The least surprising event of the year
Less so than the religious affiliation of Benedict XVI, the personal hygiene choices of Ursus arctos horribilis and wrestling being fixed.
Don't believe me?
Here goes:
Lord Hylton asked Her Majesty's Government: What sums have been paid in social benefits in respect of second or subsequent concurrent wives or of their children since 1997?
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Lord McKenzie of Luton): The information is not recorded centrally and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.
How very, very convenient.
Don't believe me?
Here goes:
Lord Hylton asked Her Majesty's Government: What sums have been paid in social benefits in respect of second or subsequent concurrent wives or of their children since 1997?
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Lord McKenzie of Luton): The information is not recorded centrally and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.
How very, very convenient.
Labels: Parliament, The horror that is the Labour Party
This entry was posted
on Tuesday, February 19, 2008 at 5:32 pm.
You can skip to the end and leave a response.
And, whatever the figure may be, it is way too much.
"could be obtained only at disproportionate cost"
Oh yes - very expensive: an email to every benefit office in the country (the email addresses of which even the DWP must have) and someone to spend a day totting up the total from the replies. I know it's a shocking thing even to consider but it's crossed my mind that the noble lord may be telling porkies?
Even if a sum had been given, I suspect it would have been of the "pick a number" variety.
» Post a Comment