31 May 2009

Why Is David Cameron Defending Michael Gove?

After my post on Julie Kirkbride, she has now been forced to stand down at the next general election. So I thought one by one I would go through all the other inconsistencies in Cameron's position - he sacrifices some old grandees while defending his 'rising stars' who have done exactly the same.

There is no difference between what Michael Gove has done and Hazel Blears. Both have 'flipped' their houses to avoid paying tax and claim exorbitant expenses, both should go. So why are the media and David Cameron so quiet on this issue. Is it because Michael is their rising blie eyed boy in the media and an influential neocon? He has to go. In fact so should David Cameron with his £20,000 a year expenses off the taxpayer. Wisteria indeed.

4 comments:

  1. it's probably because hazel blears sold a property after 'flipping', fraudulently claiming it was her first home (for tax purposes) at the same time as she told the fees office it her second home (for claiming purposes) in the process.

    michael gove's case was completely different. he has two homes, one in surrey and one in london. he changed the designation of which one was his second home when he moved from surrey to london, as required by the rules. he never sold either house and clearly therefore made no capital gain, let alone an untaxed one. all he did was claim for lavish furniture, money which i believe he has now paid back.

    that's probably why david cameron is defending him!!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anon, when I read the details - buying luxury furniture from David Cameron's mother-in-law, I think it is actually worse than what Julie Kirkbride has been up to. Do you think when it comes to selling the property Michael Gove will give the taxpayer a cut? Not likely is it, so I don't see the difference with what Blears has done. Both say they have kept to the rules and paid some money back - both should be sacked.

    ReplyDelete
  3. James Harding1/6/09 8:14 am

    Neil,

    These are the facts:

    Gove didn't flip - he didn't sell any property and hasn't done since being an MP.

    He was accused of spending too much on furniture, but for the avoidance of doubt, just paid it all back rather than just the amount that was thought to be too much.

    Gove told his constituents at an open meeting that he will not profit from his 2nd home. It is currently worth less than he bought for but if he makes a profit it will go to the taxpayer..

    I don't know what else anyone could ask of him.. time to point your fire elsewhere eh?

    ReplyDelete
  4. james. I'll tell you what we could expect of him - that je'd been honest from the start and not claimed for a load of luxurious furniture from Cameron's mother-in-law

    ReplyDelete