Evil Sid Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 make you wonder who will be fishing the dead peasants out it now then ( meant pheasants) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 Blears also blamed the system for the reason she and others did it. Sorry, but if you don't think it's right WHY do it? Damage limitation is why they are paying the money back. As I recall we used to have a cllr who wouldn't claim expenses. In the end, he had no choice, he was "ordered" to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 Not a lot been said to-date about Husband and Wife teams, claiming seperately for the same things; thus proving the saying that two can live cheaper than one! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Kennedy Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 As I recall we used to have a cllr who wouldn't claim expenses. In the end, he had no choice, he was "ordered" to. We did indeed, the late Ted Lafferty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Kennedy Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 Why not indeed Observer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagle Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 Gordon Brown is said to be "very concerned" about allegations that former minister Elliot Morley claimed more than ?16,000 for mortgage interest on a loan he had already paid. Mr Brown will hold urgent talks with Labour's chief whip, sources said. Elliot Morley continued claiming ?800 a month for the property in his Scunthorpe constituency for 18 months after the loan was repaid in 2006, the Daily Telegraph has reported. Mr Brown should also be talking to the Police since this is definitely a bit more than expense fiddling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 a husband and wife team have apparently been claiming as has been suggested. She was claiming a second home allowance on the London flat and he was claiming second home allowance on thier home in the constituency. Apparently there could be in excess of ?100,000.00 involved!! Jail them! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Kennedy Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 I heard it was ?250,000 Baz....and the MP in question blamed bad advice!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Kennedy Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 Gordon Brown is said to be "very concerned" about allegations that former minister Elliot Morley claimed more than ?16,000 for mortgage interest on a loan he had already paid. Mr Brown will hold urgent talks with Labour's chief whip, sources said. Elliot Morley continued claiming ?800 a month for the property in his Scunthorpe constituency for 18 months after the loan was repaid in 2006, the Daily Telegraph has reported. Mr Brown should also be talking to the Police since this is definitely a bit more than expense fiddling. I understand that Mr Brown was very concerned because the MP in question had set his sights so low, when there was obviously so much more money available to be pillaged....as many of his colleagues have demonstrated Seriously though, you just couldn't make this sort of stuff up. Is the MP so wealthy that he doesn't notice that he's ?800 better of each month. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 An interesting insight into the psyche of the political class, actually came from ex-Tory MP Michael Portillo who, when talking about MPs "second jobs"; said "how people expect anyone to live on ?63,000pa in London, I don't know". Such is the disconnect between politicians (or ex-politicians) and ordinary people. Meanwhile, Speaker Martin, who could be given up as the sacrificial lamb, probably won't be - rather he'll be allowed to retire to the Lords just prior to the next election, with his lump (speakers) sum of ?100,000. What is sad about this putrid mess, isn't so much the damage it has done to confidence in our democratic system, but the probability that an ovine electorate will still continue their tribal voting patterns, thus reinforcing the arrogance of the mainstream political class. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted May 15, 2009 Report Share Posted May 15, 2009 I think the forthcoming elections will be the political yardstick. obs, you might even get your wish. It's great entertainment though, reading/listening to the justifications for their actions. As many keep saying when interviewed, we wouldn't get away with it. Talk about double standards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Kennedy Posted May 15, 2009 Report Share Posted May 15, 2009 It is Peter...to some extent, problem is there are no justifications for what has gone on, they've been working the system and they've been found out and quite rightly there is outrage. At the same time that this is going on, it was announced that the minimum wage has risen by 7p...over a day not enough to buy a packet of HobNob biscuits that one MP claimed on his expenses! It is all well and good Party Leaders coming on TV all outraged and saying that they will sort it, it has been going on for years, they knew about it and did nothing, and the reason they did nothing was that they didn't want a rebellion amongst their MPs...so they ignored it...and hoped it would never come to light. That being said, maybe examples of MPs who have modest claims could be published, as clearly if they can manage on whatever they claim then so can others, so maybe their claims become the rules. Alas many people involved in politics who aren't on the make are being badly tarred with the same brush, it is a great shame for them and will deter some good people from coming forward to get involved in the political process and to make their contribution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted May 15, 2009 Report Share Posted May 15, 2009 This has been going on for ages Paul; difference is; in the long past they resigned when caught - "sorry" just doesn't cut it. The system is steeped in greed, arising from an introduction into an enviroment and a club, that believes it has the right to exploit novel and lucrative fiscal opportunities, that would otherwise be denied to most of them - "put a beggar on a horse - and he'll ride to beggary" etc. If we think the sums involved to-date are big; just wait and see what they've been pulling in from "second jobs", with consultancy rates of ?500 per hour! The whole fiasco has disclosed a cancer of petty avarice at the heart of our society, which sadly has been replicated throughout many other institutions. Perhaps the only way the the "Party Leaders" can seek redemption is by instituting a mass re-selection process within their Parties to clean out the old and bring in new blood; at the same time, they need a root and branch reform of our anacronistic political constitution, which draws clear lines of seperation between the executive, legislature and judicery; thus allowing them to scrutinise and temper each other - but I won't hold my breath. PS: Heard George Galloway hasn't claimed a penny - if true - he should be made PM! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonzodog Posted May 15, 2009 Report Share Posted May 15, 2009 My views on the greed & abuse surrounding the MP's expenses is pretty much that of everyone else's; but does anyone not think that the BBC giving ?92,000 OF LICENCE PAYER'S MONEY to a newsreader is a bit rich? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Kennedy Posted May 15, 2009 Report Share Posted May 15, 2009 I do indeed especially as the newsreader in question is one of the minor ones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted May 15, 2009 Report Share Posted May 15, 2009 These expenses claims might have been easier to bear if the MPs had been seen to being their job in parliament by holding the executive to account over the last several years. Instead of this parliament has become an irrelevance with the MPs happy just to turn up and take whatever they can get away with. Meanwhile government ministers change the law to suit themselves with no debate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted May 15, 2009 Report Share Posted May 15, 2009 The Speaker should be sacked for trying to stop the information reaching the public, and those in Senior positions should be sacked as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted May 15, 2009 Report Share Posted May 15, 2009 Two points.... Over the past few years, all i have ever seen the two Helens do for this town is have their photo taken at school fetes and shout at the council leaders. Now forgive me but that is not worth ?6000 a year let alone a basic of ?64000. So in my mind and that of many in the town is that they are not worth 5% of that figure. I can't possibly start to imagine what they have actually done to justify the quarter of a million pounds each they draw with their expenses.... Second point If a burglar hands over a tv he has nicked from a house, do the Police let him walk away scott free? Of course not. Which is why these thieves in Westminster should not be allowed to get away with just handing over a few token pounds of "wrongly claimed" expenses and expect to get away with it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted May 15, 2009 Report Share Posted May 15, 2009 At least everyone (press included) seem to have temporarily forgotton about the recession and everything else associated with it. Gordies slightly off the hook at the moment with that mess Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted May 15, 2009 Report Share Posted May 15, 2009 Seems the Police and PPS are meeting to see whether they can charge any MPs with a criminal offence - won't be holding my breath though! A poll indicates over 60% support for a snap election: errrm, who are they going to vote for?! ALL THREE MAIN Parties have been caught with their hands in the till, and if the Telegraph move on to "second jobs" and "conflicts of interest", the Tories will be the biggest losers, with ?figures involved that will dwarf anything todate! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malrowan Posted May 16, 2009 Report Share Posted May 16, 2009 Observer's new set of rules for MP's are spot. That should save the taxpayers a good few ?million. Cant see it being taken on board though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malrowan Posted May 16, 2009 Report Share Posted May 16, 2009 Sorry, meant to say spot on.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted May 16, 2009 Report Share Posted May 16, 2009 It probably won't happen, certainly if the MPs themselves are involved in any review: however, there is now an independent panel reviewing the whole issue and they will be conducting a public consultation - an opportunity for "the public" to respond in their millions to bring some sanity into the resultant recommendations. Notice the Tory Deputy-Leader has seen the storm clouds on the horizon, and I believe he has now given up ALL his outside interests and commitments! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted May 16, 2009 Report Share Posted May 16, 2009 Sorry if it's already been answered but...... When the MP's put in their expenses aren't their receipts and claims checked and verified in some way We can't submit any expenses through our company unless they are deemed to be valid by way of our business needs and service. In the same way when I worked for a very large local blue chip company(as they called themselves ) expenses were always scrutinised to such a level that the 'system' was never compromised. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted May 16, 2009 Report Share Posted May 16, 2009 Sorry if it's already been answered but...... When the MP's put in their expenses aren't their receipts and claims checked and verified in some way Nope.... thats why they have stolen so much taxpayers money Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.