Parliament's reputation brought low
The fate of nations, of monarchs and of the British people have been sealed in the Commons.
Yet now the reputation of the mother of all parliaments has been brought low by rules written and exploited here by claims for a kitkat, a tin of pet food and a bottle of shampoo... for TVs, furnishings and mortgages for the second homes of those who represent us.
Nothing revealed today has been enough to trigger an investigation let alone a resignation. Some of the headlines suggesting wrongdoing do not stand up to close scrutiny.
However, once again there is evidence aplenty of overclaiming; of playing the system to extract every penny possible and of attempts to get the taxpayer to pay for things that almost everyone else would be expected to pay for themselves.
Once again the gap between the reactions of politicians and the public has been stark.
Those whose expenses have been revealed claim either to be following the rules or to have made administrative errors. The prime minister was joined in blaming the system by the leaders of both main opposition parties who know their MPs will be next in the firing line.
What no-one said was sorry. And this on a day when M&S publicly apologised for the somewhat lesser misdemeanour of - charging more for bigger bras
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Nick -
Can you imagine Attlee, or Churchill behaving like this lot - YES or NO ?
Complain about this comment
The more details that come to light regarding Ministers and MPs' expenses, the more surprised I am.
Although Ministers and MPs enjoy generous tax exemptions (Sections 292 & 293 ITEPA 2003), I am not convinced they are wide enough to cover such things as cleaning, council tax (which is not listed in the Green Book), etc, as it seems unlikely that such expenditure will meet the notoriously narrow "wholly, exclusively and necessarily incurred" test. In addition, where Ministers and MPs have overclaimed expenses in "error", they have effectively received a loan from their employer and, if the sum is greater than £5,000, a taxable benefit-in-kind will arise and tax will be payable.
Therefore, my question is has anyone asked HM Revenue & Customs to comment on the tax position of these expenses/loans?
Complain about this comment
P.S. What guidance did the Fees office staff have to police Ministers and MPs claims under the Green Book, as this does not mention, for example, the John Lewis list?
Complain about this comment
Your colleague Martha Kearney seems to think there could be bi-elections
How come there is such distance between your views?
Any news on the arrest of McNulty?
Complain about this comment
Well said Nick, especially the point that no-one is putting their hands up with even a sorry. A point I was making here earlier
http://theorangepartyblog.blogspot.com/2009/05/lies-damn-lies-and-ministers-expenses.html
Today's been like watching a car-crash in slow motion. Another fine mess ministers have got themselves into and have only themselves to blame.
Sure it will involve other political parties and it's a house of commons matter but this is the cabinet for goodness sake. How can any of them ever look their constituents straight in the eye again?
Revelations over top Tories would have to be damn damaging to take the heat off Brown and his rotting cabinet and they could well come up clean in comparison
http://theorangepartyblog.blogspot.com/2009/05/if-camerons-in-clear-browns-dead-duck.html
If nothing much is raked up, the mud will stick on Brown and his cabinet, signing their death warrant as elections loom ever closer.
Angry? That's one word for it. I'm sure taxpayers can think of others.
Complain about this comment
Nick
I am not so sure that there are no resigning issues.
Maybe I have not looked into the issue enough at present however I do feel that we should ask for starters
1 Why did Mr Brown have to claim for a cleaner in a flat when his official residence was No 10/11.
2. Why did Hazel Blears claim for two TVs and 2 Beds for two properties in short order. Surely the original items could have been transported to the new flat. Also why was a second flat needed?
Complain about this comment
To put it bluntly:
Its time for this low-life, scumbag Prime Minister and government to RESIGN. They have completely lost the trust of the public.
Complain about this comment
I know all MP's will have one 'reason' or another for the claims they have made, but this issue hardly inspires faith in the people we elect to represent our interests. As if the public needed yet another reason to mistrust politicians!
Unless one party or other has a significantly worse record on this I can't see how this issue will play well for any of the political parties if they've all had their noses in the trough. It appears to have been common practice among some MP's of all party persuasions (again we'll have to see who has been worse)
What is certain is that the cabinet's expenses will get more attention than anyone elses which does play into the hands of the opposition, however they may not be able to make much of it with their own house to keep in order.
None of that may matter, as another blow to the government amongst the recent disasters will only keep up the momentum for the opposition.
There really isn't any good news for the government on the horizon to stop the global runaway train.
Never mind, a chance to voice our opinion in a months time.
Complain about this comment
Parliament needs bigger bras and we all know why. We also know why it also needs nappies and of course we know what the differnece is between parliament and a hedgehog.
They're all at it. It has to stop NOW!
Is there any comment on the 300 plus replies on the post below this? I think every single post says more or less the same thing...bit of a giveaway really.
Complain about this comment
There are dozens of cases for misappropriation of public funds from the Telegraph revelations. Plenty in there that if I was vetting receipts as part of an end of year audit, I would pull up lots of dodgy claims.
multiple furnishings like the two TV's inside a year, claims for services on THIRD homes such as Mr Brown claimed on his Westminster flat when he was staying in Downing Street, not to mention all manner of items that in no way can pass the argument of "wholly exclusively and necessarily incurred in order to perform ones duty as an MP"
Plenty of this stuff doesn't stand up to scrutiny even against the present lax ACA rules, so how you can argue it's small beer is beyond me.
Get a set of MRC auditors to go through the receipts against the green book comparing them across a time range of each MP and I bet you they would find all sorts of contraventions of the code.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
Brown and his team have been saying all day long that we need the public to have confidence in "the system". In reality, it's not the system that's at fault - it's the shysters who have been manipulating the system who are the problem.
No matter what new "system" is put in place, how are we going to have confidence in this lot ever again?
Two expensive televisions in one year for Hazel Blears, both paid for by us?
You really couldn't make it up!
Complain about this comment
The reputation of Parliament is so low it should be given a State Funeral. Reading about the craven cad who recorded and charged for a 5p carrier bag gave me an idea. Concerned citizens (if they even ecist any more) should hold a demonstration wearing carrier bags over their heads. This would indicate our utter distain for the MPs, and also add to media attention which is needed to intensify action and results. No doubt thsi call for action will be censored.
Complain about this comment
Why are all MP's not being investigated for abuse of tax payers money?
Complain about this comment
I'm astonished at your suggestion that there has been no wrong doing.
The expenses are supposed to be wholly, exclusively and necessarily required to perform the duties of an MP. Mock Tudor beams for John Prescott? TVs for Blears? Kitchen sink et al for Jacqui Smith? How are they 'exclusively' for an MPs duties? There is clearly at least a dual purpose.
I'm ex Tax Inspector, current tax advisor and I know the tax cases that have gone to law on that phrase and the strict interpretation handed down by the courts.
You know a lot about cosying up to politicians, Nick but you know nothing about how the law is interpreted for 'normal' people and trampled on by MPs. Perhaps you shouldn't comment on this issue until you redress that balance.
Complain about this comment
How low can the reputation of Parliament sink? There were payments to be made to rodent and pest control companies. The money was obviously wasted as the ptoperties are still infested!
Complain about this comment
As usual when something like this comes up, our resident government-supporters scuffle away until things quieten down a little.
Complain about this comment
Nick, methinks that you are perhaps being a bit soft on these serial spongers who hide behind parliamentary privalidge under the guise of being an MP. They are all at it and the average person in the street is appalled at the brazen attitude being displayed. The all need to be severly castigated or something with like that with a similar spelling and Nick you should be in the fore front calling for this.
Complain about this comment
Just going to the Pub for my small beer.
The claim is in the post!
Complain about this comment
Despite cases of Tory and Lib Dem MPs with snouts in the trough this must be more damaging for Labour as for the past 12 years they are the only ones who have have had the majority to reform the system!
Nick as I recall you were the one on Radio 4 a few months back saying MPs deserved these costs as pay rises are politically costly. Not sticking to that line any more, sometimes I wonder if your script is written in Number 10.
Complain about this comment
Poweromics = People use position and power for their own personal gain, based on poor moral values, self interest and greed.
... Who pays the price ... honest, hard-working people. Who profits ... those in positions of power ... until hard-working people take responsibility and realise the internet has afforded them far more power than they have ever had before. The internet will change everything, including 'power', 'politics', and 'economics'.
Does Politics = Poweromics at the moment?
Pretty obvious really. Will it change for the better yet? Will turkeys vote for Christmas? - I think not, but the abuse of position/power is now clear to see by all. It will still go largely unchecked until more hard-working people take responsibility and ensure this type of behaviour is systematically removed. Will people in positions of power milk the system as much as possible until this happens - absolutely.
Any Politician like to step forward and comment, bringing their salaries, receipts, second jobs, future career plans etc with them?
Complain about this comment
There must be thousands of things that are still technically legal in the UK that are morally repugnant.
Going out on a limb here so bear with me....
Suppose they make rape within marriage legal. Is it OK for me to say Well I haven't broken any laws. Or am I morally repugnant although "entitled"
Or do you have to have some "Moral Compass" to know the difference between right and wrong not just what is "legal". I choose the words "Moral compass" carefully.
As a US policeman once said to jeremy Clarkson "You don't need common sense when you have laws".
Just because loopholes exist doesn't mean that you have to run to the trough to exploit all of them for maximum gain at OUR expense.
If a starving man steals a loaf of bread he is more deserving than already extremely rich people trying to steal even more.
Complain about this comment
Well Nick, looks like you have misjudged the publics reaction to this. Could it be that you are so close to the politbureau that if you said anything they didn't like, they wouldn't let you on Gordons plane again?
You were much more independent when you were on ITV, before you got neutered as part of the deal when you transferred to the independent beeb! Don't expect to see this one make the blog!
Complain about this comment
Nick,
Todays news HAS triggered an investigation: the disingenuous one brought by the speaker's office to trace the source of the leaked allowances. An investigation about leaked documents that will be in the public domain in three months time anyway. That must be some feat, to be able to drag Parliament into even further disrepute, because to me launching such an investigation looks like sour grapes.
As I said in the comments to your earlier blog, MPs won't resign because they are within the rules and don't see they've done anything wrong. In fact they are in the main very upset to be tarred as greedy troughing pigs, because they didn't take the full allowances the rules they were told by civil servants they were allowed.
Until MPs understand that even though the allowance is there, taking the money under pretty spurious circumstances is wrong. For example, I'd love to hear how John Prescott can connect his mock tudor beams with performing his duties as an MP.
I for one suspect he (and all the others mentioned today and in subsequent days) won't be able to justify these and similar purchases as helping in their Parliamentary duties.
Thats where the problem for MPs lies.
Maybe we should write a letter to the Queeen asking her to dissolve Parliament early. I'm sure if enough of us asked nicely, she'd oblige in ridding us of this den of iniquity.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Nick, most disappointed you didn't slip "kleptocracy" into your blog as I had suggested, go on, give it a go.
Complain about this comment
corruptfred (22) - is the BBC involved in a little Poweromics (post 20) itself perhaps? Surely not?
Complain about this comment
You don't read these posts do you Nick. The court of public opinion has spoken but you continue to defend these low lives. Perhaps someone can tell me how us, the general public, can make a complaint to HMRC and get these unlawful claims which have been repaid referred for possible prosecution, because you can bet your bottom dollar if it were me or you they would be. If I falsely claimed anything I wouldn't be allowed to repay it and get away with it, why should they? Simply saying I was too busy to concentrate on what I was claiming is no defence. For goodness sake the Justice Secretary claimed 50% more in Council tax!!! That's right the Justice Secretary!!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Nick, you say:
"Nothing revealed today has been enough to trigger an investigation let alone a resignation. Some of the headlines suggesting wrongdoing do not stand up to close scrutiny."
===
What about the "flipping" of second home claims for maximum pecuniary advantage. What about Ministers getting the taxpayer to pay for their Stamp Duty on property transactions?
Complain about this comment
Geoff "Hoon" Hoon has amassed a property portfolio worth £1.7M entirely thanks to the taxpayer, but you insist that British politicians don't get rich...
Nick, you need a much, much longer spoon. You're part of the problem.
Complain about this comment
I was "very busy at the time"
The Justice Minister setting a fine example to us all.
Will my local Police be so very understanding when I forget to tax/insure the car? Of course not. I'm just an average Joe paying my taxes so my rights are minimal.
What should I do at the next election? None of the above.
Complain about this comment
Typical of Brown and his fag-end government, call in the police to investigate a leak. If they find the perpetrator, he/she should be given a medal and a pension.
Only the other week, Margaret Heywood was struck off by the Nursing and Midwifery Council for whistleblowing the dreadful treatment which elderly people are getting at some (if not most) NHS hospitals.
These corrupt politicians should be sacked and jailed.
Complain about this comment
"Nothing revealed today has been enough to trigger an investigation let alone a resignation. Some of the headlines suggesting wrongdoing do not stand up to close scrutiny."
I have to say that is a comment that could only come from someone fairly close to the Westminster scene.
There appear to be dozens of claims (approved by apparently complicit "authorities") that can in no way be related "wholly, exclusively and necessarily incurred" to enable an MP to perform his or her duties.
It beggars belief that (for example) using tax-payers' money to clean a swimming pool can be relevant to performing as the elected representative of the people.
If House of Commons authorities call in the police to investigate a perceived criminal leaking of information ruled by a judge to be public interest information, they should ALSO call in the Fraud Office to determine whether money has been fraudulently taken from the public purse, plus HMRC to investigate whether the rules agreed and managed by this club (and payments made to its members) are executed in keeping with existing laws.
If an MP declares a property to be a "second home" for purposes of claiming generous allowances, but declares it as a primary home for the purposes of avoiding Capital Gains Tax, that member is lying either to his employers (US) or to the Tax Man.
It seems totally legitimate that MPs should have a "second home" where required in order to perform services. I can't see how buying lampshades or patio heaters can be deemed as "requirements"...
I simply do not understand why there has been no test case brought by HMRC to test whether the interpretation of the rules - and consequent payments) have been legal.
Complain about this comment
My despair and anger grows by the minute
I have just listened with growing incredulity to Hazel Blears and Harriet Harman on Channel 4 news. Harman speaks of the allowance system as if she and her colleagues are neither the architects nor the abusers of it. Ms Blears who has moved 3 times in one years and whose expenses seem to rise dramatically each March near the closing date for claims justifies this because they were modest one bedroom flats. She parroted the usual government line that this was allowed within the rules and the system which of course MPs themselves constructed. They are the same MPs and government who consistently refused and tried every legal trick in the book to stop the release of any information until a member of the electorate used FOIs to out them. Where is the moral leadership, where is the adherence to Nolan principles and where are their consciences? They have at best been caught using the allowance system in an elastic way and at worse taking the concept of white collar crime into a totally new sphere.
I am particularly ashamed as a life long Labour supporter to have to tolerate this debacle on a day when 2000 jobs are lost on Teeside and four brave soldiers die in Afghanistan. For those MPs who say that the publication of this information undermines parliamentary democracy I say in return get your snouts out of the trough and do something to restore confidence in an institution which today is little more than a national joke. Brown, Prescott, Straw, Murphy and the whole cabal should hang their heads in shame and the other parties will also have their day. Indeed they might as well publish the whole lot now and get this tawdry and depressing episode out of the way without prolonging the pain. I always thought that the great virtue of British political system was its integrity; what a fool I have been. More importantly I shall never again vote for Labour until this worthless government under Browns pathetic leadership comes to an end. Representative democracy is too important to be left to people who think that the public should pay for their toilet seats. They must think that the electorate are stupid, gullible and beneath contempt. Quite why the police are investigating the leak of the information and not its substance is a mystery.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
I dont think saying sorry will make any difference anymore.
You say sorry to someone for accidently bumping into them in the street, not for systematically screwing what you can within the rules of parliamentary expenses.
For that you have to first resign, then say sorry, nothing else cuts the mustard for people who would have us believe that they are selfless 'public servants' in the job to 'help hard working families and small business'.
Exactly how many of our standard bearer public servant politicians resigned over being 'clever' with expenses rules.?
NONE
They prefer to hide like cowards behind the exact wording of 'the rules'.
The currency of all politicians is the lowest I can ever recall, the labour party have dragged the whole institution down with them. Only the lib dems seem to be left with a shred of integrity and honesty of action intact.
Talk to the 'man in the street' everybody is sick to death of them, there is no ideology to vote for no passion, no alternative vision, just a hobsons choice between the charisma of the leaders.
I wish something compelling and fresh and decent would come along and sweep this lot away, even that is hard to imagine. The incumbents on both sides have learnt the system so well now alternative views never get a serious look in the media unless you dress up as superman and strap yourself to big ben...then and only then do you get coverage but in the process lose mainstream credibility.
Done for by creeping complicity and lack of vision, what ever happened to building jerusalem in Englands green and pleasant land after WW2?.
Now all we aspire to build is shopping malls, casinos and cafe bars.
Worse than that we are now getting set up by the incumbents to line their pockets for one final time before the big crash.
Investors take note, banks will offer you 3.5% interest so long as you sign up for 1, 2 or 3 years. They know and are actively lobbying for the conditions such that next year interest rates will be on the climb again in a big way and hey guess who will be creaming off all the profits and bonuses on your savings locked in at 3.5% ????
Yet noboddy does a god dam thing about it, not the BBC not the newspapers, not anyone, they are all part of the same club.
We used to be able to rely on the BBC at least until Alaister Campbell cynically and systematically pulled out all their free spririted journalistic teeth for their 'weapons of mass destruction' governmental deception. How many weapons did they find again? How many links to Al queda did they find again??
Why arn't more people angry, why arn't journalists furious with governments and bankers?
Are we all so wrapped up in surfing the net,saving for pensions that will be worth nothing and trying to achieve the impossible of staying young and rich forever to bother building something sustainable and beautiful?
I was in Edinburgh this week, we are not even capable of building the beautiful architecture you can see there now, all we can build is cheap and nasty looking pre-fab glass and steel edifices that look rusty, dated and dirty within a few years. Where is the magnificence in society?
For goodness sake wake UP!!!
Why do I bother.
We will carry on like this until a crisis forces us to change. No point in pointing out the obvious it seems, the only thing that will get people off thier backsides will be when mass uneployment or worse directly influenses a critical mass of people.
Unfortunately due to our technology and effciency that threshold will be very high in the modern world, if people can claim benefits and still eat and have broadband and a crate of high strengh lager a week nothing will happen, except of course noboddy will have any real pleasure in existing.
Rant over, nobody ever does anything anyway, im just p****** into the wind.
Jericoa
Complain about this comment
It's been said before but worth repeating. Abiding by the rules is NO DEFENCE when you write your own rules which let you get away with anything! History is littered with governments who change the rules to suit their own ends. Luckily we live in a democracy and we have the opportunity to kick them out. That day can't come soon enough for most of us
How ironic is it that the most dictatorial, self serving, smarmy, disconnected, war mongering, disingenuous and right wing governments we have ever had turns out to be a Labour one. Party of the people (if the people happen to be in the club)
Complain about this comment
At least Sir Fred Goodwin was up-front about his perks!!
Complain about this comment
I wonder if you would be decent enough to end an arguement and settle a bet, Have you ever had a free lunch from any Member of Parliament and if so did they pay for it or the Taxpayer?.
I myself wouldnt imagine for a moment that an honest man would sit at the same table.
Complain about this comment
It really is typical that the police are called in to investigate just because the Cabinet got caught out early without time to prepare their excuses. Shoot the messenger and forget the miscreants.
Complain about this comment
The system is to blame? God damn the lot of them who has uttered that phrase, damn very MP who has claimed 'within the rules' while immorally rooking money for Tudor beams, catfood and property portfolios out of the taxpayer.
And you, the Westminster media, bless you, have colluded in this. I worked in Westminster and know that there are those open secrets that are widely known known by MPs, staff and journalists because in many cases what goes on in the Palace of Westminster stays in the Palace of Westminster. Until the pack turns.
Complain about this comment
We just had a vote in our house that we aren't going to pay our council tax or TV licence. When we are taken to court will the defence "I was abiding by the rules that I set myself" stand up?
This is no more ludicrous than the excuses being churned out by or so-called representatives. Take away all of the property purchased with taxpayers money and sell it, they can't complain because it ISN'T THEIRS.
The money raised should be returned to the treasury so they can bail out some more banks - of course.
Complain about this comment
the posts on this blog are only as good as the people who type them, the system of expenses is only as good as the people who abuse it.....Harriet Harman was a disgrace today on R4 trying to blame the system then the fees office for everything......like many on this blog words can't express how much contempt I feel for these MP's
Complain about this comment
MPs it seems have taken over from Estate Agents as being the most hated profession. It's going to take an awful lot for them to regain our respect.
Complain about this comment
You're coming close to the heart of it, Nick. This whole sorry mess is about a lack of principles - ignore the rules, they are simply a red herring. The question is whether or not MPs behaviour lives up to the levels of trust, responsibility, and, yes, moral rectitude, we should be entitled to expect from those who purport to serve the nation?
Brown et al with their insistence on changing the rules or the process are making the same mistake that the banks did. Don't ask "is this within the rules", but rather "is this right"?
Complain about this comment
Small Beer - he says Small Beer....
Why would the Daily Telegraph lead with a Major scalp.... ? Their scoop today was they have hold of the expenses, and researching them and this is the first taster....
Its gonna be long month of drip drip and they lead up to major issues and concerns.
If they went big day 1 - theres nothing for day 20, 30, 50 and 60!!!!!
Watch this space...
Small beer - lol - Nick really misses the point
Journos should be scalping the cabinet
Complain about this comment
What with John 'two bogs' Prescott and Hazel 'Smears my domicile' Blears followed by Harriet and Mr. Bell all denying any wrong doing ' because it was ok at the time' how can we have any respect for this institution . On news 24 this morning Mr. Bell admitted to the interviewer ( I wish I knew her name ) and repeated it to John Snow ( channel 4) that it was only because of the demands under the FOI that this has been publicised . They would have much rather it been kept quiet . Obviously the Guardian are going to milk this for all it's worth by putting bits out at a time ( newspapers to sell!) . What will happen when the opposition expenses are published heaven only knows - but this is a classic case of who guards the guards ?. This sanctity of MP's addresses is a smoke screen , without this knowledge the pieces of paper to be published would be meaningless - who did what with what and to where?. The most depressing thing is that the only people who can redress the situation are those who developed it in the first place and have appeared to have subsequently abused it for personal gain. Jack Straw said he was under pressure and made mistakes - I personally would prefer the highest offices of this country to be occupied by those who can work and think clearly under pressure , thereby eliminating errors .
Complain about this comment
I think that there has been mention of Geoff Hoon amassing a £1.7m property portfolio. Can someone analyse all the Cabinet members property dealings over the last 12 years - how many have been bought and sold? - how many have been transferred between first/second homes to escape CGT? - how many have had renovations paid for by the tax payer? - what profit has been amassed through the transactions? how many ministers have claimed for properties when occupying grace and favour facilities?
And hopefully how much their house values have shrunk because of the recession, just like the rest of us? Many people have worked hard to get on the property ladder and benefit from hours of work of renovation. Only the taxpayer hasn't financed all the work just like with MPs. It's a scandal made worse by the contemptuous response from ministers today.
Complain about this comment
#35 Jericoa
I agree with you wholeheartedly. I'm afraid we're all p******g in the wind here. As Al Murray said, "This is Great Britain, it would be amazing Britain if it wasn't for people like you bringing the average down". If he wasn't talking about MP's he should have been.
This will be my last post on the BBC, I'm fed up with the political hacks here failing to hold HMG to account, give me an interview with GB, mind you we wouldn't get far, I'd keep asking the first question until I got a straight answer, not good TV eh. Enjoy your jaunts on Brown Force One Nick, I expect there will be a few more on Browns farewell world tour before the next election.
Complain about this comment
To Jeroica #35
said with passion and well said.
The "critical mass" you talk of might or might not happen but you can be damn sure that if it does Government will have all sorts of anti-terrorist powers to stop any demonstrations. This is why the Nothing to hide nothing to fear lobby are so stupidly naive. They imagine that this lot won't change the laws to suit their own needs so what was legal and decent is now not because "They say so". Would you have believed 15 years ago that an elderly couple would be interviewed by police for 5 hours because they asked for Christian leaflets to be placed in a library next to or in place of "Homosexual advocation leaflets".
Them's the rules now because the leaders have said so.
behind all of this expenses shenanigans is one overiding point and you can see it in expenses, behaviours and laws passed.
Our elected politicians see themselves as our "Rulers" and not our "Servants" which is why they think Tax rules do not apply to them. surely if Glaxo or Barclays carried on like this HMRC would be down on them like a tonne of bricks with prosecutions and jail sentences involved.
Johnathan Aitken must rue the fact he was 15 years to early into politics, he would be a model MP now
Complain about this comment
Nick Robinson says (on the BBC 24h News @2110) regarding the expenses controversy, and the hotel where Mrs Blears resided, "heaven will be a let down after this".
wonderful. thank you.
Complain about this comment
It is not acknowledged that the Tory supporting paper The Daily Telegraph has carefully constructed it's release of the mps' expense claims. By the time that the Tory and Lib Dem expenses are released we will be too exhausted by hubris to comment. Go on - shout down the government, but thanks to Tory cash at the Telegraph you are all railing too, far too, soon. Silly people, you have bought a pup.
Complain about this comment
Nick
The PMs claims for cleaning (c. £6,500) are half my annual salary as a music teacher with two degrees. I know people with far less and far more salary than me. Nearly everyone I know does their own cleaning: those who don't, pay others out of their own salary. What on earth is the PM thinking and more importantly what are the expenses officials thinking to consider domestic cleaning as a valid claim..let alone the other things. Small beer - I think not!
Karen Mutch
Complain about this comment
Yes, MP's have to live in two places. Why not build an apartment block (or two, or three) within walking distance of Parliament, with enough full-service, small apartments for each and every MP. Student residence standard should be more than adequate. When they have to overnight in London, they can stay in their earmarked flat, for free. The rest of their days they can live in their own homes/flats, where ever these may be (presumably in their constituencies). That would eliminate the whole second home expenses problem.
Second point: Since the EU makes about 80% of our laws anyway, do we really need all these free-loaders? How about halving the total of MP's, just as a start?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Nick
"And this on a day when M&S publicly apologised for the somewhat lesser misdemeanour of - charging more for bigger bras".
Ironic timing - since both parliament and big bras seem to contain much the same thing these days.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
I think I'm getting a handle on this now. We have watched from the sidelines as the Government has put the country into a massive amount of debt that will take a generation to pay off. We should be angry about that, but we can't be, it was done for our "good".
We have also watched the banks laugh at us by taking our money and throwing it away - again we have had to stump up billions to prop up these institutions. We should be angry, but we can't be, it was done for our "good".
We have watched the bad news as the recession has hit, people losing jobs, businesses failing. We should be angry, but we can't be because we had our money spent on our behalf through a Fiscal Stimulus to lessen the blow - for our good.
I think we have all had a nagging feeling at the back of our heads that the government has been profligate in its use of our money, but we had no real evidence of it, no one to point a finger at.
Now, almost by accident, we can see for ourselves that the government has been profligate and inconsiderate in the way it uses public money for their own petty reasons - perhaps it is in a small way - but it illustrates an attitude that because the MPs can take public money because it is freely available to them, then they have done so without regard to the consequences of being found out.
For once we can be angry at what we see. For once we can be angry at the "It had nothing to do with me" attitude that is so prevalent. For once we can be angry that these priviledged few have become untouchable, irresponsible, careless.
I think we are overly angry at the issue of MPs expenses. But I think we are not angry enough about what it actually means - that this government has its hands so deep in our pockets that it thinks the pockets are theirs and not ours.
I think the attitude also illustrates the contempt the government holds the public in. We can be told anything and have anything kept from us, just as long as we do not question the wisdom. Clearly they think that common sense no longer has value, that a "rule" will somehow make any action "right" - but it does not. I then feel angry that the government and in particular its individual ministers should hold me in such contempt.
We do no wrong by doing nothing when we see a burglar walk into a neighbour's open house and remove goods. But many of us would think that to do nothing is indeed wrong - and of course morally it is. So I think we have raised the alarm, and the lack of a bolt on the door does not mean it was ever right for the burglars to help themselves to whatever they could carry off, because their burglar's handbook said it was OK.
So let's be angry - it seems right to be so.
Complain about this comment
What about "Let them eat cake" don't you understand. Just because there is a global economic crisis doesn't mean the ruling class should suffer. The distance between government and the governed is about where it was when James lost his head. Here's hoping.
Complain about this comment
#57 see #48,#49
Well at least i got 2 people angry..its a start...afew million to go and somethin g may happen..
Complain about this comment
The so called "rules defence" is not a defence.
The rules just state the MAXIMUM that can be claimed.
These MPs need to explain why they thought it DECENT to make their claims, taking money from taxpayers who are mostly much poorer than they are.
Complain about this comment
As usual in these situations, documents released to clarify situations suceed only in raising more questions than thay answer. Gorden Browns Cleaning 'contract' released by Number 10 today is a very curious document.
1. Firstly most people don't have formal contracts of empluyment with their cleaners, but obviously they should, so having gone to the trouble of drawing up such a document, which is supposedly a change to terms of employment, it is curious that it doesn't name one of the parties to the agreement (the cleaner) and is not signed by any party, nor are we given the acceptance of these revised terms.
2. Assuming all this is above board, the second curious fact is not the change in terms (we don't see the original terms) but the resultant amounts. A rise from £350 a month, a nice round figure, to £357.15 a month. a figure more appropriate to accountants than a salary cheque. Why not £357 or £358 or even push the boat out to £380? Playing around with the figures I can't find any rythme or reason for this figure (Not a round hourly rate for instance, but co-incidently £357.15*7/10 does = £250.0002 significantly the threshold for reciepts!).
3. Then we get the fact that Gorden Brown claims for £241.30 a month (Jan to mar 06) which isn't 7/10ths of either £350 or £357.15 so is the financial split not pro rata?
4. In their release this morning we were assured that National Insurance was paid, so if the cleaner was directly employed, this must be on top of the £357.15 a month making Gordens proportion even smaller. Did his brother actually pay this? If employed through an agency why was the letter not to the agency?
5. A final anomoly is that both brothers are married and yet they didn't split the time evenly, which you might have expected for simplicity . Is Gorden's flat bigger or Sarah more houseproud? Gordens flat is only 1 bedroom so Andrew's would have to be very small.
6. And finally this assumes that the Cleaner both recieved the money after tax had been paid, and is registered for tax, and that they were eligable to work (a not impossible issue given the number of American politicians who have been tripped up by illegal Mexican domstic staff).
Complain about this comment
#34 Muddywaters
I am particularly ashamed as a life long Labour supporter to have to tolerate this debacle on a day when 2000 jobs are lost on Teeside and four brave soldiers die in Afghanistan. For those MPs who say that the publication of this information undermines parliamentary democracy I say in return get your snouts out of the trough and do something to restore confidence in an institution which today is little more than a national joke. Brown, Prescott, Straw, Murphy and the whole cabal should hang their heads in shame and the other parties will also have their day. Indeed they might as well publish the whole lot now and get this tawdry and depressing episode out of the way without prolonging the pain. I always thought that the great virtue of British political system was its integrity; what a fool I have been. More importantly I shall never again vote for Labour until this worthless government under Browns pathetic leadership comes to an end. Representative democracy is too important to be left to people who think that the public should pay for their toilet seats. They must think that the electorate are stupid, gullible and beneath contempt. Quite why the police are investigating the leak of the information and not its substance is a mystery.
=========================================================================
Unlike you I am a Tory supporter but I am happy to stand with you and support all that you said so eloquently. Why? Because I know my own party MPs have probably shared at the same trough of plenty as well; we shall probably know more over the weekend.
Even if they were not, I would still stand with you because even if they have been more abstemious, they should not have stood by.
Party politics should be put on hold until the situation is sorted out. The situation should not be sorted out by New Labour or any of the other parties. I know there are those who talk about the sovreignty of Parliament, but remember it is the Queen who heads it all up. If you told Her Maj to get it done, there would be no messing and it would be done within days. (And to think all those pot kettle Republicans who complained about the 'wealth creating' Queen helping herself to public money - sorry I couldn't help myself).
Anyway, I have tried to make this point on previous blogs because this scandal is not about cheap political shots; each MP has colluded in this disgraceful behaviour by either troughing it up or standing by and doing nothing.
And you Nick, you should know better; just read these postings and be a little humbled. We are not interested in your one-sided snipes. If you and the BBC took your role more seriously, you would realise that the whole system is stuffed and needs radical change.
This is not a time for defending MPs rights to expenses that they think are rightfully theirs under the current rules made up on the trotter by the troughers; nor should anyone be trying to deflect blame from one party to another by saying everyone's as it. Are we meant to feel any better? I don't think so.
As for the police investigation into the source of the leak, how does this leak differ from any government sponsored leak?
If the police go in to the Commons as has been suggested, I recommend that on Monday morning, every blogger goes into their local Cop Shop and registers a complaint about the misappropriation of public funds by our MPs and ask for it to be investigated. Present the Telegraph as evidence of prima facie evidence, get a reference and ask them to get back to you with an answer.
On Monday morning, every blogger should call HMRC and in particular that number the government give out for grassing on tax dodgers; ask to speak to the supervisor to ask them what they are doing to check out any further tax liabilities due from MPs expenses or more accurately benefits in kind. When asked for proof, send them prima facie evidence as presented in the Telegraph. Take a reference number and ask them to get back to you with an answer.
If all else fails, let me know the date you will be demonstrating because I will stand shoulder to shoulder with you until respectability and democracy is restored and we can return to partisan normality and petty squabbling.
And let us not forget the soldiers who died in Afghanistan to make our country a better and more secure place for us whilst our leaders fiddled the expenses and lined their pockets to make their lives better and more secure for themselves at the expense of their country.
It's time for priorities to change!
Complain about this comment
if i made a mistake its a criminal offence if politicians make a mistake its because they are busy one law for them and another for us its not surprising they are for the EU its a bigger gravy train they now they are going to get kicked out and need a job
Complain about this comment
Nick.
Given just what along the way in everyday eye-watering items that have been claimed as Expenses by most M.P,s', including Second Homes MANY TIMES OVER, along with ALL the Bill's, and REPAIRS, then somehow it is classed as being ALL within "THE RULES" as written and passed by the same People enjoying the STATE BENEFITS of their OWN CLAIMS AND ALLOWANCES.
SO JUST WHAT DO M.P.s' SPEND THEIR SALARIES IN WAGES ON???, WHILE THEY ARE MILKING A SYSTEM OF CHOICE THAT IS ROTTEN TO THE CORE???.
Ripping - Off the Tax-Payer is seen as a way of choice of RIGHTS by MOST POLITICIANS while CUTTING BACK ON STATE BENEFITS FOR EVERYONE ELSE.
Therefore, it is now time for everyone to Vote for Political Parties other than the Labour, Conservative or Lib - Dems in ALL Elections from now onwards, for we now ALL need to be our own AVENGERS.
Complain about this comment
MPs are paid out of tax-payers' money. So is the BBC. You better make sure your expenses are clean, Nick. After MPs, the BBC is next.
Complain about this comment
#59 - Jericoa
I have a confession to make. I used to get angry and occasionally vent my spleen on this blog but these days, I can only really be bothered if the talk is of wholesale constitutional change, of ridding the poor wretched place of the whole worthless paraphernalia and dispensing with the Union. These days, I focus my attention on Mark Mardell's blog because there, at least, there are still live issues. My anger has been replaced by a deep and abiding sadness. Somebody asked me the other day when I would be returning to the UK and I heard myself saying that I would not be sorry if I never set foot in the place again.
So I commend you for your anger and urge you to keep on p****ing in the wind. It is probably the only way you will stop them simply taking it.
Complain about this comment
"Parliament's reputation brought low"
Calling the police to try and shift the blame onto the person who blew the whistle didn't help them either.
Gordon Brown even claimed for his light bulbs (plus 9grand for a nice new kitchen; hey, nick, no mention of that on the beeb, why's that then?)
Darling even had the gall to claim over 2grand of tax payer's money to pay his stamp duty tax (and 300 quid a month for food) (using *our* tax money to pay his own tax bill, and claiming expenses for his grocery bill?)
The list is endless. And to people who work in the private sector, this is absolutely obscene and would be seen as blatant fraud.
Were they "within the Commons rules?" - probably.
Were they fleecing the electorate for everything they could, and acting totally unreasonably and unfairly throughout? - definitely.
Would these kinds of claims be seen as fraud in a court if it had happened in the private sector? - 100% yes. Ignorance, stupidity, and greed, is not a valid defence in court.
Complain about this comment
What not a single one of these MPs has even acknowledged is that if any of us ordinary people were to claim for the things they have, we'd be laughed out of the HR office - and if we were to do some of things these MPs have done with their expenses, we'd be kicked out of the building.
Hazel Blears for example, we've had no apology from her for doing something that was clearly morally wrong, because it happened to be within the rules. So what they're saying is that it's completely fine to exploit every loophole in sight at the public's expense. And then have a go at those nasty bankers for doing the same thing.
Labour, Tories, they're all at it. Get rid of the lot of them.
Complain about this comment
Looks like the mods are on overtime removing anything that doesn't sit quite right.
I just lost #54 for suggesting that Harriet Harman is being disingenuous and most MPs would be in prison if they were operating under the same laws as we have to, the taxman would go nuts if I presented nappies as a valid item for running my business. I know they are the Nanny state but that is ridiculous.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it should be removed.
Maybe it was modded because I suggested Joanna Lumley should stand against Harman in th enext election...ooops there goes another post to the Mod Bin.
Complain about this comment
#68 bluejam
wholeheartedly agree. My personal favourite excuse was from Jack Straw who claimed he was too busy at the time when filling out his form to have done it correctly. He wasn't too busy to go back over his claims, realise he'd 'made a mistake' and pay back the money he'd claimed for council tax.
Like you've pointed out, let the public try telling the inland revenue or any government agency they were too busy to fill out their forms correctly, I think they would call it fraud.
Complain about this comment
I think you're all so unkind to them. They are all obviously trying their little hardest to fight the credit crunch by spending as much as they can. They can't use their own money as that might make them poor.
Complain about this comment
Could someone - maybe an MP or some 'investigative' journalist at the BBC (oh no, forget that) - explain what MPs actually spend their salary on, as the things which ordinary people spend their salaries on seem all to be claimed back by MPs as 'expenses'.
Complain about this comment
Fred Goodwin (aka Fred the Shred) acted within the rules when he took his pension but MPs were outraged and demanded that he was morally obliged to repay it.
Now MPs and Ministers' responses to the outrageous claims they have submitted - which incidentally they wanted to keep secret - is that they acted within the rules. Will they now repay the amounts claimed or will they just advise us how to spell hypocrites?
Complain about this comment
Getridofgordonnow: not just private sector either- at my echelons of the public sector (can't talk of other echelons)expenses are virtually unheard of...30 year experienced teacher with two degrees. To go to a compulsory course on a non-working day (half pay) travel 60 miles (46 miles petrol only allowance paid) on production of receipt and food (free) 1 round of sandwiches and orange juice...says it all really doesn't it.
Complain about this comment
all political journalists and commentators, MPs as well, are ducking one essential question:
was it the fees office messing up, or is it the MPs themselves claiming fraudulently?
i can understand to a degree, claiming from the system to the maximum, but claiming for full council tax (jack straw) knowing that he was only paying 50% council tax for years, has to be fraud?
brown claiming twice for the same plumbing work, again is fraud is it not?
whats worrying is how, in the two examples ive given, they obtained receipts to back up their claims?
an immeadiate criminal investigation needs to be started, into MPs of all parties.
who gave them back their recipts?
in jack straw's case, he knowingly provided a full council tax bill - when he was only paying 50% of the bill, how did he get a receipt showing a full amount without his discount? (friends on the local council?)
in brown's case, if he has submitted the receipt for the work to back his claim, how did he get it back to claim again? is it not held on his expenses file?
more importantly: why is no media source asking this question?
Complain about this comment
"mother of all parliaments"
The mother of all parliaments was the English parliament - not this cesspit.
Some people are saying a pay rise would solve this problem - categorically our representatives do not deserve a pay rise if anything it they deserve a pay cut.
The time is coming to throw these scoundrels out and start afresh. The Scots have got something right with their own parliament and it's time England had the same.
English parliament now. A new start.
English taxes for England.
English law for England.
Home rule for England.
Complain about this comment
how does all this sit with the government's argument, regarding fred the shred exploiting the system?
Complain about this comment
Nick said: What no-one said was sorry.
I think this is perceptive and important. I agree that saying sorry on its own is not sufficient, but at least it's a start. Of course it has to be an apology for an MP's own personal behaviour, and not an apology for the system, which is a way of diffusing blame and avoiding it.
Several respondents have expressed anger. The trouble with anger is that there are few topics that people can agree what to be angry about, and more importantly what to do about it. MPs expenses is clearly one of the exceptions.
I'm more angry about the level of debt that this Labour Government is building up. In exchange for a few soundbites we face higher taxes, poorer public services, and a retirement age of 70 (and that's on optimistic forecasts). This is what Labour MPs should say sorry for, personally, sincerely, and deeply.
Complain about this comment
A couple of points
Can someone tell me who the heck I am supposed to vote for at the next General election?
and one for you Nick. Why are so few journalists showing true disdain for elected politicians? Are you all so far in the governments pockets that you can't see out or is it nest feathering season?
Does the gravy train extend to hangers-on as well?
Hugh Grant for P.M.......Joanna Lumley for Home Secretary, Michael Palin for Foreign and Commonwealth affairs, Carol Vorderman for Children, Schools and Families, Jeremy Clarkson for Transport, Martin Lewis for Chancellor, Jamie Oliver for Environment and Food, although I conceed Hilary Benn is the best of a bad bunch, Dr. Christian Jesson for Health, Simon Weston for Defence, Kirstie Allsopp for Housing and finally Philip Glenister for Chief of the Met.
Couldn't do a worse job could they? Every one would have Britain's and it's peoples best interests at heart.
Complain about this comment
well it's a sorry saga I must say - MPs ought to have higher standards than your average Joe but it would appear from all this that (with one or two laudable exceptions such as Harriet Harman and Alan Johnson) they do not - just had to be Prescott with the mock Tudor beams, didn't it? - what an embarassment - hey, and we don't even know the Clown details yet! - not sure I want to know, to be honest - bound to be ugly - guess the only silver lining in this particular cloud is it pretty much proves that our politicians (in squeezing the most they can out of the system) are fairly representative of the electorate - but we want more than that, don't we? (I know I do)
Complain about this comment
One of the things that amazes me is how often MPs have to repair and decorate their houses. Most of us out here in the real world can't afford such luxuries and tend to get by as long as we can as long as it's not an emergency.
Put them all on a south London council estate. It would solve their need for a place in London and introduce them to the real world
No matter how much they go on about 'not breaking the rules' or 'we know it has to change' you have to question the judgement of people who ever thought this kind of extravagance was justified.
It's time to clear out the stables and start again - and I include all parties in that.
Complain about this comment
This from The Guardian Website:-
"The parliamentary authorities reacted to damaging revelations of cabinet and junior ministers cynically exploiting Commons expenses rules by calling in the police to investigate how the details were leaked and by whom".
Ye Gods, have these wretched people no shame?
Complain about this comment
The orchestrated response seems to be....'blame the rules'.
I guess ministers etal are saying that the rules were so slack they allowed MPs to cheat and thieve....if the rules had been tighter MPs wouldn't have cheated and thieved because the rules would have prevented them doing so. So blame the rules.
NOT ONE minister has suggested that any single MP has an ethical issue over this. That speaks volumes about these people.
The real problem for these people is the cat is out of the bag and with luck an army of investigative journalists are going to start examining these expense claims. profits made, taxes declared, and so on....in great detail.
Any MP that hasn't milked the system can be upset at being tainted by the behaviour of the others...but hopefully will support fraud investigations where appropriate. I would expect the Revenue people to be as keen on investigating this situation as they are when some small self employed worked can't account...in detail...for every penny expended according to 'the rules'.
Complain about this comment
Some of the headlines suggesting wrongdoing do not stand up to close scrutiny.
But many of them do nick that is the problem,we the public know who made the rules and they are shown to be shambolic.....whether people broke them or not is immaterial they are only coming out and saying they should be changed after they have been outed.....where were they at 12 months ago too busy filling in claim forms and maximising their take from the publics pocket.
If the Government thought these rules were ok when when they changed the green book why should we believe that they are competant to run a country.
Its pathetic you know it i know and so does everyone else the fact they are chasing the whistle blower makes it even more laughable....
We should see ministers resign over this they are as forever tainted as Peter Mandelson was with his denials over his loans...
What you havent mentioned Nick is the donations fiasco where people admitted openly that they had given illegal donations and yet again there is no case for them to answer in court....just what do you have to do to be prosecuted for illegal donations ???
Complain about this comment
This is so pertinent (denzil 69 (above)) it is worth posting again...
"all political journalists and commentators, MPs as well, are ducking one essential question:
was it the fees office messing up, or is it the MPs themselves claiming fraudulently?
i can understand to a degree, claiming from the system to the maximum, but claiming for full council tax (jack straw) knowing that he was only paying 50% council tax for years, has to be fraud?
brown claiming twice for the same plumbing work, again is fraud is it not?
whats worrying is how, in the two examples ive given, they obtained receipts to back up their claims?
an immeadiate criminal investigation needs to be started, into MPs of all parties.
who gave them back their recipts?
in jack straw's case, he knowingly provided a full council tax bill - when he was only paying 50% of the bill, how did he get a receipt showing a full amount without his discount? (friends on the local council?)
in brown's case, if he has submitted the receipt for the work to back his claim, how did he get it back to claim again? is it not held on his expenses file?
more importantly: why is no media source asking this question?"
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Harriet Harman has been wheeled out all over the media today, but all I have heard her say is that it was "All within the rules"
That also applied to Fred Goodwin's pension, however excessive it seemed.
I haven't heard Miss Harman mention her "Court of Public Opinion" today though, does it still sit, Saga?
Complain about this comment
Nick,
One of the things that you're failing to report on is the fact that these particular expenses are only a tiny proportion of what MPs claim/get.
Nobody seems to have mentioned things like employing family as their admin staff and the many other "un-expense" aspects that they draw from.
From what I can see, an MP can easily end up pocketing the equivalent of over 2 million quid gross for a single term in Parliament if they employ their family, claim all the relevant expenses, and use a good accountant and have a good head for business in what they do with the cash that they get.
These listed expenses are only a tiny proportion of the real money being pocketed. They also don't include things like the Commons restaurant being subsidised by the tax payer.
If people are angry now, you just wait until they get to see the true figures; I'm sure it's just a question of time before someone analyses it properly and tells the public what's really going on. At the moment the media is missing the biggest parts of the story.
The point is that if you get elected as an MP for just one Parliamentary term, then if you know what you're doing you're then set for life after the end of that single term. You'd be able to retire after 1 term and never have to work again.
Remember, these aren't simply tax-deductibles knocked off their taxable income, they're actually paid out as additional cash amounts, so a 10quid payment for these expenses is more like 15quid gross of extra income.
When you work out the maths for the whole picture, it's absolutely mind boggling how much they get as an equivalent gross income.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#76 englandrise
hopefully issues like this will help people realise the democratic deficit their living under. When do you think this will happen?
Couldn't believe of all the people Glen Campbell was chosen to 'grill' Mandelson on his expenses. Surprised he didn't just roll over so Mandelson could scratch his tummy for him.
Complain about this comment
(A) How can MPs use the excuse of its within the rules to justify otherwise excessive claims?
A poorly educated single mother could not claim off the state 100% more than she incurred for an Expense, without appearing in Court.
She would not be allowed to pay it back to escape punishment 5 years later - just before she was exposed.
Why can super-intelligent Jack Straw get away with the equivalent act ?
(B) Can MPs not understand the meaning of the word ADDITIONAL in Additional Cost Allowances?
You SHOULD NOT claim for the bread & bacon to make a Bacon Sandwich in your MP House, when exactly the same cost would have been incurred if in your own constituency home.
The same principle applies for claiming Toothpaste.
The media needs to examine whether there is an equivalent off-setting personal saving, whenever an ADDITIONAL public expense is claimed.
( C ) How can MPs use the excuse of its within the rules to justify blatantly immoral acts?
They seem to expect both Companies & Individuals to act by a higher moral code rather than just
within the rules when choosing whether to live in the UK or Offshore.
Yet they believe acting within the rules protects them from acting in a moral way.
Complain about this comment
I think we're making it too hard for any reading politician to understand. Here's how it is (for any MP who might be reading this blog):
a) Person gets a job
b) Same person works at job
c) Same person has taxes deducted from salary
d) Same person gets pay cheque for remaining pay
e) Pay cheque pays for food, housing, commute to work or second home near work if living at a distance, pension etc. (i.e. none of this comes from anywhere else, like out of someone else's pocket)
That's about it.
There is one rule
1) Earn money to pay your own way.
Most of us have grasped that.
If you get sick or when you get old, then the state will give you a pittance you can't possibly survive on, but until then you're on your own.
Complain about this comment
Sorry, but none of this is news. It's what politicians do. All of them. All the time. Anybody who didn't know that already is living in their own private universe.
Sill, it's amusing listening to Labour's bully boys and girls squealing when somebody drags them behind the bike sheds and gives them a good kicking.
The Telegraph probably has enough dirt to keep dripping this stuff out every day from now to the June elections, and if they have any sense of timing, they won't be serving up the real red meat till a lot nearer election day. I'm betting that six grand for a part time cleaner and 25 grand for "security" is just for starters. Come back in a two or three weeks to get the main course....
Complain about this comment
When we're through with MPs expenses and that's going to last for a few more weeks if not months, perhaps we can then start evaluating the useless and pointless expensive quangos, the lobbyists (always available for a bung), the expensive consultants and the expensive focus groups.....
These leeches live off the public purse paid for by MPs who have no idea of the value of tax payers money.
It is only when you have to pay for your own bath plugs that you realise 89p is a lot of money.
And the we should also look at failed organistaions like the FSA whose budget is not answerable to anyone, not even the National Audit Office; and yet they are allowed to finance themselves unchecked by gorging themselves on the companies they purport to regulaste.
As I have been saying for months, this country is in dire need of someone to step up to the plate. Whoever it is needs to tell their rest of their colleagues in the House that things have got to start changing around Westminster and it's not just expenses. It is the whole institution and authority of Parliament we are talking about here. It is the number of MPs; it is the completed reform of the Lords; it is reform of the Judiciary and the separation of powers of the Attorney General; it is the removal of the debased honours system; it is the reduction or reform of the public sector; it is the de-politicisation of the police force; it is managed border controls; it is eradicating public waste of funds; it is becoming more efficient.
Harriet, even if you would promise to do the above, you would always have a place in my heart.
Actually I cannot lie and will not start now.
But please, someone step up and take the lead so we may follow.
Too often politicians talk about apathy in the electorate. Perhaps now they are beginning to understand why people are not engaged.
If they were, many MPs would not be MPs as we know it.....Harriet!
We are not going to have a civil war or a revolution so all MPs, please respect the tolerance of your citizens, fix the institutions and stop taking the p*ss.
Complain about this comment
Goodnight fellow bloggers, of all political persuasions, and may you dream big dreams on a pillow bought with your own hard earned money and not at the tax payers expense.....
The boy awoke suddenly and sat up. A cold sweat ran down his face. His Mum, hearing the noise in the bedroom next door, walked towards the bed and put an arm across her son's shoulder.
She said:
'Don't worry; you've had a bad dream, a nightmare'. She laid him back on the bed and almost at once, the boy fell into a deep sleep.
The boy's mother leant over and kissed her son's cool forehead and as she departed the room, she could be heard whispering reassuring words:
'Good night, son. Sweet dreams. There's nothing to worry about. It's all in the rules'.
Complain about this comment
Now I wonder what on earth ever happened to the Cash for Honours and the question over loans to political parties. Now why am I so not surprised that the government has not gone to the courts to prevent publication of any more details of MPs expenses. Surely it is not the case that they do not want to do anything to prevent the Telegraph from printing what could be negative reports on some other poltical party(s).
Could anybody tell me what has been gained by the loss of life in Iraq and Afghanistan, surely not so that we can export our representative democracy to those countries. I nearly wrote reprehensible rather than representative but I avoided that mistake. as for your blog Nick, are you and the moderators going to adhere strongly to the rules or are we to have a bit more leaway.
Finally for tonight, I hope that Gordon Brown does not read out the names of the many dead at next weeks PMQs. I would regard it as an insult, what with Gordon demanding questions which he wants to be asked, or telling us what we already know, that this parliament, this government is shameless. The N.O.T.A. Party demand an election, right here, rightnow, an election.
Complain about this comment
Bring in Joanna Lumley I say....she doesn't take cr*p from these people. It is a real pity the right people don't stand as MPs.
This is about as bad as it get for UK democracy in my 40 odd yrs of having some interest in the process ( with the possible exception of Thatcher!).
So depressing.....what has happened to this country...what have we allowed to happen?
Complain about this comment
I have never before felt so incensed. Does anyone know how to complain to the Inland Revenue to make them investigate?
Can we get some sort of class action going - anyone else up for setting up a fighting fund?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
I find it almost impossible to explain how angry I am over this travesty. As a public servant, I have to account for any expenses within a very sensible and not generous expenses system that I work under. I put in the receipts (within a week) and most of my claims get audited. If I claimed for something outside my allowance I would be charged with fraud. That noone has been charged only indicates a useless trough, beneficial to only one set of people - it does not indicate honesty, integrity, public-service, loyalty, respect for others in financial difficulty... My anger is intense because what am I to do? They are all the same! They will all be shown to be profiteering cowboys in due course. If you can't find it in yourself to vote for anyone anymore regardless of the value of their policies, then where does it leave democracy in Britain?
Complain about this comment
As someone who has listened to BBC news - in all its forms - since the days of steam radio, it saddens me to have to listen to journalists - who supposedly should be neutral - but are now quite happy to make it quite clear where their political sympathies lie, even if they don't openly mention any particular party.
Once upon a time reporters would seek answers from politicians and keep at it until he got those answers. Now it seems that most of them read from press handouts and ask only pre-approved questions.
Here we have a House of Commons that is rife with fraud, chicanery and other wrongdoings and journalists ought to be in the politicians faces demanding the answers that we - who pay for their excesses - need to hear. Yes, such a form of interviewing may jeapordise one's seat on the P.M.'s aircraft on his next "save the World" junket. but so what!
We want the truth. Not the politicians version of it, nor some biased editorial opinion. There must be some "hacks" of the old school still out there. Where are they when we need you?
Complain about this comment
I wish I could afford to live in SW1. It seems to be the only place in the UK where benefit fraud is legal!!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Nick
If you read the MPs' expense rule book (The Green Book) you will find that most of the dubious expense claims are clearly not within the rules. The rules were just not enforced.
So why do you keep saying they are within the rules? Have you read the rule book?
Complain about this comment
#101 - Zydeco
Alas there are only two classes now - those who pay tax and those who receive it. Just ask yourself which side your broadcast journos are on.
Complain about this comment
We elect MPs to be a national moral compass.
Yet, they appear to have lost all sense of ethics and morality.
We need a separate, independent NATIONAL PEOPLES COMMITTEE to decide their pay, pension and conditions - so they don't decide their own.
Didn't Gordon Brown defend increasing MP Pensions a few years ago - saying it would be paid for by MPs themselves !!!
Wasn't it by increasing the pension value of each year worked from 1/80 to 1/60 of pay - a 32% increase in pension !!!
I never thought this could be true. Come on NICK ROBINSON investigate if he was right or not - and how much extra MPs pocketed on this ruse.
Complain about this comment
As someone who's self-employed, I'm inclined to reconsider my current accountancy practices and tell HMRC that "within my own rules that I've created" I've decided that I'm allowed to claim for absolutely all of my outgoings, including repairing my broken toilet seat (twice) [that was one of Prescott's claims], and my rules also say that I don't need to pay any council tax anyway, and that therefore I don't need to pay any income tax at all because my outgoings outweigh my income, and HMRC actually owe me money rather than the other way around this year, even if I hadn't paid them any income tax in the first place.
Would that work? Ah, no, HMRC would send me to prison for 10 years.
The people who've created the tax laws for us would send us to prison for 10 years for doing what they allow themselves to get away with. So, the obvious question is, why is this allowed to happen without riots taking place?
Complain about this comment
The amount of money in this case is small compared to illegal and unnecessary armed conflict , failed IT projects and massive bureaucracy plus the introduction of a police state . No what is most galling is that when caught the most barefaced shamelessness is exhibited by all and sundry . There is some merit in having them earn an attendance allowance as long as , like the rest of the working population they clock in and then clock out when going home . Just clocking in is no good and in effect should be treated as a day off without pay .Those working away from home should have accommodation supplied for them on an ad hoc basis - just like the rest of us . Nothing to claim there. Perhaps then they may understand the complete disgust they have earned from the real workers trying to make their way . Sadly all these buffoons fail to realise that they are handing votes on a plate to any nasty fringe party which could capitalise on the situation.
Complain about this comment
We need a peoples revolution to throw most of these people onto the scrap heap.
We need a peoples revolution to re-invent a decent REPRESENTATIVE political system.
We need to be able to throw out Failed MPs mid-term.
We need to vote a quarter of Parliament seats EVERY YEAR, so a changing public mood rapidly permeates Parliament - without waiting for a General Election.
I would willingly vote for a dictator like OLIVER CROMWELL to deal with all the dross we have representing us at the moment.
Complain about this comment
105 - Threnodio
Exactly! Typified earlier in the day when News 24 was making great play of the fact that police were being asked to investigate the scource of the leak, as if that were the worst aspect of this whole shoddy matter.
Hopefully, if the scource is exposed, that person will be well rewarded and feted as the taxpayers champion.
Complain about this comment
I am disgusted by this whole sorry mess - the utter indifference and distain that these 'public servants' are displaying is beyond belief. It defies excuses and demonstrates the utter comtempt that Mr Brown and his colleagues have for the electorate. It's like a cancer, it's like a stain on the credibility of the UK in general and the British Parliament in particular. Thanks you Mr Brown and your greedy bunch of 'its within the rules' money grabbing, nest feathering schemers. You pour yet more distasteful misery on the tax payers of this nation by your wanton greed and self interest. PLEASE - WILL SOMEONE TELL ME WHEN THIS PAIN AND MISERY WILL STOP? I now believe that ALL POLITICIANS are more untrustworthy than the lowest of the low con men, tricksters, estate agents, bankers and lawyers! I don't believe a single word of what any of them say
One last thought - tonight on the TV News we had the spectacle of Peter Mandleson bleating that the press were taking one tiny piece of data and twisting it into scandal and misinformation! How long ago was it that he was behind Tony Blair doing the same thing with such matters as WMD and poor Doctor Kelly! Really - does he believe we have such short memories - the man is completely amorale (and unelected - like his boss)
Off with their heads the lot of them - and as others have said - what is the HMRC Tax Inspectors views on such taxable benefits? What are their views on Capital Gain. Let's hear from them please - their current silence is deafening!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Seeing Mandy on TV moaning about the smear campaign was one of the most ironic moments of my life I think. The fact the man could say it without even a hint of embarrassment is beyond me. He should be sacked for what he did, as should many of the others. I wish someone would take action and clear out this rabble but tragically we will all suffer whilst they carry on.
Time for our best journalists to go forward with investigative journalism to get the facts to bring this government to account. Nick? Nick?
Complain about this comment
If I was found to be defrauding the public purse, I think I might well be prosecuted. If it was my employer, I'd be sacked and again maybe find myself in court with the prospect of doing some porridge. Seems ok if you have a seat in Westminster though
Ok sure, there are things these folks can genuinely claim for and the sensible public will understand. But seriously guys and gals, most of you are taking the p...
Complain about this comment
Nick,
It seems that Gordon Brown's cleaning claim wasn't for his constituency house (which all the BBC reports seem to imply), it was for a london flat; a stone's throw from his grace-and-favour house in Downing street and more than 400 miles from his constituency.
Next time you interview Brown, ask him to justify that claim as being an essential expense to do his job.
Complain about this comment
In reply to Post 107
I take your Point, for just why are there not any Street protest taking place in Britain about the shoddy way Politicians treat their People, for if this situation was in a Country like France then Gods know what would happen, for it would only take the increase of 1 PENNY on a Loaf of Bread to get them started.
But then again, British People in the main allow themselves far to easily to be pushed around by Politicians, and no doubts will swallow any excuses they come out with and will Vote for more of the same treatment come any Election Time from now to the General Election.
For in short, if anyone doe's not like the way either Labour, Conservative or the Lib - Dems have treated them, then DON'T Vote for any of them anymore, and this will be the Real Time to HAVE YOUR SAY.
Complain about this comment
Expenses surely means that certain costs are reimbursed but the individual does not profit by it? We have Keith Vaz claiming for pillows, Alistair Darling getting his stamp duty paid and we have no other choice to conclude that the system is being worked (and I'm being generous here).
Nick's comments that there is no wrongdoing would suggest that a lobby journalist closeness to his subjects.
We need some proper rules and we need them soon and best of all we need a list of MPs who did not "work" the system and we can get a better idea how all MPs used expenses.
Complain about this comment
Dear Nick,
Is it me, or are you too willing to swallow the party line of 'within the rules'?
I do hope you are doing an indepth political report with hard hitting question that get real results. Or are you quite happy with the results you are getting?
I do hope the police are looking into this matter, shame they are looking in the wrong direction.
I am not going onto the street to protest but will vote for UKIP from now on. Or BNP, or Lord Such.
Xxxx
Ps
They are crooks Nick, do your job (Paid for by me if you remember!)
Complain about this comment
Good article Nick which, I think, marks a rude awakening for the British public when they finally realised what a load of thieving, lying cheats their MP's really are. It seems these politicians (of all shades, apparently) seem to hold the public in utter contempt and appear to live in some kind of fantasy world where they believe they can get away with whatever they want. As for the comment enquiring whether Attlee or Churchill would ever do this kind of thing - the answer would be that they would never stoop so low. I wouldn't leave today's crop of politicians in charge of a whelk stall on Blackpool promenade never mind the whole country.
Complain about this comment
I am grateful for a number of posters for helping to clarify my views on this issue.
To any reasonable person from outside of the Westminster bubble it is obvious that the system stinks and that MPs from both parties have been using it to feather their nests at our expense.
If I am charitable, I would suggest that the expenses issue has gradually gotten worse over the years with MPs seeing what other members are getting away with and thinking that this is the way that it works. Perhaps they really do feel that they are acting within the rules and have done nothing wrong.
The outrage expressed here and elsewhere should bring them back to earth and a new parliament, which I sincerely hope will happen before June 2010, should tear up the old rules and rewrite the system. The new system to be based on the principle that only expenses incurred in the conduct of your job should be claimed. Any expense that would normally be incurred in normal life should be specifically excluded. For example we have to eat to live, therefore why should food be claimed.
Let us also draw a line under the issue with an amnesty for all but the worst offenders. Realistically the vacuum in power caused by the wholesale sacking of MP's would be counter productive in these difficult times. An independent scrutineer should be appointed to ask many of the questions posed on this blog and if an MP has been found to have abused the system, they should be forced to pay back the sum that they have misappropriated. The same scrutineer to conduct random spot checks on MPs to ensure that the new system is adhered to.
Finally, let us not let the person who has sold the list of expense claims to the Telegraph off too lightly. Yes this is important information that the public has a right to know. However, if this unnamed "businessman" has been touting the information to the highest bidder for sometime, he/she has hardly been doing so for altruistic reasons
Complain about this comment
Yes the police should be called in but not to find the taxpayers mole, but to arrest and jail all the corrupt thieving MP's who are lining their pockets while UK taxpayers are losing their homes.
This government including Tony Bliar have taken politics to its lowest form ever.
There should be an independant enquiry to setup 3 different pay structures, these pay structures should then be put to the electorate to vote on.
It's our money (taxpayers) so we should determine what they get not leave it to a bunch of pocket lining MP's.
If they don't like the outcome then they can resign.
Complain about this comment
Morning nick Nice to see ya nice.Well looks like the storm i forcast has now turned into a cyclone? i don't suppose you were on that train disscussing the weather forcast for next week were you?As a mister brown said theses afairs have got to be looked into of course the public are conserned over these expences,You bet your sweet life they are Do they pay any subs over to the trade unions to over see that they don't over step the mark? like they do with joe public? The canal boats leaving london docks carrying the urine seem overflowing,And are most certainly taking the p..s
Complain about this comment
It strikes me that some MP's have displayed more ingenuity and skill on massaging their allowances than they spent in Parliament. They are only spending 128 days this session, no wonder they have so much time to fiddle their expenses.
The Speaker should bring in the police but to examine their expenses. If not they will be carefully examined at the next election.
Complain about this comment
Overall this may be the least corrupt country in the world re the political class, however the mangling and meaness shown in the revelations - by the very top people in government - to grab back every penny and to creatively manage the expenses system for their own ends - leaves us all furious.
The lack of credibility and the palpable 3rd ratedness of the people in power at the moment is astonishing. How did this country come to this? Jacqui Smith. Home Secretary. Milliband D. Foreign Secretary. Ministers claiming for maure and 5p carrier bags. John Prescott caliming for fake Tudor beams (very middle class John, goes with your croquet). You couldn't make it up. As for Jack - "I can't count" Straw, well...
You underestimate all this Nick; petty much of might be, but people of all persuasions are hacked off with the exposure of the political class who it seems has no shame. Gordon Brown will never - note - never recover his standing after this. " Watcha buy on us today Gordie? " in every street, as he goes nosing for votes soon.
The rest of us have to buy our food, be it from from Harrods or KwikSave, with our own money. Not claim it back from someone else.
Complain about this comment
Now I understand why we don't punish criminals and thief in this country. Also this help me understand top bankers were paid all these money when they mess us up.
MP's (not all) should be very busy spending tis money and then claiming it, I cannot understand how they get time to look after the pubic and some even find time to be a minister. Lack of time could be the reason why our laws are so bad and the country is near ruin.
Complain about this comment
Brought low? Lower, you mean of course, if that is indeed possible. All the leaking of the expenses (never thought I'd say this - but well done, Daily Telegraph!), simply confirms what many of us already suspected, that the House is as big a gravy train as the European Parliament, and that we, the taxpayers, are there for their benefit, and should feel honoured to support their privilege lifestyles.
Complain about this comment
Besides the issues about MP's and their expenses, there is definitely a wider issue here coming out in this blog. It's about the cosy relationship that so called political journalists have with their political masters. A fact that I have alluded to in a previous comment.
This was patently obvious with the Damian McBride scandal too. You knew what was going on all the time but you failed to report it and once again you continue to give the scum politicians an easy ride.
I fully undrstand how Blair and Campbell cleared out any investigative journalists after the Iraq war saga from the BBC. You really do have a far too cosy relationship with your politicians. The fact is that you are also now part of the problem. And guess what me and millions of other idiots are forced to pay for it through the licence fee. I can't wait for the next election. You've got about a year to prove you're really independent for all the UK's population and not just a mouth piece for the socialists!
Complain about this comment
Don't get me wrong - even taking into account the obvious innuendo and political bias shown by the telegraph - this is a sorry tale which MPs (whethter Cabinet, Shadow Cabinet or back bench) should be ashamed of. They make the rules and why it should take so long to carry out a review is beyond me. In the Baby P case they managed to get reports out quickly, they've even got proposals for overhauling Social Work out quickly, yet all parties seem to be happy to take months over something which could be sorted out in two or three afternoons.
What annoys me is the hypocracy of the great British public. The argument that as they are the law makers so they should operate to the highest standards, must be countered by the observation that unreasonable expenses, pilfering of employers' time and property is OK then? Standards are acceptable or not acceptable, there isn't a range of acceptable standards in this matter. It goes on everywhere and everyone is involved. In the real world people who get caught lose their jobs. Or do they? The not so transparent 'oiling the wheels of business' can hide a number of dubious practices.
All I ask is that the whole 'get what you can out of expenses' culture is consigned to the bin, with MPs of all parties leading a national charge. They have set themselves up as our leaders so they should lead from the front. It is their lack of leadership (not just Gordon Brown's) on this matter which is the disgusting thing. I thought the purpose of politics was to right wrongs. In this they are failing.
Complain about this comment
Perhaps because (i) they created the current arrangements (ii) had many opportunities to change the system but (iii) chose not to change the system, the government feels obliged to defend the indefensible. It is risible and embarrassing.
The Tories and Libs should, this weekend, seek to claim the tiny piece of moral high ground that might be avialble by distancing themsleves from the government's ridiculous position. They should make a joint announcement along the following lines:
"We, the main opposition parties, recognise that all MPs have been found guilty in the Court of Public Opinion of bringing parliament into repute. We humbly apologise for our part in this. We hereby authorise the release of details of all expense claims made by our MPs over the last four years - this will be arranged through the local newspapers in each MPs' constituency. Our MPs will be reviewing their claims to identify amounts which might, on reflection, not satisfy the requirement of the Rules to have been incurred wholly, exclusively and necessarily in the performance of their duties as MPs. They will be making reimbursements as appropriate. As a further indication of our contrition, all our MPs will, on [Wednesday] of next week resign from their seats and will seek re-election."
Complain about this comment
Just cant get my head round why have the police been called in over the so called whistle blower about the MPs claims, they probably called 08003286340 a number which the government encourages citizens to call for benefit fraud, its the MPs themselves the police should be looking into , since when has it been legal to claim for a relative to work for you BUT NOT and pay them, lets not forget the baroness , Lester Piggot lost his knighthood for tax evasion is this not the equivalent? And as for one comment that MPs should be allowed to claim for anything needed to do the job a KITKAT ? Come on!
Complain about this comment
Good morning,
Decided after hearing the news to spend the day like an ostrich.
What is really disgusting about this waste of public money is how bad it is as regards taste. A lot of ignorant peasants, with illusions of grandour. Example: Prescott with his ghastly phoney 'Tudor' beams. One sees these on most 1930 semis on the motorway near Wembley, and people of taste have them removed. Then there is his wife, but enough said. If she married him, how could she be expected to show good taste? Blears, with her brash clothes, an ancient Laddie, looking like she has had a wild Saturday night. Brown and his brother sharing a cleaner, the mind boggles. No this isn't Marie Antoinette. nor the court of the last Tsar of Russia. This is more like a bonfire of teh pigs!
Complain about this comment
yellow @ 87
I haven't heard Miss Harman mention her "Court of Public Opinion" today though, does it still sit, Saga?
no, it was disbanded after proving so ineffectual in the Goodwin case (unfortunately)
you've noticed too, then, how it's always H who is sent into battle on the really difficult issues ... wonder why that is?
Complain about this comment
The Green Book rules ARE being broken. Come on Nick, hold them to account.
What about the "wholly and exclusively" rule? Many of these expenses wouldn't pass the criteria HMRC would apply to expenses in the business sector, so they shouldn't for MPs.
What about the "musn't enhance property value" rule? We have examples of £6000 spent on a bathroom, £10,000 on a kitchen. To spend that much, either the existing facilties must have been almost unusable, in which case the work must surely have "enhanced" the property value; or perfectly usable facilities were gutted for whatever reason, in which case the expenditure wasn't "wholly and exclusively" necessary to fullfil the claimant's parliamentary duties.
And that's even before considering the issue of "bringing the House into disrepute". Clearly much of what has been going on HAS brought the House into disrepute, and any "reasonable" person should have forseen that. Another rule broken.
So let's stop accepting the excuse that "everything was in accordence with the rules". Time and again, the rules WERE broken.
Complain about this comment
12. At 7:34pm on 08 May 2009, phoenixarisenq - Reading about the craven cad who recorded and charged for a 5p carrier bag
Gosh, those M&S PR guys are good. First they get the BBC to run stories on them charging the public (and MPs) to help save the planet, and then they get the political editor to help make a rather odd, if distracting point based around a fairly clear set-up where you cause a fake fuss (as a matter of interest, can I kick up on the pricing parity of anything I buy no longer needing to be based on the cost of materials?), get coverage, look into it, get coverage, and then respond... and get coverage. But yes, sorry is no longer the hardest word; it's currently smart marketing.
ps:
104. At 00:54am on 09 May 2009, Pensfold - If you read the MPs' expense rule book (The Green Book) you will find that most of the dubious expense claims are clearly not within the rules. The rules were just not enforced. So why do you keep saying they are within the rules? Have you read the rule book?
A very good question which, at risk of comments being closed again I'd love answered, as I just watched the BBC Breakfast, with one of its speed dial luvvie commentators wheeled on to say they same thing and wonder what all the fuss was about.
Almost like it was another politico-media establishment planned JASIT ('Just a storm in a teacup') campaign.
Complain about this comment
134. JunkkMale
Re: M&S, whhich luvvie was charging the public for her Large boob bags?
Complain about this comment
A month ago I must confess, I did something a bit naughty. I need repeat prescriptions on 3 to 4 different medicines a month adding up to over 37 GBP which is over a third of my monthly income, I'm not eligible for benefits of any kind, although I've only recently retired from a lifetime of full time work due to ill health and live off my meager savings.
I didn't have any cash at all last month, so when the pharmacist asked whether I paid for my prescriptions, I thought of how the bill for my medicines had tripled over the years (they've cut the amount of drugs per repeat prescription). I thought of all those MPs' televisions, second homes, porn videos and now we learn, cat food and fake Tudor beams. I thought of all those (predominantly Labour) voters in Scotland and Wales who don't pay for their life saving medicines...
So I just said "No".
Complain about this comment
Looks like the eyes have it ?good so far nick keep em coming.Looks like were all have to join old ken on the barge And we may all urinate at the same time.Ha Ha another small beer, Then i could do more.see ya.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
the war in Afghanistan is going very badly. We have finally retreated from Iraq, bar a few. When will Brown announce the inquiry into Iraq. In the meantime a family member of mine has an injunction placed on him by the High Court preventing him from speaking in public. He is silenced, why does the goevernment not take out an injunction against the daily Telegraph becuase what they are printing is against the national interest, and is a threat to national security. Furthermore, and quite seriously, they have enabled somebody to benefit from the proceeds of crime, namely nobody disagrees with the fact that thie information they are revealing comes from stolen property, or data. They must be subject to the law of the land, or does the national interest over-ride the laws of the land.
The police raided the office of an MP, surely they must raid the offices of the Daily Telegraph or are the press above the law of the land.
Finally, there are no Honourable Members, or Right Honourable Members, they are, to me no different to anybody else, they have lost totally any respect I had for them. From now on it is simply Brown, Darling, Mandelson etc...no more Lord this or Honourable Member, just Brown, Darling, Mandelson etc Shame on them all. They may not like it, but this is the end, show them all the doors. Get out now. Call an election, if we are to believe your colleague Robert Peston, then the crisis is over, why bother to go on with charade.
Complain about this comment
Nick Said:
What no-one said was sorry.
Dont see why they should Nick.
It all boils down to whether they broke the rules or not.
If the (expense) rules are sloppy, then change them & tighten them up.
Theres no use criticising MPs for not being accountable & then lambasting them for putting in an expense receipt for a Kit Kat bar.
In my expense regime, it is clearly laid out what I can claim for & I have to account for every penny, & if that means putting in a 50 pence receipt for a packet of biscuits, then I do.
The choice here is simple; You either have a per diem arrangement where each MP has a fixed living allowance given to them for being away from home, or you have a tightened no gain expense system.
The former will still have Fleet Street complaining because some people will cut corners & pocket the difference, which leaves us with the latter.
This will be expensive to Police, in fact more expensive than a per diem system, but at least the FS Editors can sleep a little better at night.
What is quite clear is that the current for profit system cant go on just because some MPs see it as a perk of the job.
Complain about this comment
76 englandrise
Forgive me if i'm wrong but wasn't the first parliament a British
parliament,and the mother of all parliaments.
#The mother of all parliaments was the English parliament - not this cesspit.
The time is coming to throw these scoundrels out and start afresh. The Scots have got something right with their own parliament and it's time England had the same.
English parliament now. A new start.
Since it would have to be all English MPs who would need to answer your criteria for a English parliament, and since those already found to have perpetrated the actions that have incurred your wrath are 98% English MPs then you shouldn't hold out to great a expectation for a squeaky clean English government should you get one. I might go so far as to say that its only the Scottish, Irish and Welsh that are giving this British parliament any air of respectability.
And finally,for "finally" 285 I did try to write this post in words of one syllable so that you might understand it but I am afraid it was beyond my limited intelligence, perhaps you have found someone to paraphrase for you, but then its probably not relevant, so you had better pass over my posts, and I'll do my very best to understand yours out of courtesy not that I feel there's to much inspiration in them for me, but then your so interlectually above me that this is probably understandable.
Complain about this comment
#136
May I suggest you go to Citizens' Advice. The way you describe your position you should get some benefit even if you have not paid any contributions after a lifetime of work. Of course you are just trying to clumsily make a valid point.
The real point is that in many cases the DWP is amazingly mean which is a stark contrast with MPs expenses.
Complain about this comment
@ 110
Hopefully, if the scource is exposed, that person will be well rewarded and feted as the taxpayers champion
they've already been well rewarded ... by the Daily Telegraph
we're not talking Gregory Peck in "To Kill a Mockingbird" here, you know
Complain about this comment
I don't think that the MPs have a case. When asked about the expenses, they say it is within the rules. What about morals?
It is within the rules for an 80 year-old man to sleep with a 16 year-old girl. Would you do it - or would you think "actually, that probably is morally wrong (as well as disgusting), so I will leave it"?
The rules are to stop people going so far off the radar it is unbelievable - our morals stop us from going anywhere near the line. I thought we were being run by a government (and a man) with a moral compass!!
I also do not understand why these people are elected. If they have to worry about expenses, they can't be very successful. To successful people, £20k worth of expenses is less than a month's interest!
I propose that we, the people, set up a party that takes the £60k a year but claims no expenses. "The Value For Money" party! How hard can it be - try your best and if it all goes pear-shaped, borrow shed loads of money or sell shares in the dozen banks you own.
Let's do it!
Complain about this comment
132 sagamix
"you've noticed too, then, how it's always H who is sent into battle on the really difficult issues ... wonder why that is?"
errrr..... because she's the Leader of the House of Commons, which all these "really difficult issues" eminate from. She also has the personal quality of being so detached from reality of life in this country that she can brazenly go on TV and keep a straight face about it all, repeatedly quoting the "within the rules" line. She looks slightly less silly than Hazel Blears does, which is about all I can say in her favour.
Complain about this comment
The behaviour of MPs and government ministers alike is a disgrace. They now have the gall to complain about privacy and threaten legal action against the press. However there is no sign of contrition from any of them, only anger that they have been caught stealing from the public purse , and claiming they have a right to do so. Each and every one of them who has taken unfair advantage of the system should now be asked to step down from parliament and seek re election. Sadly this would involve a sudden onslaught of honesty and integrity which at the moment is something our honourable members of parliament and our government are woefully lacking. The Prime Minister, who should have been above this sort of sleaze, has also been found wanting and instead of trying to sort out the problem is attempting to sweep it under the carpet "in the interest of getting on with saving the country ". He too must allow the country to reach it's own conclusions on the affair and give it's decision on it at a general election at which all those guilty of abusing the trust of their electors will be removed from office.
Complain about this comment
I don't understand how Gordon has the cheek to blame the system. Did the "system" hold a gun to his head and force him to claim for a London flat when he already had a free one in Downing Street? If he can't see that this was morally wrong, then he's not fit to be a lollipop man, far less prime minister.
Complain about this comment
"The mother of all parliaments"
Isn't there a word missing there?
Complain about this comment
Nick, it was within the rules just won't wash anymore.
The Nazis tried that defence at Nuremberg, look what happened to them in that "Court of Public Opinion"!
I can't decide whether to be 1) sickened by, or 2) merely laugh contemptuously at, Mr Mandelson for his pathetic excuse given on TV interviews last night.
He bleated on about how unfair it was for the papers to take a piece of information and manipulate it for their advantage to make government ministers look bad.
This is how the whole NuLabour project has been run for the last 12 years, architect, one Peter Mandelson, aided and abetted by his attack dogs Campbell and McBride.
They really are hypocrites of the highest order.
Complain about this comment
Nick, care to do an investigative job on all these MPs "flipping" their second homes for maximum financial advantage clearly against the Green Book rules?
Care to do a piece about the hypocricy of housing ministers and chancellors of the Exchequer getting the taxpayer to pay their housing taxes for them?
Care to do a piece about the Justice Secretary claiming ignorance and accounting errors as a legitimate excuse, when the courts would not entertain such a defence?
Nick?
Complain about this comment
Dear Nick,
In case you had forgotten someone called LORD NOLAN, let me remind you of this......
The Seven Principles of Public Life
Selflessness
Holders of public office should take decisions solely in terms of the public interest. They should not do so in order to gain financial or other material benefits for themselves, their family, or their friends.
Integrity
Holders of public office should not place themselves under any financial or other obligation to outside individuals or organisations that might influence them in the performance of their official duties.
Objectivity
In carrying out public business, including making public appointments, awarding contracts, or recommending individuals for rewards and benefits, holders of public office should make choices on merit.
Accountability
Holders of public office are accountable for their decisions and actions to the public and must submit themselves to whatever scrutiny is appropriate to their office.
Openness
Holders of public office should be as open as possible about all the decisions and actions that they take. They should give reasons for their decisions and restrict information only when the wider public interest clearly demands.
Honesty
Holders of public office have a duty to declare any private interests relating to their public duties and to take steps to resolve any conflicts arising in a way that protects the public interest.
Leadership
Holders of public office should promote and support these principles by leadership and example.
These principles apply to all aspects of public life. The Committee has set them out here for the benefit of all who serve the public in any way.
And your response is what, Nick?
Xxxx
Complain about this comment
Nick,
"And this on a day when M&S publicly apologised for the somewhat lesser misdemeanour of - charging more for bigger bras "
Presumably this is what Gordon Brown meant by "No more boom and bust".
Complain about this comment
Blame the rules... this is an interesting one.
If they say 'the rules are wrong' that means they know the rules are bad in allowing claims which were actually wrong.
So therefore, if they know this, they knew the claims they made were wrong.
Note this carefully:
They are not saying - my claims are within the rules, and the rules are fine, so I believe my claims are fine.
They are saying - my claims are within the rules, and that is why they are ok, but I know the rules are wrong. If the rules were better, my claim would be rejected.
SO THEY KNEW THE CLAIMS ARE WRONG
That's what the defence of 'within rules that we know are wrong' means!
Also Nick, you said:
"The prime minister was joined in blaming the system by the leaders of both main opposition parties"
Where did David Cameron say it was the system's fault. Ok, I have not stalked him every minute of the day since this story broke, but from what I have read of his response it was somewhat different to that.
He said in one post I read (blue blog) "I understand why people are angry about this". I don't remember any cabinet minister saying that.
David Cameron also said: "[I am] making sure that our MPs and MEPs set out clearly how they spend public money".
Ok, it's not quite what we'd like. "yes it's wrong, it's unacceptable, the public have a right to more integrity from their elected MPS, and not only have we put in place a voluntary system within the party to control expenses, but I am personally ensuring all excessive claims from my MPs are repaid" would have been nice.
But I have not heard him say: 'it's fine because it's within the rules'. Did he really say that ? Or was your statement Nick just a convenient journo-bite?
Complain about this comment
143
"It is within the rules for an 80 year-old man to sleep with a 16 year-old girl. Would you do it - or would you think "actually, that probably is morally wrong (as well as disgusting), so I will leave it"?"
Have you seen the on the news about a prominent Italian politician recently ?
Complain about this comment
some one called it the brown gravy train and that sounds about right but the openly greedy mob in parliment have damaged that institutions reputation beyond repair.
sadly the voters of this country have been hoodwinked by smooth talking pickpockets who now believe they are above every one else.
looking at some of these figures some spend more than i earn a year just on security for one property im sickened by there frivilous expences.
claiming items like nappies and offal as expences shows these peoples lack of judgement and how much they are willing to waste our tax money on personal items.
its time there was a change now sooner than later.
Complain about this comment
148 yellowbelly1959
"I can't decide whether to be 1) sickened by, or 2) merely laugh contemptuously at, Mr Mandelson for his pathetic excuse given on TV interviews last night.
He bleated on about how unfair it was for the papers to take a piece of information and manipulate it for their advantage to make government ministers look bad.
This is how the whole NuLabour project has been run for the last 12 years, architect, one Peter Mandelson, aided and abetted by his attack dogs Campbell and McBride."
===============
I have to agree with you there. I saw Mandelson give that interview on the news last night and his total lack of self awareness was quite breathtaking. It was remarkable to say the least, that the man creator of the slick New Labour spin, smear, style over substance approach should be criticising the media of manipulating information for their own purposes!!!!! Whatever makes him think he is in a position to criticise anyone else for that !!!! Incredible.
Complain about this comment
I'm getting a little bored with this blog. It has served its purpose and allowed a good number of us to let off steam. The system needs sorting end of story!
Can we get back to the real issue that is affecting all of us, that is the parlous state of our economy. The expenses row is yet another excuse for the Government to take its eye off the ball and delay the necessary changes in taxation, pensions and spending until the next parliament.
By all means use the expenses scandal as the catalyst to somehow force a general election. What we desperately need is a Government that has a mandate for a full five years to drag us out of the mire, we cannot afford to wait for a further 12 months!
Complain about this comment
Nick
Stop the soft soap, stop the excuses.
Do you really believe that sarah and gordon getting married required an extra 3 hours cleaning of gordons london flat a week? (up from 4 to 7).
That 3 hours a week had previously been enough to clean all of sarahs old flat.
Floors only have to be hoovered once, beds only made once etc...
Not a huge amount of money (compared to the trillions of our money that gordon wastes elsewhere) - but if he can't explain why so much extra time was needed, then he has been less than honest about this, and a dishonest PM's would have only one option.
Complain about this comment
"sagamix wrote:
well it's a sorry saga I must say - MPs ought to have higher standards than your average Joe but it would appear from all this that (with one or two laudable exceptions such as Harriet Harman and Alan Johnson) they do not"
Saga I am sure that you know that Harman represents a London constituency and I believe they were excempt from the second house allowance (because they really don't need them!)
However wikipedia does state the following:
"In January 2009 Harman proposed a rule change to exempt MPs' expenses from the freedom of information act. Her parliamentary order, aimed to remove "most expenditure information held by either House of Parliament from the scope of the [Freedom of Information] Act". It meant that under the law, journalists and members of the public would no longer be entitled to learn details of their MP's expenses. Labour MPs were to be forced to vote for this measure by use of a three line whip. Her proposal was eventually withdrawn following the Conservative party saying they would vote against"
So just think - if Harman had her way none of this would be known and it would have all been hidden from the public. As the defenders of ID cards say - if you have "nothing to hide you have nothing to fear".
In the cases of expenses we see exactly what Ministers had to fear.
Complain about this comment
156. At 10:39am on 09 May 2009, oldreactionary wrote:
I'm getting a little bored with this blog. It has served its purpose and allowed a good number of us to let off steam. The system needs sorting end of story!
====================================================================
Quite right, old boy. Just one last comment/question and then I will shut up. Why does Phil Woolas need women's clothing and toiletries? It seems he claimed for them. Now Mandy.......
Complain about this comment
#136 Talley-ho - a couple of points to raise with you. I am in a similar position to yourself but i am Scottish and live in Scotland. free scripts are not here yet , the price you pay has reduced and it will be zero in a couple of years& terminal cancer patients still pay full whack for scripts. How can the Scottish Parliament afford to do that i hear you cry. well if we deal with fact instead of spin our msp's can spend more time on legislation and less time on expenses because they are actually controlled and are very transparent and are published ,YES published every 3 months without the need of a whistle blower making a mint or a police investigation.it is amazing how that concentrates their minds & their actions.
this is simply yet another smear on my country by politicians and journalist's who are scared of the future, they have told so many lies ,they can't remember them all.
If Scotland is such a drain on the rest of the UK why are they fighting tooth and nail to keep us within the UK
Complain about this comment
153 strictly pickled
"It is within the rules for an 80 year-old man to sleep with a 16 year-old girl. Would you do it - or would you think "actually, that probably is morally wrong (as well as disgusting), so I will leave it"?"
#Have you seen the on the news about a prominent Italian politician recently ?
Since its considered that a sixteen year old girl is quite cabable of deciding who she may or may not sleep with,and since as I sometimes am told that if your over seventy five, never mind eighty you are unable to make a informative decision, then in the scenario posed above who would be the morally wrong?.
Personally I dont care who sleeps with who as long as its legal.
Complain about this comment
I as usual am amazed by the hypocrisy on display here.
1) Do none of the above ever read the ongoing expenses jokes in "Alex" (Telegraph cartoon serial)
2) Are there no ex trade unionists who shared a car with 3 others and all claimed for return rail tickets.
3) Are there no reps or ex reps on here that claimed the 20p for a sachet of sauce from a motorway services.
4) Have none of the above ever paid "cash in hand " for a VAT-able job.
YES they have extracted the P, but its what happens when you have a "loose" expenses system. If you added up all the "wrong doing" it wouldn't pay for 3 minuites of the banking support payments.
Check out France, The USA, Germany and don't even go third world or Africa, the UK is still and will continue to be,one of the least corrupt nations in the world.
I have been in many industries, including ones supplying goods and services to the Houses of Parliament and the level of "cash commissions" paid to lower level staff in the service departments was the same as in any other sector, often 5% of the invoice value of any delivery.
Thats the way it works, I always found "High Dudgeon" about it until the little brown envelope or the tickets to the last day of the Open golf were pressed into their grasping mitts.
When an electrical goods shop is broken into if you asked the "Blagger" how many DVD players and T.V's he got and then compared it to the number the police record as having gone and then the owners insurance claim, I'm pretty darn sure you would get three different figures.
We're in general "good" people in this country, but NOT that good.
Complain about this comment
Nick, as I understand it the Additional Costs Allowance is there for MPs who have constituencies some way away from Westminster to be able to live and work in both their constituency and Westminster.
If we take as a hypothetical example an MP who represented, say, Luton as an MP it would be quite reasonable for them to have a home in Luton and a base in London, and to be able to claim under the present rules.
Would it be fair though for them to "flip" their second home to, say, Southampton, which is nowhere near either Westminster or Luton, to enable them to claim GBP22,500 on treating dry rot at a holiday home?
Complain about this comment
MPs may not be in their positions for more than four years so I guess they "store" up assets as and when they can for the possible bad times after they are in office. They have also profited from the sale of their London acommodation (several times in some cases). When they leave office they would surely make a packet on the after dinner speech circuit etc etc.
HOWEVER, they are showing themselves to be GREEDY and GRABBERS. They no longer hold the moral high ground (as Labour / Socialists would have us believe). It is a disease from Bankers and Politicians down to the ordinary credit crazy public. No wonder self esteem is low giving rise to binge drinking, drug taking, fragmented familes, obesity etc. All compounded by complete and utter disregard for the disgraceful immigration allowed into this country by a greedy, grabbing, cloistered government. Talk about NEW WORLD ORDER! Brown and Blair ignored this country whilst following their own GLOBAL agendas. Brown will not stop till he is Chancellor of the EU or something similarly elevated. Tries to save the world but cannot save this country. Swine flu is just designed to frighten us along with climate change. Very subtle and utterly disgraceful.
My short answer is for the government to own a luxury hotel type dwelling near to Westminster with underground access to and from (for security). That would possibly stop the sex scandals too.
They should be given a large enough salary to buy their own tampons.
I am shocked and appalled that a Labour government of all things would behave in this contemptuous manner and they should be got out NOW.
Complain about this comment
161. At 11:01am on 09 May 2009, grandantidote
Are you getting in your defence early for next year?
Complain about this comment
154 delminister,
Hardly the Brown gravy train more the parliamentry gravy train, I like many others on here find that abusing the expenses system is in very poor taste to put it mildly, but I am honest enough unlike many on here for whom butter wouldn't melt in their mouths, to wonder if I had in my life ever worked in a position where I could claim expenses legally would I have used the system in the same way, I hear you all clamouring to say, I wouldn't but I do really wonder how many of you wouldn't or haven't perhaps on a minor scale, of course none of you.
Its wrong we all know its wrong, but given the opportunity???.
Complain about this comment
When you do the maths these claims are even more outrageous because they are tax free.Northern Ireland Secratary Shaun Woodwards claim of £100,000 over four years is equivalent to £166,000 before tax at a marginal rate of 40%. In addition MPs are allowed to keep the profits from the sale of houses funded by the tax taken from us. My complaint is that they shouldnt be paid a fair wage for the work they do. Its the contempt they have for the people that they represent. The defence that claims are within the rules are missing the point. We dont expect our MPs to profit from their constituents hard earnt money and we dont expect them to avoid paying tax on benefits when the rest of us are expected to pay our share. Its time someone in the Houses of Parliament had the morale courage to say that this is wrong and that in future benefits would be treated like any other employees benefits and profits from the sale of second homes would be used to cover any expenses claimed plus interest so that tax payers are not out of pocket.
Complain about this comment
1,
The BBC showed an old black and white clip recently of Clement Atlee leaving 10 Downing Street for a long distance trip on governmental business. The car was driven by his wife!
Oh, the good old days.
Complain about this comment
165 yellow belly
#Are you getting in your defence early for next year?
Still at it then,
in answer to your question,
If I was your the last person I'd tell,
my days of being attractive to 16 year old girls passed long ago, but even at 78 probably not so long as yours.
Complain about this comment
Grandantidote. "given the opportunity" we would all do I suppose you mean?
True, I have seen it many times in commerce and industry. When I worked at the Treasury you had to fill out a requisition for a pot plant!
Times have changed but I feel strongly that those who represent us in parliament should strive to lead exemplary lives whilst realising what life and struggles are like for the ordinary public.
I had always heard Labour / Socialists saying they were for the ordinary people - seems to me they may be "for" them but they want to live the high life themselves.
Complain about this comment
Ministers must be weighed down by the thickness of their skin. It was only a short while ago that Brown was calling for Fred Goodwin to pay back his pension. What's the difference between Fred and the government, Fred was only acting within "the rules".
Smith and McNulty should be sacked, with others to follow.
Complain about this comment
159 phoenixarisonq
Quite right, old boy. Just one last comment/question and then I will shut up. Why does Phil Woolas need women's clothing and toiletries? It seems he claimed for them. Now Mandy.......
Oh! pheonix you are naughty.
Complain about this comment
What is so very sad about all this is - as you say Nick - that no-one will be sacked or censured for any of this. MPs are apparently untouchable which is amazing considering how very unimpressive most of them are when you hear them perform in Question Time or on other media outlets. How do most of these people get to be MPs anyhow? I spent a day with one on holiday 6-7 years ago just after he had broken into Westminster. His stupidity was only matched by his arrogance. I think you can bend the rules for genius but this lot have promoted and rewarded themselves well above their own capability.
Complain about this comment
1607 pjc1606
#My complaint is that they shouldnt be paid a fair wage for the work they do
what do you suggest we pay them then.
Complain about this comment
I think that brown and his government should resign and call an election,and start again from scratch.These so called ministers are not working class and looking out for low paid people,they are money grabbing greedy wealthy people.I voted for a blair government in 2005 to be replaced by the this most appalling brown government. Ive seen some poor governments in the last 50 years but this takes the biscuit.
Complain about this comment
#166 i do agree with you up to a point,we all would probobly do the same,but these people should set an example,also I wonder what other public bodies expenses claims are? the bbc for example, I think we would be shocked eveen more!!!.
Complain about this comment
I'm still not sure why I have to subsidise Gordon Brown's personal house cleaning. He is in the top tax bracket, isn't he? I can understand the upkeep of No. 10 being legitimate but why his second home? Rules or no rules. Can someone justify this to me?
Complain about this comment
There are NO innocent M.P.s' in this Wasteminstergate Affair.
Why? Well even those in the Commons who now claim to have NOT Milked the System, cannot overlook the blindly obvious FACT being THAT ALL M.P.s' KNEW WHAT WAS GOING ON, and by their OWN SILENCE choose to do NOTHING.
The WHOLE of British Politics stinks to high heaven, along with their excuses in talking HORSE MANURE.
Complain about this comment
The next election....TO VOTE OR NOT TO VOTE THAT IS THE QUESTION...As somebody who has been made redundant for the third time in my working life, and has written to my MP (Lab) with relevant questions about unemployment, he eventually replied with a 2 page letter and I will add did not amswer a single question, and now this shameful behaviour I cannot wait to read his claim for expenses.Men and Women die in wars so we can be free, I despair I really do of of MP's they are morally corrupt.
Complain about this comment
167 PJC1606
I was incensed about Woodward until I discovered that he voluntarily doesn't take his Minister's salary because he is so rich. On balance, that makes him damn fine value for money. Over four years, even at £166,000, his account is in credit.
It does seem an odd thing to do, be so generous on the one hand and then maximise claims on the other. It's like he has an accountant that can't stop his employer giving up large parts of remuneration, but is determined to maximise the take on other items because that's what he does. At bit like the Scorpion stinging the frog in the middle of the river.
Cut Woordward some slack I say. He seems a lot closer to the Nolan model (see above) than some others, even the Harmans of this world with small claims but vacuous defence of the whole mess.
Complain about this comment
There is a rather splendid document "MPs, Ministers and Tax", http://www.parliament.uk/deposits/depositedpapers/2009/DEP2009-0086.doc, which provides advice to MPs and Ministers about tax.
A key point is that, if the Fees Office accept a claim under the Additional Costs Allowance, the payment is exempt from tax. The rules which apply to ordinary mortals - that expenses must be wholly and necessaily incurred in the execution of one's duties - simply do not apply. The money is a tax-free payment. End of story. Or perhaps not, as far as those of us whose incomes are not exempt are concerned.
Complain about this comment
And Blair used to talk about respect, how could anyone have anything but contempt for these greedy M.P's
Its like living in a banana republic.
Complain about this comment
When Fred The Shred said he was entitled to his pension Harriet Harman mentioned ' The Court of Public Opinion.' Haven't heard any mention of this imaginary body with regard to MPs expenses just a tame 'They kept within the rules' from the Leader of The House of Commons. The sooner the new rules come into force the better so that we can concentrate on more important matters and leave breaches of regulations to The designated Commons Commitees.
Complain about this comment
#179 I would vote,yes we should all vote,but as a labour voter all my life my vote wont be going to labour, i quite like the ukip or bnp, thats how bad things have got around here.what has happened to our country?I really feel sorry for the young people saddled with all this debt for years to come, what a great example they are being set by brown and co.
Complain about this comment
180. At 11:54am on 09 May 2009, thomasak001 wrote:
167 PJC1606
I was incensed about Woodward until I discovered that he voluntarily doesn't take his Minister's salary because he is so rich. On balance, that makes him damn fine value for money. Over four years, even at 166,000, his account is in credit.
It does seem an odd thing to do, be so generous on the one hand and then maximise claims on the other. It's like he has an accountant that can't stop his employer giving up large parts of remuneration, but is determined to maximise the take on other items because that's what he does. At bit like the Scorpion stinging the frog in the middle of the river.
Cut Woordward some slack I say. He seems a lot closer to the Nolan model (see above) than some others, even the Harmans of this world with small claims but vacuous defence of the whole mess.
===
Salary taxed at 40% plus N.I.
Expenses claims tax-free.
Simples!
Complain about this comment
Nick
Will you start a campaign to get the House of Commons authorities to bring in a team from Price Waterhouse to go through the last five years expense claims; decide which broke the rules; and get back the overpayment along with a fine equal to the original false claim.
Complain about this comment
Nick
I dont think saying sorry will make any difference anymore.
You say sorry to someone for accidently bumping into them in the street, not for systematically screwing what you can within the rules of parliamentary expenses.
For sorry to be convincing first resign, then say sorry, nothing else cuts the mustard for people who would have us believe that they are selfless 'public servants' in the job to 'help hard working families and small business'.
Exactly how many of our standard bearer public servant politicians resigned over being 'clever' with expenses rules.?
NONE
They prefer to hide like cowards behind the exact wording of 'the rules'.
The currency of all politicians is the lowest I can ever recall, the labour party have dragged the whole institution down with them. Only the lib dems seem to be left with a shred of integrity and honesty of action intact.
Talk to the 'man in the street' everybody is sick to death of them, there is no ideology to vote for no passion, no alternative vision, just a hobsons choice between the dubious charisma of the leaders.
I wish something compelling and fresh and decent would come along and sweep this lot away, even that is hard to imagine. The incumbents on both sides have learnt the system so well now alternative views never get a look in the media unless you add an element of ridicule to it, dress up as superman and strap yourself to big ben...then and only then do you get coverage but in the process lose mainstream credibility..very clever amingst the self interested press barons and the handful of media elite who control mainstream media output.
We have been done for by creeping complicity and lack of vision, what ever happened to building Jerusalem in Englands green and pleasant land after WW2?.
Now all we aspire to build is shopping malls, casinos, cafe bars and souless edifices to live in.
Worse than that we are now getting set up by the incumbents to line their pockets again before the big crash.
Investors take note, banks will offer you 3.0% interest so long as you sign up for 1, 2 or 3 years. They know and are actively lobbying for the policys to create the conditions such that next year interest rates will be on the climb again in a big way and hey guess who will be creaming off all the profits and bonuses on your savings locked in at 3.0% when the base rate is at 5% or more ????
Yet noboddy does a god dam thing about it, not the BBC not the newspapers, not anyone, they are all part of the same club, not through deliberate acts but via complacency and a desire to take the path of least resistence.
We used to be able to rely on the BBC at least until Alaister Campbell cynically and systematically pulled out all their free spririted journalistic teeth for their 'weapons of mass destruction' governmental deception. How many weapons did they find again? How many links to Al queda did they find again?? Since then all we seem to get from the BBC is pre-digested journalistic pap, no risks, no cutting edge, no servise to the people.
Why arn't more people angry, why arn't journalists furious with governments and bankers?
Are we all so wrapped up in surfing the net,saving for pensions that will be worth nothing and trying to achieve the impossible of staying young and rich forever to bother building something sustainable and beautiful?
I was in Edinburgh this week, we are not even capable of building the beautiful architecture you can see there now, all we can build is cheap and nasty looking pre-fab glass and steel edifices that look rusty, dated and dirty within a few years. Where is the magnificence in society?
For goodness sake wake UP!!!
Why do I bother.
We will carry on like this until a crisis forces us to change. No point in pointing out the obvious it seems, the only thing that will get people off thier backsides will be when mass uneployment or worse directly influenses a critical mass of people.
Unfortunately due to our technology and effciency that critical mass threshold will be very high in the modern world. if through efficinet agriculture and production we now have, if people can claim benefits and still eat and have broadband and a crate of high strengh lager a week nothing will happen, except of course noboddy will have any real pleasure in existing.
Rant over, nobody ever does anything anyway, im just p****** into the wind.
Jericoa
Complain about this comment
On 24 March 2009 the Moderators on this Blog REMOVED/CENSORED a Comment I had made about MPs and their venality and corruption.
I had written a Comment following Nick Robinson's previous Article on Parliament, MPs and Expenses etc.
I did not agree with the moderator's judgement but of course I was powerless to do anything about it.
However, in view of the new revelations about out our esteemed, elected representatives at Westminster and another Mr Robinson Article on the topic I will try again:
MPs are corrupt; MPs are venal; MPs are a disgrace.
I originally contended it would be hard to find 5% of MPs who were honest and had integrity, but, reduced that to 2.5% in another comment.
By my reckoning according to the present absolutely unacceptable, "..I did it cos the rules said I could.." excuses now being trotted out by an entire Cabinet and with the Telegraph hinting it will be the same for HM Loyal (!?) Opposition I further reduce that calculation to 0.5%.
I.e. less MPs are trustworthy and honest than the fingers on 2 hands!
I also wrote that I would never stand for Election as an MP as because of the greasy, greed-driven atmosphere I would feel the need of a shower every hour Parliament sat.
I now think I was being optimistic: It is almost certain were I or any normal Citizen (for normal, read: Paid only what I am owed not what I may be entitled to claim) to be elected to Parliament we would have to find a meeting place other than the House of Commons for we would surely risk being overcome by the stench and humbug, and it most certainly would not be emanating from the River Thames!
Complain about this comment
Every single MP who has openly abused parliamentary expenses and then claimed it is the system at fault , not them , should hang their head in shame.Thinking that this taxpayers slush fund was their right to plunder for some of the most pathetic reasons that I have ever heard.
What I find the hardest to understand is that these very MP's were happy to take advantage of the taxpayer , whilst our boys in Iraq/afganistan , for a time , had no body protection vests and were killed by roadside bombs inside thin skinned Landrovers , because of lack of money , DISGUSTING.
Complain about this comment
Out of interest, if a member of public asked for the police to investigate this matter, what action could they take?
Complain about this comment
Gordon Brown spending 6,500 pounds for a house he didn't occupy (remember he was occupying, tax-free, a grace and favour residence in Downing Street) appears excessive. One thorough cleaning, every three months, would seem more than sufficient.
So, Nick, have you asked the Prime Minister why this money was wasted on an empty property??? And you claim to be a journalist. You don't appear to do any investigation, but merely copy the latest release from the Downing Street spindoctors.
Complain about this comment
NICK
OBVIOUSLY YOU HAVE GROWN TOO CLOSE TO THE FRAUDSTERS BY SAYING THERE HAVE BEEN NO RESIGNING MATTERS.IN THE REAL WORLD WHERE NEITHER YOU OR THE GOVERNMENT LIVE ALL OF THESE MATTERS ARE RESIGNING MATTERS.PERHAPS YOU ARE SAVING YOUR ANGST FOR MONDAYS PAPERS REPORTING ON THE TORIES.THANK GOODNESS THE DAY IS SWIFTLY COMING WHERE THIS GOVERNMENT ,THE BBC INCLUDING IMPARTIAL REPORTERS LIKE YOU WILL FACE SOME SORT OF JUDGEMENT.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
in America the politicians are now becoming aware that there is a threat to their society from returning American soldiers who may want to overthrow the government. I think thgat we are fast approaching the time when our military may well say that they fought for their Queen and country. That they sign an oath of allegiance to the Queen, not PMs. So, I think that we are closer than ever before to a take-over by the military, that there will be a government of national unity, with people actually taking action to protect what they think they have lost. It is time for brave people to stand and be counted, this is a wasted parliament. Maybe we have not exported democracy to the world in our wars against terror, in Iraq and Afghanistan, but what we have brought is authoritarian rule, the actual end of a liberal democracy as we know it, but a dictatorship. This is closer than many realise to the end, America revolted over taxes, over corrupt rule from overseas, no taxation without representation I believe was the cry, well we have no representative democracy. This really is the end game.
Complain about this comment
Is Phil Woolas an incontinent cross-dresser?
Complain about this comment
I will accept that as has been suggested on these posts many people would abuse expenses given the chance,but to seemingly use this as an excuse for MPs of any party to do the same is completely wrong.If this is the justification for MPs to feather their own beds at the tax payers expense they should have the same consequences if caught,but they don'tthey just look forward to their pension.
Complain about this comment
Dear Nick,
Harriet Harperson has said that the onus was not on politicians to submit legitimate expenses but on the Parliamentary authorities to police the claims.
Is that not like the Nazis saying the were forced to murder millions because the rules said so and so they had to?
I think the Nurenburg trials would have been far more interesting if they had used that line of defence.
Nazis' are innocent, it's the rules stoopid!!!!
Xxxx
ps
You are a bit on the quiet side today Nick? Not choking on Kit kats are you?
Complain about this comment
The hyperlink in my posting 181 had a break inserted in it which means that it doesn't work. It is
http://www.parliament.uk/deposits/depositedpapers/2009/DEP2009-0086.doc
The document MPs, Ministers and Tax (which is produced by HMRC) sheds some light on Jacqui Smith's "second" home. There is a special rule for Ministers (page 29):
ACA and London Supplement
You will normally need accommodation in or near London in order to carry out your Ministerial duties. All Ministers (except those with an official residence) are
paid the London Supplement
regarded for ACA purposes as having their main home in London.
If you have a provincial constituency you may claim ACA (see page 15 for overnight stays in or near your constituency, in addition to the London Supplement). This applies even if your constituency home is your main home for tax purposes.
This special rule does not affect the capital gains tax rules on your main residence (see page 30).
I wonder why she didn't cite this when pressed to explain her claims for her constituency home? Or is the existence of the rule too embarrassing?
Complain about this comment
Lest we forget the sincerity, honesty and integrity of our Delirious Leader and the rest of his party, let us remind ourselves of his vision uttered at the time of his assumption as Prime Minister.
It is lengthy but it shows how far we have come since then which is not a lot; in fact some would say we have gone backwards.
Why is it relevant here?
Because at the time, all MPs (of all colours) knew the expenses system to be a trough of plenty.
At least New Labour took the moral high ground and promised to do something about it even if as it turned out they didn't.
As for the Tories, Lib Dems and all the others in the House, they should apologise to the country for not doing anything about the abuses that took place; instead they chose to fill their own pockets.
To be fair to the Lib Dems, apart from the odd high profile case of misappropriation, I think that they will come out of this with their heads held high. If they have got any sense, they will use this to their advantage when they come to replace New Labour as the new Opposition Party.
Here goes.
I give you our very own Gordon Brown on the day Blair was ousted and he took over at the top table:
"It is with humility, pride and a great sense of duty that I accept the privilege and the great responsibility of leading our party and changing our country.
I will endeavour to justify every day and in every act the trust you have placed in me. Leadership is an awesome responsibility.
So let me begin by personally thanking Tony Blair - a man who for 10 years has borne the burden of leadership of our country.
Let us never forget his towering presence in the international community, his work on Africa, climate change, his work to win the Olympics for Britain, and the skills and determination he brought to securing peace in Northern Ireland.
Tony - on behalf of the Labour Party, thank you.
And John Prescott - for his determination, his strength, his commitment to social justice, and a lifetime of standing up for working people: let us applaud John Prescott. And we know there is a worthy successor in Harriet Harman who has done so much to increase women's representation in Parliament.
This week I will form a new government with new priorities to meet the new challenges ahead.
Having visited every part of Britain and listened to and learned from the British people, I have seen at first hand a Britain of rising aspiration and I see the need for change to meet new needs.
I grew up in Kirkcaldy, the community I now represent in Parliament.
I went to my local school and was one of the people in my class to get to university. When at 16 I suffered an injury at rugby and lost my sight in one eye, I was fortunate enough to have the NHS which saved the sight in my other. It is for me a matter of fundamental principle that the best education and the best health care I received should be there not only for me and my family, but there for all families in all parts of Britain.
This is what my parents taught me and will never leave me: that each and everyone of us should have the chance to develop their talent, and that each of us should use whatever talents we have to enable people least able to help themselves.
And so I say honestly: I am a conviction politician. Call it "the driving power of social conscience", call it "the better angels of our nature", call it "our moral sense", call it a belief in "civic duty".
I joined this party as a teenager because I believed in these values. They guide my work, they are my moral compass. This is who I am.
Half a century ago, housing became a national priority and there was a promise of a property-owning democracy, but then unfortunately it was just for a few. Now in 2007, housing will be a priority.
The Housing minister will attend Cabinet and will lead the national debate on the new homes we must build. And this time the promise of a property-owning democracy must be open to all those wanting to get on the housing ladder for the first time.
Our national mission is to be world class in education. Step by step we will raise investment in state school pupils - now £5,500 per pupil - to today's levels for private school pupils: £8,000 a year. For every boy and girl the right to education until 18, and for every young person the offer of a college or university place or an apprenticeship, or pre-apprenticeship course, as the route to a career.
I've spent a lot of time in the last six weeks talking to patients and doctors, nurses and NHS staff. Every person I have met believes in the NHS, but I know also from everything I have heard round the country that we need to do better - and the NHS will be my immediate priority.
We need to and will do better at ensuring access for patients at the hours that suit them; better at getting basics of food, hygiene and cleanliness right; better at helping people to manage their own health; better at ensuring patients are treated with dignity in the NHS; better at providing the wider range of services now needed by our growing elderly population, and while implementing our essential reforms, better at listening to and valuing our staff.
Today we also face all the challenges that globalisation brings. I believe in a British economy founded on dynamic, flexible markets and open competition. But for workers undercut by employers in this country who break the law by paying less than the minimum wage we will act.
And we must be far clearer in speaking up for the common ground upon which we stand - the shared British values of liberty, civic duty and fairness to all. In return for opportunity for all we expect and demand responsibility from all: to learn English, contribute to and respect the culture we build together.
Also, no matter your class, colour or creed every individual citizen has the right to rise as far as your talents take you. Our way of life is to reject the prejudice and discrimination practised by those who preach xenophobia and racism.
Just as we work with the European Union, America and the rest of the world on global warming, we will also work with them to build the strongest multilateral response to all the security challenges we face.
In Iraq, which all of us accept has been a divisive issue for our party and our country, in Afghanistan and in the Middle East, we will meet our international obligations, we will learn lessons that need to be learned, and at all times be unyielding in support for our dedicated armed forces.
Our foreign policy will reflect the truth that to isolate and defeat terrorist extremism now involves more than military force - it is also a struggle of ideas and ideals. An essential contribution will be a Middle East settlement upholding a two-state solution, that protects the security of Israel and the legitimate enduring desire for a Palestinian state.
And just as our policies must change to meet new challenges, so too our party must change.
I can announce that the new Deputy Leader will be the Party Chair - from today not appointed by the leader but elected by the party.
And I can also announce that Douglas Alexander will be the general election co-ordinator so that we are ready not just to fight but to win a general election.
I want a new constitutional settlement for Britain. And the principles of my reforms are these: Government giving more power to Parliament; both government and Parliament giving more power to the people; Parliament voting on all the major issues of our time including peace and war; civil liberties safeguarded and enhanced; devolution within a Union of nations: England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland - a Union that I believe in and will defend; local government strengthened with new powers - local communities empowered to hold those who make the decisions to account; and with community ownership of assets - greater power for more people to control their lives.
Don't let anyone tell you the choice at the next election will be change with other parties and no change with Labour. Because when I take office on Wednesday I will heed and lead the call of change.
So for young people wanting the first step on the housing ladder to their first home, we will meet the challenge of change.
For families wanting their sons and daughters to get the chance of college or university, for parents wanting affordable child care, for families and pensioners who want an NHS there when they need it, for people wanting a stronger democracy, we will meet the challenge of change.
This week marks a new start. And I say to the people of Britain: the new government I will lead belongs to you.
I will work hard for you. I shall always try my utmost.
I am ready to serve".
It all seems rather hollow now, doesn't it?
Pass the sick bag!
Complain about this comment
Everybody wait! Shocking though this expenses debacle is I think we are missing the main danger happening right now.
I believe Brown et al are actually pleased to have the "noises off stage" going on about their expenses.
What is far more serious is that Brown is slowly and surely trying to nationalise the banks to get CONTROL. This will enable him and other world leaders who are all in it together to launch the NEW WORLD ORDER and anything we may say or do in protest will be peanuts compared to what they are trying to do to us.
Complain about this comment
I know you did'nt notice Mr Robinson,but this Government brought itself into disrepute long time before this little debacle.
I cannot believe that I have heard aright, politicians calling in the police to search for the whistleblower and the Guardian warning the Telegraph that what it has done MAY be illegal.
In the court of public opinion , whether it is within the rules or not , it would seem the cabinet ministers who took the max by playing fast and loose with addresses will be lucky to get away with the sack!
Complain about this comment
I agree with the person who has posed the question about the Inland Revenue. They are blatantly absent from all this. Those guys hound us to death for a £2 receipt, so again let's ask the question why they have not been involved in this investigation.
The rules were put on place to allow MP's to attend parliament - fine. But what is the difference between that and us normal people who have litigable business expenses? We have to submit receipts and explanations for everything! The Inland Revenue are tough on this point and anyone claiming for non business expenses has to pay it back and face a fine. If we had submitted any of these expenses we would have been subjected to a rigorous and aggressive investigation. Our opinion is that the rules have been blatantly broken and everyone should be made repay the monies they have purposely embezzled from the public purse.
Complain about this comment
A contrast of lives:
On the one hand... I am currently unemployed but have had some p/t work recently. I have to submit every bit of paper and receipt in order that my meagre earnings are considered then deducted almost in full from my benefit so i get almost no net gain from working. If i don't submit the paperwork n prove im looking for work with letters and details of telephone calls my benefit can be stopped. Even when i do everything they ask the the benefit agency make mistakes which i then pay back, as any overpayment can be clawed back (annoying but fair and very prudent in times of austerity);
Yet on the other... this lot in our legislature of all places can stick their noses in the public trough, no (serious) questions asked, no interviews, no receipts, no problem, thank you very much. If they were on fire i wouldn't piss on them.
Only one MP has had the decency and good political sense to apologize (Stephen Pound on your news channel) and he hadn't even done any fiddles. Interestingly he said he was taken aside "some old soak" when he came into Parliament and given some friendly and lucrative advice of how to milk the system. To use the "it was all within the rules and was approved by the authorities" is pathetic! The "rules" were a deliberate joke, and designed to be so by the MPs themselves. The HoC authorities were a load of rubber-stamping and spineless "good chaps" reluctant to press MPs to justify these appalling and penny-pinching scams. The MPs set up then ran this gravy train for all it was worth and then fought like tigers to hide it all from public gaze (the Speaker is probably the worst offender in that he is there to uphold the dignity and probity of the HoC and yet was in the vanguard of those trying to keep it all secret). hats off to the campaigner's who brought the FoI case and the judges who forced the MPs to 'fess up. But even then they thought they'd managed to hide the switching of 2nd homes trick by using "security" as an excuse in the official redacted documents due out in July.
Well done the leaker and the DT for publishing the whole sorry mess. Even if they do find out who it was and do prosecute no jury in the land will convict. They'd insist on a medal and a place in the house of lords!
also well done hilary, alan and all other honest and decent MPs.
Complain about this comment
Why on earth are some Labour supporters considering voting BNP??
Labour has of late a good record on racial equality and fighting discrimination. A vote for the BNP would be totally against their ethos.
Labour's immigration policy has been a shambles IMO and they can be accused of being uneven in their approach to faiths and communities but I'd rather their intentions were good and the execution poor, than vote for a party whose manifestos are motivated purely on racial discrimination, despite their protestations.
The argument that it's about jobs and national identity is spurious and misplaced. Learn from history.
Please read this link.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/may/08/bnp-nick-griffin-arthur-kemp
I'm not Labour or a Guardianista but this is the reality, trust me.
I'd rather vote for an MP that's fiddled their expenses than for this disgusting shower. They are that odious.
Complain about this comment
The real problem here is that the system permits MP's to make claims for expenses that, while within the letter of the rules, bear no relation to their underlying principle and intent. Relevant questions to ask those who have been caught out operating the system in a venal and self-serving way are: 1. Do you belive that your claims are within the spirit of the rules? and, if the answer to 1 is yes, then 2: Are you familiar with the concept of shame?
Complain about this comment
i notice they are quick to bring in the police to find the mole....but what are the fraud squad doing at the moment? These people flipping their second homes to milk the system are nothing less than fraudsters (does the home secretary really believe her sisters flat is her "main" home, regardless of what the rules say!) I would expect the inland revenue to bring hundreds of prosecutions as they would if this was going on in the private sector...
the mp's keep saying in defence...."i followed the rules"... well if you read the green book rules it states ...wholly, exclusively and necessarily on parliamentary duties. Not many of the accounts i have read about have anything to do with duties and a lot to do with enriching themselves at the taxpayers expense.
Lets have a wholesale clearout...all mp's found to have claimed expenses not wholly, exclusively and necessarily on parliamentary dutiesshould be sacked without pensions, and brought to justice. We just cannot allow one law for politicians and another for the rest of the population ...
Complain about this comment
I weep for this now rotten country.
Complain about this comment
@ 203 re the BNP ...
I hope it's mainly ignorance to blame for this because anyone who understands what the BNP stands for, and still proceeds to vote for them is, without question, a racist - not just racist, the adjective (we're most of us a little bit that) but a racist, the noun - I think people should vote Labour but, if they feel they can't, I'd even rather see defections to the BTP than to the Nationalists
Complain about this comment
The heading to this piece was: Parliament's reputation brought low.
It should have said: Britain's reputation brought low.
We have a broken economic, social, and political model.
MPs act the way they do because they reflect the values (or lack of) of their constituents.
Several respondents have said, correctly in my opinion, that Churchill and Atlee would never have fiddled their expenses.
But Churchill and Atlee were not just individuals. They were conditioned by the society that produced them, and that society has passed into history.
Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. We need to reduce the power of the State, and reduce the power of politicians, of whatever persuasion, absolutely.
I'm sure that all political parties will be shown to have acted corruptly, but I hold the Labour Party most accountable, not just becuase they are in Government, but also because they constantly seek to extend the brute power of the State.
Complain about this comment
One MP commented that if the expenses rules were made too stringent then the job wouldn't attract the right calibre of people to stand for Parliament. Looking at the past conduct of the present batch of MP's, this comment is rich.
Complain about this comment
#207
Sagamix,
You are quite correct about the BNP.
This is exactly why the expenses scandal is so damaging for all mainline political parties, and why these parties need to solve this crisis fast.
Complain about this comment
toby @ 196
Harriet Harperson has said that the onus was not on politicians to submit legitimate expenses but on the Parliamentary authorities to police the claims. Is that not like the Nazis saying the were forced to murder millions because the rules said so and so they had to?
bit of a stretch, Tobe
tricky dicky @ 202
also well done hilary, alan and all other honest and decent MPs
... and Harriet of course!
Complain about this comment
35 Jericoa
I'm way behind here I know but I liked your rant - it is as you say, this belief that we could be better but nothing seems to change.
All I can think of to explain why it is that the whole country has been lulled into this strange apathy is that it's happening for a reason. Until the point is reached that we become so sick of what has been done and happening to all of us as individuals, that we finally reject our day to day experience of life and we rebel.
But how do we rebel when the government has tied us in knots by laws and regulations. We are not allowed to demonstrate unless we have permission to do so. We are unable to vote for anything better because there is nothing on offer so we go on accepting the status quo.
What is awful is that even though the present government has been exposed in daylight as to exactly how it operates - no one in the government thinks it's wrong.
This behaviour is fraud and in the real world would end up in prosecution by the very laws they and preceding governments have made. They should be made to face the full rigour of the laws they expect us to abide by.
Sorry is not enough in this case I am afraid - I am ever hopeful that we will by sheer weight of protest - be given due recompense
Complain about this comment
What may I ask is the fuss all about, afterall these politicians a curious mix of left wing/liberal/pc tinkerers are doing no more for themselves than they have kindly done for us. Perhaps in their simple minds this is their motivation.
The culture they have created has resulted in it not being necessary to take responsibilty in life if one chooses not to do so.
Decide not to work and live off the state and you are a friend of the government. Take all you can in benefits and you will be helped to find more funding. A unmarried teenage mother, no problem we will give you a free home, the father of your offspring can walk away from his responsibilities, this is good news because you will receive yet more help from the state.
No matter if you are friend or foe of this country please come on in, cause disruption and chaos and we will give you more supprt.
A criminal, a drug pusher OK, the courts may punish you in the first instance with a heavy sentance but we will see that you do not need to serve that sentance, we will give you weekends with mum and the family really early on to soften the blow of the unkindly judge.
Not interested in educating yourelf that is OK, as we quite like the fact that the same school can produce a proportion that paid attention and those that displayed indiffernce. There is nothing wrong if the devide today is far greater that when we had those unfair Grammer and Seceondary Moderns
You want to abuse doctors and nurses when uou are drunk, we will provide you with a friendly ear to vent your feelings.
You have a total lack of respect for the law and police - then we will understand, in fact we will take your side against them.
The abuse of children is more to uour liking - fear not because the state will help you in your crisis - real punishment is banned.
You want to prop up a useless PM and ulected leader of this country, who will stop you- just carry on regardless.
You have a deputy leader intent on positive discrimination in favour of selecting women instead of the best "Managers" irrespective of gender to control high spending departments - so what - politics is more important than talent.
What have you all done to our beautiful country, your crimes in this respect are far greater than robbing the taxpayer.
We must all fear for our Parlamentary system, built with the blood and tears of our ancestors, we are now witnessing history in the making as the little people of this government have all but ruined that wonderful heritage for us.
It must be said that if Cameron, Hague and colleagues are not strong in sorting out the mess that we are suffering the existing system of government will be dead forever. They cannot afford to fail us and we cannot afford for them to fail.
Complain about this comment
A small point to bear in mind here. The data bought by the DT, shows the retail recipt in its entirety - i.e. all items actually bought from that shop. Mr Woolas says that the non food items were not claimed, and although I am not a fan of his I am inclined to believe him.
The failure here lies with the scanning procedures. It would be easy enough to "black out" the items on the bill that were NOT being claimed. The Parliamentary authorities should now hold their hands up, say sorry that they have made a mistake. The whole point about scanning the receipts is to cross-reference the claimed reimbursement with what was paid. Including non claimed items on the scanned document only muddies the water.
I am more inclined to see independent auditors doing this type of work. The work carried out by the Parliamentary authorities looks at best sloppy and at worst shows them to be out of their depth.
Complain about this comment
Harriet Harmans my MP and Jaco Smith and her sister lived in my road for a year - we thought that was all a bit odd then - how unlucky can one get?
I have to ask with all the allownces and expenses; What DO they spend their salary on then?
As for within the rules that Harman and Mandy keep on about - wouldnt it be easier to list those items that MPs cannot claim for? Certainly a shorter list, it seems.
Complain about this comment
#196, #211
Agree that the Nazi analogy is absurd, but for some reason it reminds me of Albert Speer.
At Nuremburg Speer was acknowledged to accept, alone amongst the Nazis on trial, personal responsibility for Nazi war crimes (though his sincerity was a matter of later debate).
It is, of course, a totally different level of abuse, but please could we have just one MP prepared to admit personal culpability for the expenses fiasco rather than blame it on the system (and resign from politics completely). Come on Hazel, you can do it.
Complain about this comment
Why is nothing released enough to trigger an investigation? there seems to me to be plentiful evidence of theft and fraud that would land an ordinary individual in Jail. I mean preactices like claiming everything for council tax then claiming a 2nd hom discount is stealing pure and simple. redeisgnating houses as 1st and second homes depending on financial advantage is surely tax evasion pure and simple. Their allowances are supposed to be claimed "wholly and necessarily in the course of their parliamentary duties" anything else is clearly wrong
Yur right about the difference in reactions though . A load of info---which is supposed to be published anyway in July--- is leaked It reveals plentiful evidence of what can only be described as stealing--- and who do they call the police to investigate--- not all the thieves this list reveals but the person who dobbed them in it-- presumably they are annoyed as evidence of criminal behaviour has been revealed that they would otherwise have destroyed before July.
This incidetally demonstrates whose side the police are on, since trying to find the leaker will inevitably lead to also uncovering copious evidence of theft which MPs must be confident will be ignored by Police who now serve the people in power not the nation
What however angers me is the standards they apply for everyone else and those that apply to themselves. The double standards are amazing For example a measure called IR35 was passed in 2003 greatly tightening up what the self employed could call expenses so that dual use items eg a lap top could be called beenfits in kind . Yet the same year MPs voted a measure exempitng their own allowances from tax. Thus loosening the rules for their own benefit. whilst cracking down on everyone else the same year
Howeevr I dont mind any of this since I beleive that Parliament is more rotten , more corrupt than at any time since the great reform act of 1832. I think Parliament itself is too corrupt to remedy these abuses itself and there isnt the faintest chance that just voting out Nu Labour will make a blind bit of difference to any of this
I think that we need radical constituional reform. We need a parliament that actually represents the interests of the people, not one that completely ignores them like over Iraq
We need a goivernment that is our servant not the increasingly opressive master that treats ordinary people more and more like serfs and seems incompetent at anytihng beyond extortion and bullying
I think the behaviour of MPs make the case for radical reform very eloquently even though most of them will fight any change to their last self interested breath.
Complain about this comment
From the BBC News headlines:
Backbench Labour MP Margaret Moran also came under scrutiny on Saturday.
She has yet to comment on reports she apparently spent £22,500 on treating dry rot at the coastal property she had designated as her second home - which is not in London and is 100 miles from her Luton constituency.
A spokesman for Ms Moran said she would speak exclusively to the BBC's Politics Show East on Sunday....
Now there's a surprise.
Why the BBC exclusively? Is she scared to face a proper journalist?
Complain about this comment
Some 3 years ago my Police Constable daughter took and passed her Sergeant's exams.
She knew she would not get an immediate posting, but, she's still waiting: This is not some sexism or doubts about her ability (she's 11 years into the job, been commended for bravery twice and has specialist arms and driving qualifications).
No, she is still waiting because her Division has not got the money for her to have a permanent new rank.
How is it you ask?
Well, she tells me the rise in pay would amount to about half of what PM Gordon Brown claimed for his unused House!
I truly believe that MPs are the most venal, corrupt, thieving no-goods in England: And, I would like someone to justify to me why my daughter should not go with colleagues to Westminster and and No10 and arrest every last one of the conniving crooks!?
Complain about this comment
a point to remember about the details being published now, the receipts published in july will have been edited and private addresses deleted...so making it impossible to see who is using the second home scam......I believe that is why they have been leaked, to show the truth and if mr plod ever finds the culprit he should elect for a jury trial and demand every original receipt is brought in as evidence and every mp to be a witness under oath! No jury in the land will find him/her guilty...
Complain about this comment
I just wish a group of competent people would get on and the run the country in the face of nigh-on UK bankruptcy in the next few years (for which we can thank Gordon Brown, taking great care to ignore his apologists). How can the equivalent of no more than a battalion's worth of plonkers so foul up the lives of 60 million people, and the generation after them, whilst fleecing them along the way? It all seems crackers to me. Talk about the decline and fall of the United Kingdom, or what?
Complain about this comment
Having read the "Green Book", I am astounded that there has never been a test case brought by HMRC to determine the tax situation regarding "expenses" claimed.
The rules clearly indicate that costs associated with the "second home" allowance are restricted.
I'd challenge anyone to say how a patio heater is household furniture or relevant to garden maintenance. Likewise pot plants. As far as I can tell, masses of claims have been "approved" which actually fall into a taxable category.
So just why has the HMRC bulldog lost its teeth when dealing with money handed to MPs?
Complain about this comment
Some say that most of us would claim to the max allowed by their employer's expense system.
This misses an important point - the MPs' set up their own system just as they set up their own salary structure and gold-plated, diamond encrusted pensions. The result is clearly a system designed with benefit to the MP placed far above value to the taxpayer. The one benefit that we are now getting is that we can readily identify the very small proportion of their number with an ounce of integrity and self-restraint.
Complain about this comment
zydeco: Now there's a surprise. Why the BBC exclusively? Is she scared to face a proper journalist?
Moran's probably got mates on Look East who'll do a such a rigorous interrogation of her affairs, that we'll end up feeling sorry for her only being able to afford an East Anglian seaside villa/second home, instead of one on the Cote D'Azure.
I was struck by how chummy the LE journalist accompanying her around Luton on her last appearance on the local news programme appeared to be with Luton's MP bet you the interest on my savings it'll be the same one.
Complain about this comment
We have brave men and women, in Iraq and Afghanistan, giving their lives for this country. They are seen to live in sub-standard service accommadation.
Why is then that the government live a luxurious life on the taxpayer but they do nothing for those brave soldiers and their families.
McNulty and the others should hang their heads in shame.
Complain about this comment
Is there any difference in these two cases, or is it just another example of hypocrisy at the highest levels of public life?
"The Daily Telegraph today insisted it had acted in the public interest by publishing leaked details of MPs' expenses.
But lawyers said that, if claims the paper paid up to £300,000 for the information reportedly contained in a computer disk stolen from the parliamentary fees office were accurate, both the mole and the paper remained at risk of criminal prosecution.
Lawyers said that if a criminal offence had been committed by stealing the disk and selling it, the Telegraph could be liable for having aided and abetted or procured the material.
"If money were paid, it makes it more obvious that the information was obtained by the mole for personal profit," Graham said."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/may/08/mps-expenses-daily-telegraph
"The British tax authorities have paid an informant for the bank details of scores of wealthy Britons. The records were stolen from one of the worlds most secretive tax havens.
HM Revenue & Customs paid £100,000 for data that it is using to launch investigations of up to 100 British citizens who have accounts at Liechtensteins biggest bank.
British authorities regard it as a coup to have penetrated accounts that have been beyond their reach for decades. There will be many frightened people who thought Liechtenstein was secure, said a City accountant."
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/money/tax/article3423610.ece
Complain about this comment
"Nothing revealed today has been enough to trigger an investigation let alone a resignation. Some of the headlines suggesting wrongdoing do not stand up to close scrutiny.
However, once again there is evidence aplenty of overclaiming; of playing the system to extract every penny possible and of attempts to get the taxpayer to pay for things that almost everyone else would be expected to pay for themselves."
Nick, I suggest that you read the rules set out below and then reconsider your blog. Stop making excuses for people who in any other walk of life would be sacked.
Here are the rules courtesy of someone on Guido Fawkes where a better grasp of the issues is apparent
The Additional Costs Allowance (cost of staying away from main home/ACA) is paid to reimburse Members for necessary costs incurred when staying overnight away from their main home for the purpose of performing parliamentary duties.
Parliamentary allowances are designed to ensure that Members are reimbursed for costs
properly incurred in the performance of their duties.
FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES
In July 1995, the House agreed to adopt the Code of Conduct for Members of Parliament
[link] which includes a number of general principles of personal conduct. These are based
on concepts of selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty and
leadership. The broad principles set out below are derived from the Code of Conduct and
underpin the allowance regime. When making claims against parliamentary allowances,
Members must adhere to these principles.
The principles are:
Claims should be above reproach and must reflect actual usage of the resources being
claimed.
Claims must only be made for expenditure that it was necessary for a Member to incur
to ensure that he or she could properly perform his or her parliamentary duties.
Allowances are reimbursed only for the purpose of a Member carrying out his or her
parliamentary duties. Claims cannot relate to party political activity of any sort, nor
must any claim provide a benefit to a party political organisation.
It is not permissible for a Member to claim under any parliamentary allowance for
anything that the Member is claiming from any other source.
Members must ensure that claims do not give rise to, or give the appearance of giving
rise to, an improper personal financial benefit to themselves or anyone else.
Members are committed to openness about what expenditure has been incurred and
for what purposes.
Individual Members take personal responsibility for all expenses incurred, for making
claims and for keeping records, even if the administration of claims is delegated by
them to others.
The requirement of ensuring value for money is central in claiming for
accommodation, goods or servicesMembers should avoid purchases which could be
seen as extravagant or luxurious.
Claims must be supported by documentary evidence, except where the House has
agreed that such evidence is not necessary.
Bring in the police.
Complain about this comment
222. At 3:37pm on 09 May 2009, fairlyopenmind
See my post above at #226 to see HMRC's cavalier attitude to the law when it suits them.
Complain about this comment
I'm sure we'll all acknowledge, even the rabid Labour hating majority on here, that there's only one reason why we can have this opportunity to bash our MPs over expenses and that's the FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT.
That's the only thing that's actually changed though I suspect most will insist that the claiming of allownces to the Max is a phenomenon which started in 1997.
There's no doubt that change for the better will result thanks to FOI perhaps we should remember who brought in the legislation and who opposed it!!
Complain about this comment
225. At 4:02pm on 09 May 2009, telecasterdave wrote:
We have brave men and women, in Iraq and Afghanistan, giving their lives for this country. They are seen to live in sub-standard service accommadation.
Why is then that the government live a luxurious life on the taxpayer but they do nothing for those brave soldiers and their families.
McNulty and the others should hang their heads in shame.
===
Especially ex Defence Secretary Geoff "hoon" Hoon.
Complain about this comment
baseballer @ 215
Harriet Harman's my MP
if you posted that to make me jealous, you've succeeded ... so what's she like as a local MP? ... is she very good?
Complain about this comment
221 Moray
So there really are people out there that haven't yet "twigged" that "Global" banking practice along with "Global" credit rating agencies are the real culprits here, hence the "Global" recession. The solutions will also need to transcend national boundaries as was recognised (by most anyway, possibly not yourself)at the G20, little difference will be made by the occupants of no 10 and 11 acting in isolation.
Complain about this comment
229. At 4:08pm on 09 May 2009, Eatonrifle wrote:
I'm sure we'll all acknowledge, even the rabid Labour hating majority on here, that there's only one reason why we can have this opportunity to bash our MPs over expenses and that's the FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT.
That's the only thing that's actually changed though I suspect most will insist that the claiming of allownces to the Max is a phenomenon which started in 1997.
There's no doubt that change for the better will result thanks to FOI perhaps we should remember who brought in the legislation and who opposed it!!
===
And we should also remember who fought to keep MPs' expenses exempt from FOI requests!
http://www.cfoi.org.uk/mpsexpenses.html
Complain about this comment
Mr. Robinson - and others - it is time to stop your never ending apologia for the thieving scum in Westminster. Forget the "rules". The ministers and MP's have no sense of decency, no sense of shame and clearly have no idea of the difference between right and wrong. Stop making excuses for them!
Complain about this comment
yellow @ 226
yes, I can see what you're driving at - I guess there is something of a difference, however, in that the first is about an individual making money from an illicit, potentially criminal act, whereas the second is HMRC acting (on behalf of you and I) to increase the tax take from wealthy avoiders - but, like I say, I get your drift
Complain about this comment
Eton: The passing of the Freedom of Information act was only a result of Blair's admiration and anxiety to ape all things American. He soon had second thoughts...
Also I think you'll find that it was the Conservatives and Liberals who defeated the leader of the House, Harman's proposal on behalf of the government, which was that MPs' expenses should be excluded from the FOI act in a vote this last January. If the Conservatives hadn't opposed it, we would still be in ignorance of what they are doing with our money.
So no. I am not grateful. Not one smidgeon of gratitude for the most venal and corrupt, but at the same time, pious and hypocritical government this country has ever known.
Complain about this comment
229 eatonrifle
"thanks to FOI perhaps we should remember who brought in the legislation and who opposed it!!"
I seem to remember that MPs tried to exempt themselves from the FOI, and its taken numerous court actions to get them released. Don't try and tell us that this is intentional some New Labour driven success story, and they are delighted that its happening.
Complain about this comment
It is grotesque for MPs to plead 'we were only obeying the rules.' They wrote the rules.
Two urgent changes needed: first, a new Speaker. This one has done everything in his power to obstruct change or clarity. Second, a new Parliamentary Watchdog Committee made up not of MPs but with real power over them. Henry VIII had the right idea.
Complain about this comment
235. At 4:35pm on 09 May 2009, sagamix wrote:
yellow @ 226
yes, I can see what you're driving at - I guess there is something of a difference, however, in that the first is about an individual making money from an illicit, potentially criminal act, whereas the second is HMRC acting (on behalf of you and I) to increase the tax take from wealthy avoiders - but, like I say, I get your drift
===
Can't see the difference personally. Both involve a whistleblower being paid money for information, both lots of information are in the public interest, in fact the HMRC case is worse because it involves a department of government paying for stolen information. How can that ever be justified?
Both lots of information will enable us to see who is defrauding the British taxpayer.
Complain about this comment
I for one apploard the Telegraph for publiching this list.
This list belongs in the public view, we need to be told exactly what has been claimed for.
As does the actual payments for the invoices with items that MP's are claiming they didnt gat paid for.
As for the MP who wrote to the fees office saying he should be full paid for the TV because he didnt understand the rules. He needs to resign!
Complain about this comment
yes, but it's fair to deduce that a Clown administration wouldn't have brought in the FOI in the first place, and so there would have been nothing to exempt MPs from, would there? - secrecy would probably have prevailed, in other words - a far worse outcome than this one, I'm sure we all agree
Complain about this comment
Just like the FSA and the banks the 'Green book' was left unregulated making it a total wast of time.
Forget the Nappies, TV sets and blue films, the 88p bath plug is the winner the minister should have been kicked out!
Give them bus fares and Rent-a-tent in Hyde Park or let them doss down in on the benches in the Commons like we used to seeing them nod off. Calling the police in to investigate the leak is pathetic when their expenses should be investigated instead.
It is clear they knew what they was claiming for is wrong... imagine someone out of work on benefit claiming for something that they shouldn't... they would soon have people knocking on their door and facing a Judge... spot the difference.
These Ministers are a disgrace and they are that two-faced they blame the law.
Complain about this comment
237 Pickled
The Labour Government introduced the FOI Act.
It's a simple matter of fact.
Complain about this comment
As for Browns cleaning bill, why are we the tax payer paying £6000 to clean his wifes london flat?
Just before he became chancler he transfered the flat into her sole name.
She and not him own it! So can you ask him to explain where in the rules that he claims he has not broken it states that he can claim expenses of his wifes property?
Complain about this comment
233 Yellow
Neatly avoiding Tory David Maclean's Private members bill.
BTW was it you yesterday that declared the Telegraph NOT to be Tory supporting but now leaning to Labour/Government ??? Say no more.
Complain about this comment
I wuld also like to remind every one that the £400 a month food bill that MP's are allowed to claim is more than the uninployment benefit and state pension that millions are forced to live off!
Complain about this comment
#229 Eatonrifle
So it's the LibDems who have the moral high ground over this issue then, is that what you weere getting at?
===
"MPs above all should be subject to the Freedom of Information law since they are the ones who made it. I do not think that anyone has really made the case for this change. It is, to say the least, very disappointing that they have chosen not to apply the same approach to themselves that they apply to others."
Sir Christopher Kelly, Chairman Committee on Standards in Public Life
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Liberal Democrats are totally opposed to any Government move to allow MPs to avoid being subject to Freedom of Information requests...MPs should stop trying to hide their work in secrecy and accept that the same rules that apply to everybody else should also appy to them."
Nick Clegg, Lib Dem Leader
Complain about this comment
243. At 4:54pm on 09 May 2009, Eatonrifle wrote:
237 Pickled
The Labour Government introduced the FOI Act.
It's a simple matter of fact.
===
Should read:
"The Labour Government introduced the FOI Act for everybody else and tried to exempt themselves from it."
It's a simple matter of fact!
Complain about this comment
From the Telegraph
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/5298316/Michael-Martin-Speaker-spent-1400-on-chauffeurs-to-his-local-job-centre-and-Celtic-Park.html
"On another occasion, Mr Martin took a car to John Smith House, the head office of the Labour Party in Glasgow. The driver waited outside, and eventually billed Mr Martin for £64.11."
The RULES clearly state that expenses cannot be claimed for party political work.
"Claims cannot relate to party political activity of any sort, nor
must any claim provide a benefit to a party political organisation."
What was he doing at John Smith house if it wasn't party political? Ask the Speaker Nick.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Whilst I abhor the immoral use of the allowance that is intended to enable our MP's to convey our wishes into the heart of Government, I also find it interesting that the Press and Media have not mentioned the 'benefits' which they enjoy including those specifically within such entities as the House of Commons?
Perhaps whilst also bringing the 'public interest' stories to light, they should also inform us as to what perks they enjoy alongside the MPs?
Complain about this comment
Not surprised they fought so hard to keep their expenses and fiddles secret. Labour ministers had 12 years to clear the mess of the so called Tory sleaze. Labour make the Major's years miscreants look like real amateurs, Smith , Blears and most of their colleagues are real pros at it.
Being so busy to milk the system I am amazed they had any time left to deal with any ministerial matters ( that could be an excuse for the appalling mess they are leaving the country in )
Even moral Gordon was not adverse to a bit of personal enrichment .
Will any minister resign in shame? How can they look their constituents in the face and feel no shame?
Is the famous H Harman's court of public opinion sitting at present or is it in recess?
Complain about this comment
welcome to the uk all immigrants please note that as a small island state that at one time controlled over a third of this planet we need a good strong government that listens to its people and runs this countries finances prudently.
sadly what we have is rampent immigration and a government too obsessed with lining their own pockets, to out of touch with the common english person and unable to calculate figures properly.
this country has become a laughing stock so why are you bothering to sneak into this country.
voters of this once great island please dont refuse to vote just use your vote to bring in a government that listens to to the people and work for the people.
its time those who have funded their lives on our taxes be removed, loose their seats and have to suffer public ridicule and humiliation.
Complain about this comment
245. At 4:59pm on 09 May 2009, Eatonrifle wrote:
233 Yellow
Neatly avoiding Tory David Maclean's Private members bill.
BTW was it you yesterday that declared the Telegraph NOT to be Tory supporting but now leaning to Labour/Government ??? Say no more.
===
It was, I did, it is.
As evidenced by the spolier story on "Smeargate" and the fact that Andrew Porter, political editor, is a close associate of Damian McBride.
Complain about this comment
243 eatonrifle
"237 Pickled
The Labour Government introduced the FOI Act.
It's a simple matter of fact."
==================================================
And I for one are jolly pleased that they did so ! Having seen various ministers on TV the past few days, however, they don't appear to be sharing my unbridled delight at having all this information made available.
I find this very odd, as they belong to the government which, as you rightly point out, introduced the FOI legislation making it all possible.
Complain about this comment
251. At 5:15pm on 09 May 2009, Talysin wrote:
Whilst I abhor the immoral use of the allowance that is intended to enable our MP's to convey our wishes into the heart of Government, I also find it interesting that the Press and Media have not mentioned the 'benefits' which they enjoy including those specifically within such entities as the House of Commons?
Perhaps whilst also bringing the 'public interest' stories to light, they should also inform us as to what perks they enjoy alongside the MPs?
===
Glad to help.
[Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]
See Press Dining Room, Press Cafeteria, Annie's Bar and Press Bar.
Here's a sample menu:
[Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]
Ever heard of the saying "Don't bite the hand that feeds you"?
Complain about this comment
Further to my #256
"Figures released under FoI show that in 2007/8, House of Commons catering had an income of £7,173,800, against an expenditure of £12,625,800 - meaning a subsidy of £5,452,000."
http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/politics/domestic_politics/slap+up+meals+at+parliament+prices/3092362
===
More snouts in the trough! Literally, this time!
Complain about this comment
The crassest comment was from Gordon Brown who blamed "the system". Would that apply to anyone who got double the money from a hole in the wall? As for those MPs threatening to sue, bring it on , cant wait to see the current equivalent of a halfpenny damages awarded, so long as we dont have to pay their legal costs that is. That would be insult to injury.
Complain about this comment
The Labour Government introduced the Finance Act in 2009 and one for every year that they have been in power.
It's a simple matter of fact.
The Finance Act is brought about to determine the level of taxation that citizens of this country should contribute towards the government's programme.
It's a simple matter of fact.
The Labour Government introduced the FOI Act.
It's a simple matter of fact.
Whilst the rest of the country have to abide by these laws for fear of being punished, MPs exempt themselves from the bits that affect their lifestyle to the detriment of us all.
It's a simple matter of fact.
It's time it stopped.
Complain about this comment
Much as Eatonrifle would like you to think otherwise, it is in fact Heather Brooke we have to thank for fighting long and hard to get all MPs' expenses published.
Interesting that it took an American to campaign for us to know exactly what MPs do with our money! Where were our fearless jounalists, in Annie's Bar?
http://www.yrtk.org/
Complain about this comment
251. At 5:15pm on 09 May 2009, Talysin wrote:
Whilst I abhor the immoral use of the allowance that is intended to enable our MP's to convey our wishes into the heart of Government, I also find it interesting that the Press and Media have not mentioned the 'benefits' which they enjoy including those specifically within such entities as the House of Commons?
Perhaps whilst also bringing the 'public interest' stories to light, they should also inform us as to what perks they enjoy alongside the MPs?
===
[Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]
See Press Dining Room, Press Cafeteria,Annie's Bar and Press Bar.
Here's a sample menu:
[Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]
Soup 55pence, Steak or salmon GBP3.40.
Very nice!
Complain about this comment
#140 grandantidote
The earliest known legislative assembly was a bicameral one in Erech, Iraq 2800 BC.
Althing of Iceland founded in AD 930 is the oldest current legislative body. This body was abolished in 1800 but restored by Denmark to a consultative status in 1843 and a legislative status in 1874.
Most European countries had some kind of parliament, curia regis, colloquium or similar in the 13th century.
"The mother of Parliaments" is simply a bit of British self-aggrandisement. Nothing new there.
The first "British" Parliament didn't exist until 1707.
Complain about this comment
Absolutely right that MPs should be exposed for manipulating expense claims. I'm certain that it is entirely wrong for anybody to fiddle their expenses, whether it's public money, or private sector money. Either way, it's theft. That is why I'm certain that the journalists editors and managers at the Telegraph wouldn't want to be thought hypocritical.
So, when will they be publishing an independently audited list of their own expenses claims?
I'd hate to think that there was the slightest possibility that these people might be exposing practices of which they themselves are guilty.
Complain about this comment
Hey my first post to a BBC blog got censored!
Let's try this. MPs and ministers are straight folk who act for the common good without any regard for personal benefit.
Any good?
Complain about this comment
So Barbara Follet claimed GBP25,000 for security expenses between 2004/08.
The Green Book says:
"Security budget
Where the local police advise, the House will contribute to the
costs of security measures taken to safeguard Members, their staff
and their equipment at their constituency office or surgery. AOE (Administrative and Office Expenditure allowance) must be used for the first £1000 of expenditure. The House will meet half of the rest of the cost up to a maximum contribution of £2000."
Not sure how they interpret that, but the maximum would be 1K plus 2K i.e. GBP 3,000 per annum for 4 years = GBP 12,000.
So how can she (and the people supposedly enforcing the rules) say "It's all within the rules"?
And just what effort does the Tax Man take to check on expenses actually paid to MPs and the element of those expenses that are taxable?
The Green Book says:
"Taxation of allowances
Expenditure for which reimbursement is claimed under the provisions of the Green Book should be wholly, exclusively and necessarily incurred for the performance of a Members parliamentary duties, and therefore deductible from income for tax purposes.
This does not apply to Winding-up Expenditure on dissolution...."
Of course, HMRC will refuse to divulge details of individuals' tax situation. Quite right. (Although in the USA, full disclosure is provided by people in the Senate.)
But who oversees the way in which payments over and above those needed wholly, exclusively and necessarily incurred, etc., are actually taxed?
The fact that the rules are approved by Parliament does NOT make them legal. There are frequent challenges to elements of law, both in the High Courts and the European Court of Justice.
Bring on a HMRC - taxman - test case.
Complain about this comment
263. At 6:08pm on 09 May 2009, Kolya6 wrote:
Absolutely right that MPs should be exposed for manipulating expense claims. I'm certain that it is entirely wrong for anybody to fiddle their expenses, whether it's public money, or private sector money. Either way, it's theft. That is why I'm certain that the journalists editors and managers at the Telegraph wouldn't want to be thought hypocritical.
So, when will they be publishing an independently audited list of their own expenses claims?
I'd hate to think that there was the slightest possibility that these people might be exposing practices of which they themselves are guilty.
===
Except it's not public money, so why do we need to know?
I'm sure the Barclay Brothers are fully aware of all expenses claims, they are the ones who need to know, not us.
Complain about this comment
Moderators, why do you have a problem with somebody pointing out that journalists can eat at heavily subsidised prices at the House of Commons?
Complain about this comment
Why is the coverage of this debacle on BBC so muted? Go to ITV and you get a completely different take, which is a more accurate appraisal of what has been going on.
The interviewing by the BBC of those named and shamed so far has hardly been probing.
I thought the BBC prided itself on independence; but time and again they have let these MPs come out with the usual diatribe that no rules were broken and then allowed to walk away withhout being asked the killer questions.
Poor show all round BBC.
Complain about this comment
If they used the internet to run their "meetings", we wouldn't need a physical House of Commons, and they wouldn't need second homes. Isn't it about time MPs abandoned London, and did business from their own homes?
Eventually, we could run national votes over the Internet and dispense with "representatives" entirely. We should be leading the world in "democracy", but instead we are stuck in yesteryear.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Why is it that we have council workers, nurses, members of our armed forces and the emergency services, and many others who do 10 times as much work as our "politicians" and are a million times more valuable to this country, but earn a 10th of what Gordon Brown and the rest of his mob make, and they aren't allowed to claim "living expenses", "property maintenance costs", "mortgage payments" etc etc?? Why, just last year we had the fire service having to threaten strikes to force chiefs to re-examine their pay. I'll take one firefighter over the whole of our House Of Commons any day of the week.
I've said all this before, but it definitely bears repeating. These are people who decide the meagre rate of unemployment benefit a married man needs to support his family if he's out of work, the amount of council tax that we all have to pay, and they have the audacity to claim back money for hanging baskets, dressing gowns and sanitary products!!
The publication of these figures only confirms what I'm sure the general public at large already suspected; that our system of government is a complete sham, and only serves to keep public schoolboy freeloaders in a vastly inflated income, while ensuring that they do as little as possible to earn it. An income which they evidently don't have to touch, as we then pay for everything from toilet rolls to mock Tudor beams!!
Complain about this comment
245. At 4:59pm on 09 May 2009, Eatonrifle wrote:
233 Yellow
Neatly avoiding Tory David Maclean's Private members bill.
===
Eatonrifle, did you mean this bill?
[Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]
"Note: This email was sent by the Parliamentary Labour Partys
Parliamentary Committee to Labour MPs on 9/5/07.
From: CRAMPTON, Alexandra Sent: 09 May 2007 16:24 Subject: From Parliamentary
Committee RE: David Maclean's Freedom of Information Bill
Dear Colleague,
You may be aware that David Maclean's Private Members Bill on the workings
of the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act is set to complete its Commons
stages on Friday 18th May. We feel strongly as your Parliamentary
Committee representatives that the measures contained in the Bill, which
would protect the confidentiality of MPs correspondence on behalf of
constituents, are worthy of support. Contrary to the impression given in some
sectors of the media the Bill would not lead to any change in the current
disclosure of MP's allowances . This is because the Speaker has committed
the House to continue publishing the current details irrespective of any future
changes to the FOI (see Hansard February 7th - Report of Committee
Proceedings"
===
Was that the Bill you meant, the one supported by the Parliamentary Labour Party?
Complain about this comment
245. At 4:59pm on 09 May 2009, Eatonrifle wrote:
233 Yellow
Neatly avoiding Tory David Maclean's Private members bill.
===
Eaton, did you mean this bill?
"On 18 December 2006, Conservative MP David Maclean, introduced a Private Member's Bill to remove Parliament from the scope of the FOI Act and create a new exemption for MPs' correspondence with public authorities.
The Freedom of Information (Amendment) Bill was justified as a measure to protect MPs' correspondence on behalf of individual constituents. This was misleading. Correspondence about a constituent's personal circumstances was already exempt under the Act. The real effect of the Bill'would have been to (a) prevent the disclosure of detailed information about MPs' expenses claims and Parliament's spending and (b) allow MPs to lobby public authorities in secret, in the knowledge that what they write could not be disclosed under the Act.
The Bill received backing from the Parliamentary Labour Party's committee, which urged Labour backbenchers to support it. Conservative frontbench spokesman, John Bellingham, also associated his party with the Bill."
Was that the Bill you meant, the one supported by the Labour Party?
Complain about this comment
Being self employed , I have to keep all me records for at least 10 yrs, I have mine for 20 so far, all receipts showing VAT etc, I have looked at Mr Browns cleaners receipt and it looks to me as if this was knocked up on microsoft word in five minutes, where does it show the cleaners company or vat amount etc
I also noticed this falt has been passed over to his wife , so why are we the tax payer paying for this.
And regarding Blears TV Sets, why did she have to buy two in one year, why could she not take the first TV to he new abode ? together with her first bed !!!!!!!!!!
Come on this is the biggest scam going and it needs to stop NOW.
Lets have it all published and audited properly.
DR
Complain about this comment
243. Eatonrifle
And have been regretting it ever since!!
Besides they can slap a D-Notice on anything they really don't want published.
Dunblane. Remember that??
Complain about this comment
Off-Topic - (For which, my apologies)
Steve Hermann, in reply to one of my comments, has invited debate about Rolling News in the 'Webby Awards' Blog. I've started it off and suggest that anyone who's interested take a look and feel free to put the boot into my comments.
Complain about this comment
# 229 Eatonrifle
"I'm sure we'll all acknowledge, even the rabid Labour hating majority on here ..."
Not sure what point you're trying to make about the "Labour hating majority"? If there is a Labour loving majority in the land right now, what's stopping them coming on here and telling us all how brilliant the Labour Party has performed in running (ruining?) the country this past 12 years?
As someone who was born in to, and grew up in a staunch, working-class, Labour-voting family, I find it impossible to recognise the Blair/Brown/Balls Labour Party of today. For 12 years, we've been governed by a bunch of incompetent, self-serving political gangsters who have brought the country to near-bankruptcy. If there are people out there willing to stick up for the venal bandits that have purported to lead us with a "moral compass" for the past decade or more, I'd love to hear from them ... and to read of the wondrous economic and social benefits that have resulted from The Brown Terror, now that state spending is smashing through the £600 billion per year level, public sector debt is shooting off the scale and we're printing money like there's no tomorrow.
Gordon Brown saving the world? He couldn't save for a weekend break.
Complain about this comment
Quote "Hey my post to a BBC blog got censored!"
So did mine,I thought there was a difference between moderation and censorship.
I'll try the same line.
Let's try this. MPs and ministers are straight folk who act for the common good without any regard for personal benefit.
Any good?
Complain about this comment
Even though I am a Conservative I am happy to believe my local Labour MP David Drew when he says he does not have a London home and stays in a Premier Inn (budget) when he stays in London.
He is a very good constituency MP (majority approx 500) who regularly goes against the whips. Good for him!!!
My wife regularly travels up to London from Stroud where she sees him early in the morning. He is obviously normally in a rush. I have seen him with his breakfast down his jumper, collar and tie totally at odds with one another, or toothpaste round his mouth. He travels second class.
David Drew is, I believe, an Honourable Gentleman, unlike some other MPs I could mention. I almost feel pity that he will almost certainly lose his seat at the next election.
I hope I am not proved wrong in my assessment of him. But I doubt I will.
Complain about this comment
jacques @ 269
that's an interesting observation - don't know about them working from home but I would definitely like to see a move away from the current set-up - hundreds of braying, self seeking men "of a certain type" engaged in perpetual, sterile debate with no-one but each other, trading facile, unoriginal phrases and insults, scoring points which don't matter sweet fa - and all of this taking place in an out of date building with silly, outmoded practices, presided over by a bozo with a red nose and a wig! - c'mon
Complain about this comment
Extract from BBC news report:
Liberal Democrat MP Norman Baker has called for the official release of the information to be brought forward, to avoid the "drip drip effect" of the Daily Telegraph story.
However, his fellow Lib Dem MP Nick Harvey, a member of the House of Commons Commission, which is responsible for publishing the data, said it would be premature to release it while officials were still "getting it into a form where the public can make some sense out of it".
I love the last phrase - "it would be premature to release it while officials were still "getting it into a form where the public can make some sense out of it". Does he mean they need more time to get rid of the embarassing bits? It must be very obvious by now that the general public already understands quite clearly what is going on. By July when the official, censored, cleaned up version is issued it is going to be meaningless. Nobody is going to believe that suddenly all MPs claims are purer than the driven snow.
The damage is done, you have been rumbled, you are a bunch of shysters and are no longer fit to hold office.
Please go now!!
Complain about this comment
# 268 briangare
Yes sir. Time was when I swore by the BBC. Now, I find myself swearing at it. The BBC has declined at the same rate and in the same way as our politics and politicians over this past 12 years. The institution of the BBC is in as much need of a clearout as British politics. Indeed, I have pretty much come around to the view that we'd probably be better off without it. The BBC is now little more than another arm of the gargantuan, on-message state that has grown unfettered under 12 years of the Blair/Brown/Balls ("B Cubed") style of governance .... and which has now all but shafted the country.
Complain about this comment
#271 Eddie_G_1888
"The publication of these figures only confirms what I'm sure the general public at large already suspected; that our system of government is a complete sham, and only serves to keep public schoolboy freeloaders in a vastly inflated income, while ensuring that they do as little as possible to earn it".
========================================================================
You were doing fine until your sneering class envy got the better of you.
Firstly there are many more state educated MPs in the House of Commons than privately educated MPs.
Secondly, most public schoolboys don't need to freeload as there is the trust fund to support their lifestyle (myth - but it's what the masses are led to believe).
Thirdly, it was that public schoolboy cad Jonny Prescott who ordered the Tudor beams hence the bad taste.
Fourthly, I don't know who claimed for the toilet rolls but I will bet you it wasn't Bronco (private public school joke).
Grow up. It matters not which class you belong to or aspire to; men and women of all classes are perfectly capable of screwing anyone; ripping people off is not the preserve of one class however irksome to you that this picture does not fit neatly with your chosen political dogma.
Complain about this comment
The only way to restore confidence in Parliament and allow politicians to get a grip on the impending disasters is to have a General Election now. Nothing else will work. The worst scroungers of whatever party will be de-selected, lose their seats or give up. The rallying call must be, "Defend democracy - Go to the country! God save the Queen".
Complain about this comment
# 278 Road_Hog
I have also had posts "moderated" on this BBC site, but which are posted in identical form on other Blogs (The Spectator, The Daily Telegraph, Guido Fawkes, Burning Our Money ... to name a few). I find it a tad sinister that the BBC's "moderation" is what some people might call censorship. However, the BBC these days seems to me to be little more than an institutional arm of its beloved (if rapidly disintegrating) New Labour Party. How else can one explain the remarkably limp BBC interrogation of the political gangsters that have been governing this country for the past 12 years?
Complain about this comment
282. At 7:14pm on 09 May 2009, moraymint wrote:
Yes sir. Time was when I swore by the BBC. Now, I find myself swearing at it.
My feelings exactly! However I keep watching and listening in the hope (probably a vain hope) that they will eventually return to their previously high standards. They have the budget and the technical facilities to provide the best news service in the World, so it can only be political interference that prevents to prevent this happening.
Sorry Beeb. I'll keep listening to you but only while wearing slippers and with nothing but soft cuddly toys within reach of my throwing hand.
Complain about this comment
There is a poll site in which the overwhelming majority answered yes to the question of whether the BBC is left leaning biased.
It most definitely is left leaning but I detect a slight - just slight - change occasionally because they can't help but see the ocean of support looming up for the Opposition party (and others) not Labour.
Now they are between a rock and a hard place because it's obvious they recruit from left biased universities. Big dilemma for them but that's what happens when you put a huge broadcasting company under the aegis of a failing Labour government.
I too have had stuff censored which is eagerly accepted elsewhere.
They seem incapable of realising that the public would rather the BBC kicked Jonathan Ross off than censored the true feelings of the British public who pay the licence fee.
Complain about this comment
finally @ 283
Fourthly, I don't know who claimed for the toilet rolls but I will bet you it wasn't Bronco (private public school joke)
what, you mean a joke only understood by other toffee apples?
is it a good one? ... bet it is!
Complain about this comment
Despite all the furore, I still don't think the MPs and Ministers "get it".
They don't seem to appreciate that the VAST majority of people, even those in highly responsible, skilled or onerous jobs, will never in their lives earn as much as the basic salary of the lowliest backbench MP. These voters will never be able to claim anything like the generous amounts that MPs do, even if they have to work a long distance from home. The MPs who state that their claims were within the rules conveniently ignore the principles of the system - which part of "beyond reproach" don't they understand?
Those Ministers who are "fighting back" are merely compounding the loathing which ordinary decent people feel about them. I might even have a small amount of grudging respect for an MP who threw his hands up and said "I'm sorry. I took guidance from more experienced MPs about what should be claimed. I now completely accept that I was wrong. I shall never claim for these items again". But all we have is a litany of them blaming "the system".
"Snouts in the trough" isn't sufficient to describe the situation. It's an insult to pigs!
Am I the first to think that Heather Brooke and the other campaigners who doggedly persisted with action under the Freeedom of Information Act are the real heros. They should be honoured for services to Open Government.
Complain about this comment
262oldnat
I quite believe you, my argument was that the Term mother of parliament was generally excepted as describing the British parliament not the English parliament, its just that I find many things that are British, called English, mostly by the English of course.
Complain about this comment
#212
THE LAWYER CULTURE
If you consider MP's are often lawyers or legally trained their shameless and bizarre behaviour becomes more comprehensible if you put them in a courtroon, not the house of commons.
They clearly do not see any issue so long as they are 'within the letter of the rules'.
To use the courtroom analogy the lawyers rely on the jury to provide the morality, they are not required to exercise any themselves, in fact they are not allowed to, they are duty bound to look for the technicality or the loophole that will get their four time convicted rapist off the hook even if they know he is guilty...
Is that a sensible attitude to be allowed to prevail in politicians?
It is that same attitude that allows Harriet and the like to feel like they can morally as leaders avoid direct questions, evade, quote the letter of the law in defense of the undefensable. to them that is acceptable bahaviour as part of a greater moral system!!
NOT SO IN POLITICS
They appear like they genuinly feel like they are doing nothing wrong!!
They simply have the attitude that the electorate are the jury, the electorate is the moral voice. Having a moral voice or morality of action is nothing to do with them, they feel they are 'released' from morality by the electorate. They are not normal human beings in that respect..far from it, that makes them dangerous.
Their only duty is like a lawyer, to try to protect the interests of their client (e.g. the labour party) while earning as much money as they can for themselves as well.
That would explain why normal people find politicians behaviour so bizarre, irritating and annoying. They would say the same thing about lawyers.
There are good reasons why it has to be that way in the courtroom but it is counterproductive in the house of commons, the house of commons requires our leaders to shine a genuine moral light and display genuine honesty in action in all they do. We do not want people leading the country who would tell the country to jump off a cliff because the proceedures said they can!!!
That is what it ammounts to if you have lawyers or a lawyer culture in charge.
Political parties take note..no more lawyer politicians please, recruit politicians not for their silver tongues, recruit them for their hard earned understanding of real life. Let the people judge them on their CV's of life experience not thier quick fire wit to embarres an opponent.
There I go again p***** into the wind.
Jericoa
Complain about this comment
i hope GB's cleaner has declared this income for tax purposes, and by the look of the home made "receipt" she doesnt appear to be self employed... otherwise she will end up in court....wouldnt that be ironic! Also she is good value for money compared to the £40,000 a year jacqui smith pays her "housekeeper" husband.....
Complain about this comment
I'm starting to get seriously fed up of MP's defences of these claims.
The common line seems to be "yes, 50 quid for some towels can't really be justified, but hey, its the system thats at fault, not us."
They just don't seem to realise how ridiculous their arguments are. Many of these MP's have been in Parliament for decades. They have used the system for all these years and knew full well how they and their colleagues exploited it. Yet it is only now they're being dragged through the mud in the papers, that any of them turn round and speak out and say the system needs reforming.
Not a single politician has had enough backbone to bite the hand thats been feeding them. So when they turn round now and say the system needs reform, they look utterly hypocritical.
Complain about this comment
289. At 8:18pm on 09 May 2009, ian h wrote:
...Am I the first to think that Heather Brooke and the other campaigners who doggedly persisted with action under the Freeedom of Information Act are the real heros. They should be honoured for services to Open Government.
===
No, I was! See my #260, but I agree that they deserve to be recognised.
Complain about this comment
By July, if not published earlier, the electorate will have a full description of the expenses " earnings " of all MPs. It will be absolutely clear who has been milking the system and who should be got rid of. A decade or so ago Martin Bell stood as a beacon candidate and got elected. What we need over the next few months is a comprehensive list of those MPs to be ousted and "peoples" candidates to stand against them. Sure, the party machines might be strong ( can they really back up the fraudsters? ) but here is a real chance to show the miscreants that their gravy train is ended and that the people want to be heard. A new chance for political change.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
I live in exeter in England. Born in Plymouth. My son served in Afghanistan and Iraq. I'm going to take on my local MP, Ben Bradshaw, one of the Ministers in todays Daily Telegraph. Mr Griffin goes to Westminster, nice ring to it don't you think. No political party at all, completely Independent. Come on England. Others can do the same, might cost a few hundred quid, but I will not be beholden to anybody or any party. He who pays the piper calls the tune. It is not too late. However, I think that this is the last chance for this country.
Complain about this comment
Looking forward to Margaret Moran's interview tomorrow. Going by the body lanuage in the snippet shown on News 24 it could be interesting.
Incidentally, as the whole matter of MPs expenses is of national importance, why is this interview being restricted to one area?
Also notice that the house in Southampton isn't listed in the register of members interests (May update) Her joint ownership of a property in Spain and her leasehold flat in SW1 both are though. Surely not another "oversight"
Complain about this comment
Having caught the House of Commons (an appropriate term, it strikes me) with their trousers down, let's now scrutinise the House of Lords. One anticipates far worse misdemeanours from that motley crew which, to top it all, is unelected.
Complain about this comment
Margaret Moran, Labour's Luton South MP, told the BBC the paper's report was "inaccurate" and "probably actionable".
But she didn't say (at least the BBC haven't reported it) that the fact that her second home was 100 miles away from her constituency (and from westminster) was untrue, she just said "I was within the rules"
Likewise with Keith Vaz, he didn't dispute the fact that his second home was only 12 miles away from westminster (a distance smaller than most people commute to central london), he also just said "I was within the rules".
Gordon Brown who's been living full-time in a massive fully tax-payer-funded house in central london for 12 years claimed over 6grand to clean a separate flat that was a stone's throw away which he doesn't even spend any time in and just said "I was within the rules." (Nick; have you explained yet what Brown is using that "london flat" for?)
All show indignation at the public finding out about their troughing which only makes them look even more on the take.
Cameron's response months ago was definitely the right one. ie he basically said to his MPs: Forget the rules, because the rules just say "there are no rules". Instead, if you don't think a reasonable member of the public will think that your claim is fair/right for your situation, then don't make the claim. If you make the claim and you can't defend it to a normal/reasonable member of the public without having them spit in your face in disgust then you're on your own.
MPs still don't get it, especially labour MPs. They still don't understand that what they've been doing is blatant tax fraud if had been done in the private sector (or even in the public sector at lower levels). In the private sector, these "within the rules" claims would lead to you going to prison.
I also don't think they fully appreciate how badly this is going to effect their parties in the various local/euro elections in june.
In fact, I think that the labour response to this has meant that it's increasingly likely that in 2010 labour will come 4th or even 5th and may never be heard of again after 2010.
While I like the idea of labour coming 5th in the next general election, I don't like the fact that labour MPs have each been able to pocket the equivalent of over 2million quid gross for each term that they've been elected. They've ruined the economy, and will never have to work again because they've built up massive property portfolios at the tax payers' expense by fleecing us all.
You can boot them out of power, but they have the last laugh; they never have to work again and they've got all your money.
Complain about this comment
I'm surprised that more fuss is not being made about the £400 per month allowance for food. Surely an if an MP is eating in a second home in London,he/she is not eating in their first home in their constituency, so this allowance is just another way of ripping off the long-suffering taxpayer.
Complain about this comment
@300
I'm sure that this was set up in the same way as company schemes, where when you stay away from home you are allowed so much money to buy food because you don't have access to cooking equipment etc
In the case where MP's, however, have a permanent base this does not apply and for tax purposes they must therefore be treated like students away at University.
Complain about this comment
I also note that there is still no update to this story.
Some of the newspaper editorials are openly suggesting that there will be MP resignations, and the Telegraph is openly suggesting on one column that DC should show his control of his party by expelling those who are deemed to have broken the spirit of the code because that would demonstrate the divide between Tory and Labour and their response to public outrage.
I would enjoy this, but taxes have been paid for these people to be able to act in this manner and effectively some didn't want this information in the public domain.
I now believe, like DC, that "sunlight" is the best deterrent.
Complain about this comment
Margaret Morans defence is that MP's lead a very stressful life and that her partner lives in Southampton, well if he lives in Southampton and it makes life difficult then it's obvious that her being an MP is not suited to her home life and she should resign immediately.
She should also realise that thousands of people have to work away from home every week for a fraction of her wages and don't receive a handsome expenses account like her and her trough snorting colleagues.
Complain about this comment
jericoa @ 291
that's very true about the macho lawyer culture in parliament - all about superficial sharpness, bullying, point scoring, isn't it? - not fit for purpose as they say - the only surefire way I can think of to fix that is to have lots more women MPs (preferably a majority) or, more to the point, less men
hey, and apparently no CGT paid on the sale profits from these second homes ... how about that?
Complain about this comment
This point may have been made before so I apologise if it has.
Harman went on the Andrew Marr show demanding repayment by Fred the Shred of some of his pension and talked about the court of public opinion.
Well it is fairly clear that the court of public opinion has found the some MPs guilty. So the MPs who have made money out of the sale of second homes should pay back out of the profit they have made, funds given to them that have been to cover interest payments on the mortgages and also any renervations made to that second home.
That way they could at least demonstrate to the court of public opinion that they accept that they should not have made money at tax payers expense.
Complain about this comment
getrid @ 299
I don't like the fact that labour MPs have each been able to pocket the equivalent of over 2million quid gross for each term that they've been elected
absolute peanuts compared to the tens of thousands of people in the banking sector in the City, and on Wall Street, who have walked away with enormous sums, the proceeds of the greatest rip off ever seen - they are the ones who have done the most damage to the economy, both globally and here at home - private sector, these guys were, PRIVATE sector - you need to drop the phoney charges on the economy and come clean as to the real reasons why you hate Gordon Brown - it's a personal thing, isn't it?
Complain about this comment
uncivil @ 305
no, only maybe 7 or 8 times at most, so no need to apologise - it's quite a good point, let's face it
Complain about this comment
A new BPIX poll for the Mail on Sunday has:-
CON 45 (nc) LAB 23(-3) LD 17 (nc)
Most of the polling took place BEFORE MPs' expenses details were released.
It doesn't look good for Labour!
Complain about this comment
Please give all Members of the houses of Commons and Lords a bucket and spade each so that no one would need to buy Horse Manure on their expense accounts - they could collect their own BULLS--T for FREE from the floor of the respective House.
Complain about this comment
Research for the Mail on Sunday found the party's support had dropped three points over the past month to just 23 per cent - even lower than when Michael Foot was at the helm in the 1980s.
The fall gives the Tories a massive 22 per cent advantage, enough for a landslide victory if repeated at a general election.
The dire position was reinforced by a separate YouGov poll for the Sunday Times, which suggested Labour's support had tumbled 7 per cent to 27 per cent - 16 points behind the Conservatives.
The news is likely to heighten anxiety among Labour MPs over whether Mr Brown is the right man to lead them, in the wake of a dreadful few weeks.
Mr Brown's personal judgment was called into question when one of his closest aides, Damian McBride, was forced to quit after planning false smears against senior Tories.
And the last few days have been dominated by revelations over parliamentary expenses claims by Mr Brown and his ministers - although the polls were only carried out as details started to emerge.
Complain about this comment
mps
Complain about this comment
#308 yellowbelly1959
Not that I'm particularly concerned what the polling figures are at a UK level, BPIX are not members of the British Polling Council, and don't publish their detailed data. Their headline figures should not be relied on.
Complain about this comment
#304
Not sure about that..last time I looked there were plenty of female criminal lawyers around also and if you ever tried to win an argument with my wife reason and reasonableness do not always form a part of her stategy:)
Complain about this comment
#304
To continue my solution would be presidential, who wants King Charles anyway, its quaint but is it sensible? lets have presidential election mid commons term to keep em honest. Keep the royal family to look at and for a bit of pomp and tourism..King Charles would be ok for that I think.
Complain about this comment
#312 Oldnat
YouGov good enough for you?
Complain about this comment
It is interesting to read that Lord Carey is saying that the authority of Parliament has now sunk to its lowest ebb in living memory, when it fact the trust in ALL Politicians has sunk to its LOWEST POSITION EVER.
Complain about this comment
I've just spent some time reading back through this and several other blogs and forums in case I missed any posting that actually supported the MPs actions in any way.
I can't find one!!
Is this a first? It really does seem to be MPs v The rest of the UK.
Complain about this comment
#315 yellowbelly1959
In UK terms, yes. It's weighting factors applied to Scotland probably make it less accurate here than in England.
The YouGov figures for the Sunday Times today of CON 43%(-2), LAB 27%(nc), LDEM 18%(+1) also predate the expenses scandal, so don't tell us terribly much.
My point was simply to avoid relying on a supposed pollster which doesn't match industry standards.
Complain about this comment
#318 oldnat
On the contrary, I think they tell us a lot. The Tory lead is up by nine to 16 points in the past month.
"GORDON BROWN, battered by revelations over ministerial expenses and a series of embarrassing climbdowns, is heading for a humiliating third place in next months local elections.
An analysis for The Sunday Times by Colin Rallings and Michael Thrasher, the election experts, shows Labour is trailing the Liberal Democrats as well as the Tories as it heads into the June 4 elections in 34 English local authorities.
They predict Labour will lose all four of the councils it controls and half the 500 seats it is defending. A separate YouGov poll shows Labour will get barely more than a fifth of the vote in European parliament elections on the same day. This is worse than five years ago, when Tony Blair was at the height of his unpopularity over the Iraq war.
Among those certain to vote in the Euro elections, Labour polls 22%, 15 points behind the Tories and four points ahead of the Liberal Democrats. But smaller parties such as UKIP and the BNP are expected to gain ground during the campaign.
In terms of voting strength, the YouGov poll of more than 2,200 people puts the Tories on 43%, up two on last month, with Labour down seven on 27% and the Liberal Democrats up two on 18%. The Tory lead is up by nine to 16 points in the past month."
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6256702.ece
Complain about this comment
I wonder how many of these 'necessary' purchases actually ended up in the 'necessary' second home ... and how many Aga cookers, plasma TVs and fancy washing machines have fallen ONTO the back of a lorry, to be exchanged for outdated items in their family residence.
Complain about this comment
#304
" that's very true about the macho lawyer culture in parliament - all about superficial sharpness, bullying, point scoring, isn't it? - not fit for purpose as they say - the only surefire way I can think of to fix that is to have lots more women MPs (preferably a majority) or, more to the point, less men
hey, and apparently no CGT paid on the sale profits from these second homes ... how about that?"
Problem is that women Ministers seem to be just as cavalier with expenses (Smith, Blears, Follett, etc.) and show no greater competence (Smith, Harman, Hewitt, etc.) compared with the men.
Far too few politicians have ever been exposed to life in the private business world. Far too many have a complete "working world experience" bypass before morphing from university into some think tank or party internship. Far too many read PPE, economics or law, get good degrees and think that, because they are "bright", they would automatically
have made it in the commercial world - so they are entitled to be treated as equivalent to senior people in business. (I can't find many directors of FTSE 100 companies holding PPE degrees... I'm aware of thousands of academically gifted folk inprivate and public jobs who you wouldn't trust to run a whelk stall.)
Over the decades, governments have eroded the idea of personal responsibility and grown expensive, complicated tentacles to fill the gaps. We get too many laws to fill the voids where common sense has been worn away. Then too many public bodies to oversee the laws. Plenty of women involved in both aspects.
Said it before - but I think we need a public test-case brought by HMRC to test the validity of the Green Book rules, their application and the actual execution of tax-law on those parts of MPs' "allowances" which are quite evidently not necessarily incurred to support their parliamentary activities.
Complain about this comment
Just as we no longer see Jacqui Smith and Tony McNulty appearing on political current affairs programmes and audience shows like Question Time to put The Government case will the same now be true of Hazel Blears? We shall see.
Complain about this comment
To all venal politicians currently infected our Parliament with your filth from all party's
"It is high time for me to put an end to your sitting in this place, which you have dishonoured by your contempt of all virtue, and defiled by your practice of every vice, ye are a fractious crew, and enemies to all good government; ye are a pack of mercenary wretches, and would like Esua sell your country for a mess of pottage, and like Judas betray your God for a few pieces of money; is there a single virtue now remaining amongst you? Is there one vice you do not possess? Ye have no more religion than my horse; gold is your god; which of you have not bartered your conscience for bribes? Is there a man amongst you that has the least care for the good of the Commonwealth? Ye sordid prostitutes have you not defiled this sacred place, and turned the Lords temple into a den of thieves, by your immoral principles and wicked practices? Ye are grown intolerably odious to the whole nation; you were deputed here by the people to get grievances redressed are yourselves become the greatest grievance. Your country therefore calls upon me to cleanse this Augean Stable, by putting a final period to your iniquitous proceedings in this house; and which by Gods help, and the strength of he has given me, I am now come to do; I command ye therefore, upon peril of your lives, to depart immediately out of this place; go, get ye out! Make haste! Ye venal slaves be gone! So! Take away that shining bauble there, and lock up the doors. In the name of God, GO!
Oliver Cromwell
Complain about this comment
#323:
Nice one! The very last plea has been aimed at Gordon for a good three months now but still nothing doing.
Complain about this comment
MP's "expenses" are looking increasingly like a political black economy.
There is a wonderful opportunity for members of the audience to use the supplementary questions on Questiontime to ask the political panel about their expenses. It is increasingly clear that a number of MP's can no longer appear on the panel.
At least we will be spared Miss "Grin and Spin" with her big cushion as a panelist.
Complain about this comment
Clearly the Labour party is now dead.
Parliament as a whole is seriously wounded.
323 has given us an appropriate quote.
However we have no Cromwell and we probably would not like him if we had.
Does the Crown have any power left at all?I for one would like to see it use it.
The real problem is the way we select our MPs and the power we give each Party in that process
Couple this with the patronage that the Party leaders have at their disposal and the MP belongs,with one or two honourable exceptions,to the party leadership
The result is very little different from the Rotten Boroughs of the 19th century where the local aristocrat had the gift of the local parliamentary seat.
We need a new way of selection for OUR representatives.
I favour local primaries for the candidates but the time has come to have a debate on the answer and then ask the Crown to find a way of implementing it.
Complain about this comment
The Green Book is available on this website together with background information.
http://www.parliament.uk/mpslordsandoffices/finances.cfm
The Green Book:
http://www.parliament.uk/documents/upload/GreenBook.pdf
Complain about this comment
Dissolve Parliament.
Get the facts on the behaviour of your own MP. If he/she has been at it, write to your MPs local constituency office demanding his her/her de-selection.
Hold a General Election.
Make MPs' expenses 100% transparent and subject to the identical rules on claims, allowances and tax-on-benefits as the rest of us.
Anything else will maintain the "other worldliness" of MPs and the cancer in our democracy. Before we know it, we'll all be at the mercy of extremist political parties and civil unrest.
Complain about this comment
Re :326
You are wtong we do have a Cromwell. We the people are Cromwell. I have always been a Labour Party Supporter but I have already sent this to my Local MP via Writetothem.com
We elect politicians in part because we beleive they are better than us and therefore they have the moral authority to govern us. It does not matter what party you support that remains true.
Who can possibly anymore have any faith in that? I agree the Labour Party is finished it is rotten to the core and for that I as a supporter appologise to this nation even if its politiicians will not.
If every person on this blog sent Cromwell's speech to their MP you can be assured it would have an effect. It has been used before not just by Cromwell but by other MPs and has brought down governments.
The time has come for the people to use it to end this disgrace and reclaim soverignty over Parliament instead of allowing Parliament to be sovereign.
Each person has a moral choice to make. What is more important your party or your country? What is more important your party or your democracy? What is more important the future of your party of the future of your children grandchildren etc?
Send the quote and end this scandal once and for all which is of course just the tip of the iceberg. The EU, All the local Athoritys Councils etc, The BBC etc etc etc.
If our politicians can not be trusted can you imagine the scale of the abuse still to be uncovered?
Start at the top and work your way down. We once had a nation to beleive in we could again if we took a few moments to send Cromwells quote.
Complain about this comment
Am I the only person in the 'real' world feeling quite exasperated by the current expenses revelations? Of course, our honourable members of parliament are entitled to claim 'expenses' it just appears that the majority of them have misunderstood the meaning of the word. Perhaps, this misunderstanding could be rectified at election time? I, for one, am still hopeful that we still have honest, hard-working, capable candidates in this country who could breath a bresh of fresh air into a system where the 'air-conditioning' appears to have packed up!!
Complain about this comment
Morning nick ,The storm clouds are coming over your way so be ready with the old brolly rained here during the night so no need to water plants ,Never the less it was refreshing, to say the least pouring over the post, good comments all round no mencion of the baroness hoddiney must have done a vanishing act and escaped with the cash? my little ditty for to day is this Pack up your troubles in your oldkit bag and smile boys smile, whilest youv'e a goverment that takes the p..s smile boys thats the style, whats the use of worrying it never was worth while,so smile boys smile.Ps h blears seems to have made a packet,No vat on unearned income either,Nice for some hey?
Complain about this comment
328 moraymint
Well said.
By asking MPs to work by the same set of rules as us mere mortals, they may realise just how hard it is in the real World.
Considering how many of them have no experience of proper jobs that could be a real eye opener for many of them.
As a lot of the controversy about expenses seem to be focussed on the 'professional' politicians, perhaps the time has come for the selection process for candidates to include a condition that anyone offering themselves as a candidate must have some experience of genuine employment.
Complain about this comment
Not sure, but by the evidence of my own eyes and what I read here it is not just Parliament's 'reputation brought low'. Make that, even lower.
And it might be worth noting that it has been brought to where it is now (not sure the current location suggested can even be viewed from where they are currently, and still digging) by their own actions, as most have and a few in some very cosy places still seem to have had trouble even mentioning some clear, blatant, incontravertable facts in a blizzard of 'events interpretation'.
Complain about this comment
Why the Telegraph is trying to minimise gordon browns cleaning expense is beyond me, how on earth is cleaning essential to his being able to do his job, why couldn't Sarah do the house work, and why has she not made contribution to the cleaning bill,also
What the main stream media wont be talking about unless the blogshere gives them no choice.
curtesy of political betting.
484. Will L May 9th, 2009 at 10:56 pm
I have looked into Brown and that Flat and effectively he and his wife have cashed it in now! Please follow the link to see why! The Press seems slow at understanding what they have done! It is grubby and they have withdrawn equity out of a property at Taxpayer expense!
http://tinyurl.com/qs8j78
by Martin Day May 9th, 2009 at 11:01 pm
Complain about this comment
If all this information is available to be leaked to a newspaper why is the commons not publishing it now rather than waiting until JULY! If anyone should be investigated it should be those who are not immediately releasing the information, they seem to be delaying until they can all
a) nip into hiding
b) check through and repay anything they shouldnt have had
or c) work out what to say to the press usually "it's within the rules... I took advice... I have not broken the law... (when it comes to grace and favour accommodation) others have always done this"
Complain about this comment
Given that BBC news correspondents are also publicly-funded through the licence fee, when can we expect - in the interests of full disclosure and impartiality - publication of their expenses? How many MPs have enjoyed a long lunch or late-night conference drinks on a BBC bar tab in return for some piece of gossip to fill a blog or become 'breaking news'?
Complain about this comment
Why are we paying for a cleaner to work over 5 hours a week (10 pounds an hour over 26months), for a flat belonging to Sarah Brown. Just how messy can a rairly used flat in london get in a week?
I live in a large 5bed house yet our cleaner only works 4hours a week.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
Can you answer a question?
Given that the normal man in the street earns around 15-18k BEFORE tax, exactly how many tax payers are needed to raise enough income tax to pay an MP's second home and food allowances?
Once you have worked it out coupld you ask as many MP's as you can for their guess of the answer. MP's are offten asked for the pice of a pint of milk or loaf of bread, I think the answer thay should know is how many taxpayers are needed to fund their second home.
Complain about this comment
not sure why telegraph has backed off....but anyway GB appears to have signed the flat over to his wife...if there anything in the green book that states the taxpayer has to fund the expenses of spouses? and why has flat cleaning anything to do with ..."wholly, exclusively and necessarily on parliamentary duties.
Complain about this comment
I wondering if I should just send my hard earned July Income Tax payment on account straight to my hard up MP and cut out the middle man.
If we just send our cheques to the MP's then we dont need the parlementry fees office or the inland revienue so we can make masive savings to the hard up struggling tax payer!
Complain about this comment
The forthcoming local and EU elections are going to be a disaster for the Labour Party.
Once the results are announced, would this not be a good time for Gordon Brown to do the right thing and go to the Country.
He doesn't have a mandate to govern at the moment, so this would give him the excuse he needs to do the right and honourable thing.
The only problem being that 'right' and 'honourable' are neither part of his vocabulary nor his psyche.
Complain about this comment
jericoa ... yes, let's have a complete overhaul including a President as Head of State, PR instead of FPTP, fixed 4 year terms with a quarter renewed each year, a properly democratic upper House - you sound like a nice Clear Thinking Progressive type of person, on the whole, which is quite exciting for me to find on here - you should not however base your objection to more women in positions of power and influence on the debating techniques of your wife (itself, of course, a position of power and influence)
fairly ... saying that certain female ministers don't seem much better than the men is missing my point (not the first time you've missed my point, is it?) because they are just fitting in with the prevailing culture (overwhelmingly male, macho, sterile) and it's the culture that needs to change - if women were in the majority (or equal in number) the culture would change - a load of clowns coming in won't change anything which matters, probably make things worse
gordon ... this expense scandal has done it, you're DEAD - no chance whatsoever, now, of avoiding a 79 style defeat, I'm afraid - only question is clown landslide or something even bigger than that - what I therefore recommend (instruct, actually) is that you step down asap and we go for a New Leader - I like Harriet Harman (as you know) but in these circumstances she won't do because she's too associated with you - we need to throw in someone young, untainted by either you or expenses ... someone we've never heard of, preferably ... please give me a name and I'll get cracking on bigging her up
Complain about this comment
"claims for a kitkat, a tin of pet food and a bottle of shampoo"
This has I'm afraid, got nothing whatsoever to do with the above. These are "normal" noise in any expense system.
No, what we are fuming about are the likes of Brown & Darling - FOR WHOM WE PROVIDE A SECOND HOME - going on to claim "second home" allowances.
Brown has already admited (on YouTube) that this is wrong - so he has done it knowingly. It's MUCH worse than the Conway affair.
Once the CPS address that pair, then they can go onto the obvious fraud of the others who have "flipped" their addresses (or seaside cottages) - and jail them as well.
Complain about this comment
According to the Telegraph, Gordon Brown may have been the "victim of a complex system".
Oh come on!!! This is the man who boasts he can save the World's economy.
If the PM cannot even fill out an expenses claim form properly - especially one that apparently doesn't get checked or queried - how on earth can he save the World.
The mind really does boggle!!
Complain about this comment
I am intrigued at the £400 monthly food allowance. Is it for expenses incurred by the MP, not his family while parliament is sitting or do they claim it for the 12 months of they year? If it is the latter it should be taxable as it is not incurred while at work. Apart from which the wine and dine in HOC subsidized restaurants don't they?
My wife and I spend £400 in Sainsburys every month and that includes wine and the occasional diversions down the TU aisle by my wife.
Complain about this comment
342 Frank Field?
Complain about this comment
curtesy guido blogger
- (Gordon Brown) Misled the public about the election that never was, the incident that shattered Browns reputation as a strong leader. No matter what anyone says, the election had been called and was then cancelled. We had been working on it for weeks. We spent £1.2m in immediate preparations, Watt said.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6256748.ece
Complain about this comment
Andy Burnham the Culture Secretary, is on his hind legs on Sky News at the moment telling us that he appreciates people are are finding it hard and that the Government needs to 'do the right thing and help people through these difficult times'
They could start by making the same expense/allowance system that they enjoy available to the rest of us.
Complain about this comment
306 sagamix
299 get rid
"I don't like the fact that labour MPs have each been able to pocket the equivalent of over 2million quid gross for each term that they've been elected"
Sagamix
"absolute peanuts compared to the tens of thousands of people in the banking sector in the City, and on Wall Street, who have walked away with enormous sums, the proceeds of the greatest rip off ever seen"
===============
You are tue in what you say, but that in no way makes it right or acceptable in any manner or form for MPs to be abusing the system of allowances and expenses.
I watched your political fantasy woman Harriet Harman make her "court of public opinion" speech on TV about Fred Goodwin and bankers. I've also seen her "within the rules" briefings on TV, and for some reason she is not quite as threatening to MPs. Any reason for this ?
As for the bankers/MP salary analogy, I can only say that if MPs hold themselves in such high regard that they believe that they are underpaid and could earn a fortune working in the private sector, then this theory will be put to the test in the next year or so, as many of them will be looking for new employment.
Complain about this comment
Just seen Ed Milliband on the Andrew Marr show. He's a pleasant enough chap, but completely in denial about the current situation. What hope is there for any of us with people like him running the country ?
Andrew Marr did make a good point which went something like "the rules are one thing, the actions of the people who abuse them are quite another". I think a bit of personal responsibitility from MPs is called for here. Moving the discussion from the system to the people involved is one bit of "flipping" that MPs will certainly not welcome.
Complain about this comment
#342 Sagamix
You asked for a new leader of the Labour Party. We need to throw in someone young, untainted by either [Gordon] or expenses ... someone we've never heard of, preferably
Time for a novice then.
Complain about this comment
Hazel Blears, and others, must live on another planet. To say publicly that they accept "the rules" are wrong but have at the same time taken the fullest possible advantage of those selfmade rules to line their own pockets is a disgrace. In other words they knew it was wrong but they did it anyway. I have long regarded Labour as unelectable due to the number of groups they have upset or wronged from pensioners through sporting shooters, motorists, muslims,smokers,unemployed, disabled, etc ;the list goes on. But they have survived by upsetting disparate groups that have no connected response.Now they have upset everybody at the same time. End game?
Complain about this comment
Just heard on The Andrew Marr comfy sofa show a nifty notion, and that was a quiet, dignified protest by the people of the country to show these venal sharks and their media WUVI-supporters just what we think of them.
All I ask is it is not decided to be some silly all-points descent on London, as this would be a public order nightmare, unfair on the capital and require a ton of folk to use cash and carbon to get there.
I'd suggest a minute of silence for our country's kids' lost futures, in designated local town squares nationwide at a suitable lunchtime period that does not interfere with trying to survive and play into the hands of funded extemists without jobs to worry about.
All coordinated online and with images in a patchwork quilt in some kind of Pixel Protest like those ad spaces, in the manner of a FaceBook group. I am sure even the local plod could provide halfway accurate crowd size estimates for once.
And if the numbers add up to what... more than half the voting population who turned out at the last election, then I think it would be valid that a new one be called forthwith.
Complain about this comment
Oh nick whos kidding who more woman mp.The current bunch coulden't run a in a brewery so lets not have any more of the same,And talking of brewerys make mine a double scotch ,Oh sorry we allready had a pair did'nt we , better get back to work on the cannal boats ,buckets over filling.?
Complain about this comment
340. At 09:30am on 10 May 2009, wombateye wrote:
I wondering if I should just send my hard earned July Income Tax payment on account straight to my hard up MP and cut out the middle man.
If we just send our cheques to the MP's then we dont need the parlementry fees office or the inland revienue so we can make masive savings to the hard up struggling tax payer!
===
Better than that, join this campaign and send Gordon the shirt off your back! After all, he's had everything else!
http://lpuk.blogspot.com/2009/04/taking-shirt-off-you-back-campaign.html
Complain about this comment
351. At 10:29am on 10 May 2009, johnharris66 wrote:
#342 Sagamix
You asked for a new leader of the Labour Party. We need to throw in someone young, untainted by either [Gordon] or expenses ... someone we've never heard of, preferably
Time for a novice then.
===
Touche!
Complain about this comment
337 wombateye
you say
#I live in a large 5bed house yet our cleaner only works 4hours a week.
why not do as Tisfedup 334 suggests for Gordon
#why couldn't Sarah do the house work,
why can't the mrs do it.
Complain about this comment
oh come on people, grow up! - under any system, MPs are going to be paid a considerable multiple of the average wage - let's stop pretending that's not the case - when the expense system is rationalised, there will need to be a significant increase in salary - it's because that wasn't done (because it was thought the public wouldn't wear it) that we have this ridiculous scenario of them trying to top up with sordid expense claims - it's been a tacit cross party conspiracy, hasn't it? - now exposed, thankfully, but if the public (again) won't show sufficient maturity to accept the necessary big pay rise for MPs, then we're no further forward, are we? - this is just like the way that income tax was not raised in a clear, straightforward manner (as it should have been) and instead we got all the so-called "stealth taxes" and the ridiculous complexing up of the tax and benefit system - why? - because it was thought (and perhaps rightly thought, I'm sad to say) that the Public weren't grown up enough to see what was necessary - same thing some of you posters are saying now about this silly pretending that we don't have to cut some front line public services - same point, a good point, and not a party political point - it's about the politicians not trusting the public - treating them like children - and I'm afraid with all this "they should live in Halls of Residence and be paid 60 thou a year and no more" you are continuing the CHILDREN WHO NEED TO BE LIED TO act - we really need to break this cycle somehow - all that's going to happen now is we'll switch from Lab to Clown under the false pretences of greater Clown economic competence (rubbish) and a perception that clowns are not as corrupts as labs (double rubbish) - I'm quite depressed to be honest and, apart from those of you that are truly committed clowns, I think you ought to feel the same - get the government we deserve? ... 'fraid so
Complain about this comment
Nick
More gloomy news. Depressingly unsurprising (no-one in the system asks themselves what is right, but merely whether they've stayed within the rules or not) but still depressing. We've had a lot of criticism about the wages of senior public servants but at least most of them pay for their own TVs and cleaners. Mind you, no doubt we will soon be told more about 'I'm all right Jack' behaviour running wild in their world as well.
Maybe we need a real shock to the political system to get politicians at all levels to wake up and realise what the public now think of them. Local elections, coming up in June might be an opportunity. What if none of us cast a vote? If no votes were cast I wonder what they'd do - elect no-one on the basis that no-one has the public's confidence?
Complain about this comment
it looks to me from the stories being told that mp's have worked very hard designing a system that looks good to the public but pays them well above the odds.
it looks from the revelations that those who are mp's councilors etc do so just to line their pockets whilst they can becouse they would be unemployable out in the real world, may be the whole system needs changing before too long.
public office is just that publicly funded to benefit the public.
its the same with election campaigns both major parties owe millions on electioneering that i feel shows how corrupt the parties have become thus corruption at the top filters through the entire being.
party politics has run its course this country deserves better more honest people friendlier government not the joke thats there at the moment.
Complain about this comment
I see that the House of Commons officials have called in the police to search for the mole who leaked MPs' expenses details.
They wont be able to find the mole, John Gummer had it killed!
===
"House of Commons officials have today called in the police to hunt down the mole who leaked details of MPs expenses.
The parliamentary officials spent the morning in talks with Scotland Yard, and made the decision this afternoon."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/may/08/mps-expenses-commons-commission-inquiry
"John Gummer, the former environment secretary, used the parliamentary expenses system to claim more than £9,000 a year for gardening.
Mr Gummer also received hundreds of pounds to meet the costs of "treating" moles, removing jackdaw nests, tackling insect infestations and an annual "rodent service" contract. He claimed more than £100 a year for the mole treatment alone."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/5301734/John-Gummer-claimed-more-than-9000-a-year-for-gardening-on-MPs-expenses.html
Complain about this comment
357. At 10:50am on 10 May 2009, grandantidote wrote:
337 wombateye
you say
#I live in a large 5bed house yet our cleaner only works 4hours a week.
why not do as Tisfedup 334 suggests for Gordon
#why couldn't Sarah do the house work,
why can't the mrs do it.
===
Because he can spend his OWN money how he wants, it's not OUR money, can't you see the difference?
Complain about this comment
Why aren't 650 Members of the House of Commons under lock and key this morning whilst their solicitors sort out bail pending further enquiries on possible charges of embezzling Public monies?
Why is there a Police Officer outside No.10 instead of several inside sifting through the documents for evidence of the whole-sale corruption that has been alleged?
Why do any of these 650 wretched, venal, odious MPs still think they are fit to be in office?
I trust as soon as this utter collapse of morality and ethics has been fully explored and revealed all 650 will be banned from ever again holding Public office?
Complain about this comment
Here's a phrase
"Just because you can, doesn't mean you should"
Could none of them operate any moral judgement, no self restraint.
I have the perfect right to walk up to any of you and call your child "a fat, ugly pig".
I have broken no laws, BUT I would hope a moral compass would steer me along the right path, I wouldn't do it and then say "It was all within the rules".
These people obviously have very flexible and short term moral compasses.
Complain about this comment
It occurs to me that the very nature of the way in which we now run parliamentary democracy is at the root of the problem as it is bound, in these greedy days, to provide ways in which the avaricious can feather their nests at our expense.
So I would propose that MPS and Lords should have to live in their constituencies fro a decade BEFORE they can be elected to parliament. This ensure that they have a knowledge of their constituencies and indeed live in and have a home in their constituencies. (And further that once elected they cannot be re-elected, but they should serve and I stress 'SERVE' for a decade.)
The necessary overnight accommodation in London should be in a hostel or pre-booked hotel accommodation paid for centrally on a room-only basis or bed and breakfast basis and the details of evening attendance and overnight stays should be made available daily.
Office expenses should be published monthly including the number of emails and letters handled and meetings attended, as should travel expenses for parliamentary work.
Complain about this comment
john and yellow
time for a novice? - just because you both make the same joke doesn't mean it's not a good one - 'cept it's not a joke because it is time for a novice - not Cam though - want an inspiring, Clear Thinking Progressive type novice if that's okay with you guys
sky
mmm, Frank Field - thank you - in the Cabinet, for sure, but not for Leader - I need a woman (excuse the phrase)
pickled
Ed Milliband came over better than usual on Marr, wouldn't you say? - not a woman though (I don't think so, anyway) and not suitable for Leader - again, in the Cabinet no problem (but not his bro, thanks very much) - Harriet? ... with a heavy heart I'm dropping her - tainted
Complain about this comment
356 sagamix
I feel like many on here,angry at the abuse of expenses. but I am sorry that so many on here want to condemn parliament en bloc,There are almost certainly dozens of MPs from all parties who came into politics because it was a life they wanted to pursue but also because they believed they could make a difference to our lives hopefully for the better.
This latest feeding frenzy is not taking these people into consideration.
I am not, unlike many on here trying to make a political point here I am just trying to defend all the MPs who have not abused the system, from all parties, these people whether it be ten or one hundred or five hundred do not deserve the sort of abuse that is being heaped on parliament as a whole.
I feel that language should be moderated not about individuals but about parliament as a whole, this mass hysteria is not a encouragment for those that have behaved as we would expect but probably the opposite, if their going to have to share the blame then who can blame them if they say well what the hell..
Complain about this comment
In 2008 Moran complained that her Council in Luton South was not using their powers to utilise privately owned houses for needy families requiring housing, will she be volunteering the one she doesn't use any more as she now lives in Southampton? Top Trougher Margaret, do the decent thing Resign!
Complain about this comment
358. sagamix
Absolutely agree that they should be paid a more realistic wage which would (hopefully) remove the temptation of fiddling their expenses. However the scale of some of the alleged profiteering transcends reasonable wage debates, Hoon's property portfolio is top of mind, likewise some of the other 2nd home 'flippers'. I get the impression that even with higher salaries some would still have abused the system without it bothering their conscience.
Complain about this comment
Since this government is so keen on league tables we should have one for MPs' expenses.
Complain about this comment
wombat @ 340
I wondering if I should just send my hard earned July Income Tax payment on account straight to my hard up MP and cut out the middle man
hard earned? ... hear that such a lot ... wonder what it really means?
Complain about this comment
Just watched the interview with Labour MP Margaret Moran (£20,000 paid to fix dry rot to a third home 100 miles from her constituency). What planet is this person living on?
Well worth watching if you can. She played the victim card, and the right to family life card, shamelessly. However, she really should practise crying in front of the mirror before she is interviewed next time.
A completely different point that may have been mentioned before. The rules for payment of expenses by Parliament does not have to co-incide with the rules used by the Inland Revenue (just as the Revenue may not accept that expenses paid to employees by an employer are genuine). Many of the expense claims submitted were not exclusively for business purposes and should be taxed. Interest should be charged, and for extreme cases penalties up to 100% of the claim should be levied. I believe the Revenue can go back 6 years, and in case of fraud far longer.
Complain about this comment
Nick
You are heading in the right direction but are still too sympathetic to MPs.
I am self employed and have some rights to claim expenses. However the rules I operate under are far stricter than what MPs apply to themselves. I would never have dreamt of claiming for what they have done.
When they claim "its the system" perhaps someone should point out it was them who brought in the system. Also a list should be made of those who voted in 2003 for their expenses to be tax free....
As to Hazel Blears, if the allegations against her are true surely she must be guilty of tax fraud.The police should be investigating this.
Complain about this comment
Since my trust in politicians which was already low, has now been eroded further by the expenses revelations, I was wondering if a system exists that checks if MPs are only registered to vote in the constituency that contains their main residence?
Does anyone know what the rules are? With all this flipping of primary and second homes which has made them a lot of money, are they also changing their place of voting? Would any of them be so underhand as to vote in effect twice?
Complain about this comment
Sagamix,
If you really insist on the next Labour leader being chosen on gender grounds then may I suggest Kate Hoey. She and Frank Field, alone amongst Labour MPs, talk sense most of the time. You might find this would be a popular choice. She's not a novice though, which may disqualify her in your eyes, but sometimes you have to compromise.
Complain about this comment
I see there are questions being asked about the propriety of The Telegraph in revealing the corrupt practices of our M.P.'s. Smacks of shooting the messenger. The Telegraph is to be applauded whatever anti government stance it is accused of having. Though why The Telegraph should want to bring down a government only slightly to the left of Atilla the Hun escapes me. This is not the first time that the expences subject has been aired, I am still waiting for an explanation as to why you and me have to buy Gordon Brown's TV licence, as revealed in a previous exposure. This time The Telegraph has done the job properly.
Complain about this comment
saffron stomach ...
this MY MONEY thing, it's a fallacy - your money is what you earn (or otherwise receive) after taxes - the way you talk makes it sound like you consider yourself to be the employer (the Boss, as it were) of anyone working in the public sector - sure you don't mean it that way, but that's pretty much how it sounds (not just you, btw, plenty of others too)
Complain about this comment
I have two questions about the information released this week:
1. Why is the PM allowed to make a claim for a 2nd home when he has been provided with one for the last 12 years?
2. Why are MPs allowed to keep the profit that they make from the sale of 2nd homes (and sometimes, it now appears, without the payment of Capital Gains Tax)?
Complain about this comment
Sadly no MP will resign from this, because doing so will mean that are admitting to fraud and open them selves for prosicution.
Complain about this comment
Good to see the Telegraph are now starting to reveal the expenses of the other big parties, starting with.........
Who else but Sinn Fein!!!!
Clearly it will be Plaid Cymru next followed by the Tooting Popular Front.
This Labour Loving rag (Yellow)are giving the Tories a real grilling.
BTW Cameron's exceedingly quiet on the subject of expenses, I'd have thought there'd have been an orgy of mock outrage by now.
Wonder why not?
Complain about this comment
john @ 375
yes I do insist, I'm afraid, and Kate Hoey is not the worst suggestion I've heard, so thank you - would prefer someone a little younger and with considerably less experience, however - ideally, it should be a woman that the Public have never even heard of - trouble is, that means that I won't have heard of her either, and so I can't make a concrete suggestion - let's just call her SUPERGIRL and proceed on that basis
Complain about this comment
#380 Eaton
Keep your powder dry, Ben Brogan has confirmed that the Tories will get their fair share of coverage.
Clearly you don't work in the newspaper-selling business.
Complain about this comment
#380 Eaton
By the way, last time I looked John Gummer and Greg Barker were Tories!
Complain about this comment
On her website, Hazel Blears says she attended Nottingham Trent University. On the website of the Department for Communities and Local Government, it states that she went to Nottingham Polytechnic, as does 'Who's Who'. Yes - the Poly was one of the predecessor institutions which became Nottingham Trent, but it was still the Poly when Hazel went there, presumably in the 70s. Nottingham Trent was not created until 1992. A minor matter, perhaps, but not strictly accurate. A solicitor should know better. A tiny indication of her regard for the truth, perhaps? And a bit of vanity as well?
Complain about this comment
"371. At 11:25am on 10 May 2009, sagamix wrote:
wombat @ 340
I wondering if I should just send my hard earned July Income Tax payment on account straight to my hard up MP and cut out the middle man
hard earned? ... hear that such a lot ... wonder what it really means?"
It means working an average of 12 hours every week day, plus an hours travel and silly hours most weekends, running a small profitable company employing 12 staff. In the current climent living off savings so I don't have to lay off 3 staff members. It means wondering why goverment departments have how become the slowest payers (from an average of 35 days to 73days) dispite G.Brown saying that departments pay within 28days. It means like today reading 2 inches of employment law and new regulations that apply to my area of work to ensure we are complient.
OH and if i do actually move house I'll have to pay capital ganes because two rooms are used for work. I even pay for my own cleaner out of my taxed income!
But I'm not alone, every small company owner does the same!
Complain about this comment
382/3 Yellow
Morning
"Clearly you don't work in the newspaper-selling business."
and you do?
BTW last time I looked for John Gummer in politics we were in a different recession it was so long ago.
Complain about this comment
367. At 11:17am on 10 May 2009, grandantidote wrote:
I feel like many on here,angry at the abuse of expenses. but I am sorry that so many on here want to condemn parliament en bloc,There are almost certainly dozens of MPs from all parties who came into politics because it was a life they wanted to pursue but also because they believed they could make a difference to our lives hopefully for the better.
I take it then that you believe that these "innocent" MPs were totally unaware of the scams being carried out by their colleagues. Not a likely scenario methinks.
By merely ignoring what was going on they were condoning such actions.
I'm sorry but while some were more involved than others, none are left untarnished by this.
Complain about this comment
One of the interesting things is going to be the wild swings in voting for MP's of all parties at the next Election. The Court of Public Opinion could well find a lot of sitting MP's guilty and safe seats lost and marginal ones kept where the sitting MP is seen as honest.
Bring on the Election.
Complain about this comment
I just heard the news...
There is a mother facing a year in jail for claiming her parents address is hers, so she can get her 5 year old child into a primary school.
And we have a MP (in fact a Minister in the goverment) who is claiming the home where his parent live is his second home so he can claim expenses on it.
Which in the court of public opinion more deserves to go to jail, the mother or the MP?
Complain about this comment
@ 385 (WOMBAT)
okay okay, guess I asked for that - sounds like hard work in anyone's book! - a much overused phrase though, I still feel - sort of an I work hard and deserve everything I get, whereas they are lazy skivers who I am forced to support - with the "they" being the unemployed, public sector, illegal immigrants etc
Complain about this comment
I must stop watching the news , it is doing my blood pressure no good whatsover. Who does Hazel Blears think she is? "the public dont like it","ordinary people must be involved". Do all MP's consder themselves super beings above the lowly rest of us? The French had a way with this a little while ago, this new breed of "aristos" should thank their lucky stars they weren't born then, and French of course. Love the Cromwell speech, poted by superAngry, 323. 10th May. How do I copy it to others?
Complain about this comment
NO HAZEL, NO GORDON, THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE SYSTEM, THERE IS SOMETBHING WRONG WITH YOU.
THE EXISTING EXPENSES SYSTEM WOULD WORK FINE IF POLITICIANS USED IT WITH PUBLIC SPIRITED INTEGRITY.
POLITICIANS CHOOSE NOT TO DO THAT, POLITICIANS CHOOSE TO SEEK OUT EVERY LOOPHOLE AND OPPORTUNITY FOR THEIR OWN FINANCIAL GAIN.
THE POLITICIANSD ARE WRONG NOT THE SYSTEM.
YET ANOTHER CYNICAL ATTEMPT TO DEFLECT AND EVADE RESPONSIBILITY AND MORALITY BY OUR LAWYER CLASS POLITICIANS.
JUST LIKE LAWYERS THEY DO NOT SEE THIER DUTY AS A MORAL ONE, THEY SEE THEIR DUTY AS AN INTELLECTUAL ONE, TO WIN FOR THEIR PARTY BY EXPOSING EVERY LOOPHOLE AND USING THEIR SILVER TONGUES AND INTELLECT TO WEAVE A SPIDERS WEB, NOT THEIR MORAL COMPASS.
LOOK AT ALISTAIRS HOPELESSLY OPTIMISTIC BUDGET FORCAST HE MANIPULATED TO MAKE THE NUMBERS STACK UP, THAT BUDGET WAS NOT IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST IT WAS IN THE LABOUR PARTIES INTEREST AS IS THE MASSIVE BORROWING, SELLING DOWN THE RIVER OUR CHILDRENS FUTURE FOR A PERCIEVED PARTY POLITICAL INTELLECTUAL ADVANTAGE.
sorry about the capitals, i dont make ahabit of posting this way, I am just very angry this morning at the sheer hypocracy of ex lawyer hazel and Gordon browns attempts this morning to blame the system they created. No system is perfect all systems can be abused by those who have adesire to do so.
I am with you #323. Perhaps we should arrange a march on westminster with one of the battle re-enactment societies at the front dressed in full civil war costume with Oliver at the front ready to read out that speech once again ..word for word..it is as relevent today as it was then.
Who knows we may even be able to steal king Charles crown from him again......but with no blood this time.
It must be worth doing..anybody know a battle re-enactment society we can call to set it up ?
PLEASE
There muyst be someone out there who reads these posts who has some power and influence, i am just a struggling engineer with barely enough time to look after my family and funds to pay the bills.
we have set up the lobbygroup org to at least get a forum for people to get togther..but guess what..only afew people bother when it comes to the crunch.
Jericoa (angry)
Complain about this comment
If the system allows claiming of these expenses, particularly for the cost of second homes, then why complain about it. The system does need changing, but what disappoints me is the stock answer from MP's that they have "kept within the rules" but then say that they know the rules need tightening. Well if you know, why do you push the boundaries. Can't they understand that the public will see them claiming for food, televisions, etc - all things that the tax paying public have to pay out of their salaries - and wonder which planet they are on. No wonder we are losing respect for them. If they want the public to treat them as anything other than idiots, then they have to behave as if they don't think we are stupid either.
Complain about this comment
The main problem with British Politics today is that Parliament is seen by the Labour, Conservative and Lib - Dems as a kind of Exclusive Club whereby whatever happens during any General Election Time, the same FACES return and its back to business as usual in their Twilight Zone World far removed from the everyday World of the wider Public.
These Exclusive Club Members, Eh' Sorry - So called Politicians, believe that in any time of Crisis always insist that ANY REAL PAIN must ALWAYS befall the weakest in our Society, with changes in State Benefit payments to appease their folly in prop - up an Economic Crisis in all sectors including Banking, while at the same time carrying-on in their Time honoured tradition of Claiming Expenses, and Allowances for GAIN to the March of the Call that "IT IS ALL IN THE RULES".
We will continue to see this Rip - Off, and Gravy - Train mentality all the time we "ONLY" Vote for and have these same Political Parties heading-Up U.K. Politics, for until then there will be NO REAL REASONS for Real ACCOUNTABILITY AND OPENNESS in British Politicics, perhap ONLY a tinkering around the edges of events such as the Expenses Affair, again to dupe the General Public into believing that progress has been made.
The real "ONLY" way to bring about a Sea - Change in British Politics is to Vote for OTHER Political Parties to Westminster thereby cutting down on the current University Club Circus that has resided of British Politics for now far too long.
Complain about this comment
Architarist #393
No wonder we are losing respect for them.
=====
Losing respect? Where have you been the last 12 years? Losing?
Sorry to say I lost respect for these jokers many, many years ago. Along with any respect for the main stream media and, in particular, the BBC. Both politicians and the media have failed the people of this country massively.
Complain about this comment
The system is fine - now that the information is public. Publish new receipts monthly until the next election, and vote out those whose claims are what we judge to be unjustifiable.
Complain about