There was an article by Naomi Wolf in yesterday's Times saying that porn has become normal, and that the reason we're all shocked about the Jacqui Smith thing is because it was the taxpayer's money, not that her unfortunate husband looks at porn.
I'm not sure I agree.
First off, we're talking about £10. It was clearly not a deliberate attempt to defraud. Hands up anyone who really thinks he knew he was putting this through wrongly but hoped to get away with it? I think it's about as clear as can be that it was a mistake. If he wanted to rip off some expenses money, he'd choose something bland and boring, costing about £150.
And one thing I'd like to know is how the papers found out? I haven't seen that mentioned. But I haven't followed it that closely, so if anyone else has seen that, please let me know. At the moment I can only assume the papers are somehow scrutinising every detail of her expenses... otherwise how did they get this? And they haven't come up with a large list of other dodgy claims ... so I am assuming there are none. If there were, they'd be trumpeting them. So the extent of the fraud is .... £10? Big deal.
Would the papers have made a big story out of "Home secretary's husband accidentally claims £10 for stationery that he then used for his own purposes" ? I think not. I think it's the fact that it's porn that made them (and us) interested.
I also object to the way the media keep telling us how we feel: apparently we are "so shocked" or whatever. I haven't actually met anyone who is outraged or shocked -- just amused.
So no, Naomi, I don't think we're "so shocked" because someone carelessly overclaimed £10 of the taxpayers money. I think we're titillated that someone in the realms of the high and mighty, those who tell us how to behave, the great and the good, those who make the laws about porn ... is watching rubbish soft porn movies on pay per view while his wife stays at her sisters. They're human after all.
