Post by Pancho Post by JNugent
But the names "Huhne" and "Onasanya" keep springing to mind.
I'll raise you Elphicke, Archer and Atkin.
Who is defending any of those?
Imagine if you were a constituent of either Huhne or Onasanya and you
were about to be banned from driving on "totting up" after being flashed
at a few mph over the motorway speed limit. Imagine the prospect of
losing your licence, your job, your home and maybe your family and
imagine writing to either of them asking for their help. The answer
would undoubtedly have been something along the lines that the law is
the law and is there to foster safety and that there was nothing they
could do to help. If you asked them to help get the law changed so that
the penalty were less harsh, you'd have been quietly laughed at after
you'd left the "surgery" office.
But of course, the penalties *were* recognised (by them) as too harsh to
apply to important people like themselves.
As I said, the present case, where a Labour MP is standing trial for
allegedly making a fraudulent application for housing and dishonestly
receiving £63,000 of other peoples' money by making false statements to
Tower Hamlets Council, is sub judice and it would be wrong to make
comment about the honesty or otherwise of the defendant.