eBay Earl beats rap for punting Parliament tours
Ermine-clad tour guide is awfully sorry
Customer Success Testimonial: Recovery is Everything
The 20th Earl of Caithness will not be punished for offering US tourists trips around the Palace of Westminster and the chance to meet "various colleagues" including the Speaker.
The House of Lords Commissioner for Standards Paul Kernaghan said the Earl had clearly breached the rules on use of Westminster facilities but he had apologised and promised not to do it again.
The Commissioner received two complaints about web advertisements which promised private tours of Westminster with Lord Caithness and a tour of the Scottish Parliament accompanied by a less grand Member of the Scottish Parliament.
The $11,000 tour would then visit assorted Scottish piles owned by or associated with Caithness.
The Earl, who pushed through Thatcher's hated Poll Tax, ended up cancelling the Attlee rooms which he had reserved for the tour because of lack of interest from US travellers. The ad, which appeared on R.Crusoe.com, has since disappeared.
The impoverished Earl explained to the Commissioner that the tours were arranged with an old chum with the aim of securing money for charity. He said the adverts had been changed without his knowledge and could have suggested he was set to gain from the trips.
More from the Commissioner here.
There's background at the Herald.
Thanks to the concerned Clansman who sent in a link to the original advert which Crusoe has kindly kept online here. ®
COMMENTS
Let's see
"Earl had clearly breached the rules on use of Westminster facilities but he had apologised and promised not to do it again."
for comparison
"[Huntley] had clearly breached the [law of the land] but he had apologised and promised not to do it again."
Either the rules (law) are enforced for all, or they are enforced for none. You cannot have a two tier system.
Our leads must not only obey the rules, they must been seen to obey the rules and lead by example; or pay the consequence. If I had a say (and I don't under our current 'democracy') I would strip the Earl of his title and eject him from the house.
"but he had apologised and promised not to do it again."
"but he had apologised and promised not to do it again."
Oh, well that's okay then. CLEARLY!
Mines the one with "connections" hanging out the back pocket.
Mmm
I cannot think for a moment why trust in Parliament and parliamentarians is so low.
"Earl had clearly breached the rules on use of Westminster facilities but he had apologised and promised not to do it again."
Well, that's OK then! Who would be unpleasant or suspicious enough to question this?
"He said the adverts had been changed without his knowledge and could have suggested he was set to gain from the trips."
Again, look! See! it's been fully explained and this is, er, 'evidence' that he would not have personally benefited.
How reassured I am that we are not governed by a bunch of self-serving, freeloading, greedy shitbags.
Mine's the one with my wallet, a bunch of American tourist wallets, and every UK taxpayers' wallets in the pocket.
IT infrastructure monitoring strategies
What you need to know about cloud backup
Enabling efficient data center monitoring
Agentless Backup is Not a Myth
Customer Success Testimonial: Recovery is Everything
