Woman Leaves 500K To "whoever Is In Goverment"

[DEATH]

What kind of madness is this?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23679967

A woman who left more than £500,000 in her will to the Tories and Liberal Democrats specified the money should go to "whoever is in government".

The Conservatives received £420,576 from Joan Edwards' bequest during the second quarter of this year, while the Lib Dems got £99,423.

[SpectrumFX]

What kind of madness is this?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23679967

I would guess that her actual intent was to donate the money to the exchequer but her will was poorly worded and/or missunderstood

[SHERWICK]

What a nutter.

[crashmonitor]

It makes you wonder whether this will was badly worded........500k off the national debt would make sense imo. I am surprised that more individuals are not more altruistic and leave a bit to the National debt, especially if they are nonagenarians and have obviously took out more than they contributed, meanwhile they could have racked up 7 figures portfolios.......as indeed many do on public sector/ state pension rocket fuelled portfolios.

Leaving this life having been part of the two trillion quid noose around the unborn, should be a consideration.

[thecrashingisles]

I would guess that her actual intent was to donate the money to the exchequer but her will was poorly worded and/or missunderstood

+1

It's difficult to see how this was interpreted to mean the money should go into party coffers. You could just as easily say it should be split between the Cabinet to top up their salaries.

[The Masked Tulip]

Extra G&Ts all round tonight then!

[MrPin]

Remember that well-meaning nutter who set up a fund to pay off the national debt?

(they clearly didn't understand how the money supply worked)

http://www.thirdsect...k/news/1102601/

1927 was probably not a good time to invest long tern in the stock market!

[snowflux]

I would guess that her actual intent was to donate the money to the exchequer but her will was poorly worded and/or missunderstood

Given that it is grammatically incorrect (should be "to whomever"), it was probably also badly worded. It certainly seems unlikely that she intended the money for the Conservative and Lib Dem coffers.

[bendy]

She probably thought, Tory, Labour, Lib, there'll all the same so it doesn't matter which one's in!

[thecrashingisles]

Given that it is grammatically incorrect (should be "to whomever"), it was probably also badly worded. It certainly seems unlikely that she intended the money for the Conservative and Lib Dem coffers.

Given the likely time when she made the will, Gordon Brown must have a case that she intended it as a personal gift to him. He should sue.

[CrashedOutAndBurned]

She probably thought, Tory, Labour, Lib, there'll all the same so it doesn't matter which one's in!

Yes. Either extreme statement of sarcasm (you've been robbing me all my life so, here, have the rest) or, probably more likely, she meant government coffers for the NHS or a bit of a new school.

How on earth this has gone to the Conservative Party and Lib Dems probably needs investigation. Even if this had been an act of sarcasm the parties SHOULD have given the money to government coffers not just robbed it. Obviously this wasn't a genuine political donation.

[crashmonitor]

They have had to give it back to the Treasury

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/tories-and-lib-dems-hand-over-520000-bequest-to-treasury.1376474848

Well I was right about the ambiguous will (yesterday). Good on her. You've lived a good life, possibly taken benefits out in excess of contributions through longevity and she has done something altruistic in return.

[crashmonitor]

Actually there does appear to be a bit of dishonesty here. I jumped to the conclusion that the will was intended for the National debt within two seconds of reading the OP. Yet the Tories and Liberals with their combined brain power conveniently didn't consider this. I do think their behaviour is immoral.

[rw42]

The will is up at http://order-order.com/

... "For whichever government is in office at the date of my death for the Government to use in their absolute discretion to use as they may think fit".

So she left it for the government to use as they saw appropriate, and they thought their own back pocket would be mighty fine indeed. Absolute bastards, the lot of them.

[dalek]

Now the Treasury will get it, and due to the media frenzy around this, will have to be seen to spend it wisely. The coalition parties have been exposed as the money-grubbing low-life that they are. (And it's the second great exposé today by Daily Mail! What's going on?)

[MrPin]

Clearly, the woman was apolitical, in that "whoever is in power" may change! It would have better to have built a school or hospital building with it!

[phead]

How have they been "exposed" , the distribution is solely down the the executors of the will.

[Executive Sadman]

While i dont disagree with handing it back, i wonder how many of those labour types demanded it was also demand state funding for political parties come out of general spending?

Same thing. If that wasnt going to parties it could be spent on services.

[Steppenpig]

I think the English language needs a new word for when someone changes their behaviour due to their shameful conduct being found out, but they don't actually feel shame, more like anger and annoyance.

They were "hypocracied" into handing back the money, or something.

[Charlie The Tramp Returns]

How have they been "exposed" , the distribution is solely down to the executors of the will.

The Treasury holds the Wonga while the Government decides what to do with it as per instructions in the will.

Hey Nick as we are the largest party we get the biggest cut in our coffers. Fair enough Dave just send your cheque to Lib/Dem HQ.

[stormymonday_2011]

How have they been "exposed" , the distribution is solely down the the executors of the will.

Executors don't have carte blanche in these matters

I think the courts are very unlikely to interpret a statement willing money to the 'government' as a bequest to the political parties that currently form that government

The will was apparently written in 2001 which is long before the Coalition was formed

It is noticeable that the criticism of how this was handled has come from MPs of all parties (many of whom are lawyers) not just the Labour opposition

BTW it would be interesting to know if any of the individuals involved in the drafting or execution of the will have any affiliation with either of the coalition parties. The solicitors claim to have discussed the matter with the lady in question and claim that her intention was to leave the money to the political party or parties that were in government. That begs the question that if this was Ms Edwards intention was why was that fact not reflected clearly in the wording of the will. After all it is that document that forms the legal basis of any distribution. Me thinks there is something rotten going on here . I wonder if there are any smaller bequests being snaffled in this manner by our thieving politicians that we are not hearing about

[okaycuckoo]

1927 was probably not a good time to invest long tern in the stock market!

Really? I mean, REALLY!?

Doesn't matter. She was sending back to the state that which it had issued in the first place. Maybe she understood the futility.

The only issue is over the best manner of recycling the stuff. And we call that politics.

I think "whomever" is correct.

[SNACR]

Executors don't have carte blanche in these matters

I think the courts are very unlikely to interpret a statement willing money to the 'government' as a bequest to the political parties that currently form that government

The will was apparently written in 2001 which is long before the Coalition was formed

It is noticeable that the criticism of how this was handled has come from MPs of all parties (many of whom are lawyers) not just the Labour opposition

BTW it would be interesting to know if any of the individuals involved in the drafting or execution of the will have any affiliation with either of the coalition parties. The solicitors claim to have discussed the matter with the lady in question and claim that her intention was to leave the money to the political party or parties that were in government. That begs the question that if this was Ms Edwards intention was why was that fact not reflected clearly in the wording of the will. After all it is that document that forms the legal basis of any distribution. Me thinks there is something rotten going on here . I wonder if there are any smaller bequests being snaffled in this manner by our thieving politicians that we are not hearing about

This stinks of corruption. Should certainly be investigated if the executors have done some sort of backhander brown envelope deal. Frankly, I'm finding it hard to see that the interpretation, of it being a party donation, passes any sort of test of reasonableness.

I think a lot of people have not yet grasped we have sat by whilst the country's culture, heritage and values were discarded, for all sorts of spurious but politically expedient reasons, and now inhabit one of the worst sort of corrupt banana republics.

[Si1]

Executors don't have carte blanche in these matters

I think the courts are very unlikely to interpret a statement willing money to the 'government' as a bequest to the political parties that currently form that government

The will was apparently written in 2001 which is long before the Coalition was formed

It is noticeable that the criticism of how this was handled has come from MPs of all parties (many of whom are lawyers) not just the Labour opposition

BTW it would be interesting to know if any of the individuals involved in the drafting or execution of the will have any affiliation with either of the coalition parties. The solicitors claim to have discussed the matter with the lady in question and claim that her intention was to leave the money to the political party or parties that were in government. That begs the question that if this was Ms Edwards intention was why was that fact not reflected clearly in the wording of the will. After all it is that document that forms the legal basis of any distribution. Me thinks there is something rotten going on here . I wonder if there are any smaller bequests being snaffled in this manner by our thieving politicians that we are not hearing about

That solicitors firm well have a lot of public relations work to do, looks very ugly indeed

Agreed with general atmosphere on this discussion. Very poor judgement by lib dems and tories, stinks in fact. Well done those MPs, and I believe labour were first, for raising this.

I believe the money will simply enter the pot to pay off the national debt.

[R K]

What media commentators and of course Cameron appear to have missed is that this is effectively fiscal tightening. It's like a one-off tax rise of £500k for this particular estate.

I've seen comments suggesting that if 3m people did this the govt. debt could be completely repaid, without seemingly being aware that in fact it would be the equivalent of removing £1.5trillion of private sector savings, cause the economy to implode, GDP to fall to pretty much zero and inevitably be rapidly followed by hyperinflation.