According to the Telegraph, transport minister Sadiq Khan is in an ANOTHER election expenses row.  Again its about using office expenses to fund his struggling local party.

I bet that Chris Mole is thanking God (or Dawkins – this is Mole we’re talking about) that he is charismatically challenged, and his national profile matches this. Otherwise the press would be paying an interest.

The website of Chris Mole was paid (at double the going rate) for by you and me, as taxpayers.

http://mpsallowances.parliament.uk/mpslordsandoffices/hocallowances/allowances-by-mp/chris-mole/Chris_Mole_0506_IEP.pdf

If you’re a Labour loyalist then this is a good deal, if you’re not then you’ve been robbed.

When one of the most prominent links on their website is to a scaremongering Labour website you can almost hear the refund cheque being written.  The office expenses are not for party political activity after all.

You then get some of the frankly bizarre poll questions that make you wonder if the author hasn’t been hired from the Chinese Communist Party Department of Very Fair One Sided Poll Questions.  Take this example:

“Do you agree that getting a university campus in Ipswich is a major triumph for the Labour Party in Ipswich”

How do you parody that question?  Remeber that you, not the Labour Party paid for that.

From beyond parody to the screaming subtext, how about this poll question:

“Do you think that local Tories and Liberals were vindictive to sack Labour councillor Phil Smart from the chair of Ipswich Buses for revealing cuts plans”

Now what would the publicly funded Chris Mole website, Ipswich Buses and Councillor Phil Smart all have in common?

I said that there where some interesting items on Chris Mole’s expenses.  One of the themes (possibly the theme) of Chris Mole’s expense claims has been the way in which he cross subsidises the Labour Party at a number of different levels.  In effect it means we have state funding of political parties, or more accurately of the Labour Party, in Ipswich.

The most blatant way in which this was done was the payments to the Ipswich Labour Party of £500 per month for use of a room in the Labour Party offices.*  This is going to be the equivalent of the third of the salary of a full time election agent (who also happens to have a council seat and so a nice swag of expenses).  This gives Labour a massive advantage in a marginal seat where none of the other parties can afford this.

So why can’t Chris Mole borrow an office in the Ipswich council building, like David Blunkett does in Sheffield?  As well as being cheaper for the taxpayer he will be in far closer contact with council officials, maintain a non partisan presence and be able to use the receptionist and switchboard services that the council has.  Of course you won’t be able to subsidise your party political machine, but that’s hardly the point of taxes, is it Mr Mole?

*  To see one example of this go to the 2008 incidental expenses entry:

http://mpsallowances.parliament.uk/mpslordsandoffices/hocallowances/allowances-by-mp/chris-mole/Chris_Mole_0708_IEP.pdf#page=[115]

You may have to go to page 115 manually, depending on your browser. 

There you will see £3000 rent.  This is for six months, so you can divide this by six to get £500 per month.