Hehehehe, only in Britian! But really, aren't the cases of child neglect due to playing video games in Korea?
British Politician Suggests State-Funded Games Addiction Rehab
- Thread starter Hevva
- Start date
Right... we have a coalition government. The conservatives AKA tories/tory(singular) - Think republicans and Liberal democrats - ....well - both hold an equal(ish) amount of power. So obviously the tories get their way. Mr. Vaz is a labour MP but generally holds opinions similar to a tory. A lot of our politicians are massive pussies and are scared crapless of being called anything that remotely means they aren't multicultural - seriously, anything - and then you have a few extreme ones who will make a fuss about something they hear in the Daily mail - UK version of FOX News.WWmelb said:
Like all politicians though, they believe in making a vague policy and throwing money at it until it works.
This excluding the "too funny" part. Priorities need to be recognised, especially when cuts are being made daily. To be honest though, I would kill for Labour to be back in charge; Conservatives only have their own interests at heart regardless of others.Orcboyphil said:
wasn't there this whole economic crisis going on at the moment?
you know, astronomic debts and everything, why would these clinics take priority?
you know, astronomic debts and everything, why would these clinics take priority?
I have my own private rehab clinic for people addicted to licking seagulls. So now any claim holds water that seagull licking is addicting, right?
I think this is a constructive suggestion on behalf of Keith Vaz, certainly compared to his other ones. For all the amount of people here who refuse to accept that video games could have any possible negative impact on someone's life (what do you mean there's a generation of under-achievers?), let's face it, gamers are simultaneously the best and worst people to ask about that.
And experience has shown me that a large proportion of gamers are idiots. Stupidity is not the sole reason addiction happens though. Many intelligent people become addicted to something. In fact, just knowing that they are intelligent probably makes them secure in the belief that they would never become addicted.
Possibly he does want the attention, yes. It's better than drawing attention to something in a wholly negative manner though. Perhaps he's changing his tack because no one likes his previous approach.Blunderboy said:
And experience has shown me that a large proportion of gamers are idiots. Stupidity is not the sole reason addiction happens though. Many intelligent people become addicted to something. In fact, just knowing that they are intelligent probably makes them secure in the belief that they would never become addicted.
I'm not trying to suggest that there aren't any negative effects to too much of anything, or that there aren't stupid gamers.Lord Mountbatten Reborn said:
I am merely pointing out that experience has taught me not to trust anything politicians say. Especially when it seemingly goes somewhat against the grain of their usually attitudes.
I think the problem here is that there is no firm evidence that excessive video game playing is a source of problems rather than a symptom. For instance, we have flu clinics, not fever clinics. I see no benefit in spending government money on unconfirmed "diseases". Private companies, on the other hand, can do what they want.
You know, I'll just quote Wiki on all the stuff Mr Vaz has done since he's been in power.
Mr Vaz is a Cretin, he is known for his lies and his bandwagon jumping, he protested the satanic verses and never quite got round to denouncing the people calling for Salman Rushdie's head, he never EVER backs up any of his facts with actual evidence and when questions pulls out the same BS unproveable facts in order to appear a better MP then he is, while in reality he could have his way with a Pig on national television and still be in better standing as an MP.
And onto his point, no one has been able prove game addiction as a real thing, they can point to people obsessed with games, as they can nearly everything else, you rarely see calls for music or shopping rehab centers and the like. When i was younger I did play far too many games for far too long, my dad took my N64 and playstaion away and wouldn't let me have them back till i did all my school work/Went outside etc. Job done. Less pointing to the evils of the games industry more pointing to lazy parents.
PS - I love auto complete.
[http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/9/keithvazmp.png/]
Uploaded with ImageShack.us [http://imageshack.us]
Filkin inquiry
In February 2000 the Parliamentary standards watchdog Elizabeth Filkin began an investigation after allegations that Vaz had accepted several thousand pounds from a solicitor, Sarosh Zaiwalla, which he had failed to declare. The allegations were made by Andrew Milne, a former partner of Zaiwalla and were denied by both Vaz and Zaiwalla.[4][5] He was censured for a single allegation - that he had failed to register two payments worth £4,500 in total from solicitor Sarosh Zaiwalla.[6] Elizabeth Filkin accused Vaz of blocking her investigation into eighteen of the allegations. [7]
Hinduja affair
In January 2001, immigration minister Barbara Roche revealed in a written Commons reply that Vaz, along with Peter Mandelson and other MPs, had contacted the Home Office about the Hinduja brothers. She said that Vaz had made inquiries about when a decision on their application for citizenship could be expected.[8]
On 25 January, Vaz had become the focus of Opposition questions about the Hinduja affair and many parliamentary questions were tabled, demanding that he fully disclose his role. Vaz said via a Foreign Office spokesman that he would be "fully prepared" to answer questions put to him by Sir Anthony Hammond QC who had been asked by the Prime Minister to carry out an inquiry into the affair.
Vaz had known the Hinduja brothers for some time; he had been present when the charitable Hinduja Foundation was set up in 1993, and also delivered a speech in 1998 when the brothers invited Tony and Cherie Blair to a Diwali celebration.[9]
On 26 January 2001, Prime Minister Tony Blair was accused[by whom?] of prejudicing the independent inquiry into the Hinduja passport affair, after he declared that the Foreign Office minister Keith Vaz had not done "anything wrong". On the same day, Vaz told reporters that they would "regret" their behaviour once the facts of the case were revealed. "Some of you are going to look very foolish when this report comes out. Some of the stuff you said about Peter, and about others and me, you'll regret very much when the facts come out," he said. When asked why the passport application of one of the Hinduja brothers had been processed more quickly than normal, being processed and sanctioned in six months when the process can take up to two years, he replied, "It is not unusual."[10]
On 29 January, the government confirmed that the Hinduja Foundation had held a reception for Vaz in September 1999 to celebrate his appointment as the first Asian Minister in recent times. The party was not listed by Vaz in House of Commons register of Members' Interests and John Redwood, then head of the Conservative Parliamentary Campaigns Unit, questioned Vaz's judgement in accepting the hospitality.[11]
In March Vaz was ordered to fully co-operate with a new inquiry launched into his financial affairs by Elizabeth Filkin. Foreign Secretary Robin Cook, Vaz's superior, also urged him to fully answer allegations about his links with the Hinduja brothers. Mr Vaz met Mrs Filkin on 20 March to discuss a complaint that the Hinduja Foundation had given the sum of £1,200 to Mapesbury Communications, a company run by his wife, in return for helping to organise a Hinduja-sponsored reception at the House of Commons. Vaz had previously denied receiving money from the Hindujas, but insisted that he made no personal gain from the transaction in question.[12][13]
In June 2001 Vaz said that he had made representations during the Hinduja brothers' applications for British citizenship while a backbench MP. Tony Blair also admitted that Vaz had "made representations" on behalf of other Asians.[14]
On 11 June 2001 Vaz was officially dismissed from his post as Europe Minister, to be replaced by Peter Hain. The Prime Minister's office said that Vaz had written to Tony Blair stating his wish to stand down for health reasons.[15]
In December 2001 Elizabeth Filkin cleared Vaz of failing to register payments to his wife's law firm by the Hinduja brothers, but said that he had colluded with his wife to conceal the payments. Filkin's report said that the payments had been given to his wife for legal advice on immigration issues and concluded that Vaz had gained no direct personal benefit, and that Commons rules did not require him to disclose payments made to his wife. She did, however, criticise him for his secrecy, saying, "It is clear to me there has been deliberate collusion over many months between Mr Vaz and his wife to conceal this fact and to prevent me from obtaining accurate information about his possible financial relationship with the Hinduja family".[16]
Suspension from House of Commons
In 2002 Vaz was suspended from the House of Commons for one month after a Committee on Standards and Privileges inquiry found that he had made false allegations against Eileen Eggington, a former policewoman. The committee concluded that "Mr Vaz recklessly made a damaging allegation against Miss Eggington to the Commissioner, which was not true, and which could have intimidated Miss Eggington or undermined her credibility".[17]
Eileen Eggington, a retired police officer who had served 34 years in the Metropolitan Police, including a period as deputy head of Special Branch, wanted to help a friend, Mary Grestny, who had worked as personal assistant to Vaz's wife. After leaving the job in May 2000, Grestny dictated a seven-page statement about Mrs Vaz to Eggington in March 2001, who sent it to Elizabeth Filkin. Grestny's statement included allegations that Mr and Mrs Vaz had employed an illegal immigrant as their nanny and that they had been receiving gifts from Asian businessmen such as Hinduja brothers. The allegations were denied by Mr Vaz and the Committee found no evidence to support them.[17]
In late 2001, Vaz complained to Leicestershire police that his mother had been upset by a telephone call from "a woman named Mrs Egginton", who claimed to be a police officer. The accusations led to Ms. Eggington being questioned by police.[18] Vaz also wrote a letter of complaint to Elizabeth Filkin, but when she tried to make inquiries Vaz accused her of interfering with a police inquiry and threatened to report her to the Speaker of the House of Commons. Eggington denied that she had ever telephoned Vaz's mother and offered her home and mobile telephone records as evidence. The Commons committee decided that she was telling the truth. They added: "Mr Vaz recklessly made a damaging allegation against Miss Eggington, which was not true and which could have intimidated Miss Eggington and undermined her credibility."
A letter to Elizabeth Filkin from Detective Superintendent Nick Gargan made it plain that the police did not believe Vaz's mother ever received the phone call and the person who came closest to being prosecuted was not Eggington but Vaz. Gargan said that the police had considered a range of possible offences, including wasteful employment of the police, and an attempt to pervert the course of justice. Leicestershire police eventually decided not to prosecute. "We cannot rule out a tactical motivation for Mr Vaz's contact with Leicestershire Constabulary but the evidence does not support further investigation of any attempt to pervert the course of justice."[17]
The complaints the committee upheld against Mr Vaz were:[19]
That he had given misleading information to the Standards and Privileges Committee and Elizabeth Filkin about his financial relationship to the Hinduja brothers.
That he had failed to register his paid employment at the Leicester Law Centre when he first entered Parliament in 1987.
That he had failed to register a donation from the Caparo group in 1993.
It was concluded that Vaz had "committed serious breaches of the Code of Conduct and showed contempt for the House" and it was recommended that he be suspended from the House of Commons for one month.[20]
Vaz was represented by his solicitor Sir Geoffrey Bindman.[21]
Nadhmi Auchi
In 2001 it was revealed that Vaz had assisted Anglo-Iraqi billionaire Nadhmi Auchi in his attempts to avoid extradition to France. Opposition MPs called for an investigation into what one dubbed "Hinduja Mark II".[22]
Anglo-Iraqi billionaire Nadhmi Auchi was wanted for questioning by French police for his alleged role in the notorious Elf Aquitaine fraud scandal which led to the arrest of a former French Foreign Minister. The warrant issued by French authorities in July 2000 Auchi of "complicity in the misuse of company assets and receiving embezzled company assets". It also covered Auchi's associate Nasir Abid and stated that if found guilty of the alleged offences both men could face 109 years in jail.[22]
Vaz was a director of the British arm of Auchi's corporation, General Mediterranean Holdings, whose previous directors had included Lords Steel and Lamont, and Jacques Santer. Vaz used his political influence on GMH's behalf; this included a party in the Park Lane Hilton to celebrate the 20th anniversary of GMH on 23 April 1999, where Lord Sainsbury presented Auchi with a painting of the House of Commons signed by Tony Blair, the Opposition leaders, and over 100 other leading British politicians. Lord Sainsbury later told The Observer that he did this "as a favour for Keith Vaz". In May 1999 Vaz resigned his post as a director after he was appointed a Minister. In a statement to The Observer, a GMH spokesman said that Vaz had been invited to become a GMH director in January 1999, yet company accounts showed Vaz as a director for the financial year ending December 1998.[22]
Labour confirmed in May 2001 that Auchi had called Vaz at home about the arrest warrant to ask him for advice. A spokesman said that Vaz "made some factual inquiries to the Home Office about the [extradition] procedure." This included advising Auchi to consult his local MP. The spokesman stressed that Vaz acted properly at all times and was often contacted by members of Britain's ethnic communities for help. In a Commons answer to Liberal Democrat MP Norman Baker earlier the same month Vaz confirmed that "details of enquiries by Mr Auchi have been passed to the Home Office".[22]
Since 2003 he has been a Member of the Constitutional Affairs Select Committee.
Speculation over Counter-Terrorism Bill
Vaz?s backing for the 42 day terrorist detention without charge ?was seen as crucial by the Government.?[23] During the debate the day before the key vote, Vaz was asked in Parliament whether he had been offered an honour for his support. He said: ?No, it was certainly not offered?but I do not know; there is still time.?[23] The Daily Telegraph printed a hand written letter to Vaz, written the day after the vote, Geoff Hoon wrote:
?Dear Keith... Just a quick note to thank you for all your help during the period leading up to last Wednesday?s vote. I wanted you to know how much I appreciated all your help. I trust that it will be appropriately rewarded!... With thanks and best wishes, Geoff.?[23]
Vaz wrote to the Press Council complaining the story was inaccurate, that the letter had been obtained by subterfuge and he hadn?t been contacted before the story was published. The complaint was rejected as the article made it clear that the reports of an honour were just speculation which Vaz had already publicly denied.[24]
Conflict of interest
In September 2008 Vaz faced pressure to explain why he failed to declare an interest when he intervened in an official investigation into the business dealings of a close friend, solicitor Shahrokh Mireskandari, who has played a role in several racial discrimination cases against the Metropolitan Police, and who was representing Assistant Commissioner Tarique Ghaffur in his racial discrimination case against Scotland Yard Commissioner Sir Ian Blair.
The Solicitors Regulation Authority began an investigation into Mireskandari's legal firm, Dean and Dean, in January 2008 after a number of complaints about its conduct. Vaz wrote a joint letter with fellow Labour MP Virendra Sharma to the authority's chief executive, Anthony Townsend, in February 2008 on official House of Commons stationery. He cited a complaint he had received from Mireskandari and alleged "discriminatory conduct" in its investigation into Dean and Dean. The Authority was forced to set up an independent working party to look into whether it had disproportionately targeted non-white lawyers for investigation.
Liberal Democrat deputy leader Vince Cable said that Vaz should make a public statement to clear up his role in the affair. "It is quite unreasonable that an independent regulator should have been undermined in this way. I would hope that the chairman of the home affairs select committee will give a full public statement.
Parliamentary Expenses
Vaz?s total expenses of £ 173,937 in 2008/2009 were ranked 45th out of 647 MPs with office running costs and staffing costs accounting for 70% of this.[1] The register of Member?s interests shows he owns the constituency office.[1]
His second home expenses, ranked 83 out of 647 at £ 23,831 in 2008/2009[1] were the subject of a Daily Telegraph article.[27] Vaz who lives in Stanmore, a 45 minute journey time from Parliament, claimed mortgage interest on a flat in Westminster he bought in 2003.
In May 2007, after claiming for the flat's service and council tax, he switched his designated second home to his constituency office and bought furniture.[27] The report into the Parliamentary expenses scandal by Sir Thomas Legg showed 343 MPs had been asked to repay some money[28] and Vaz was asked to repay £ 1514 due to furnishing items exceeding allowable cost.[29] New expenses rules published by the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority which came into force after the 2010 general election limit the second home allowance to £ 1,450 a month, i.e. the Westminster cost of renting a one bedroomed flat. Profits made on existing second homes will be recouped.[30]
In February 2000 the Parliamentary standards watchdog Elizabeth Filkin began an investigation after allegations that Vaz had accepted several thousand pounds from a solicitor, Sarosh Zaiwalla, which he had failed to declare. The allegations were made by Andrew Milne, a former partner of Zaiwalla and were denied by both Vaz and Zaiwalla.[4][5] He was censured for a single allegation - that he had failed to register two payments worth £4,500 in total from solicitor Sarosh Zaiwalla.[6] Elizabeth Filkin accused Vaz of blocking her investigation into eighteen of the allegations. [7]
Hinduja affair
In January 2001, immigration minister Barbara Roche revealed in a written Commons reply that Vaz, along with Peter Mandelson and other MPs, had contacted the Home Office about the Hinduja brothers. She said that Vaz had made inquiries about when a decision on their application for citizenship could be expected.[8]
On 25 January, Vaz had become the focus of Opposition questions about the Hinduja affair and many parliamentary questions were tabled, demanding that he fully disclose his role. Vaz said via a Foreign Office spokesman that he would be "fully prepared" to answer questions put to him by Sir Anthony Hammond QC who had been asked by the Prime Minister to carry out an inquiry into the affair.
Vaz had known the Hinduja brothers for some time; he had been present when the charitable Hinduja Foundation was set up in 1993, and also delivered a speech in 1998 when the brothers invited Tony and Cherie Blair to a Diwali celebration.[9]
On 26 January 2001, Prime Minister Tony Blair was accused[by whom?] of prejudicing the independent inquiry into the Hinduja passport affair, after he declared that the Foreign Office minister Keith Vaz had not done "anything wrong". On the same day, Vaz told reporters that they would "regret" their behaviour once the facts of the case were revealed. "Some of you are going to look very foolish when this report comes out. Some of the stuff you said about Peter, and about others and me, you'll regret very much when the facts come out," he said. When asked why the passport application of one of the Hinduja brothers had been processed more quickly than normal, being processed and sanctioned in six months when the process can take up to two years, he replied, "It is not unusual."[10]
On 29 January, the government confirmed that the Hinduja Foundation had held a reception for Vaz in September 1999 to celebrate his appointment as the first Asian Minister in recent times. The party was not listed by Vaz in House of Commons register of Members' Interests and John Redwood, then head of the Conservative Parliamentary Campaigns Unit, questioned Vaz's judgement in accepting the hospitality.[11]
In March Vaz was ordered to fully co-operate with a new inquiry launched into his financial affairs by Elizabeth Filkin. Foreign Secretary Robin Cook, Vaz's superior, also urged him to fully answer allegations about his links with the Hinduja brothers. Mr Vaz met Mrs Filkin on 20 March to discuss a complaint that the Hinduja Foundation had given the sum of £1,200 to Mapesbury Communications, a company run by his wife, in return for helping to organise a Hinduja-sponsored reception at the House of Commons. Vaz had previously denied receiving money from the Hindujas, but insisted that he made no personal gain from the transaction in question.[12][13]
In June 2001 Vaz said that he had made representations during the Hinduja brothers' applications for British citizenship while a backbench MP. Tony Blair also admitted that Vaz had "made representations" on behalf of other Asians.[14]
On 11 June 2001 Vaz was officially dismissed from his post as Europe Minister, to be replaced by Peter Hain. The Prime Minister's office said that Vaz had written to Tony Blair stating his wish to stand down for health reasons.[15]
In December 2001 Elizabeth Filkin cleared Vaz of failing to register payments to his wife's law firm by the Hinduja brothers, but said that he had colluded with his wife to conceal the payments. Filkin's report said that the payments had been given to his wife for legal advice on immigration issues and concluded that Vaz had gained no direct personal benefit, and that Commons rules did not require him to disclose payments made to his wife. She did, however, criticise him for his secrecy, saying, "It is clear to me there has been deliberate collusion over many months between Mr Vaz and his wife to conceal this fact and to prevent me from obtaining accurate information about his possible financial relationship with the Hinduja family".[16]
Suspension from House of Commons
In 2002 Vaz was suspended from the House of Commons for one month after a Committee on Standards and Privileges inquiry found that he had made false allegations against Eileen Eggington, a former policewoman. The committee concluded that "Mr Vaz recklessly made a damaging allegation against Miss Eggington to the Commissioner, which was not true, and which could have intimidated Miss Eggington or undermined her credibility".[17]
Eileen Eggington, a retired police officer who had served 34 years in the Metropolitan Police, including a period as deputy head of Special Branch, wanted to help a friend, Mary Grestny, who had worked as personal assistant to Vaz's wife. After leaving the job in May 2000, Grestny dictated a seven-page statement about Mrs Vaz to Eggington in March 2001, who sent it to Elizabeth Filkin. Grestny's statement included allegations that Mr and Mrs Vaz had employed an illegal immigrant as their nanny and that they had been receiving gifts from Asian businessmen such as Hinduja brothers. The allegations were denied by Mr Vaz and the Committee found no evidence to support them.[17]
In late 2001, Vaz complained to Leicestershire police that his mother had been upset by a telephone call from "a woman named Mrs Egginton", who claimed to be a police officer. The accusations led to Ms. Eggington being questioned by police.[18] Vaz also wrote a letter of complaint to Elizabeth Filkin, but when she tried to make inquiries Vaz accused her of interfering with a police inquiry and threatened to report her to the Speaker of the House of Commons. Eggington denied that she had ever telephoned Vaz's mother and offered her home and mobile telephone records as evidence. The Commons committee decided that she was telling the truth. They added: "Mr Vaz recklessly made a damaging allegation against Miss Eggington, which was not true and which could have intimidated Miss Eggington and undermined her credibility."
A letter to Elizabeth Filkin from Detective Superintendent Nick Gargan made it plain that the police did not believe Vaz's mother ever received the phone call and the person who came closest to being prosecuted was not Eggington but Vaz. Gargan said that the police had considered a range of possible offences, including wasteful employment of the police, and an attempt to pervert the course of justice. Leicestershire police eventually decided not to prosecute. "We cannot rule out a tactical motivation for Mr Vaz's contact with Leicestershire Constabulary but the evidence does not support further investigation of any attempt to pervert the course of justice."[17]
The complaints the committee upheld against Mr Vaz were:[19]
That he had given misleading information to the Standards and Privileges Committee and Elizabeth Filkin about his financial relationship to the Hinduja brothers.
That he had failed to register his paid employment at the Leicester Law Centre when he first entered Parliament in 1987.
That he had failed to register a donation from the Caparo group in 1993.
It was concluded that Vaz had "committed serious breaches of the Code of Conduct and showed contempt for the House" and it was recommended that he be suspended from the House of Commons for one month.[20]
Vaz was represented by his solicitor Sir Geoffrey Bindman.[21]
Nadhmi Auchi
In 2001 it was revealed that Vaz had assisted Anglo-Iraqi billionaire Nadhmi Auchi in his attempts to avoid extradition to France. Opposition MPs called for an investigation into what one dubbed "Hinduja Mark II".[22]
Anglo-Iraqi billionaire Nadhmi Auchi was wanted for questioning by French police for his alleged role in the notorious Elf Aquitaine fraud scandal which led to the arrest of a former French Foreign Minister. The warrant issued by French authorities in July 2000 Auchi of "complicity in the misuse of company assets and receiving embezzled company assets". It also covered Auchi's associate Nasir Abid and stated that if found guilty of the alleged offences both men could face 109 years in jail.[22]
Vaz was a director of the British arm of Auchi's corporation, General Mediterranean Holdings, whose previous directors had included Lords Steel and Lamont, and Jacques Santer. Vaz used his political influence on GMH's behalf; this included a party in the Park Lane Hilton to celebrate the 20th anniversary of GMH on 23 April 1999, where Lord Sainsbury presented Auchi with a painting of the House of Commons signed by Tony Blair, the Opposition leaders, and over 100 other leading British politicians. Lord Sainsbury later told The Observer that he did this "as a favour for Keith Vaz". In May 1999 Vaz resigned his post as a director after he was appointed a Minister. In a statement to The Observer, a GMH spokesman said that Vaz had been invited to become a GMH director in January 1999, yet company accounts showed Vaz as a director for the financial year ending December 1998.[22]
Labour confirmed in May 2001 that Auchi had called Vaz at home about the arrest warrant to ask him for advice. A spokesman said that Vaz "made some factual inquiries to the Home Office about the [extradition] procedure." This included advising Auchi to consult his local MP. The spokesman stressed that Vaz acted properly at all times and was often contacted by members of Britain's ethnic communities for help. In a Commons answer to Liberal Democrat MP Norman Baker earlier the same month Vaz confirmed that "details of enquiries by Mr Auchi have been passed to the Home Office".[22]
Since 2003 he has been a Member of the Constitutional Affairs Select Committee.
Speculation over Counter-Terrorism Bill
Vaz?s backing for the 42 day terrorist detention without charge ?was seen as crucial by the Government.?[23] During the debate the day before the key vote, Vaz was asked in Parliament whether he had been offered an honour for his support. He said: ?No, it was certainly not offered?but I do not know; there is still time.?[23] The Daily Telegraph printed a hand written letter to Vaz, written the day after the vote, Geoff Hoon wrote:
?Dear Keith... Just a quick note to thank you for all your help during the period leading up to last Wednesday?s vote. I wanted you to know how much I appreciated all your help. I trust that it will be appropriately rewarded!... With thanks and best wishes, Geoff.?[23]
Vaz wrote to the Press Council complaining the story was inaccurate, that the letter had been obtained by subterfuge and he hadn?t been contacted before the story was published. The complaint was rejected as the article made it clear that the reports of an honour were just speculation which Vaz had already publicly denied.[24]
Conflict of interest
In September 2008 Vaz faced pressure to explain why he failed to declare an interest when he intervened in an official investigation into the business dealings of a close friend, solicitor Shahrokh Mireskandari, who has played a role in several racial discrimination cases against the Metropolitan Police, and who was representing Assistant Commissioner Tarique Ghaffur in his racial discrimination case against Scotland Yard Commissioner Sir Ian Blair.
The Solicitors Regulation Authority began an investigation into Mireskandari's legal firm, Dean and Dean, in January 2008 after a number of complaints about its conduct. Vaz wrote a joint letter with fellow Labour MP Virendra Sharma to the authority's chief executive, Anthony Townsend, in February 2008 on official House of Commons stationery. He cited a complaint he had received from Mireskandari and alleged "discriminatory conduct" in its investigation into Dean and Dean. The Authority was forced to set up an independent working party to look into whether it had disproportionately targeted non-white lawyers for investigation.
Liberal Democrat deputy leader Vince Cable said that Vaz should make a public statement to clear up his role in the affair. "It is quite unreasonable that an independent regulator should have been undermined in this way. I would hope that the chairman of the home affairs select committee will give a full public statement.
Parliamentary Expenses
Vaz?s total expenses of £ 173,937 in 2008/2009 were ranked 45th out of 647 MPs with office running costs and staffing costs accounting for 70% of this.[1] The register of Member?s interests shows he owns the constituency office.[1]
His second home expenses, ranked 83 out of 647 at £ 23,831 in 2008/2009[1] were the subject of a Daily Telegraph article.[27] Vaz who lives in Stanmore, a 45 minute journey time from Parliament, claimed mortgage interest on a flat in Westminster he bought in 2003.
In May 2007, after claiming for the flat's service and council tax, he switched his designated second home to his constituency office and bought furniture.[27] The report into the Parliamentary expenses scandal by Sir Thomas Legg showed 343 MPs had been asked to repay some money[28] and Vaz was asked to repay £ 1514 due to furnishing items exceeding allowable cost.[29] New expenses rules published by the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority which came into force after the 2010 general election limit the second home allowance to £ 1,450 a month, i.e. the Westminster cost of renting a one bedroomed flat. Profits made on existing second homes will be recouped.[30]
Mr Vaz is a Cretin, he is known for his lies and his bandwagon jumping, he protested the satanic verses and never quite got round to denouncing the people calling for Salman Rushdie's head, he never EVER backs up any of his facts with actual evidence and when questions pulls out the same BS unproveable facts in order to appear a better MP then he is, while in reality he could have his way with a Pig on national television and still be in better standing as an MP.
And onto his point, no one has been able prove game addiction as a real thing, they can point to people obsessed with games, as they can nearly everything else, you rarely see calls for music or shopping rehab centers and the like. When i was younger I did play far too many games for far too long, my dad took my N64 and playstaion away and wouldn't let me have them back till i did all my school work/Went outside etc. Job done. Less pointing to the evils of the games industry more pointing to lazy parents.
PS - I love auto complete.
Uploaded with ImageShack.us [http://imageshack.us]
Honestly, Because i'm in a dick mood, I'm going to say You can get addicted to anything. ANYTHING. And personally, I consider it a form of natural selection. If you're stupid enough to get hooked on something harmful, death is a possiblity, but people don't seem to realise this. By all means help people in trouble, but don't treat people for this kinda thing. Videogames arn't a disease. Stupidity like this is.
Fine. Let's also treat people from TV addiction. Oh wait, when EVERYONE does something, it's not addiction, it's normal.
This is a simple case of gaming not being recognized as a valid form of entertainment. Old people and their stupid ideas about innovations.
This is a simple case of gaming not being recognized as a valid form of entertainment. Old people and their stupid ideas about innovations.
How about he goes to a state funded clinic for being a fatty. An actual clinical condition far more real than saying people cannot use the internet too much.Hevva said:
Why should there be state funding for something there is such a low demand for there is only one clinic in the whole of UK which offers anything like this? HE seems to want state funded clinics purely to create concern over internet use.
This is cart-before-the-horse logic.
Addiction is chemical dependancy, only liberals have watered it down to mean "I don't wanna show self control because I am an immature brat" just like Cons have watered it down to mean "I can stop cocain anytime, but don't wish too because I want welfare"Patrick Buck said:
Videogames are not addictive. When I was younger I skipped meals to go outside and just randomly play (Mostly ride my bike) for several hours, ignoring calls to come in, throwing fits when my bike was taken away... It's called an enjoyable passtime. And parents need to smack their kids instead of panicing and claiming "Addiction"
I really wish people would stop taking him seriously. Vaz is a spunk-juggling thundercunt, massively out of touch and with more dirty laundry than your average parliamentarian.
Ever since that mugging-cum-murder in our city that he blamed on Manhunt he's become a self-styled expert on violent games.
Oh, and I don't like him. At all.
Ever since that mugging-cum-murder in our city that he blamed on Manhunt he's become a self-styled expert on violent games.
Oh, and I don't like him. At all.