• 0 Posts
  • 58 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 12th, 2023

help-circle









  • Often as different benefits have different qualifying conditions. But the larger point against means testing (IMO) is that universal benefits are far less likely to be attacked and devalued over time. If something is just given to a small section of society, often a relatively powerless one, it is easy for politicians on the right to scrap that benefit or daemonize those who receive it. On the other hand universal benefits (like this one) see huge pushback when politicians try to take them away.

    The better path forward is to make benefits universal, but make them taxable income and raise higher rates of income tax, that way most of the money given to higher earners naturally flows back to the treasury.



  • misconduct in public office

    This seems to be the key bit

    “The words “acting as such” plainly mean acting in the discharge of the duties of the office… Misconduct in public office bites on breaches of duties, which constituted the offence itself… the offence will only be made out if the manner in which the specific powers or duties of the office are discharged brings the misconduct within its ambit. Consequently, at the time of the alleged misconduct the individual must be acting as, not simply whilst, a public official… No authority was shown to us suggesting that the offence can be or has been equated to bringing an office into disrepute or misusing a platform outside the scope of the office.”

    I imagine its fairly hard to make the case they were acting as MPs while making the bets instead of merely acting while being MPs. The gambling offences seem much more likely to stick.