“We’ve spent a weekend arguing about whether David Laws should go when we should have been trying desperately to persuade him to stay.” This from Matthew Parris, writing in The Times. Yeah, right on. Many of us are currently experiencing a crisis of conscience, asking ourselves whether our tight-fisted parsimony over taxpayers’ money has caused us to lose the greatest Treasury Chief Secretary since Liam Byrne. On this the mean-minded British public has previous form: did we not, through the same nit-picking fastidiousness over public accounting, lose the incomparable Jacqui Smith as Home Secretary?
If one fraction of the hagiography that is being heaped on Laws is true, it seems we should have regarded £40,000 as a small price to pay for retaining the services of such a genius. It is to be feared the country will pay dearly for letting go of this household name of 18 days’ standing who was instantly recognisable inside the Westminster bubble and even in some parts of his constituency. We have only ourselves to blame for being so mean about expenses. Why should a fat-cat Senior Nurse on £20,000 a year grudge subsidising a former vice-president of J P Morgan and managing director of Barclays de Zoete Wedd for the upkeep of his lovenest?
&Copy; CA-NEWS: Центральноазиатская новостная служба, 2007-2010.
От мала до велика права защищены и охраняются законом. Любое использование материалов сайта допустимо при условии ссылки на CA-NEWS . Редакция не несет ответственности за достоверность информации, опубликованной в рекламных объявлениях.
Редакция может не разделять мнения авторов статей в рубрике "Обозрение прессы" и "Анализы и комментарии".