Old Pig, New Trough

Patricia Scotland was born in Dominica to Dominican and Antiguan parents and she emigrated with her parents to Walthamstow in east London when she was two years old. She is a British citizen and as Baroness Scotland of Asthal, is a member of the House of Lords. She was a government minister during the Blair/Brown years, first as a Home Office Minister and then as Attorney General, and between 2004 and 2009 she wrongly claimed £170,000 in expenses.

She was claiming £38,280 a year 'night subsistence allowance' which is intended only for ministers who have their primary residence outside the capital. But the Baroness listed her £2 million home in Chiswick, west London, as her main residence. Other peers in the Cabinet, including Lord Mandelson, the then Business Secretary did not claim the allowance. Neither did Lord Adonis, the Transport Secretary; Lord Drayson, the science minister; Baroness Vadera, the enterprise minister; Lord Davies, the trade minister, and Lord Young, the postal minister.

She was elected Secretary General of the Commonwealth despite allegations she bought votes with knighthoods bestowed by an ancient religious order of which she is a prominent member and succeeded Kamalesh Sharma, from India in April of this year.

In 2009, while Attorney General in Gordon Brown's administration, she was exposed for employing an illegal immigrant from Tonga called Loloahi Tapui as a cleaner. Despite her wealth - she has a £2 million house near the Thames in Chiswick and a cottage in the Cotswolds - the Baroness was paying Tapui a paltry £6 an hour. Scotland was duly prosecuted for breaking immigration laws that she herself had helped draft, and fined £5,000. Her apparent lack of contrition earned her the nickname ‘Baroness Shameless’.

​

Since her election as Commonwealth Secretary General, this self-styled paragon of virtue has been embroiled in more scandal than you can shake a stick at:

• Shortly before taking office, she made a mysterious ‘working visit’ to Kazakhstan, meeting key figures in its despotic government. She was a paid adviser to Arcanum, a secretive Swiss-based private investigation firm which has been hired by the Kazakh regime to track down dissidents.
  
• She initially refused to take up the Commonwealth post saying that its £160,000 salary, generous (index-linked) pension, private healthcare, a chauffeured limousine and a vast grace and favour mansion in Mayfair were insufficient. This was resolved - at some cost to the tax payer - by agreeing to reimburse her National Insurance contributions, paying for first class travel for her, her husband and dependants between London and the Caribbean at times of her choosing, she was given a 'special allowance' in lieu of expat costs in London despite living in Britain since she was two and a generous education allowance in respect of her two children - both of whom are grown-up adults in their twenties and no longer being educated.
• Upon taking office, she appointed Matthew Doyle, a former Downing Street public relations spokesman who worked for Tony Blair, and Joe Phelan, another (Labour) PR man. They each were paid £48,000 of tax payer money for a 12 week contract.
• Scotland again bypassed standard recruitment procedures by appointing her friend, Lord Patel, to to advise on how to run the Commonwealth Secretariat, at an initial cost of £30,000 a month - despite the fact that neither he nor his company had any relevant experience. Lord Patel was paid a further £325,000 to ‘implement changes’ at the organisation. She insisted that the job not be put out to tender - as was required - telling officials that Lord Patel was a friend whom she trusted.
• One of her first moves after taking office was to hold meetings with the dictatorship in charge of the Maldives, who have previously paid her £7,500 a day to carry out legal work regarding its case against its former President (represented by Amal Clooney).
  
• As Secretary General, she has a 'grace and favour' home - The Garden House in the heart of Mayfair is a five storey, 6 bedroom Edwardian mansion just six and a half miles from her home in Chiswick which she is decorating at quite some expense to the tax payer. The works, supervised by the celebrity interior designer, Nicky Haslam, and Lady Scotland's sister Hazel (also on the payroll?) were budgeted to cost £230,000 but this has ballooned to about £450,000 due to Scotland's extravagant demands which include:
  • a mirror-lined cupboard costing £4,000
  • £1,200 to move a chandelier
  • £1,500 to remove some curtains on the staircase
  • £2,500 for some new stair carpet
  • a senior official complained that the Baroness wanted paint from Farrow & Ball, a high-end manufacturer which the official described as “top of the range of commercially available paint. The contract allowed for Dulux”. That added a further £33,000 to the renovation costs.
  • she was not satisfied by the already costed replacement carpeting at £65 per square metre and demanded upgrading to carpeting costing £81 per square metre, thereby adding a further £7,216 to the cost
  • a new door costing £4,000
  • a £5,000 vanity unit for her 'powder room'
• The Prime Ministers of India and Antigua have both issued statements condemning Lady Scotland's scandalous misuse of public funds with India threatening to withhold its subscriptions.

In response to the growing concern, the Baroness has threatened legal action if and when the whistle blower is identified and she has strenuously denied any overspend to the original budget which she claimed to be £330,000 - £100,000 more than it actually was. Her latest tactic is to blame her predecessor whom, she claims, approved the expenditure - a claim Kamalesh Sharma, her predecessor, strenuously denies.

On the Today programme last Friday, her defence was essentially: Extravagance? What extravagance?

​

Baroness Patricia Scotland: another hypocritical champagne socialist with an over-inflated sense of entitlement.

One word, "GREED."

Shameful

Another new snout belongs to Sadiq Khan's new part-time aide, Amy Caddle, a self-styled comedian who some may know by her Twitter name, Amy Lamé. She will be paid her £35,000 a year taxpayer funded salary, for two days' work a week as the mayor's "Night Czar" (whatever that is) via her personal service company, Amy Lame Limited. This ruse enables her to pay corporation tax rather than income tax despite being a public servant.

​

This porcine useful idiot paid no income tax last year but has attacked others, including Boris Johnson and Amazon, over supposed tax avoidance:

​

And she is an undoubted admirer of David Cameron, George Osborne and Her Majesty:

​

This appointment stinks – Lame is a completely unqualified z-list comedian who has been rewarded for her Labour fundraising with a fake job funded by the taxpayer. And despite her previous virtue signalling is now being allowed to take her salary in a highly tax efficient way.

The Labour Party - Animal Farm personified.

Back to Baroness Scotland. It now emerges that she spent £24,000 of our money to refurbish the smallest room in her Mayfair mansion. That includes £307 for a bog seat. Obviously a top-of-the-line bog seat; presumably made-to-measure. She does now admit that she spent over £33,000 on paint for just six rooms despite dismissing earlier reports of her profligacy as "outright lies, half-truths and innuendo".

In today's Times she feigns outrage, claiming that she was "furious about some of the money spent" yet leaked emails show it was her staff who complained to her about the costs and pleaded with her to reduce her demands. In the email below the most senior Commonwealth official notes it is Scotland who "wants her bathroom completely done" and says the paint was her priority:

​

Can someone advise me please?

I'm planning to begin business in London, specialising in taking down curtains on staircases. I'm aiming to charge around £1200 for this service, but wonder if I am likely to be accused of blatant undercharging.

(I'm going to invest all my money in rope, as come the revolution, we are going to need a hell of a lot of it with which to form nooses.)

Sadiq Khan was taken to task this morning during Mayor's Questions at (London's) City Hall regarding Amy Caddle's offensive tweets. As you can see, his response was somewhat mealy-mouthed.

​

Weak kneed responses and evasive

A guillotine would surely be more efficient and cost-effective as coffins for those dispatched could be 12 - 18 inches shorter ...

Ladies and gentlemen, meet Corri Wilson who has only been a Parliamentarian since last year's General Election but has already achieved some notoriety in the expenses department.

​

Covering the period 1 June 2015 to 31 May 2016 she claimed the 7th highest public expenses of any MP in the United Kingdom, claiming a total of £94,545.41. Upon entering the House of Commons as the SNP MP for Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock, she began employing her son Kieran as her PA; on 15 September 2016, Ms Wilson began employing her daughter Shannon as another PA. Both of her children each receive taxpayer-funded salaries of around £34,000 a year.

Ms Wilson is now facing a Standards probe over allegations that a sum in excess of £87,000 of taxpayers’ money was paid into her company and then spent on her election campaign. The allegation, made by John Lamont, a member of the Scottish Parliament, is that former SNP MSP Chic Brodie used his expenses account to fund Caledonii Resources, a company 90% owned by Ms Wilson. The firm then played a key role in providing resources for her election campaign. The Daily Telegraph broke this story back on March but it is only now that it is being investigated.

I must say, I really do not enjoy reading these posts as it makes my blood boil. Its so apparent they are fiddling and taking the p##s big time, they know they are doing wrong, how the hell can you trust someone like this?

If you were working in the private sector and you fiddled your expenses even for a small amount of money then you would be fired.

You can hardly buy a bag of chips for six quid!

Oh irony of ironies, guess who Transparency International has invited to deliver its "Annual Anti-Corruption" lecture discussing how important it is "to champion integrity, increase public awareness on the adverse impact of corruption, and promote appreciation of how important it is that the UK acknowledges the pressing need to tackle corruption within its own borders." Why, it's none other than Baroness Shameless herself, Patricia Scotland!!

​

According to Guido, Transparency International admit it’s a slightly odd choice given the Baroness has been mired in a sleaze scandal of her own. It says: "We are aware that since then a number of allegations have been made against Baroness Scotland and our Annual Lecture will provide the ideal opportunity for her to respond directly to those claims, as well as allowing members of the public and press to raise any questions they may wish to ask."

Starting with that £307 toilet seat, those phantom school fees and her £90,000 crony contract …

Baroness Scotland did give Transparency International's anti-corruption lecture last night but she refused to answer any questions regarding the scandals surrounding her, even though this event had been billed as "the ideal opportunity for her to respond directly to those claims, as well as allowing members of the public and press to raise any questions they may wish to ask." Apparently the audience was unimpressed.

That's annoying.

What remained of Baroness Scotland’s credibility lies in tatters after the IPSO press regulator threw out a litany of complaints she made about stories exposing her expenses shame. Last year the Mail titles, as well as Guido and other outlets, published a series of shocking revelations about Scotland’s expenses based on documents leaked by concerned whistleblowers. The Labour Baroness denied everything and filed a vast number of complaints to IPSO about the stories. Today, after a nine month IPSO investigation, Scotland is left humiliated:

1. Baroness Scotland claimed she was the victim of a “partisan campaign” by the Daily Mail, that the paper’s articles about her were “distorted“, inaccurate and that the Mail had published knowingly false allegations against her. IPSO rejected all of this and threw out every single one of Scotland’s complaints against the Mail.
2. Baroness Scotland claimed reports recruitment rules had been bypassed to hire her friend Lord Patel’s company were untrue. IPSO found the standard recruitment process had been waived – the reports were true.
3. Baroness Scotland denied reports her spending figures, published every three months, had not been released on time. IPSO found they were not released on time, the reports were true.
4. Baroness Scotland claimed reports she had “brought in” interior designer Nicky Haslam were untrue. IPSO found Haslam had indeed been brought in by Scotland, the reports were true.
5. Baroness Scotland denied Haslam had “partly overseen” the planned renovations. IPSO found this was an accurate description.
6. Baroness Scotland denied that her advisers were “left-wing political fixers”. IPSO found they worked closely with the Labour Party and Labour figures and the reports were accurate.
7. Baroness Scotland denied reports of plans for a “swanky new dining area” in her Mayfair residence. IPSO found there were plans to relocate a chandelier to the dining room so this report was accurate.
8. Baroness Scotland denied reports staff had received a “sinister” notification from her office warning their communications were being monitored. IPSO found the reports were accurate.
9. Baroness Scotland claimed it was misleading to refer to Lord Patel as her “partner in crime”. IPSO found Scotland had herself referred to him using those words.
10. Baroness Scotland denied she had been “dubbed Baroness Brazen”. IPSO found that a Conservative MP had indeed dubbed her Baroness Brazen.
11. Baroness Scotland claimed newspaper reports suggested she had paid her sister for advice. IPSO found the reports made clear she hadn’t paid her sister.
12. Baroness Scotland claimed there was no evidence to suggest the Queen was “embarrassed” by her. IPSO found a well-placed Royal source said the Queen was embarrassed.
13. Baroness Scotland claimed there was no whistleblower, as there was nothing to blow the whistle on. IPSO found it was accurate to call the concerned source a whistleblower.
14. Baroness Scotland claimed it was misleading to say Downing Street had refused to give its confidence in her. IPSO found Downing Street would only give confidence in the role of Secretary-General, the reports were accurate.

IPSO ordered one minor correction, changing a headline in the Mail on Sunday about the sums paid to Lord Patel. This was the only breach found out of all the complaints made by Baroness Scotland against three titles. Her claims of inaccuracies, media lies and a vendetta against her have been exposed as fantasy – after such an unequivocal humiliation it is laughable that she can continue to hold public office.

News of Baroness Scotland’s abject humiliation has travelled quickly around the Commonwealth. Caribbean News Now has published an editorial today headlined: "How much longer can Baroness Scotland continue as Commonwealth secretary-general?"

The site accuses Scotland of "questionable appointments", "attempted suppression of press freedom" and "allegations of profligate spending", warning: "The resulting implications of her continuing in office for much longer are now of active interest in a growing number of Commonwealth capitals". It concludes: "The question now is will United Kingdom exert any influence and shield the Queen from further damaging controversy as Head of the Commonwealth at the London Summit next April."