It's official

The Maximum Leader of The Hegemon, the man who is meant to epitomise the values of the institution, and put our case to those in power - Lord Paul - has been suspended from the House of Lords for expenses fraud. 


Management must be so proud. 


The multimillionaire businessman (88th richest in the UK) with a Master's from MIT and member of its Mechanical Engineering Advisory Council, Olympics Delivery Committee member and Chancellor of the University of Westminster, member of the Foreign Policy Advisory Council, former Deputy Speaker of the House of Lords, claimed that he's the victim because all Indians are naturally stupid (is there any other way to interpret this?): Meanwhile

"Lord Paul explained his interpretation of the term 'main residence' by reference to his cultural background.

"He insisted that 'anyone coming out of India would not understand what main residence means'. He accepted that he had 'not once' looked at the guidance on the back of the claim forms."

 Meanwhile, another friend of ours has been busy, presumably solely to get his face on TV. Yes, Paul Uppal's been costing the state money asking questions (and here) which he should have known couldn't be answered; attempting to curry favour with local reactionary newspaper the Express and Star by harping on about asylum seekers (and here) despite being an immigrant himself (and not receiving a very sensational reply); and finally, by inserting his tongue as far up Mr Osborne's posterior as it is possible to go:

It is often said of the last Labour Government that although talk is cheap, the consequences of their actions were very expensive. Does the Chancellor agree that the sentiment of the spending review is not about cuts but about responsibility and the financial responsibility that we bequeath to our children and our grandchildren?

George Osborne (Chancellor of the Exchequer, HM Treasury; Tatton, Conservative)

My hon. Friend makes a very good point. We have talked a lot about fairness and about fairness across the income distribution, but there is also a fairness between generations. If we do not deal with these debts and do not have a credible plan, it will be our children and grandchildren who are saddled with the debts that we were not prepared to pay. I think that is very unfair.

Is it 'often said'? I've never heard it, and I spend most of my time obsessing about politics.