This was the argument used to justify giving Members of Parliament and their families a free pass from money laundering. Note that the Daily Mail clearly signals its skepticism in this story from January:Britain’s banks have been accused of hounding MPs’ children, parents, grandparents and even in-laws in a crackdown aimed at curbing fraud by corrupt African dictators.They have threatened to shut the bank accounts of MPs and their relatives – on suspicion of being linked to terrorism and international money laundering.And up to 150,000 people – those with any family link to all national and local politicians, civil servants, Army officers, City workers, financiers and diplomats – could have their money seized.That is the remarkable claim made by senior Conservative MP Charles Walker.He led a Commons debate last Thursday to demand action to stop ‘heavy-handed’ British banks using new international anti-money laundering rules to threaten people who happen to be related to someone in public life…Mr Walker said last night: ‘It is ridiculously heavy-handed for banks to treat British MPs and their families in this aggressive way. They should be targeting crooked despots and dictators, not MPs’ grannies.’ UK Osborne exempts members of parliament other politically exposed persons from money laundering oversight
Thursday, April 21, 2016
Rules MPs and Money Laundering ...
"The driving factor to bring someone into compliance is almost always fear. As the reality of the fishbowl world we live in becomes more clear, more and more individuals are coming forward to declare offshore assets..."
~ Bathroom Quote*When the Rules Change the Game Elizabeth Drew, New York Review of Books
You cannot make this up. So much for that rule of law thingie. Hat tip Guido Fakwesvia Richard Smith: