Labour of Love

And here is the official Hansard Text via TheyWorkForYou.com. All so very reminiscent of other pleadings which LOL have seen.

This is Hansard's early doors transcript of the Nadine Dorries MP speech of Tuesday afternoon which I mentioned and linked to in the last post. There will be a tidied up Hansard proper at 8 am and a video also.

I think this speech is quite extraordinary. I believe eyes were rolling. Just as Nadine's related blogpost entitled "Corruption" of 4 February 2010 and indeed the rather earlier document which that blogpost appears to be related to are extraordinary. As it goes I understand the "Detective Superintendent" mentioned grandly on the blog is in fact currently a Sergeant, and not through demotion.

It is axiomatic I feel that spread betting of whatever sort is not the investment route to take for any more than a tiny to small proportion of the funds of widows, orphans and indeed others who are well advised to keep their wealth safe.

Nadine Dorries MP has made this speech under parliamentary privilege. This makes it all rather unaccountable. The businesses and individuals mentioned have little or no recourse to the law should they feel what's been said is untrue or damaging. Even if they can prove it's untrue and damaging. Isn't that it?

I wouldn't bet the farm, as it were, on the basis of any of it. Tomorrow I have a lot on. But with a fair wind I'll be writing some more about these matters.

For the moment I'd wonder out loud what Nadine means by the expression "my investors"? Was she carrying on an investment business? Had they invested in Nadine? Are they Mid Bedfordshire constituents? What is she on about? Is this even covered by Erskine's definitions and protocols? Is it a question? Is it related to Nadine's parliamentary duties? And I'd wonder why Nadine is apologising at the end of all this for taking up the House's time, rather than keeping it to herself.

Tuesday 27 July 2010 2.43 pm

Nadine Dorries (Mid Bedfordshire) (Con): First, may I say what a pleasure it is to follow so shortly after my hon. Friend the Member for Witham (Priti Patel)? It is a delight to be speaking in the same debate in which she made her maiden speech. I am sure some of us can remember how terrifying that is, and my hon. Friend did amazingly well.

I want to use this opportunity to highlight the unusual case of an institution that fails people who look to it for protection and help when situations go wrong. I shall mention the names of a number of people and organisations, but there is no court case pending so that is not sub judice.

Many people work hard all their lives, and save hard. Some people may run corner shops or work as self-employed plumbers and save a deal of money, and a time comes in their life when they realise that they want to use that money for their pension or to help them through their later years, so they look to make investments with that money. Some people will use organisations such as investment banks and stockbroker firms, and I want to talk about a particular stockbroking firm with which, in 2007, a number of people decided to invest their life savings. This story is also about the Financial Services Authority. The company took these people’s life savings — a number of people’s livelihoods were also involved — and within weeks it had all gone.

A trader by the name of Stuart Waldron handled the accounts of these people. He asked all of them to set up a separate e-mail account that he could use for trades only. He then rang particular people and said that the e-mail account was not working and asked for their password. The investors thought that there was nothing unusual in that, because the account was just for trading, so they gave the trader their password. He then proceeded to send messages to and from himself giving instructions on buys and sells. When that became apparent, the FSA became involved and I sent a number of documents to the authority. That was a considerable time ago and I have not yet had a response from it. I e-mailed the relevant inspector at the FSA, Margaret Cole, three weeks ago because I knew I was going to speak about this matter today, but I have not had a reply.

The stockbroking firm is called WorldSpreads, and it operates outside the City of London — surprise, surprise. Therefore, it does not come under the jurisdiction of the City of London police. It appears that the people who run WorldSpreads used to run a stockbroking firm called Square Mile Securities, which was inspected and closed down, although because of its financial situation at the time, it paid a reduced penalty. Those people from SMS who were closed down and had to pay that fine then went on to set up WorldSpreads. The inspector who closed down SMS was Margaret Cole.

WorldSpreads held up its hands and said Stuart Waldron was a rogue trader. My investors decided not to believe that and chose instead to take the case further. They had a meeting with the directors of WorldSpreads, which was recorded. On the recording it is made very clear that Stuart Waldron was not a rogue trader but that the operation was planned — indeed, it was a procedure that the company appeared to carry out regularly.

One key point is that the FSA has so far failed to represent the individuals who have lost their life savings, but there is also a bigger point. I am aware of this group of individuals — I know what has happened to them in their particular case — but how many more stockbroking firms are operating in such a way? How many more individuals are the FSA failing to protect? How many people are walking into a stockbroking firm with their life savings — even as I am giving this speech today — trusting that firm and hoping that there is a procedure behind them and an organisation such as the FSA that will regulate and monitor events and protect them should something go wrong and their life savings are taken away?

I am not being naive in making this speech, and I am aware that financial journalists might want to pick up on this story. If they do so, we would love to know whether Stuart Waldron, who disappeared overnight, is still trading somewhere in the City of London. We have a barrister’s statement of case that analysed the whole situation. Unfortunately the case cannot be taken on any further because there is no money left to do so; the people involved cannot fight their corner. If any financial journalist would like a copy of the barrister’s statement of case they would be very welcome to it.

It is amazing that an organisation such as the FSA, which is supposed to protect the interests of ordinary hard-working people, should have let people down so spectacularly. It will not be the stockbrokers, the City bankers or the huge institutions that bring about the upturn in this country; it will be the hard-working individuals who set up their own businesses, go to work every day, save as hard as they can and hope that, with those savings, they can look after themselves and their families and see the rewards of their labour. It is an absolute disgrace when organisations such as WorldSpreads try to blame their own misdemeanours, corrupt dealings and failings on to one individual, Stuart Waldron, who disappears overnight — paid, we believe.

I hope that while I am giving this speech there is not someone sat in the WorldSpreads offices handing over their life savings, because we will know what will happen to them. We know the pattern: over a number of weeks, those savings will dwindle and suddenly, a situation will occur—perhaps like that involving BP—and the explanation given will be, “We are so sorry your savings have disappeared, but the markets were badly affected by the current situation”. That provides the smokescreen for such activities. We know the corrupt e-mails that such organisations send. They depend on the naivety and inexperience of those who do not have the educational background in, or experience of, the financial markets.

I am sorry to have taken the House’s time up with this case. I hope that, as a result of highlighting it today, some steps might be taken towards providing justice and to returning some of those people’s money to them.

The Rambler blogged what amounts to a follow up (23 July) to my blogpost and comments about Nadine needing the expenses book thrown at her (19 July). The Rambler makes a request to IPSA that they provide the Mum-P with a replacement. With an amusing suggestion for the financing of this measure, in this age of austerity.

Carelessly allowing a tornado to whisk the 74 or 123 page guide and scheme booklets through a waiting window - as she describes. I think she threw it, don't you dear readers? I don't know mind. No proof. Apart from the physical sciences. But that's my opinion. Some of Nadine's sockies think different. They've put up a bit of a fight in comments. But not much.

Ms Nadine has been on her feet in the house quite a bit these last few days but has probably surpassed many of her very best efforts today with what might well be highly defamatory attacks on a named company and a named individual too. Clearly parliamentary privilege protects the ridiculous and I rather think untrue remarks in her ludicrous and torturous speech. But if they were uttered anywhere else? That would be different. Compare (04 February 2010, itself based on an earlier document) and Contrast (this afternoon in parliament).

Lib Dem councillors elected in Manchester on the back of ridiculous lists of supposed urgent environmental reports have a lot to answer for. One kid - who claimed amidst smearing his opponent to be the "local" candidate and to work in the ward but actually lived mainly IN LONDON where the whelk was a full time student - claimed to have reported *something* in every single street on the patch. *Anything* at all, but *something*, reported for every street whether the street wanted it or not. 500 reports in all claimed.

Call it anal. Call it childish. Call it ridiculous. Call it OTT. But consider this .. the above grafitti, and at least a handful of other instances in the same hand, have been extant in the vicinity, oooh, for about ten weeks now. They'll say anything to get elected and then comrades they think it's job done. It's a disgrace. Vote Clegg get Cameron. Vote VAT rise is ridiculous, get VAT rise. Vote no to Labour cuts, get Condem slashings. And locally? Vote grafter get slacker.

Nadine Dorries: The Conservative Mum-P for Mid Bedfordshire has resumed her blogging parallel universe fantasy, showing an extraordinary lack of respect for IPSA, whose manual she claims was uniquely whisked from her desk and out of a waiting window by a gust of wind on the opening of her office door.

Here you go: "IPSA in the air", a title which refers to who knows what. Perhaps correspondents could comment to confirm the weight of the booklet in question? Perhaps too to comment on the design fault that allows opening an office door when a window happens to be open to distribute MP's private correspondence on the four winds? Perhaps on the strange lack of other wind-borne detritus?

On a day when we caught up with news that our old friend* and Nadine's Conservative colleague from the Gloucestershire-Warwickshire borders Lord Taylor of Warwick (peer's own website, we are especially liking the donations button) is to face the music, from the generally more lenient Lords expenses regime, for claiming for a "second home" when the South Midlands main home he claimed was a figment, HERE, you'd think that Missy Dorries would be keeping quiet.

* In which earlier post we asked whether the £70,000 or so Warwick had apparently trousered on the back of fictitious "main home" arrangements - he is in fact currently only being tried over £11,000 - made him worse even than Dorries (proceeding) and Rennard ("exonerated").

Lord Warwick had apparently put through his mother's home in Solihull, which he did not own, did not visit, did not pay for (etc etc) as his "main home" to justify the claiming of vast allowances from the taxpayer for his real main home in Ealing, London. Lord Warwick continued to claim thusly even after his mother had died and the tenuously related property had been sold on the open market.

LOL say: "Well fancy that!" and "Who'd have thunk it?" And LOL also point M'Learned Friends at Taylor's last blogpost, from October 2009. "Caught on Camera" was the tag. "Caught Red Handed" might be more to the point.

LOL have a very low opinion of Taylor from his patently shiny bonce to his patently shining tap dancing shoes. Here's just one sentence from his blogpost. In which the smarmy self-aggrandising tube promotes himself to a Law Lord with masterly word ordering:

This month the new Supreme Court took over the judicial functions of the House of Lords, a role which had previously been exercised by my Law Lord colleagues in parliament.

Despite telling the world pre- her election to parliament in 2005 that she had married Paul Dorries, a mining engineer on her return from Zambia; and telling the world post- election and in parliament to boot that she married him in Zambia before their return, laden with child, there is no record whatsoever of her ever marrying the man. There should be even if the wedding was overseas. Clearly then there would be no need for any divorce! Messy or otherwise. They were just living over the broom as it were. And with a woodyard at the back of Nadine's ridiculous seven-bedroom "second home" there are all the makings of a new broom when Mr Dorries gets his affairs in order.

Although he's been a missing person for some time his red saloon, a Jaguar or similar, has been spotted in the vicinity. And the rascal has even sneaked in late at night and used the Mum-Ps land line telephone - including for at least one international call - to try to score some more with his chronically ill-advised rich widows. A MissPer poster campaign has we're told begun with an epicentre in South Warwickshire where he had digs and indeed a mate's sofa as a refuge when he had to leave the Mum-P. Well wishers have now hired a most excellent Private Investigator to find Paul and help get him back on the straight and narrow.

DORRIES TRIVIA: The picture these chaps are using is from 2003, taken on the occasion of the opening of Nadine's ill-fated, nominally Gorgeous shop in Prestbury, Cheshire. The hand creeping in on the right of shot belongs to a rather famous former coke fiend and adulteress, now in recovery and selling thousands of snort and tell tomes. As it goes there is another mystery fella in one of the other shots on this reel. We may come back to that one and try to crowd-source his identity another time. But I digress. And Paul may have changed a bit in the intervening seven years.

DORRIES CROWD SOURCE: Have you seen this man? A former Gloucestershire councillor who harboured parliamentary ambitions before his partner rained on his parade and took the gig. Sometimes of course "the disappeared" who want to stay disappeared may use an alias or three but in this case we've no reports of such. Mike Lenny's team would love to catch up with Paul. Please ring 020 7794 8100 if you can help. Perhaps you've done a bit of business with the fella and you'd like to give him a reference?

The many and varied discrepancies in Nadine Dorries Mum-P's life story and work history are said to be a key, tell-tale sign that she is in fact an embedded Russian Spy. Her mission? To get hob-nobbly with the chinless Masters of the Universe in the British Conservative Party, persuade them to run the country into a double-dipping recession, and subject the Christian-right elements of decadent Western society to global ridicule with unfounded and bizarre crack pot alternative and reproductive medicine propaganda. The former Tsarina of the Blogs is to be relieved immediately of her many and diverse parliamentary duties, pending convening of a Star Chamber, says David Cameron: "When I need a sacrifical lamb to distract from our major cock ups, I'm sorry Woburn, but Nadine's toast. I've protected this woman long enough".

Nadine Dorries Mum-P is to be the "award-winning business woman" entering the Big Brother House, **LIVE**, in a space ship, along with two other entryists in about 15 minutes time. She has been given leave of absence from all her many and diverse parliamentary duties, says David Cameron: "For as long as it takes, she has my blessing". She will donate the sub-rental income from her main home - a picturesque bijou Cotswolds love-nest - to an unnamed charitable cause.

Or it might be these three mightn't it?