Labour MP forced to apologise after aide insults the Queen for 'scrounging benefits for 60 years' on the day she celebrates accession

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-20...-scrounger.html

 

An aide to a shadow minister was yesterday forced to apologise for a ‘shameful slur’ which likened the Queen to a benefit scrounger.

 

Matt Zarb-Cousin, who works for shadow justice minister Andy Slaughter, provoked outrage by suggesting the Queen had been ‘scrounging benefits off the taxpayer’ for 60 years.

 

As the Queen marked 60 years on the throne, Mr Zarb-Cousin wrote on Twitter: ‘Congratulations this morning to Queen Elizabeth II. 60 years of scrounging benefits off the taxpayer without being caught.

 

But Mr Zarb-Cousin, who is also on the left-wing Fabian society’s youth committee, was later forced to apologise after he was given a dressing down by his bosses.

 

Labour sources said that the aide had been given a ‘carpeting’ after Mr Slaughter became aware of his controversial remarks.

Embarrassment: Shadow Justice minister Andy Slaughter described his aide's comments as 'totally unacceptable'

 

Embarrassment: Shadow Justice minister Andy Slaughter described his aide's comments as 'totally unacceptable'

 

Describing his behaviour as ‘totally unacceptable’, the Shadow Justice minister said: ‘The Queen has given great service to our country and these comments are totally unacceptable.

 

I’ve spoken to the member of staff in the strongest terms and he has apologised for his comments.’

 

Admitting he had also been subjected to a ‘right barrage’ on Twitter, Mr Zarb-Cousin wrote: ‘To clarify earlier comments about the Queen: it was a joke & wasn’t meant to be taken literally. I didn’t mean to cause offence & apologise.’

 

A Labour spokesman confirmed that Mr Zarb-Cousin had been ‘disciplined’, but said he would not be sacked over the comments.

 

He said: ‘He has been disciplined and has apologised. We are going to draw a line under it now.’

 

Tory MP Charlie Elphicke said people all over the country would have been ‘disgusted’ by the comments, adding: ‘This is a shameful slur against the Queen.’

 

But Graham Smith, from the anti-monarchy campaign group Republic, said: ‘This is political correctness of the very worst kind - it is nothing less than censorship.

 

More than a quarter of the population think we’d be better off without the royal family. Are they not allowed to express their views?”

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Yeah, right, whatever, a "shameful slur against the Queen", and, err, shall we f***ing count the "shameful slurs" and incredibly "off colour" and borderline racist comments her bloody husband the Duke of Edinburgh has made over the years, for which he had NEVER once personally apologised... Oh, but that's okay, cos the Daily Fail LOVES Phil cos he's so "politically incorrect" and he's "not afraid to speak his mind"... Well f*** YOU, THAT WORKS BOTH WAYS DAILY MAIL JOURNOS..... <_< <_<

 

I'm personally sick to the back teeth of all this grovelling and bowing that elected officials and those in the media are still expected to do to this vomitous bunch of dysfunctional, inbred c'unts that we have forced upon us as our heads of State...

 

Yes, I am a REPUBLICAN, and PROUD of it..... It's time to rid ourselves of this parasitical Royal vermin.....

 

 

 

Just what you'd expect from the Wail. The BBC started a three part documentary series about Betsie tonight. I look forward to the three part series on Republicanism by way of balance.

Here we go, the "wit and wisdom" of Phil The Greek....

 

You look like you’re ready for bed!’ To the President of Nigeria, who was wearing traditional robes.

 

‘Do you still throw spears at each other?’ To Aboriginal leader William Brin during a visit to the Aboriginal Cultural Park in Queensland, 2002.

 

‘We don’t come here for our health. We can think of other ways of enjoying ourselves.’ On a trip to Canada in 1976.

 

‘You managed not to get eaten then?’ To a British student who was trekking in Papua New Guinea, during an official visit in 1998.

 

‘Aren’t most of you descended from pirates?’ To residents of the Cayman Islands in 1994.

 

You can’t have been here that long — you haven’t got a pot belly.’ To a British tourist he met during a tour of Hungarian capital Budapest in 1993.

 

‘How do you keep the natives off the booze long enough to pass the test?’ To a Scottish driving instructor in 1995.

 

‘If you stay here much longer, you will go home with slitty eyes.’ To a British student on a visit to China in 1986.

 

‘So who’s on drugs here? He looks as if he’s on drugs.’ To a 14-year-old member of a Bangladeshi youth club in 2002.

 

Oh, what an absolute card....

 

 

 

 

 

Just what you'd expect from the Wail. The BBC started a three part documentary series about Betsie tonight. I look forward to the three part series on Republicanism by way of balance.

 

Indeed... Aint gonna happen is it.. Not with the Biased Broadcasting Corporation who just seem to endlessly grovel and brown-nose every fecking time they see a Royal... Pathetic really.... Impartial broadcaster...? My arse.... -_-

Indeed... Aint gonna happen is it.. Not with the Biased Broadcasting Corporation who just seem to endlessly grovel and brown-nose every fecking time they see a Royal... Pathetic really.... Impartial broadcaster...? My arse.... -_-

 

It's reassuring to see it's not just the right-wingers who think the BBC's biased. If it offends both extremes of the political spectrum in equal measure, it must be doing something right.

It's reassuring to see it's not just the right-wingers who think the BBC's biased. If it offends both extremes of the political spectrum in equal measure, it must be doing something right.

 

You rather assume that everyone who's a Republican is left-wing....

 

And franky, I think that we should all be a bit more critical of the role of the BBC in spreading totally uncritical and one-sided royalist propaganda that's been basically drummed into us since we were kids.. I can still remember being a kid and all the hoo-hah surrounding the Silver Jubilee, the wedding of Charles and Di, Andy and Fergie, etc.. The BBC has basically functioned as the PR reps for the Royal Family since its inception and we've been conditioned and brainwashed into accepting the Monarchy.. Some of us, however, see through this conditioning and reject it...

It's reassuring to see it's not just the right-wingers who think the BBC's biased. If it offends both extremes of the political spectrum in equal measure, it must be doing something right.

Many of the claims of BBC bias are rubbish. However it is undeniable that Republican views are very rarely expressed in current affairs programmes. Yes, some satirical programmes have a pop at the royals at times but even that is hardly hostile. Anyone from overseas watching BBC output (and the other broadcasters for that matter) would be forgive for thinking that Republicans represent a tiny minority of the population.

 

By contrast the amount of time given to climate change deniers is grossly out of proportion to their representation among scientists. Similarly, until recently, you could be forgiven that scientific opinion was evenly divided on the question of the safety of the MMR vaccine.

It's reassuring to see it's not just the right-wingers who think the BBC's biased. If it offends both extremes of the political spectrum in equal measure, it must be doing something right.

Ha! Agreed.

 

Though yes, they do sometimes present the 'other side' to issues that have a scientific consensus such as the science behind climate change and the MMR-Autism drama in a way / to the extent that people might think they're issues up for debate. The BBC are hardly the worst offenders though! (and rightly so, I suppose)

 

And w.r.t. the article, misuse of 'political correctness' really does aggravate me! Especially how the word isn't even mentioned in the article.

Many of the claims of BBC bias are rubbish. However it is undeniable that Republican views are very rarely expressed in current affairs programmes. Yes, some satirical programmes have a pop at the royals at times but even that is hardly hostile. Anyone from overseas watching BBC output (and the other broadcasters for that matter) would be forgive for thinking that Republicans represent a tiny minority of the population.

 

By contrast the amount of time given to climate change deniers is grossly out of proportion to their representation among scientists. Similarly, until recently, you could be forgiven that scientific opinion was evenly divided on the question of the safety of the MMR vaccine.

 

Actually, it's more like anyone overseas would be forgiven for thinking that we were still a Feudal Monarchy for all the fawning and brown-nosing BBC presenters do around the Royals.... -_-

 

Ha! Agreed.

 

Though yes, they do sometimes present the 'other side' to issues that have a scientific consensus such as the science behind climate change and the MMR-Autism drama in a way / to the extent that people might think they're issues up for debate. The BBC are hardly the worst offenders though! (and rightly so, I suppose)

 

And w.r.t. the article, misuse of 'political correctness' really does aggravate me! Especially how the word isn't even mentioned in the article.

 

I dont agree, I think it's a very clever use of the phrase (and, actually, about the only correct context in which the term has ever been used, as it originally meant 'in line with prevailing political thought or policy'..), it is rather the likes of the Daily Mail that incorrectly use the phrase when they attack perfectly sound measures to counteract still prevailing racism, sexism and homophobia... The Mail is want to throw around the phrase all the time, so I think it's kind of amusing that they're getting it thrown back in their face...

Here we go, the "wit and wisdom" of Phil The Greek....

 

You look like you’re ready for bed!’ To the President of Nigeria, who was wearing traditional robes.

 

‘Do you still throw spears at each other?’ To Aboriginal leader William Brin during a visit to the Aboriginal Cultural Park in Queensland, 2002.

 

‘We don’t come here for our health. We can think of other ways of enjoying ourselves.’ On a trip to Canada in 1976.

 

‘You managed not to get eaten then?’ To a British student who was trekking in Papua New Guinea, during an official visit in 1998.

 

‘Aren’t most of you descended from pirates?’ To residents of the Cayman Islands in 1994.

 

You can’t have been here that long — you haven’t got a pot belly.’ To a British tourist he met during a tour of Hungarian capital Budapest in 1993.

 

‘How do you keep the natives off the booze long enough to pass the test?’ To a Scottish driving instructor in 1995.

 

‘If you stay here much longer, you will go home with slitty eyes.’ To a British student on a visit to China in 1986.

 

‘So who’s on drugs here? He looks as if he’s on drugs.’ To a 14-year-old member of a Bangladeshi youth club in 2002.

 

Oh, what an absolute card....

 

Those are all ace. Have you had a sense of humour bypass Scott? Philip's my fave member of the Royal Family as he's so funny.

To answer the question, yes of course he should apologise. A disgraceful and shameful thing to say. Yes I'm a Royalist and very proud of it.

To answer the question, yes of course he should apologise. A disgraceful and shameful thing to say. Yes I'm a Royalist and very proud of it.

Scrounger solidarity and all :D

Scrounger solidarity and all :D

 

They're not scroungers at all. She didn't ask to be born in to a Hereditary Monarchy did she? We're the envy of most of the rest of the world for having such a great Monarchy. It brings far more in tourism earnings than they cost to the taxpayer.

They're not scroungers at all. She didn't ask to be born in to a Hereditary Monarchy did she? We're the envy of most of the rest of the world for having such a great Monarchy. It brings far more in tourism earnings than they cost to the taxpayer.

 

Stuff her and put her in a museum then?

They're not scroungers at all. She didn't ask to be born in to a Hereditary Monarchy did she? We're the envy of most of the rest of the world for having such a great Monarchy. It brings far more in tourism earnings than they cost to the taxpayer.

No, she didn't. She did however choose to allow a system whereby she's funded to high heavens by mere virtue of falling out of the right vagina to continue.

 

And if you asked anybody around the world what they envied most about the UK the monarchy would be the last thing they'd think of - why on EARTH would you envy a nation for having a bunch of people chosen by right of birth at the top of the table? And if we're going to take the tourism argument - why don't we make the London Eye the head of state? Getting rid of the Queen as head of state wouldn't stop the tourism earnings at all. If anything it'd increase them as the palaces would be open more often...

No, she didn't. She did however choose to allow a system whereby she's funded to high heavens by mere virtue of falling out of the right vagina to continue.

 

And if you asked anybody around the world what they envied most about the UK the monarchy would be the last thing they'd think of - why on EARTH would you envy a nation for having a bunch of people chosen by right of birth at the top of the table? And if we're going to take the tourism argument - why don't we make the London Eye the head of state? Getting rid of the Queen as head of state wouldn't stop the tourism earnings at all. If anything it'd increase them as the palaces would be open more often...

You've been reading my posts on the royals over the years :lol:

No, she didn't. She did however choose to allow a system whereby she's funded to high heavens by mere virtue of falling out of the right vagina to continue.

 

And if you asked anybody around the world what they envied most about the UK the monarchy would be the last thing they'd think of - why on EARTH would you envy a nation for having a bunch of people chosen by right of birth at the top of the table? And if we're going to take the tourism argument - why don't we make the London Eye the head of state? Getting rid of the Queen as head of state wouldn't stop the tourism earnings at all. If anything it'd increase them as the palaces would be open more often...

 

Couldn't have put it better myself....

Is it a crime to voice Republican sympathies these days? In my opinion if someone wants to call the Royals a bunch of scroungers he or she is perfectly entitled to do so. Whether that person is in a political role or not.

 

Honest to God, when is all this bowing, scraping and fawning going to end? The Royal Wedding coverage was bad enough. I fear the Jubilee coverage may tip me over the edge. :drama:

To answer the question, yes of course he should apologise. A disgraceful and shameful thing to say. Yes I'm a Royalist and very proud of it.

 

How come that doesn't surprise me in the least! :lol:

 

No way should anyone apologise - they are scroungers.

 

And for all those who say they do wonders for tourism - how come France is possibly the most visited place in the world. Getting shut of their royalty hasn't done France's tourism any harm has it? If the Royal Family does anything for tourism - it is purely for London - they don't benefit the rest of the country at all.

 

One of the best TV programs I watched was during the late 70's called 'The Spongers' - said all I need to know or express about the Royals. You should watch it Victor!

 

Kath