There's also a lot of bickering about the rights and wrongs of the whole shambles, dominated by the pink elephant in the room: "is it because he is a gayer?".
Of course it fucking isn't. An expenses trougher is an expenses trougher, regardless of which end he bowls from. See picture to the right for details.
This furore is absolutely bugger all (oops) to do with Laws' sexuality and everything to do - as always in the ol' expenses scandals - about a genuine deadly sin: Greed.
If 'Genius' Laws had not wanted anybody looking too closely at his 'private' life, wouldn't he have been much better off not asking us, the taxpayers, to fucking well fund it?
He's supposedly a very successful banker - could he have just worn the costs himself? Was his little 'secret' not worth that much? Or did he just think he'd never be rumbled?
Surely, if you ask the we, the taxpayers, to pay for something, then we, the taxpayers, might well wonder what the fuck that something is?
Whereas if you don't ask we, the taxpayers, to pay for something, then it really is none of our, the taxpayers', fucking business?
And if you want your domestic arrangements - whatever they are - kept secret, for any reason then .. well .. duh!
Or is CF missing something here?