunkett has admitted he had been wrong to give the rail warrant to Mrs Quinn and promised to repay the £180 cost. His spokesman said it was "a genuine mistake".

Inquiry remit
The former chief economic adviser to the Treasury, Sir Alan Budd, has been asked to investigate the claim Mr Blunkett fast-tracked the visa application. Mr Blunkett himself ordered his top civil servant to set up the inquiry.

But critics say the focus of that inquiry is too narrow and want the other allegations considered. The chairman of the committee on standards in public life, Sir Alistair Graham, has criticised the alleged ad hoc way the inquiry was arranged and said a second inquiry might be needed to deal with the other allegations.

Sir Philip Mawer, the Parliamentary commissioner for standards, is now investigating Mr Blunkett's admission that he gave Mrs Quinn a free first-class rail ticket after the civil servant received two requests from members of the public to look into the other claims.
Bigger men have resigned over far lesser allegations...
 
#2
Stephen Byers resigned , because his assistant was heard to say , "It was a good day to bury bad news"

Why are we even talking about this? A minister of the Crown, has been caught in flagrante delecto , and he hasn't seen the whitewashed wall yet?

I thought the Lord High Blair, was such a devout Christian, as he's always telling us, that it would make it hard for Blunkett to remain in his cabinet, stinking up the place with the aroma of immorality, and dragging British Politics even further into the sewer.

Why are her Majesties Loyal opposition not crucifying this man?

Is it because a lot of his suggested policies, are exactly what they want in place, should they come to power?

Or

Is it a simple case, that they are all at it, and no one dares speak up, lest his wife gets a shock over her Sunday Kipper?.

Why is a man in such a sensitive position, who has engaged in an adulterous affair with a foreign national, allowed to remain in post?
 
#3
"DO AS I SAY - NOT AS I DO"

The people in power are realising they can get away with more and more. Its the direct result of pacifying people through 'political correctness'.......

Brain washing for the masses.........
 
#4
Like them all, he thinks that he is superior and that "little people" rules do not apply to him.

Pride comes before a fall. Most of his own party hate him after his indiscreet biography comments and his pathetic attempt at a singalong at the backbencher christmas party.

Talking about his biography, did anyone see the aftermath of PMQs when that poisonous cnut Hilary Armstrong threw a copy (brought in and used to good effect by Michael Howard) at the Tory benches, landing in the lap of Alan Duncan?

Never underestimate the sheer ego, spite and vindictiveness of this current crop of politicans.
 
#5
PartTimePongo said:
Why are her Majesties Loyal opposition not crucifying this man?

Is it because a lot of his suggested policies, are exactly what they want in place, should they come to power?

Or

Is it a simple case, that they are all at it, and no one dares speak up, lest his wife gets a shock over her Sunday Kipper?.

Why is a man in such a sensitive position, who has engaged in an adulterous affair with a foreign national, allowed to remain in post?
No high public official, on either side of the Atlantic, resigns in disgrace any more. It just isn't done. It went the way of fighting duels and writing with quill pens.

Resignation implies, after all, that the office holder is in some way accountable for his behavior to the public.

There is now in office a generation that considers itself accountable to the public in the same way that the owner of an ant farm considers himself accountable to the ants.
 
#7
exXIX said:
You missed out the obvious one.

Tupping another man's wife.

Man of honour? I think not.
It is surprising that Bliar has stuck by him, given that the Wide-Mouthed-Frog is a Papist and Bliar is one in all but name.
 

Top