Coffee House

Chris Huhne resignation: CCHQ cranks up the by-election machine

4 February 2013

4 February 2013

Chris Huhne’s guilty plea alters the political landscape. There’s now no need for a reshuffle to accommodate his return to the top table of British politics. Huhne, who ran for the Lib Dem leadership twice and some thought would do so again, is now standing down as an MP.

In this respect, Huhne’s departure from the scene makes the coalition more stable. But the coming by-election in Eastleigh will be quite a fight between the coalition parties. Even Tory ministers are looking forward to landing a few blows on their coalition partners. One I spoke to just now, declared ‘we’ll throw everything at it. You have to win by-elections’. I understand that CCHQ is already moving resources to the seat.

This contest is a particular test for the new Tory chairman Grant Shapps. He has been appointed as a campaigning chairman and his strategy for a Tory majority is dependent on taking seats Lib Dem seats such as Eastleigh. A victory there would make a Tory majority look achievable. A defeat, especially in these circumstances, would confirm that it close to being mission impossible.

More Spectator for less. Subscribe and receive 12 issues delivered for just £12, with full web and app access. Join us.

Show comments
  • Bob339

    Great news! One down:56 to go! Roll on the next resignations.

  • vvputout

    Obviously no tears for Huhne, though much sympathy for his wife and son.

    Pity Davey remains in the DECC to continue Huhne’s disastrous environmental policies.

    This by-election is an opportunity for an open debate between those who espouse old fashioned left-liberal/socialist economics, as did Huhne, and those who realise that such policies have no future and will look to what Sweden and the other Nordic countries are doing – see Economist special feature. No doubt the Eastleigh LibDems will chose a Huhne-clone, so let battle commence.

  • paulus

    Criminal!! he asked his wife to take three points when he was caught on a speeding camera, where is your sense of perspective, I think he is a hand wringing, hypocritical bastatrd, but he is hardly a criminal and as for saying send him to jail, he might as well fess up to 400 burgularies so he is assured probation.

  • Ron Todd

    Future party leader and potential future deputy PM admits to perverting the course of justice. Coverage given on Newsnight the BBC’s premier news analysis programme, about 7 minutes.

  • maurice12brady

    Some days are better than others — One down & many to go.

  • Paul Demunnik

    A former Secretary of State called Huhne
    Found a driving offence inopportune
    His wife he suborned
    But forgot that a woman scorned
    To spite is not immune.

  • Nkaplan

    The following quote from the BBC of what Huhne said upon resignation wonderfully demonstrates the self-serving narcissism of this smug and dishonest man:

    “Having taken responsibility for something that happened 10 years ago [i.e. his deliberately and wilfully perjuring himself], the only proper course of action for me is to resign my Eastleigh seat in Parliament, which I will do shortly.”

    Don’t you just love the use of the passive voice in ‘something that happened 10 years ago’, which serves to suggest that he was purely a passive object of an unfortunate series of events rather than an active agent who willfully lied. There is also a wonderful implied suggestion that the passage of time has served to render whatever ‘happened’ all that time ago morally irrelevant, making any forthcoming conviction somewhat unfair and rendering him brave and virtuous for ‘taking responsibility’ (now using the active voice) for things that any reasonable person/ society would long since have let go of or forgotten about.

    The common locution for what his has done is ‘Having admitted my guilt’ and it really is as genius as it is narcissistic how he suggests that this is some supererogatory act of heroism on his behalf by rendering it ‘having taken responsibility for what happened’ (which is normally something one might say when one puts right some harm that one accidentally caused to another); we are, I suppose, meant to feel some kind of sympathy, if not admiration, for his having so bravely done this.

    He then ends on a sombre note of how he proposes to diligently do his duty and quietly stand down as an MP; how nice of him.

    All in all it is truly spectacular how, in the space of just one sentence, he manages to avoid accepting that he ever really did anything wrong, while allowing himself to feel hard done by as a result of how things have worked out, and yet strangely virtuous for having so honourably resigned.

    • Gust

      Brilliant piece.

      • James R

        @Nkaplan:disqus Beautifully put.My thoughts exactly on listening to his statement.Odious man.

    • FrankS

      “Having admitted my guilt” – ie, “having lied for the past ten years”.

  • Tom Tom

    Chris Huhne is Vicky Pryce’s second husband and he left her for a lesbian so she seeks solace with Denis MacShane. Is he thinking of going to prison ?

  • sceptic3

    All the main parties seem to have their share of shysters and wide boys with serving MPs doing time or attaining criminal status; career politicians of course.

    UKIP seems to be the only party where there are no career politicians None of them are in it for the money. Many spend their own money and time with no claims for expenses.

    The big three have had their chances and left the country in ruins. From the caliber of some of them; that is no surprise. Time for UKIP I think.

    • HooksLaw
    • HooksLaw

      But an isolated example surely
      ‘former UKIP Member of the European Parliament Tom Wise was jailed for
      two years for stealing £39,000 worth of parliamentary expenses.
      This comes after local UKIP MEP Ashley Mote served a nine-month prison sentence for £67,000 worth of benefit fraud.’

      And you call yourself a ‘sceptic’? What a laugh.

      • sceptic3

        Yes, we all have our rouges gallery. But UKIP haven’t left the country in ruins. And. Unlike the others; they didn’t pervert the course of justice and get the wives and daughters to lie for them.

        • Chris lancashire

          Give ’em time. Give ’em time.

  • David Lindsay

    Labour Gain.

    Why ever not? Of course, it would depend on the candidate.

    As for UKIP, Nigel Farage would look as if he were running scared if he did not stand.

    Yet he would never again be taken seriously if he stood but did not win, which he would not.

    This could be the end of three parties.

    • Fergus Pickering

      Bet you a tenner it isn’t a Labour gain, Lindsay old son. Are you on?

      • David Lindsay

        Never bet. Just follow the bookies.

        If Labour doesn’t win this, then it’s not trying. The Coalition has changed the entire political landscape. The weather, even.

        With the right candidate, this is Labour’s opportunity to prove that, killing off the media-favoured Blairite carping while creating a Leadership crisis in each Coalition party and in UKIP.

        As I say, anything else would just not be trying, not making the effort.

    • ButcombeMan

      I am not sure you are correct in your conclusions about Farage “if he did not win”.

      If he got a substantial vote, with a lot inevitably from the Tories, it might make Cameron realise that his “jam tomorrow” position on resolving the EU issue, just does not wash with the electorate.


      1) He is not trusted even by many Tory supporters, (re-defining marriage & his let down on Europe).

      2) He made his EU speech in forced circumstances

      3) The EU rules do not allow for his method of negotiation and he is ignoring Article 50 which does allow, what most people, (who do not view the EU through a rose tinted almost -religious, Ken Clarke prism), now want.


      4) Very few Tories seriously believe he will BE Prime Minister after the next election. He has been too careless with the party. That is widely understood, even if, in public, many remain loyal.

      Cameron and the Tory party needs a bloody nose to make him/it, see sense.

      • David Lindsay

        Farage was the UKIP candidate in the Eastleigh by-election of 1994. He got 1.7% of the vote.

        This or any other by-election will have absolutely nothing to do with that issue. That is just a fact. No wonder that Farage looks like not going for it after all. No one, absolutely no one, sits in the pub or stands at the bus stop and talks about the EU.

        The Tories defecting to UKIP are mostly doing so over same-sex “marriage”. But Farage was in favour of that until Cameron decided to legislate for it. He is also still on record in favour of the legalisation of drugs (a position for which he sacks junior functionaries) and the legalisation of prostitution.

        • ButcombeMan

          You really do churn out some utter rubbish.

          Firtsly what Vote UKIP got nearly 20 years ago has little relevance now.

          Just look at the polls. UKIP stands higher than the LibDems.

          Secondly, people really are talking about the EU in the pubs, you need to get up to speed. There is widespread fear of massive Romanian/ Bulgarian immigration for one thing, but wider than that, there IS massive public concern about the efffect the EU has had on our lives, the cost of it, the failure of the euro (not over yet) and the crooked way it runs.

          The re-defining of marriage is certainly in the mix, as I said, but your “mostly” is not proven. The way YouGov asks the final question tends to flush out the most recent thing, the public would wish to ask Cameron about, not all of the things they would ask about.

          The official policy of UKIP is a Royal Commission on Drugs. It is emphatically not, legalisation.

          I have no idea if Farage will stand, I merely challenge your silly self serving suggestion that he must win to be taken seriously.

          As for your suggestion Labour might win, it is so ridiculous it is hardly worth commenting on.

          It is la la land, with Balls as Shadow Chancellor? In Eastleigh?

          Do get a grip on reality.

          • David Lindsay

            I really have touched a raw nerve, haven’t I?

            This is UKIP’s and Farage’s one and only chance. Take this seat, or be finished, and laughed out forever thereafter.

            They won’t, so they will be.

            And Labour can have this seat if it makes enough of an effort. This year, Labour can have absolutely any seat if it makes enough of an effort. The question is whether it will.

            • ButcombeMan

              Touched a nerve-no.

              I actually feel sorry for you. You churn out a lot of rubbish, plainly you have little or no, basic common sense.

              The suggestion that Labour could win in Eastleigh is but your latest utter silliness.

              Psychological counselling might help you, of course it might not.

              Take Brown & Balls along with you.

        • FrankS

          What pub and bus stop do you frequent?

          • Wessex Man

            It’s no good trying to avoid dear David like that FrankS, he will haunt you on every blog around and try to off-load his lateset political tome on you!

        • Hexhamgeezer

          UKIP was less than 6 months old when that by-election was fought.

          ‘absolutely no one, sits in the pub or stands at the bus stop and talks about the EU.’ Maybe not in the Second Life one you frequent – try a real one.

    • Nicholas chuzzlewit

      “Labour gain. Why ever not?” Because this constituency is situated in a well educated, hard-working and prosperous part of Hampshire and where labour polled 10% at the last election. Second, the labour candidate will have to campaign with a massive policy lacuna to people who have no interest in the agenda of scrounging, mediocrity, spitefulness, hatred and failure of socialism. I am afraid you will have to wait until 2015 before the bankrupt, dishonest and anti-democratic Stalinist rabble are in a position to set up the oppressive single party state that is your keenest desire.

    • Nicholas chuzzlewit

      Labour gain. Why ever not? Because this constituency represents a prosperous, hard-working and educated population in Hampshire where Labour polled only 10% at the last General Election. Second, the Labour candidate will be campaigning with a policy lacuna and the image of the odious Ed Balls fixed in the minds of those prosperous and educated voters. I am afraid you will have to wait until 2015 at the earliest before your fondest dream of an anti-democratic, Stalinist, totallitarian state becomes a terrible reality.

  • humeanbeing

    The Telegraph has brought together a string of quotes from Huhne that don’t leave much room for sympathy:

  • foxoles

    Is that feather-brained Lynne Featherstone (who once called out the Fire Brigade on a 999 because her boiler was ‘making a noise’) grinning like a loon behind her idol, Huhne?
    The quality of politicians these days beggars belief …

    • Fergus Pickering

      I think you might publish a list of MPs who went to jail. It would be a very lobg list and go back a very long way

      • foxoles

        And how many made a 999 call because they ‘heard a funny noise’?
        Typical Lib Dem. Completely out of touch with reality – with what is acceptable behaviour and what is not.

      • John McClane

        Make it even longer. Include those MPs who should have gone to jail but didn’t.

  • David B

    Go for it, you know what they say about payback and a bit of it needs handed out to the Lib Dems

  • Tim

    Bye Chris. Couldn’t happy to a better man.

    Eastleigh – UKIP all the way. I believe Nigel is up for this one.
    Bubble boys – watch out!

    • David Lindsay

      I don’t know what you imagine that Farage is. Anyone would think that he was the proprietor of the BBC, the amount of time that he is on it. In fact, Rupert Murdoch very rarely appears in his papers. Farage is never off the air.

      • Tim

        Your comment makes no sense. Is it a late night in your underpants using mummy’s computer swigging from daddy’s brandy?

        • David Lindsay

          Don’t get me started about my mother and computers.

          When Farage either crashes and burns at Eastleigh, or more probably doesn’t dare risk at all, then perhaps the BBC that is currently so obsessed with him might allow on parties that have, you know, seats?

          • Vindice

            The party that he leads is polling level with the Lib Dems. I imagine it polls higher in the demographics that watch ‘serious’ political shows. Farage leads EFD, a group of political parties in the European parliament. Less than three months ago UKIP came 2nd in two by-elections and 3rd in another. LibLabCon have a near-identical official stance on immigration and the EU. UKIP has a distinct policy that is much closer to that of the English electorate. I cannot imagine why you think Farage isn’t worthy of significant exposure.

            A suggestion that the BBC overly represents the ideas that Farage espouses would be laughable. Just one example from thousands – after the Saturday after Cameron announced his referendum plan the guests on R4’s Week in Westminster were Douglas Hurd, Peter Hain and Simon Hughes

            Be serious man.

            You’re right on Scotch though. Ardbeg and Laphroig’s Quarter Cask are ambrosial.

    • Bob339
  • humeanbeing

    This is classic “one rule for us, one rule for the little people” territory. A nice present for the fourth estate, I must say.

  • humeanbeing

    Chris who?

    • humeanbeing

      If he were to use his time in prison constructively, he could be known as Dr Who by the time he’s released.

      • FrankS

        It’ll probably be “Dr What – Already!”

  • Daniel Maris

    I hope Huhne is not punished too severely. Whilst he committed an offence, he did so to preserve his career rather than to advance crime.

    Every day of the week in courtrooms up and down the country criminals are perverting the course of justice through BS perjury, jury intimidation and feigned illness.

    None (or very few) of them ever get prosecuted. Why not? Why are the authorities so keen to put the boot into Huhne (rightly so) but do nothing about these career criminals? If career criminals knew they faced serious additional penalties for perjury and perverting the course of justice (the maximum penalty should be 20 years, not 3 years) they would think twice and plead guilty more often.

    • sarah_13

      You are wrong, it is extremely serious to pervert the course of justice. Our society is held together by the rule of law, without respect for it we would live in chaos with no safety for ourselves or our property. Mr Huhne is a well educated man, he is a member of parliament someone who MAKES the law. The fact that he is happy to see other people go to prison but thinks that he is above the law is disgraceful; he is a hypocrit. In my view It is very sad that his ambition got the better of him but he unfortunately should receive the full force of the law.

      • Fergus Pickering

        But surely everybody who lies in order to escape prosecution is perverting the course of justice. I always thought Jeffrey Archer and Jonathan Aitken were sentenced to ridiculously long prison terms but don’t we like getting the boot in after someone falls from grace. I never liked the man but I would feel rather cheap to join in rubbing his nose in it. Any chance of sending Tony Blair to jail? Thought not..

        • arnoldo87

          Apart from hating his guts for humiliating the Conservative Party for 10 long years, why would you want to sent Blair to jail, Fergus?

          Have you got some evidence of Blair crimes to tell us about?

          Thought not…

          • Chris lancashire


          • Fergus Pickering

            Good Lord, feller, EVERYBODY wants to send Tony Blair to jail. If there isn’t a law that fits then we must just pass one.

            • arnoldo87

              Almost everybody on this blog, Fergus, it’s true. But out here in the normal, rational world, where we are generally free of foam-flecked ranting, people tend to rate Tony Blair as the world-class statesman that he is.
              This, by the way, includes the current Tory cabinet, who have a high regard for the Master. This makes passing a new law just to punish Tony most unlikely.
              Some people (like Chris Lancashire, below) seem to think that parroting the word “Iraq” is somehow as good as putting forward some facts, or at least a decent argument.
              But even after Iraq, at the height of the controversy over the tragic aftermath of the invasion, Blair still inflicted a third consecutive thrashing to the Tories.

              • Fergus Pickering

                I’ve never met anyone who didn’t think he was a c*nt. You are a first.

                • arnoldo87

                  Fergus – I had quite forgotten your skills as a polemicist. I should have remembered that one should never tangle with someone who can wield a four letter word with aplomb.

              • Chris lancashire

                OK Arnoldo, here are some facts. We went to war on the back of a dodgy dossier that said Saddam had WMDs. In total some 600,000 people have died. So far no WMDs have been found but people are continuing to die. Now, at best, some would call that an error of judgement. Others would call it criminal negligence or worse. You would appear to think it was all OK because your hero inflicted a third consecutive thrashing to the Tories – before being ejected by his own party.
                Oh, I also belong to the normal, rational world that you obviously inhabit and, like you, am not foam-flecked or, like you, ranting.

                • arnoldo87

                  The dossier (not the dodgy one, by the way) was compiled by intelligence experts, and nothing was contributed by Blair except the executive summary. None of the intelligence said that Saddam had NO WMD. Nearly all of the world powers thought that Saddam still had them, as well as Hans Blix, and he (Saddam) had a record of seeking, owning and using them.
                  In the end there were no WMD, but there was plenty of evidence that Saddam was biding his time, waiting for sanctions to be lifted, before building up his WMD stocks and rocketry once again.
                  I think Blair, along with Bush, was guilty of complacency about how easy it would be to rebuild Iraq. But hindsight is a wonderful thing, and complacency is not yet a crime.
                  As for your 600,000 dead, this is of course the much criticised Lancet estimate. The Iraq Body Count has a figure of just over 100,000. This is quite bad enough of course, but you have to examine how many would have died without Coalition action.
                  You only have to look at Syria to get an idea of how Iraq may have looked in 2013 with Saddam and his sons still in power.

                • Chris lancashire

                  Yes arnoldo, there are fairies at the bottom of my garden too.

                • arnoldo87

                  I respect a man who can maintain a reasoned debate when his assertions are challenged.

                • Chris lancashire

                  I respect a man who defends his political beliefs; but not at the expense of his morals.

            • wrinkledweasel

              Blair did more damage to the UK than the Luftwaffe. Not only that the damage is nigh on irreversible. Coupled with promoting an illegal war and misleading the public, I would have thought jail was the soft option. In a slightly, ever so slightly different world, Tony Blair would be in the Hague right now defending himself on the gravest charges.

              • arnoldo87

                Heard it all before, Weasel. We have made progress, however. We don’t get so much of the Bliar accusations, now that we know that none of you can come up with a single lie.
                It’s “misleading” now.
                In the end you will get there. Keep learning.

            • Ron Todd

              Much as I would like to see Blair in Jail passing laws and applying them retrospectively would be setting a bad precedent.

              • Fergus Pickering

                It would but Blair is a special case.

        • sarah_13

          Fergus, I do not wish to put the boot, on the contrary this whole thing is extremely sad, sad that he allowed his ambition to get the better of him. There is nothing to be happy about but it is extremely serious to pervert the course of justice, he was a law maker, law is what holds our society together. He could have admitted it when it was clear he was to be charged, he continued to lie knowing he had done what he was accused of for a year. The law is there for a reason, to protect us all, if some people think they are above or are left in positions where they can affect justice for others and cannot be trusted where will that leave us.

          • wobble

            I wish to put the boot in ………..
            Because he does

            And I want the tax payers money (a couple of million quids worth in wages and expenses ) paid to him over the last decade which he claimed while knowingly and fraudulently claiming that he was an “honorable ” member of parliament , …… to be returned…….!

          • Tom Tom

            Hubris – Hamartia

          • The_Missing_Think

            “Our society is held together by the rule of law, without respect for it we would live in chaos with no safety for ourselves or our property.”

            That sounds theoretically great, fits like a glove, the sort of civilized society I like, apart from, I was wondering, is it ok for the odd exception to the rule, based on racial grounds?

      • Tom Tom

        We should shed a tear for Daniel however who has lost a pin-up boy for Eco-Fanaticism

      • Daniel Maris

        I suggest you read what I wrote. I am suggesting it is very serious and should be treated so. But it isn’t fair that Huhne will be made an example while no effort at all is made to deal with obvious attempts to pervert the course of justice and also perjury.

    • Russell

      The maximum penalty for perverting the course of justice is life imprisonment!
      It is regarded in legal circles as one of the most serious crimes of all crime. I hope the judge remembers this when sentencing this jumped up liar who has continued receiving taxpayers cash and pension contribution for a year knowing that he was guilty and declaring his innocence on a regular basis of tv.. .

      • Fergus Pickering

        Well of course bloody lawyers think it is terribly serious. But the rest of us suppose murder, rape and armed robbery are a tad more serious, silly laypersons that we are.

        • Tom Tom

          The highest Court is the House of Commons which requires members to resign when perjuring themselves but Profumo stands head and shoulders above the trash that followed him

      • Daniel Maris

        Not according to the link the Spectator provided. 3 years max.

    • Andy

      ‘I hope Huhne is not punished too severely’.

      Don’t be so wet. This piece of scum has committed a very grave offence and he should be severely punished according to the Law. Doing so to ‘preserve his career’ makes the matter worse, and is no mitigation. This man was, at the time a member of the European Parliament. We expect better of a man in such a position. He should go to prison for 2 years.

      • foxoles

        Quite. A few votes either way, and he might have been Deputy PM. This is *not* a trivial matter.

      • Fergus Pickering

        We expect better of a man who is a member of the European Parliament. Did you just say that? Anybody who is a member of the European Parliament who is not there to bring it down is a turd and no amount of polishing can change that. Do you kniow what the bastards are paid?

      • Ron Todd

        I expect he will get a suspended sentence and a fine to small to hurt.

        • Andy

          I would be very, very surprised if he did not receive a custodial sentence. And remember he could have told the truth months ago instead he waited until he was actually in the dock. That’s wasting the Courts time. 2 years would be appropriate given the circumstances.

          • Ron Todd

            Would he plead guilty if there wasn’t a deal in place?

            • Andy

              I think you’ll find he pleaded Guilty because his legal team advised him he would have lost. And had he lost after a trial the sentence would be greater.

    • Chris lancashire

      To my own surprise I tend to agree with you Daniel. From what one reads Huhne seems to be a fairly unpleasant man – a characteristic shared with many politicians – but I have some sympathy for a man who has wrecked his career on an utterly stupid decision. What he did was not trivial but neither was it heinous. Thosr that delight at his downfall should maybe reflect on their schadenfreude.

      • Andy

        Had he taken the points and paid the fine (even taken the ban) we would not be discussing this. It would not have destroyed his career – maybe set it back a bit, but he would still have that career. Now we know him as a Liar. It is the lie that has destroyed his career and will, I hope, send him to prison where he so rightly belongs. And he persuaded his wife to take the points, thus making a liar out of her too. He is a dishonest, dishonourable man; a bloody disgrace. Be gone I say. Good riddance to bad rubbish. We do not need such scum in public life.

        • starfish

          IIRC he already had 9 points – so previous punishments had no affect on his behaviour

          He used to be his party’s law and order spokesman……..

          This should be the end of his career – now he will just have to be a full time lobbyist for the eco-fascists, probably end up working for Tim Yeo

          • Andy

            Yes, and less than 3 months later he was caught using his mobile phone while driving, so gained the points and was banned from driving. So all this rubbish was for naught. The man is an idiot.

    • Tom Tom

      Yes Daniel, he was determined to keep on driving when mortals get disqualified but he was driven by the needs of the nation to continue his spirit of self-sacrifice. The nation will mourn his passing ! Perhaps we should repeal the Road Traffic Acts to prevent future difficulties for LibDem Living Saints ?

      • Daniel Maris

        Tom Tom – That would be a well argued riposte…if I had advanced that argument but as I didn’t it isn’t.

        I am not arguing for Huhne to be spared punishment, only excessive punishment, especially as I say, the authorities make absolutely no effort to prosecute career criminals for the same offence.

  • HooksLaw

    ‘marital coercion’? What is that? On examination I learn that the law commission recommended its abolition in 1977, and mere loyalty to a husband is not a defence.

  • Wessex Man

    The fact that the Tories and the Lib/Dems talked about this criminal and David Laws coming back into the heart of Government shows just how low politics has sunk. Never mind the Tories thinking they are going to win the by-election, I hope they both lose their deposits!

    • HooksLaw

      Laws is not a criminal – where is his conviction. Huhne has broken the law and there was no question of him coming backm if found guilty,, but his biggest crime is hypocrisy.

      • Wilhelm


        Plus he’s all for mass immigration.

      • Russell

        And lying at every opportunity when interviewed about the matter for the past year. Displays the main characteristic of all MP’s, no integrity or honesty, I hope he gets more than a year in prison.

        • HooksLaw

          I do not condemn Huhne for the original offence (except in his hypocrisy), but as soon as he stood up and said ‘I am not guilty’ then he was finished.

      • Tom Tom

        Which would be the appropriate body to prosecute David Laws ?

        • David Lindsay

          The one that rightly bangs up Housing Benefit fraudsters for stealing far less than he did.

          • HooksLaw

            Laws did not steal any money – he saved the taxpayer money

            • David Lindsay

              And good luck to him if that is defence before a Bench of Magistrates with a dozen or more further Housing Benefit fraud cases to hear that morning or afternoon.

            • Tom Tom

              You are very protective……

              • ButcombeMan

                Indeed he is -puzzling. Laws had to resign because of questions about his financial probity in relation to his expenses-simple fact.

                • Wessex Man

                  and that was the point I was making, his was in any other walk of life fraudulent and he should have faced a Court, instead although not a Minister he attends Cabinet Meetings as if nothing happened.

    • sarah_13

      I think that is unfair, the no one else is responsible for this but
      Chris huhne. He has always in my view seemed a particularly unpleasant man, and he lied to his colleagues the conservatives. It’s unfair to tar them with this.

  • NiceTeaParty

    They will obviously say he got what he deserved.

    But who can honestly say that they too do not have little secrets they would rather keep in the marital bed ?

    And who can honestly say they did not (once ?) think of marriage as a shared or joint enterprise when one party took one for the team with a little give and take.

    The institution of marriage has become a joke with divorce a blackmailer’s charter.

Can't find your Web ID? Click here