Please check out the following Official Explanatory Notes relating to Section 2 of the Fraud ACt 2006

Section 2: Fraud by false representation

10. Section 2 makes it an offence to commit fraud by false representation. Subsection (1)(a) makes clear that the representation must be made dishonestly. This test applies also to sections 3 and 4. The current definition of dishonesty was established in R v Ghosh [1982] Q.B.1053. That judgment sets a two-stage test. The first question is whether a defendant’s behaviour would be regarded as dishonest by the ordinary standards of reasonable and honest people. If answered positively, the second question is whether the defendant was aware that his conduct was dishonest and would be regarded as dishonest by reasonable and honest people.

Please explain which part of this Act does NOT apply to those MPs who have made the sort of false claims exposed recently in the press!

I still believe that this person plus the others voting to put all this data under wraps are probably
crooks and the Fraud Act 2006 should be deployed following a totally independent investigation by an independent
police force. No past or present politician or anyone employed by parliament should be allowed near except as a
witness.

Or are we suggesting that the juries in future criminal trials should only contain known felons?

As a tax paying citizen, I will still be expecting to hear the slamming of cell doors

It is not going to work.

Has anyone checked that the taxpayers’ money claimed have been spent appropriately?….. No!
Has anyone checked that it has been spent where (in the geographical sense)
it has been claimed to have been spent?……………………………………………No!

I have asked who authorised payment of the Jacqui Smith’s claims. When I know, you will
know.

The Seven Principles of Public Life:

SELFLESSNESS
Holders of public office should act solely in terms of the public interest.
They should not do so in order to gain financial or other material benefits for themselves,
their family, or their friends.

INTEGRITY
Holders of public office should not place themselves under any financial or other
obligation to outside individuals or organisations that might seek to influence
them in the performance of their official duties.

OBJECTIVITY
In carrying out public business, including making public appointments, awarding
contracts, or recommending individuals for rewards and benefits, holders of public
office should make choices on merit.

ACCOUNTABILITY
Holders of public office are accountable for their decisions and actions to
the public and must submit themselves to whatever scrutiny is appropriate to their office.

OPENNESS
Holders of public office should be as open as possible about all the decisions and
actions that they take. They should give reasons for their decisions and restrict
information only when the wider public interest clearly demands.

HONESTY
Holders of public office have a duty to declare any private interests relating
to their public duties and to take steps to resolve any conflicts arising in a way that
protects the public interest.

LEADERSHIP
Holders of public office should promote and support these principles by leadership
and example.

These principles apply to all aspects of public life. The Committee has set them out
here for the benefit of all who serve the public in any way.

How many of the cases we have heard about recently hit these principles.

The MPs we have today seem to have one guiding principle;

‘Let citizens burn while MPs fiddle!’

http://www.julianlewis.net/speech_detail.php?id=142

and the background to the NOTW story about him can be found at:

http://conservativehome.blogs.com/platform/2009/03/julian-lewis-mp.html