Wellllll, yes and no

A Labour frontbencher used taxpayers’ money to silence his Jewish Parliamentary assistant after she accused him of religious discrimination, The Telegraph can disclose.

Khalid Mahmood, the shadow foreign minister for Europe, was taken to an employment tribunal by Elaina Cohen, his assistant and former lover.

The case was settled and Ms Cohen signed a non-disclosure agreement (NDA) as a condition of an out-of-court settlement, which bars both him and her from discussing the matter publicly.

Mr Mahmood’s costs of dealing with the claim were covered by insurance, which is funded by the parliamentary expenses system and made available to all MPs.

Well, yes, there’s he fun of a Jew and a Muslim getting it on, he employing her, then the religious discrimination allegation and so on. But the claim that using standard employers’ liability insurance (I think that’s right?) to defend the clam an then insisting this is taxpayers’ money? That’s going a little far I think, no? I mean, yes, suppose it is, but we don’t want MPs to be insured? Rilly?

9 thoughts on “Wellllll, yes and no”

  1. Even if he did use taxpayers’ money, it would be important to remember that this would be different than if a Tory MP did the same. Because reasons.

  2. Yes, but there’s insurance & insurance. And I’m pretty sure ordinary employer’s liability insurance doesn’t cover employment disputes with members of the insured’s family. Which the bint could & would be construed as. But as the taxpayer’s paying, no doubt the insurance is gold plated – no expense spared. Did we also cough up for the cover on the NDA costs ? Hard to see why that’d be insurable, in this case.

  3. Isn’t this one reason why employers tend to take a dim view of employees porking (although perhaps a different verb in this case) subordinates. It turns employer’s liability into a complete minefield.

  4. Khalid Mahmood, the shadow foreign minister for Europe, was taken to an employment tribunal by Elaina Cohen

    Why are these people in our country?

  5. Not convinced this is The Inimitable Steve. Calling for Corbyn to expel or execute all Jews because they’re ugly isn’t his usual modus operandi.

  6. Anon – nah, it’s two things:

    I’m mainly hacked off with the hysterical anti-Corbyn stuff. Nobody hates socialism more than me (well, maybe Mr Ecks does) but – like the orchestrated campaign of scare stories about “No-Deal Brexit” – this is absolute bollocks in pursuit of a sinister agenda.

    So three Jewish newspapers got together to declare Jez an “existential threat to Jewish life”.

    Seriously. They’re flat-out comparing him to Hitler. Them’s fighting words, and if you prick a Corbyn, does he not bleed? If you paint a toothbrush moustache on him, shall he not seek revenge?

    Why are we constantly bombarded with fake news about how much Jeremy Corbyn supposedly hates Jews (which seems to be pure projection)? As with Project Fear, it’s because the establishment wants to drag us back to the failed metropolitan wanker consensus of pre-2016.

    Jez, for all his terrible flaws, is the legitimate and popularly elected leader of the opposition. Those who seek to force him out in favour of another Blairite stooge want us, the British people, to have no real democratic choice. They’re also mad-keen, like the execrable Jeremy Hunt, to drag us into a war with Russia.

    The other thing is this:


    Ms Cohen describes herself as a Zionist, i.e. a Jewish nationalist, and a fan of mass Muslim immigration to Britain.

    So… what do we Brits get out of this? How does it benefit us? Why are foreign-ethnic nationalist activists permitted to take part in our political process? I’m pretty sure Ms Cohen believes English nationalism is intolerable, so why should the English tolerate her nationalism?

    The blessings of diversity mean identity politics for everybody. We’re approaching a goose, sauce, gander intersection.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *