Test 2

Please select your preferred language.

請選擇你慣用的語言。

请选择你惯用的语言。

English
中文简体
台灣繁體
香港繁體

登入

記住我

初到 Fridae?

Fridae Mobile

Advertisement
Highlights

More About Us

新聞&特寫

« 較新的 | 較舊的 »
31 May 2010

UK Cabinet minister outed, resigns over questionable expenses claim

A debate is brewing about whether David Laws is trying to use his sexuality which he says he prefers to keep secret (until the scandal broke that is) to explain away a controversial expenses claim.


David Laws (left) and James Lundie had lived together for
11 years – nine of which they have been lovers. 

U.K. Chief Secretary to the Treasury David Laws resigned from his position after a newspaper reported he’d claimed an estimated £40,000 (US$58,000) in expenses for renting rooms in two London properties owned by his male partner over a period from 2006 to 2009. He had vowed to immediately repay what he had claimed as housing costs. Since 2006 parliamentary rules have banned MPs from leasing accommodation from a partner. 

The Liberal Democrat MP for Yeovil since 2001 was only 17 days into his first cabinet post in Britain’s new coalition government.

The Daily Telegraph reported that Laws claimed up to £950 a month for five years to rent a room in two properties owned by his partner, James Lundie, 34, who works for a public relations firm.

The multi-millionaire former banker issued a statement to the British media last Friday saying he was motivated by a desire to keep his relationship with the man private and not to reveal his own sexuality.

“I’ve been involved in a relationship with James Lundie since around 2001 – about two years after first moving in with him. Our relationship has been unknown to both family and friends throughout that time,” it read.

“James and I are intensely private people. We made the decision to keep our relationship private and believed that was our right. Clearly that cannot now remain the case.

“My motivation throughout has not been to maximise profit but to simply protect our privacy and my wish not to reveal my sexuality.”

The Independent newspaper noted: "Mr Laws apparently convinced himself that since there was a degree of ambiguity in his relationship with his landlord, James Lundie (they are not civil partners or a couple in social circles), the arrangement remained within the rules. That was a misjudgement, as Mr Laws now accepts. But any fair-minded person examining Mr Laws's conduct would conclude that it was an understandable one."

The 44-year-old was quoted in The Guardian as saying: "When I grew up, being gay was not accepted by most people including by many of my friends. So I have kept this secret from everyone I know for every day of my life. I was so determined to keep my private life secret that James and I behaved as if we were good friends."

He hinted at the difficulties in his private life: "I hope that others will now learn that it is time for people to be honest about their sexuality. Keeping secrets is much tougher than telling other people who you really are."

Admitting his actions would seem "very strange for many people today", Laws said Lundie was the only person with whom he had had a relationship. "Only one person was aware of who I really am – James. I hope that people will understand that fear of loss of privacy rather than desire for financial gain has been behind the problems I now have," he said.

While many are disappointed that Laws – considered the most powerful gay man in the Cabinet – could not be open about his sexuality, some are not convinced by his justification that what he considered “partner” under Commons’ expenses rules did not not apply to his situation as they had separate banking and social arrangements despite living together for nine years (as the relationship progressed from landlord to partner).

"Am I mad or does the fact that David Laws is gay make no difference to the fact that he fiddled his expenses?" The Observer's Barbara Ellen wrote in her column "The David Laws story is nothing to do with sexuality. It's about money."

"The gay public figure coming out to great sympathy and applause is almost a British cliche now. Unfortunately for Laws, it is also an irrelevancy. This cannot be judged to be in any way a gay issue – how could it, when, had Laws been straight, his actions would be judged exactly the same, if not more harshly?"

Ben Summerskill, chief executive of Stonewall, the gay, lesbian and bisexual charity, wrote in column for The Independent: "If his reported comments were correct, it is genuinely confusing that Mr Laws said his motivation was not to reveal his sexuality and to protect his privacy and that of his partner. If he had made no claim, then none of this would be in the public domain now and no one would know about their relationship."

The Parliamentary Standards Commissioner will now have to scrutinise whether any rules have been broken.

United Kingdom

讀者回應

回應#1於於2010-05-31 18:02被作者刪除。
2. 2010-05-31 18:09  
Oh phooey! The Observer's Barbara Ellen, why should any one disclose his/her private life if he/she chooses not too. not every one wants to be open and public and any way these days in far to many places being in any relationship automatically disadvantages people financially, 'couples' shouldn't be penalised by Government cost cutting rorts, loose benefits or be disadvantaged, apart from living in the same premices and bonking each other they were effectively still single.
3. 2010-05-31 22:24  
Oh what a tangled weave we web, when we practice to deceive
4. 2010-05-31 22:24  
Oh what a tangled weave we web, when we practice to deceive
5. 2010-06-01 05:21  
Let me get this straight (pun intended). The excuse is that it was thought by the minister to be legitimate to bill the UK taxpayer 60 large so that he could further the invisibility of gay people in politics (namely himself).

6. 2010-06-01 05:32  
Well, I'm Irish and in Ireland, so I shouldn't really comment on him and - Oh, what the hell, that never stopped me before!

So. As people are quite rightfully saying, what the hell does his sexuality have to do with his swindling the British taxpayer out of lots of money? I/they don't care if he's gay, if he can make giraffes with balloons, or if he know where to buy the cheapest tin of beans this week - the story is NOT that he's been outed, it's that he deliberately lied for Years to make money from the public purse.

The only 'gay' thing he's done is to prove that we're just as equal as straight people when it comes to the occasional crooked politician, and I just hope he doesn't try to weasel out of the mess he's in with some kind of lame "Oh, it's all because of the pressure of being closetted - I defrauded the electorate because I was stressed and confused, boo hoo..."

Nope. That excuse won't wash with me, and I hope the British electorate - gay and straight alike - don't let That get used as an excuse, if That angle emerges...
7. 2010-06-01 07:49  
"...If he had made no claim, then none of this would be in the public domain now and no one would know about their relationship."

Guess by this statement, the only way for discreet GLBT to stay private is to absorb all legitimate claims otherwise fairly reserved for "normal" people. Interesting. :)
8. 2010-06-01 09:19  
no one cares if you are gay, but if you cheat on your taxes and claim stupid expenses you are doomed, if he was doing this for his female mistress he would be doomed too
9. 2010-06-01 09:20  
if a guy can't handle legal expense claims, how can he work for the Treasury? so many of my ex boyfriends are terrible with money too and I booted them out pretty fast too
10. 2010-06-01 19:12  
Excuse the diversion, but just heard the police and charity commission are investigating financial dealings at the one of the biggest, richest and in the past most actively antigay churches in Singapore. Reports on CNA and Today Online. 17 people being questioned.

http://www.todayonline.com/Hotnews/EDC100601-0000111/City-Harvest-probe
修改於2010-06-01 19:19:28
11. 2010-06-03 22:31  
How do you think he and his bf became rich? By doing shady business deals of course like this one!

My bf pays me rent but he doesn't get compensated by the government for it.

What a load of crap. This guy is just using this as an excuse. Wealthy people use every trick in the book to stay that way.
12. 2010-06-03 23:58  
@11 - perhaps your boyfriend would be able to claim back the rent if he had to work half the time in congress in Washington and maintain two homes to do his job. Most MPs in the Uk need to have two homes, one in their constituency, and one in London for when they're working in Parliament. It's said this guy could have legitimately claimed more expenses than he did, if he had been open about his relationship. Also not to have claimed back the rent would have blown him out of the closet. I guess the inquiry will establish the facts. On the plus side all his family and friends have accepted him as gay, and he'll get a govt job back if he's cleared over the expenses.
修改於2010-06-03 23:59:48
13. 2010-06-04 02:38  
getting your just desserts...............

Sounds seedy to me...

I'm not a guy who believes in "outing" but he makes gays look pretty poor with this story...............

請先登入再使用此功能。

Social


請選擇新聞及專欄版本

精選個人檔案

Now ALL members can view unlimited profiles!

Languages

View this page in a different language:

讚好

合作夥伴

 ILGA Asia - Fridae partner for LGBT rights in Asia IGLHRC - Fridae Partner for LGBT rights in Asia

Advertisement