He was appointed only around 24 hours ago but the knives are already out for him.

The Telegraph reports tonight (out in tomorrow’s paper) that:

Danny Alexander, who was appointed on Saturday after the resignation of fellow Liberal Democrat David Laws, designated the property as his second home for the purpose of claiming parliamentary expenses but described it to HM Revenue and Customs as his main home.

Last night Mr Alexander admitted that he took advantage of a loophole to legally avoid paying CGT on the sale of the south London property in June 2007.

The disclosure that he failed to pay CGT comes at a particularly sensitive time because the Coalition is planning to increase the rate of the tax for owners of second homes and buy-to-let properties in an emergency budget next month.

The Telegraph campaign may partially be motivated by its opposition to Libdem calls for Capital Gains Tax to be increased to 50%.

The full story is here.

It remains to be seen whether the pressure will also mount on Alexander to go.

Update LibdemVoice has a statement from Alexander:

My wife and I bought our property in Elspeth Road in 1999, we sold it and moved to the current property in June 2007.

Until the spring of 2006 this was the only property we owned. I had rented a place in Aviemore until then, we subsequently bought a place there and moved into it.

I have always listed London as my second home on the basis set out in the parliamentary rules as I spent more time in Scotland than I did in London.

I sold the Elspeth Road flat in 2007 and moved to another flat but was advised that CGT was not payable because of the operation of final period relief, which exempts homes from CGT for 36 months after they stop being the main home. I paid all the taxes required but CGT was not payable on the disposal of my Elspeth Road flat.

I have already publicly declared that I will pay Capital Gains Tax if the time comes for me to sell my second home.

Who is to blame for David Laws having to resign over his expenses? According to many right-wing blogs there’s only one enemy: The Daily Telegraph.

The newspaper published the story on Friday night and once David Laws resigned on Saturday evening, the bitter recriminations followed.

ConservativeHome published an article by Donal Blaney, a wingnut who idolises Karl Rove, titled: It is time for conservatives to boycott the Telegraph. Anybody with me?

“Don’t get mad, get even”, we are told. Norman Tebbit once said that that maxim was wrong in the context of politics. “Get mad and even”, he said. The sordid whiff of prurient homophobia disguised as concern for taxpayers’ money coupled with a galling display of cant from our political opponents has managed to drive from office a man who true fiscal conservatives were proud to have as Chief Secretary.
…
The Telegraph long ceased to be a serious paper of record. It long ceased to be the natural home for conservatives. It long ceased to deserve our patronage and custom. It is time for conservatives to vote with our feet. It is time for conservatives to boycott the Telegraph. Anybody with me?

The article is followed by a stream of “grassroot activists” loudly agreeing with the call.

Some of the comments are downright hilarious:

Also the Alistair Campbell angle needs to be investigated. Why exactly was he wielding a framed photo of David Laws on Question Time?

and

Damn right. Not just grassroot Conservatives either. No. 10 should from this point until a time when the Telegraph returns to its former standard treat the Telegraph like the Daily Mirror. Blacklist them. No co-operation. No calling Telegraph reporters at press conferences.

To be fair, there were about five commenters who thought the Telegraph was merely reporting on what was a good scoop.

This anger against the Daily Telegraph isn’t actually new.

Tim Montgomerie and Paul Staines have repeatedly tried to undermine the paper in the past. As they have done with the FT.

Last night, Tory Bear was also full of angry questions:

Last year The Telegraph undertook a fantastic public service in blowing the lid off the murky cover-up of MPs expenses. Without bias they gave all barrels to all guilty politicians of all colours. However it seems they haven’t been quite as open and honest in their tactics as it first seemed. Why did they not unveil these details about David Laws when they were orgasmically pushing their “Expenses Files” a year ago?
…
Or could it be that they are now willing to do someone’s dirty work using their information to carry out political vendettas?
…
It is no surprise that The Telegraph won the race to out Laws – they are now abusing their position as leading light in the expenses fight.
…
The economic security has been undermined by The Telegraph’s ego and flogging of a dead horse.

This is a win-win situation. May the civil war among the Tory right continue for a long time to come.

David Miliband has written to the five other Labour leadership contenders asking them to join him in a TV debate on the Labour leadership.

The Observer reports today:

“This leadership election must be a credit to the Labour party,” he tells them. “It should also be our chance to re-engage the public so we can both understand why we lost but also to show how we will win back their trust. Therefore we should use every opportunity to engage the widest possible audience. The TV debate fired up interest in the election – and could be an excellent way to re-engage people with Labour.

Potentially risky, as Toby Helm says, but I’d wager that David Miliband won’t do so badly if such a debate goes ahead.

He might come across slightly stunted in speeches and in person but the elder Miliband has always been quite articulate in debates.

But it would definitely force a wider debate that with two strident left-wing voices – I’m all for it.

The right’s hypocrisy towards identity politics is on naked display today with the news that coalition minister David Laws claimed £40,000 on expenses.

There is a view on the story, articulated quite well here, that David Laws should be pardoned because he wasn’t trying to screw over taxpayers but keep his gay relationship secret.

But there is an equally compelling point that Laws is a millionaire. If he wanted to keep his relationship secret then why spend any taxpayer money at all? Why the need to claim it back? After all the other MPs who thought they were obeying the rules at the time weren’t spared were they?

Many Tories are either trying to imply homophobia on behalf of the Telegraph or saying how they understand Laws’ predicament:

I will never forget that day, even though on many occasions I have wanted to. I’m glad I did it, but I know it was a tremendous shock to my mother and we have never discussed it since. So when David Laws explains why he wanted to keep everything private I understand only too well. The only reason was because he didn’t want to hurt those closest to him, especially his mother. That’s the thing about us gayers, we’ll do anything to avoid hurting our mothers :).

That was Iain Dale. I said on Twitter that Dale never showed that level of “understanding” on race issues, which Dale quickly tried to turn around by asking if I was accusing him of racism. Paul Sagar has earlier called this the Double-Demon maneouvre.

But there is a simple way to defend this. Iain Dale has no problems pointing out homophobia in the press or public life (and he is perfectly entitled to do that) but when he also has no problems accusing others of ‘playing the race card’ when they point out examples of racism. Especially myself.

Here and here are two examples.

In the second instance I was complaining about a Telegraph column by Melanie McDonagh where she is worried about non-whites in the UK having lots of babies. Iain Dale not only thinks I’m imagining it but says I should get my lawyers ready against the Telegraph. So much for tolerance and “understanding”.

When I asked Dale if I should now accuse him of “playing the gay” card, he says very little in response. It’s one rule for himself – screw the rest eh?

Then he goes on to say “I couldn’t care less about you” while constantly blogging about me. Dale is not only vindictive, but obsessed.

Back to David Laws. Former journalist Charlie Beckett says:

Laws may be a wonderful guy but he’s failed the test on transparency, accountability, honesty, judgement & the rules. He has to go.

Which is really what it comes down to.