Thursday, 15 August 2013


I read the following information on a Facebook page. It concerns the UK government's Work and Pensions Secretary, Iain Duncan Smith.
Many people know that Iain Duncan Smith was accused by ''Newsnight'' of claiming over £20,000 for employing his wife in his office, even though she never turned up once to do a day’s work. Had he not been rumbled, this arrangement and free money on top of his already considerable tax-payer funded wage and expense claims for being the worst shadow leader in Tory history, could have gone on unnoticed and indefinitely.

But what a lot of people do not know is the lengths this man went to, with the aid of other Tory members, to dismiss the ''Newsnight'' claims, and how he and his network of thugs tried to bully and pressure his '' Head of the Office of the Leader of the Opposition'' Dr Vanessa Gearson to back his claims that his wife did indeed work in the office for a minimum of 23 hrs per week. Dr Gearson, to her credit, refused to lie for her boss.

Here are excerpts from Dr Gearson’s  sworn statement to the Select Committee on Standards and Privileges. The full statement can be read here. If you can find the time, at least skim through it to find out how many other people, including T May and O Patterson, knew all about this situation and how long it took to resolve the situation, by people paid from public funds.

You do have to ask yourself, in light of this information, which has clearly been available to the public on the government website for some time, if it is entirely appropriate for IDS to be in charge of a department with so much money at its disposal for dispersal to the weak, sick, old, vulnerable and needy. 

16 October 2003

It is with great reluctance that I find myself having to set out the following facts, as I understand them, after what has been an extraordinarily difficult period in my professional life. I set out in this document everything I can recall to be relevant to the remit of your investigation in the interests of openness and transparency.

My experience over five years of running constituency/parliamentary offices and the political offices of the Chairman and Leader of the Conservative Party gives me a unique insight and understanding of the requirements of these offices.

I saw absolutely no evidence of the work carried out by Mrs Duncan Smith and cannot establish, by analysing the distribution of tasks and responsibilities within the two offices, what work she was effectively carrying out.

The four key tasks as I see them are as follows:

· The Diary—I saw no evidence of Mrs Duncan Smith performing a professional role regarding the diary.

· Correspondence—I saw no evidence that Mrs Duncan Smith wrote any letters on Mr Duncan Smith's behalf

· Financial Arrangements—I saw no evidence that Mrs Duncan Smith took any responsibility in this regard.

· Practical Considerations—I saw no evidence of Mrs Duncan Smith requesting office supplies that she would have reasonably needed in order to have carried out such a role.

Moreover, from August to December 2002, whenever I raised the issue of Mrs Duncan Smith, not one person ever questioned or contradicted my assertion that she was being paid without appearing to do any work. Critically, these people included Owen Paterson and Christine Watson, both of whom would, had Mrs Duncan Smith worked for over 25 hours a week, certainly have been aware of the extent of her work and would surely have indicated to me that my concerns were unfounded. The memo to me from Christine Watson (see Appendix 4) is important in that it shows the extent of the work being carried out by her and leaves little if any role for Mrs Duncan Smith. Indeed, the first time I ever heard that Mrs Duncan Smith worked in excess of 25 hours a week was in the statement issued by Mr Duncan Smith on Monday 13th October 2003. (After the airing of Newsnight )

The information as detailed above reveals the facts as I understand them and demonstrates why I felt unable to publicly state that I was entirely satisfied with the arrangements regarding Mr Duncan Smith's assertion that his wife, Betsy, carried out a position of significant parliamentary work. ''All THE SUBSEQUENT ACTIONS OF MR DUNCAN SMITH AND THOSE AROUND HIM IN APPLYING PRESSURE ON ME'' have merely confirmed my view.


  1. Tris

    Not surprised by this at all. The thing that I don't understand is how much money do they need. IDS has a pile of money, so has no need to rip off the taxpayer at all. If I had a pile of dosh, and was in a public position, if anything I wouldn't rip off the public purse I would probably not claim anything at all over and above what I needed to exactly do my job if even that.

    However, we all know what an odious person IDS is, like Alexander, Moore, Currun etc they come across as totally uncaring and nasty and may actually be that in general. I believe that Cameron, Osbourne, Clegg and Miliband actually have no idea of how the other half live. They just don't get it and probably don't really care either way. They really do see the low paid, vulnerable, unemployed and disabled as the problem but I don't think they set out to really hurt people I just think they don't understand the problem, don't care and are acting like they always have. They are a huge part of the problem but for different reasons.

    I guess the other thing is, as I have said before, we have allowed this problem to exsist by not caring enough in our politics and our representatives. The Tories are the Tories but the Liberals and Labour could be changed overnight by the members taking actual control of their parties but they just accept the guff and don't stand up and fight for what they believe in. The Unions are the same and why I am not involved in either, I am a royal pain in the arse and try to spread the word but at the ground level within organised politics there is no will to make change and I am not sure I know how you do that anymore other than hope that a YES vote next year is a start to people actually demanding change and making change for the benefit of all and not the few.


    1. I didn't know about this incident, Bruce.

      I just don't think he should be in government.

      He was paying his already very rich wife for doing nothing, and depriving someone of a job.

      In fact, I think he should be in jail.

  2. Westminster disease where infection can be caught as soon as our elected representatives pass the entrance doors then they become susceptible of infection. They are guided by mandarins(vector) who beguile these targets through pomp and ceremony that they have joined an elite club of untouchables with extraordinary powers making them immune from the common law of decency. With multiple layers of watchmen to protect the inner sanctum then unimaginable wealth and glory is theirs for the taking at will as we are all at it.

  3. An odious man indeed.

    He should be drummed out of office and never allowed to return, actually, he should probably be prosecuted for fraud.

    1. Well, if I had my way, he'd be doing time. He prosecutes people who lie about their partners working in order to get more benefit. Why is it different because he was a poxy Tory leader (even worse that Willie Hague and possibly even less appealing) and she's the daughter of some aristo blue blood?

      Oh yeah, because this is Britain and that's how things are here.

  4. That is a fraud and so why were the Gendarmes not called in?

    let me guess....... mmmmm Could it be that they all had their hands in the till in one or another fashion.

    So there is honour amongst thieves; honour to their caste.

    1. Too busy selling stories to the press, methinks.

  5. Is there any truth to the rumour Tris that there is a raffle taking place on the following:

    1) someone to hang IDS

    2) someone to draw IDS

    3) someone to quarter IDS

    4) someone to shoot IDS in the knee caps

    5) someone to shoot IDS in the elbows

    6) someone just to shoot IDS

  6. Ah, Arbroath. You've heard about it. That saves me taking out an ad in the Telegraph. :)

  7. PHEW!

    I thought it was only a nasty little rumour.......AGAIN! :-)

    Just a wee aside here, but if you don't already know Rev Stu is on Good Morning Scot;land tomorrow as well as Scotland's one and only polling expert the good professor.

    1. Thanks for the heads up Arbroath. I had read the piece, but not everyone will have.

      Excellent news. I hope I catch it.