What a difference two years makes?

Two years ago the Rotherham MP had the Parliamentary Whip withdrawn, Labour’s statement read thus:

“Following a referral by the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards to the Met Police Service, the Labour Party has today suspended Denis MacShane from the Parliamentary Labour Party and the Whip pending the outcome of any investigation.”

It has been announced that the Met will take no further action!

Labour today stated:

“In view of this decision the Labour Party will lift its administrative suspension of Denis MacShane with immediate effect.”

An email came in as this post was being prepared, can’t resist letting you see it:

So Da Dokta Dint Doo Owt, innit
So back to my garage-office and 11-laptops to catch up on my expenses.

Kind Regards,
Grald-Hunter

Guido: Met Police Say MPs Can Claim for Fake Offices

Don’t miss: The MacShane Files

14 thoughts on “What a difference two years makes?

  1. Comment from the Guido site:

    “Presumably McShame can now rejoin the Labour party again and accept the parliamentary party whip.

    I wouldn’t even put it past him to be re-elected by the brain dead voters in his constituency”.

    Nobody can be that daft.

    Like

  2. Well I know I won’t be voting for him, Just on the basis that he is such a euro-fanatic that it could put you off your corn flakes.

    Like

  3. Suspension lifted this week on:
    Lord Ahmed
    Denis MacShane
    Who knows we might see Blair, Prescott, Brown and Jaqui Smith on the fronth oppistion bench at next week’s PMQ’s.

    Like

  4. Oh dear!

    Not the outcome that some of our councillors aspiring to become an MP will be jumping for joy about tonight.

    Now just how do you plot to deselect an MP or two?

    Like

  5. Omar, George Galloway, Lord Ahmed and Dennis Mc Shame are all alike, nothing to choose between any of them. Self above all, and the poor bloody electors of Rotherham get dealt. another bad hand. McShame brings the whole of Rotherham into disrepute and I personally feel that the evidence was not strong enough to get a conviction. It has to be beyond all reasonable doubt in a criminal case, which doesn’t exactly clear him. If a civil case could be brought, this would be on the balance of probabilities in other words 51% and he would be sunk, but not unfortunately in the nick.

    Like

  6. @CAS, only reason I like Galloway is because he showed us all that you don’t need to be a Labour/Tory lackey to get into Westminster. But I agree about the other two jokers.

    Like

  7. I don’t like George Galloway because he comes out with the most bizzare comments like he had gave an interview a few weeks ago stating that Britain should give the Falklands to Argentina. The man is deluded, he just says things like this for air time, that’s what he craves, air time.

    Like

Leave your comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.