Has Peter Hain misused taxpayer funds for Labour party purposes?

Looks like when I said Peter Hain had four problems at the moment, I should have said five.

Peter Hain websiteHis website – www.peterhain.org – says at the bottom, “This website is funded by the Communications Allowance”. Now that’s ok in itself – MPs are allowed to use the funds they receive to communicate online. However, what they’re not allowed to do is to use the money for party politics.

So it’s a bit of a problem, that the site says “please use this site to join the debate about Labour’s future.” (Click thumbnail to see screenshot higlightining the relevant text from the site’s frontpage).

That’d be party politics methinks. Oops.

Read more by .
This entry was posted in Online politics.


  • Does anyone care about this sort of pettifogging transgression? I mean, well done for spotting it, but really, in a world ravaged by genocide, war, famine and death, does one link on a website really matter?

  • Jeremy Poynton 11th Jan '08 - 1:32pm

    Yeah we DO care – why? Because the rest of the nation has been hit my a blizzard of legislation courtesy of ZaNu Labour PF, with some 3000 new crime son the statute books, and with ever-increasing power to intrude into our private lives. OBEY THE LAW is the prime message of ZaNu. Unless, that is, you are one of us.

    Regardless of the above, had Harman, Woozy Alexander or Hain a shred of personal honour, they would have resigned. But they have worked so hard for their pensions.

    Hold on – it’s US who are paying their pensions. Whilst losing ours.

    Bring back the 60s

    [Note: language moderated; please keep postings polite. Thanks :-)]

  • As we’re on the subject of pettiness, I’m sure Mark meant complimentary. I saw the opposite mistake yesterday in a blog comment where someone wrote “full compliment”.

    Petty I know, but these aren’t typographic errors. And we have the gall to criticise today’s students.

  • Jeremy Poynton 11th Jan '08 - 5:48pm

    Okay, what I said, somewhat bowdlerised, was

    “Up against the wall, Oedipals”

    OK ? 🙂

  • Just another point on this. I’ve just looked at the Hain web-site. Is it appropriate for him to use the communications allowance to advertise his books?

    It’s a small point I know but I am sick to death of seeing politicians use every trick they can to gain the maximum personal benefit from the taxpayers money.

    It’s about time they stopped extracting the urine!

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?


Recent Comments

  • Alex Macfie
    nvelope2003: You should perhaps read David Warren's comment. It wasn't a matter of a "colourful private life" but the way he treats women that's cause for conce...
  • Alex Macfie
    Michael 1: Apart from the arithmetical error (4.7% going down to 3% is not half), what makes you think a third (as it actually is, approximately) of the Lib Dem...
  • Michael 1
    @nvelope2003 Article 24 of the Lib Dem constitution outlines how the Liberal Democrats would act in the event of "Support for a government which contains ot...
  • Michael 1
    @Simon Hebditch Thanks for your comment. The Labour party didn't advise its supporters to vote Liberal Democrat in Chesham and Amersham - although clearly...
  • Simon Hebditch
    As a supporter of the so-called progressive alliance, I welcome the Lib Dem victory in Chesham and Amersham. Clearly, thousands of Labour voters decided to supp...