SOMETHING TO SMILE ABOUT?

Somewhere, on an obscure estate in downtown Maidstone, the county town of Kent, there is a small ground floor flat where Baroness Uddin, pictured, claims to have spent quite a lot of time. As a result, she designated the flat as her `main residence` thus being able to claim a shedload of taxpayers` money on her `second home` in Wapping, east London.

Uddin was born in a Bangaladeshi village and moved with her parents to the UK in 1973, when she was 13 years of age. She grew up in London`s East End, went to school in East Ham and on to the University of East London where she earned a Diploma in social work. After a career in social services in Newham and Tower Hamlets, in 1998 she was raised to the peerage as Baroness Uddin of Bethnal Green in the London Borough of Tower Hamlets. She was the youngest woman and the only Muslim and Bangladeshi woman to be appointed to the House of Lords. She was invited to the House of Lords for her `contribution to the advancement of women and disability rights,` swearing in by saying "Almighty Allah" as she took her seat in the parliament. How very `New Labour.`

In 1999, Uddin created the first purpose-built education and training centre for Asian women in the UK located at Whitechapel. In 2005, she was selected by Tony Blair as part of a delegation to tackle Islamic extremism and in 2008, she was made the chairwoman of the ethnic minority women's taskforce.
It`s all very commendable, of course, but not only very New Labour but also very `London` - East Ham, Tower Hamlets, Whitechapel, Newham - how much more `London` could it be? Nonetheless, the good Baroness asserts that her main home is the tiny ground floor flat in provincial Maidstone, of all places. Nearby residents have reportedly said they had not seen any occupiers in the flat since Uddin purchased it and that it has remained completely unfurnished.

However, Uddin claims: "The Maidstone property is furnished and I strongly deny that I have never lived there." Uddin's husband even denied having a property in Kent when questioned on the issue and she has appeared on the voting register at her London address from 1996 to date. Uddin claimed a total of £29,675 for accommodation in 2007/8, a time when the maximum daily accommodation claim was £165 a day. Her bill represents a claim at the maximum possible rate for 179 days, more days than the Lords actually sat that year.

Uddin has in fact claimed her main home has been outside of London since 2001, earning an extra £83,000 as a result. In January 2010 it was revealed in The Times that the property she had claimed for during this period was owned and occupied by her brother and his family, with Uddin's sister in law stating she couldn't recollect the Peer ever living there. She also has one of the highest claims for overnight subsistence of any member of the Lords.

The Crown Prosecution Service announced yesterday that Baroness Uddin would not face any charges on the grounds that a senior parliamentary official had ruled that a Peer`s “main house” might be a place they visit only once a month. So no wonder the Baroness has something to smile about this morning, while those who pay for her excesses can only look on with contempt and disdain. The whole business clearly raises many more questions than answers but the one question that needs to be answered above all others is, simply, how can it possibly be that people like this can ever become Peers of the Realm?