The Kelly Report
A skim-read of the document just published reveals two surprises alongside confirmation of the tough new regime on second homes and employing family members.
Kelly rejects the cry of many Labour MPs that MPs should be barred from having other jobs. He also says that the new independent regulator should set MPs' pay and pensions. For those fearing that politics may become a rich man's game, this will be some comfort. To those who fear snouts in the trough, it will be a source of real concern.
I'm 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~54~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Excellent,, now lets see who's first to complain they're being hard done by.
The prize for the most inapropriate complaint so far goes to the tory who compared the treatment of MPs to Jews in Nazi Germany, but I'm sure someone can go further with the hyperbole by the end of the day.
Complain about this comment
So 'flipping' is to being kicked out but not the 'flippers' who filled their boots while they could (Without breaking any rules, of course!)
Complain about this comment
I think it's very good news that Kelly hasn't stopped MPs from having outside employment. Those with broader business backgrounds and experience in the real world have a lot to bring to parliament and the country. Career politicians who have lived in the Westminster bubble are too removed from every day life to make realistic and reliable policies.
Complain about this comment
Well, its certainly a start.
Lets see how it pans out over the coming days and weeks...
Complain about this comment
Perhaps those MPs who have outside jobs should not receive their 'resettlement allowance' when they are kicked out at the next election!
Complain about this comment
Does anyone know whether there is anything to prevent or limit 'expense' claims from second, third, 'n'th jobs? Or any limit on the number of other paid jobs being performed while still claiming a full-time salary from the state?
Complain about this comment
What's the betting that our MP's will do everything they can to water down these proposals.
The gravy train will still keep rolling along
Complain about this comment
For those fearing that politics may become a rich man's game, this will be some comfort. To those who fear snouts in the trough, it will be a source of real concern.
Nick I don't understand what proposal is snouts in the trough?
It seems very sensible to me.
Anything on the new wad of money Labour are handing to the bankers while they are still been given bonuses for failure?
Can we afford it?
I believe it is extra to the stupid forecasts on borrowing so we could be into 235 Billion this year.
Even the Tory plans to inflict pain and save 7 billion pale into significance when someone is running debt up for you of this magnitude.
At what point do we become insolvent and have we already passed it?
Complain about this comment
I give it 2 hours till theres reports of MPs complaining and trying to get bits changed and taken out.
Complain about this comment
So long as they do their second jobs in their own time and not during the time I'm helping to fund. And it does not compromise the MPs independence and integrity.
What happens to the basic salary?
Complain about this comment
Can't wait for 4 o'clock. Will Kelly get hit into the long grass by a radical new Tory EU policy or will he give us all something to talk about when Cameron comes up with not a lot?
Odd it should all happen on the same day. Mudddying the waters again are we?
Complain about this comment
Why such a bloomin fuss?
Would any business go through this rigmarole? I doubt it.
If the gov isn't going to buy a block of flats to accommodate MPs who live too far away to commute, then surely it's rent or mortgage payments for a one-bedroomed flat, or hotel costs; subsistance, travelling and a few other things that can be set out on a page of A4.
I mean, just this palaver is costing us all money that could be better spend elsewhere.
Complain about this comment
#6 probablynogood wrote ""Does anyone know whether there is anything to prevent or limit 'expense' claims from second, third, 'n'th jobs? Or any limit on the number of other paid jobs being performed while still claiming a full-time salary from the state?""
Does it matter what expenses they claim from ancillary jobs so long as the taxpayer is not paying for them? Presumably such expenses will be incurred in the fulfilment of their job specification, and, if in the private, sector, the problem of the employer and not the taxpayer. As for how many jobs, surely an MP should be entitled to have as many jobs as he wants, provided that there is no reduction in the contribution he makes to his constituents as their MP, and does not use a secondary job commitment to avoid attending at the House when necessary
Complain about this comment
#10
'... And it does not compromise the MPs independence and integrity.'
(Sprays monitor with tea and chokes on biscuit!)
Complain about this comment
Well, reform has been a long time coming. Let's hope these long overdue changes are implemented without rancour and any deviation is stamped on immediately.
My only concern is MPs not being allowed to employ members of their family. I would have thought this contravenes some European law, time will tell. Providing all expenses/payments are declared and electors have a clear and transparent view of where and how taxpayers' money is being spent I see no problem.
Gone are the days of the avarice lifestyle, the gravy train and "think they can get away it" attitude that has beset this nation for decades, indeed, let's hope so!!
Complain about this comment
I think the BBC should keep its opinions to itself. I guess if you have microphones, cameras and transmitters, the temptation to say a few words and influence our political process is just too great.
I believe that MPs are ridiculously underpaid. They should never have agreed to suppress their salaries and they should certainly have not made up the difference through underhand expenses arrangements.
If MPs are not given decent salaries I fear that the quality will decline and democracy will be further damaged. I can also see corruption creeping in. We may end up with Nick Robinson and Esther Rantzen running things.
Complain about this comment
The difference between what Kelly has proposed and what will actually happen will soon become all too obvious. If Gordon thinks he will be able to implement all the proposals as recommended by Kelly then he ought to think again. There are enough disguntled Labour MPs already kicking up a fuss behind the scenes to ensure that Brown will eventually waters some of the proposals down. If he doesn`t its curtains for him. Harriet has already fired a warning shot across his bows and there is plenty more from where that came. After all, she wants his job and wants to be seen as being on the side of the MPs and not Brown in all of this.
Complain about this comment
Nick Robinson:
Thanks for the overall summary of the Kelly Report...How long will
it before someone complains about some part of the report...
=Dennis Junior=
Complain about this comment
Nick (or anyone else who knows)
Do MPs become technically unemployed at any time after Parliament is "prorogued" and (if they are re-elected) before they are sworn in in the new Parliament? Or do they have continuity of employment
If tthe former, what happens to their staff? Is their employment de facto or de jure ended, so they are re-employed on new contracts by the "new" MP?
If that is the case, then surely family members have no right of continued employment if their spouse / parent is re-elected?
This is relevant to the Kelly recommendation that family members be banned from working for MPs and the campaign by existing MPs for this to be resisted.
Complain about this comment
15. At 11:20am on 04 Nov 2009, DavidHankey wrote:
Well, reform has been a long time coming. Let's hope these long overdue changes are implemented without rancour and any deviation is stamped on immediately.
My only concern is MPs not being allowed to employ members of their family. I would have thought this contravenes some European law, time will tell. Providing all expenses/payments are declared and electors have a clear and transparent view of where and how taxpayers' money is being spent I see no problem.
---------------
As long as its properly scrutinised i have no problem with MPs employing family members - as long as the work exists and needs to be done, why shouldn't an MP employ family, Small businesses are allowed to, why not MPs.
I want to see them subject to the same rules as everyone else, no more, no less.
Complain about this comment
Wow…. Apparently Kelly has found that Westmidden is Expensive and Leaky:
Watchdog takes swipe at party leaders over leaks.
Standards watchdog Sir Christopher Kelly took a swipe at party leaders today over "frustrating" leaks of his MPs' expenses reform proposals.
Well I never…. i’ll go t’foot of our stairs
Roll On 2010
Complain about this comment
The other thing that really is going to annoy me is that we are going to get MP's moaning about how hard done by they are when 5 of our soldiers (who get paid next to nothing for they risk) have been killed this morning.
I have nothing but utter contempt for MP's
Complain about this comment
Certainly good news. Trouble is, though, we already *had* rules on expenses and a regulator, who simply got ignored.
I forget the exact wording of the official guidelines on MPs expenses - somebody posted extracts recently on another blog about the MPs expenses issue - but it goes something like "All claims made must only be for things directly related to carrying out your duties as an MP" and "all claims must be justifiable to the taxpayer and beyond any reasonable reproach".
And from that, some of them managed to interpret that it was ok to claim for things like having their gardening done, or getting their private moat cleaned, or to claim mortgage payments for London homes they didn't really need.
And when they asked the regulators - the Fees Office - they too interpreted the existing rules to mean that some of these ludicrous claims were acceptable. Now, ok; the Fees Office shouldn't have given that answer. But why the heck were the MPs even asking these questions to begin with? I don't need to ask anyone's opinion to know that any company expense account I'm given to help cover the costs of doing my job, probably doesn't extend to having my damn lawn cut!
And the man in charge of the Fees Office at the time, Michael Martin - who should have been the one to take one look at some of these claims and say "look, these have nothing whatsoever to do with your ability to do your job" - despite being forced from his position as Speaker over his handling of the affair, simply moves on and gets a nice cosy seat in the House of Lords! Wow, I wish I was completely incompetent and involved in borderline-fraud, so I could get a promotion, too...
And, so far, none of the MPs involved - barring a few isolated cases where the miscreant in question has resigned to save him/herself further embarassment - has any real action been taken to punish those who abused the system.
So, whilst I applaud the tough new restrictions announced in the Kelly report, I have little confidence that once the furore around MPs expenses has died down, and the public's attention is captured by some other scandal, they'll just start ignoring them and getting their noses back in the public trough the same as they did the first time around.
Rules are only effective if there is some sort of come-back for breaking them!
Complain about this comment
#16
'If MPs are not given decent salaries I fear that the quality will decline and democracy will be further damaged.'
(Sprays monitor with tea and chokes on biscuit!)
And I'd just cleaned up after the last one!
Complain about this comment
We still going to be providing MP's with housing expenses, only now they are looking to pull the wool over our eyes and retitle the expense as rent based on the rentable value of their homes, Surely all of this should be stopped immediately and we either supply a block of flats for them to use or have a floating accomodation module built for them and berthed close by on the Thames. In the short term we could get a good deal on on hotel accomodation based on a block booking retention fee, this could actually work out to be the cheapest option of all. This would put this whole matter to bed immediately.
The properties that they have bought with and & that have been maintained with the tax payers money should be returned to the tax payer.
Why is HMRC not overseeing their expediture claims, why are we looking to pay for yet another dodgy quango office to oversee this.
Complain about this comment
The most apposite comment is "only want to see them treated the same as everyone else". I echo and support that. I am slightly disappointed that those who profited by flipping have not been asked to repay their ill gotten gains. Or is my recollection that the PM berated the MP for Salford then kept quiet when it cam to light that Mr Hoon managed to do it as well.
Complain about this comment
As always the "committee" syndrome rules. Kelly seems to have done his best with the bucket of slime he was handed.
Once the dust settles, and we have the luxury if time to look at all the proposals in full (extermemly unlikely), then we can make a measured response.
I hope we get sensible proposals that MPs who are paid a salary to do what seems to be a job, do get just that. I don't object to them moonlighting, but only if it doesn't have an adverse effect of their ability to discharge thier primary duty.
they should be allowed expenses for travel to and from their constituencies (subject to similar rules that apply in business, generally), including accommodation. It cannot be beyond the wit of a sophisticated civil service in the 21st century to come upon an idea of getting communal lodgings, and avoiding the problems we have now found out about. MP's who represent constituencies within an hours public transport travelling time would be expected to go home, since their travelling costs are paid. In the case of a late sitting, or vote, in the house, which may cause them to miss their last train (which happens to real people occasionally) I'm sure that government cars (and drivers) could be found and provided.
However, I'm sure some avaricious lobby fodder will find some reason to object. the good thing is, we will know who they are, and re-act accordingly at election time. the people will have some real power at this election.
Come on Gordon, bring it on now
Complain about this comment
Poprishchin #14 & 24
I'm glad I'm not the only one wiping down my monitor...
Complain about this comment
No, not another independent so-and-so. What will this regular depend on?
MPs are public servant entrusted with the greatest responsibility for for the welfare of the country, therefore, their rewards must be closely tied to the welfare and the majority of the people of this country.
MPs' salaries and pension should be tied to the cost-of-living related to state pension, crime statistics, national debt, health and inflation.
So they deserve a big salary if state pension goes further, the streets are safer, no national debt, low inflation and a healthy population.
Cabinet ministers and PM should not be paid more because pwoer is its own reward.
Complain about this comment
can we please have a blog on the "sellafield" question please as this looks like the thin end of wedge
where next a Mp is band from visiting and RAF base for fear of seeing
helicopters sat there in peices when £500+ has been spent on them ?
Complain about this comment
Nick:
He also says that the new independent regulator should set MPs' pay and pensions.
That sounds like a wonderful idea; But, will it be FULLY independent....
=Dennis Junior=
Complain about this comment
No 16
Talking of the BBC, remember that Carrie Gracie (a hitherto obscure BBC News24 nightshift newsreader) admitted to hauling down GBP 92K per year - presumably plus expenses.
If the House of Commons is ever cleaned up I'd expect far fewer people actually wanting to be an MP. There's far better money in the media, talking about MPs.
Complain about this comment
Here's my prediction about how this will play out:
MPs will make a lot of noise about how they accept the Kelly report in full, how it's important to tighten up the rules, they are committed to behaving properly etc etc.
Meanwhile, behind the scenes, they will make sure that it gets so mired down in interminable procedural stuff that the current crop of MPs are all long since retired by the time any of the recommendations actually get implemented.
For any Gilbert & Sullivan fans out there, I'm thinking of "Yes but you don't go!" from the Pirates of Penzance.
Complain about this comment
If that lot is applied in full we will be back to "Tory Toff's" and "Union Rep's" for MPs, back 30 or more years - why - because only people of either independent means or sponsored will be able to afford to work in two places at the same time, as we expect MP's to do so.
Also, why is the 'Expenses Tsar' (possibly) going to be paid more than MPs are? Not only that but he isn't even an accountant, nor holds any financial qualifications, talk about "Job for the boys" - he obviously moves in the right civil service circles!...
Complain about this comment
I think you are getting ahead of yourself here Nick. You seem to imply that everything is done and dusted when it's not.
The Kelly report is just that - a report. Nothing will see the light of day this side of a general election.
I agree many of the comments here, who've seen through the sham summed up by 7: "What's the betting everything will be done to water down these proposals."
The proposals should have been accepted in full and MPs given the chance to vote on the review recommendations. In that way MPs would have to stand up and be counted.
Instead it's down to yet another unelected, unaccountable quango or committee.
Setting up another quango in Kelly's wake was not the best way to build trust. When all the fuss dies down, won't voters and taxpayers still be left out in the cold?
http://theorangepartyblog.blogspot.com/2009/11/kellys-heroes-and-zeros.html
Complain about this comment
Rigid rules, such as those suggested by Kelly, would certainly be unfair. It would be better to rely on the one rule about expenses being necessarily and wholly incurred for parliamentary duties being applied firmly but flexibly and fairly by the Fees Office.
The problem in the past was that the civil servants in the Fees Office knew that if they got a reputation for interpreting the rule too strictly, they were likely to be moved out of their jobs, in the congenial atmosphere of the House, very quickly.
Supervision of the Fees Office, general management of the House and disciplinary matters should be in the hands of a body truly independent od both MPs and government.
Complain about this comment
The very interesting point will be what Harriet had to say. I noticed in scanning the online PMQ's that GB said a committee would have to approve Kelly befor Kennedy implements it. Long grass or what?
To stop further procrastination why not treat MPs as self employed under HMRC regulations. Then they would have to live by the rules that they put in place for we mere mortals.
Complain about this comment
"two surprises" ?
Well, the surprise to me was that the Kelly report was just another layer of beaurocracy, and that it's still going to be referred to yet another committee who in turn will come up with their own report which may or may not pass into law.
Sir Christopher said he "recognises the unique circumstances of an MP's life" - since when was having 2 offices unique to MPs?
There's absolutely no need for any of this rubbish; all they need to do is say:
"see the hmrc laws/guidelines that everyone else in the country who has more than 1 office has to follow? we'll use those" - job done.
Complain about this comment
I can't see why MPs shouldn't have outside jobs.
After all, our Prime Minister has a few:
- MP for a specific constituency - even though he is only responsible for a fraction of the legislative and regulatory impact of his voters because of the powers devloved to the SCottish Parliament),
- PM - first amongst equals of the Ministers of the Crown (and that must be a separate job, as it has a separate pension scheme!),
- "author" (though in his case "forest abuser would seem more appropriate)and
- sometimes journalist.
Wouldn't you prefer an MP who understands and has to be involved with the "real world", rather than someone living in a Westminster Village?
They don't bother to read all the legislation anyway. So when not spend a bit of time doing something useful?
Complain about this comment
So the head of the committee that oversees expenses is to be paid £100,000 whereas a backbench MP receives less than £65,000.
I realise our MPs are a much-derided bunch, and in some cases deservedly so. However, in the long term it really does our democratic system a disservice to hold MPs in such low regard.
Perhaps there are many civil servants, especially the quangocrats, who should have their pay cut in half. Come the revolution, that is.
I realise £65,000 may seem a lot of money to many, but for a professional job based in Central London is is not really.
Some of the problem with second homes is that when Parliament is sitting MPs should be based in London, whereas when it is not they should be in their constituencies. MPs with families should expect their families to be with them, not living in hotels. I know other people work and live away from home, and I have done 6 months stints myself, but that was about the limit.
Complain about this comment
As in many walks of life the majority will be affected by the irresponsibilty of a minority. Given that, reform is lonng overdue as we are talking about public funds.
I'll be surprised if not being able to "employ" a member of your family will pass certain laws but we'll have to wait and see.
As for this stupid notion that MPs will need higher pay to cover loss of some expenses they've always been used to is absolute tosh. It will not lead to a lowering of standards of our MPs, on the contrary, they have done extremely well to lower standards all by themselves already!!
Complain about this comment
#31:
"But, will it be FULLY independent..."
Would that be the independent regulator who is appointed by Parliament and given a £100K salary? Let me think about just how independent that makes him...
Complain about this comment
I like the idea of performance-related pay for MPs; it would sharpen their minds. Measuring their performance would be tricky, but I"m sure a system could be agreed which took various indices into account.
Actually, I don't share the general disdain for our MPs and think it's missing the mark to label them corrupt. Up until now, the expenses system has been a covert way to boost MPs' salaries and thereby avoid the politically sensitive issue of publicly raising their pay. It isn't hard to understand how this situation arose back in the 80s recession, and it isn't fair to blame Mrs Thatcher entirely - she just didn't have the guts to risk public disapproval. But it was a precarious situation, to say the least.
Have the Telegraph done the country a service by exposing the 'expenses scandal'? It's hard to see how. And it's always difficult to stomach when journalists are sanctimonious, particularly over something like expenses. I agree with other posters (a minority) who have said the whole furore is a waste of time and money.
The worst thing is, it's diverted the public's ire away from the bankers, who frankly have cost us all a great deal more money than a few dodgy expenses claims could ever amount to.
Complain about this comment
30. At 12:43pm on 04 Nov 2009, IR35_SURVIVOR wrote:
can we please have a blog on the "sellafield" question please as this looks like the thin end of wedge
----------
speakin as someone who severed their ties with Unite Against Facism over aa year agobecause of their unwilliness/inabilty to control the violent element which has begun attending their events, i suspect its as much to do with them as the BNP.
The thought of upwards of a thousand protesters, some of them determined to get access to the buildings probably has them pretty worried.
On the other hand it my be the well-documented criminal records of some of those Griffin habitually emp-loys as bouncers...
Complain about this comment
I'm afraid Nick does have a Westminster Village approach. Of course everybody wants the MPs' pay and allowances regime to be sorted out.
But Darling has announced massive new injections of "public money", which we don't have, into failed banks. And brayed about improving future competition n the high street.
Well, if Brown had not bumped LloydsTSB into the ill-considered takeover of HBoS - then waived the competition rules - that competition would have been more easily achieved. Having Lloyds Group and RBS hive off little minnows with little clout or coherence will just mean they will be swallowed up again as soon as the market turns up...
Brown, with the connivance of the rediculous Chairman Blank, turned a decent and largely sensible bank (Lloyds) into a supplicant. And HBoS - which could have been the sole beneficiary of prop-up money - could eventually have assumed a role as a significant mortgage group.
Instead, there will still be an enormous concentration of mortgage/ retail banking in the hands of people who need a good kicking.
Meanwhile, Lord Sugar blasts off at small businesses and recommends that swathes of them should seek "insolvency practitioners", rather than loans.
For goodness sake, if Brown wants a "Government Of All the Talents" and feels the need for a TV "personality", why pick Sugar?
He could probably have cut a deal with Homer Simpson. Or, if it had to be more local, I guess Bill and Ben would fit right into this political environment.
(After all, so many so-called senior politicians seem to have their strings pulled all the time!!!!)
Complain about this comment
There should be tighter regulation on MPs. I've heard enough about how the financial sector needs more regulation, but the way our politicians have acted throughout this whole affair is no different. At least the financial sector haven't appeared to do as much complaining as MPs have about how these reforms will affect them.
They had years to address and resolve these things but instead the vast majority were either complicit with the system, knew about it but did nothing or had their snouts in the trough abusing the system as far as they thought they could get away with.
However, as much as I understand the element of hiring family members, I actually disagree with this. Yes, there should be monitoring to ensure family members are doing what they're paid for but it's just about a person doing a job. If they're being paid and not doing a job then full accountability and responsibility lay with the MP and they should be forced out and banned from ever standing again as a candidate.
That is my only issue because I feel that there are many family members who probably do a very good job but they're being punished due to the MPs who abused the system. Apart from that, their only choice is to accept all the reforms laid out if they want to start heading in the direction of regaining the trust of the public who they represent.
However, I don't actually think the enquiry went far enough, I think there should be a full review in to everything regarding the jobs of MPs. The moment they choose to be a candidate for election, they should be made to sign contracts and be put through a process that ensures whoever ends up as MP is not allowed to abuse their position in any way and should receive a criminal conviction for anything they do outside what is considered proper conduct.
The politicians have been given too much freedom to run about uncontrolled for years. Time to reign in the leashes and train these people about what being an MP is really about. I'm fed up of hearing the line "I went in to politics to become an MP to serve the community". If serving the community is what matters then this is their first test to prove it. Either be the ones to complain and prove that you were only in it for the power, prestige, money and influence or accept the reforms in full and prove that you're willing to learn. This is merely the first step, though, on a staircase that goes up a very long way.
However, until people are allowed to have their say and give their votes on the matter, I doubt I would consider the word "Independent" in the same way the government does. The reforms should have been put to public scrutiny in some type of public forum and not run by someone within the system who claims to be independent, but at least they've taken things in the right direction.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
14. Poprishchin:
#10
'... And it does not compromise the MPs independence and integrity.'
(Sprays monitor with tea and chokes on biscuit!)
:-)
Sorry, just sprayed and choked after rereading my own post...
Put it down to a rare lapse of cynicism.
Complain about this comment
I just wonder how many MP's will instead of charging mortgage interest will opt to "Rent" their second homes to them-selves?
I hear that the channel islands have some good property managers who dont answer questions re who the actual land lord is etc.
Of course they can charge more than the interest, after all there are additional costs for land lords, like agancy fees, repairs, paying off the actual loan, furnishings etc. Of course they will have to pay Tax on any profits but stamp duty, legal fees, repairs, interest, council tax, furniture etc are deducted BEFORE the profits are calculated and losses can be carried forward for a large number of years.
What is the going rent for a fully furnished flat near Westminster?
Looks like a lose one win two possition for MP's
Complain about this comment
Opps of course if the MPs Husband or Wife becomes the landlord the renting there own property becomes TOTALLY ligit!
Complain about this comment
I for one would offer my services to chair the MP's pay committee for free, with my only expense claims the Train Fair to London and if the committee sits after 8pm in the evening an overnight stay in an average london hotel.
But then I would never be asked as my attitude with their claimes would to use the civil services standard expense rules (not the MP's) and apply them to the letter!
Complain about this comment
On the day five of our brave sons die in Afghanistan; paid a pittance and starved of the best equipment by a parsimonious treasury, we yet again have to listen to the wails from the overpaid, venal, discredited, duck island parliament, determined to wring the last penny from the system.
Have these people any idea of the contempt this nation has for them?
Complain about this comment
They still don't get it! They're already looking at ways to beat the system and contravene regulations by employing each others wives. Whatever sensible and decent rules are introduced these people will try and find ways of working round them for their own gain. And they've got the cheek to announce smugly how easy it is to exploit loopholes an keep on cheating. Outrageous.
Complain about this comment
interesting (isn't it?) that David Cameron managed to get his mortgage claim in before these changes ... you know, back when it was all "within the rules"
Complain about this comment
39. At 1:21pm on 04 Nov 2009, fairlyopenmind wrote:
"forest abuser"
===
I like it, I like it a lot!
Complain about this comment
Saga your hobby horse has had a little too much exercise. He at least has not avoided CGT with in the rules as some have.
Complain about this comment
None of the above is quite so beyond belief as the interview with Gordon Brown in GQ magazine who claims to be hard up living in Downing Street with his fleet of cars, the country house at Chequers, the satellite TV and cleaning paid for...all because he's turned down a rise on his piffling 195,000 pound salary.
My heart bleeds.
Another shot in his own foot for our stumbling prime minister.
Call an election
Complain about this comment
54#
Put a sock in it will you, if Jackboots and McNulty arent going to be interviewed under caution for fraud then neither is Cam going to be.
Get over it for Christs sakes.
Complain about this comment
#58
It's difficult to 'get over it' when you see that these people, er, 'Jackboots', McNulty and Cam the Sham, walking away, scot free, with their pockets stuffed full of our cash. Don't you think, Foobs?
Complain about this comment
I'm amazed it took over 50 posts for saga to bring that up tbh. Such a tired and flogged to death piece of smearing.
Complain about this comment
#60 calmandhope
Tired and flogged to death sums up exactly how saga ought to be.....
Complain about this comment
Sagamix 54
By what I have read, it is claimed, McNulty has got away with 60 thousand pounds of our money, so I would not shout too loudly about Cameron if I were you.
Camerons mortgage seems to be another subject where your needle has got stuck. It gets a bit boring to be honest.
Complain about this comment
Poprishchin 59
The difference is unlike McNulty or Jacqui Smith, as far as I know, Cameron has done nothing wrong, no matter how you feel about MPs expenses.
Complain about this comment
This Early Day Motion is published today, tabled by independent MP Dai Davies (Blaenau Gwent). It is rather different in tone and content from what a lot of other MPs have said:
EDM 2212 EXPENSES AND ALLOWANCES FOR HON. MEMBERS03.11.2009
http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDetails.aspx?EDMID=39472&SESSION=899
Davies, Dai
That this House, while taking into account the recommendations of the report of the Chairman of the Committee on Standards in Public Life on parliamentary allowances and expenses, believes hon. Members should be encouraged to sign over current mortgages for their second home to the parliamentary authorities on behalf of the taxpayer; further believes that new rental agreements for second homes should be arranged and managed centrally, and that rent should be paid directly to the landlord by the parliamentary authorities; further believes that all hon. Members' staff contracts should be managed centrally, but that hon. Members should be responsible for the recommendation of any staff bonuses within agreed pay bands, when exceptional work is delivered; further believes that travelcards should be available for hon. Members alone, excluding family members, and should be used only between the hon. Member's constituency and Parliament, excepting circumstances of very large constituencies, or constituencies remote from London; further believes the case has now been made that no other expenses should be paid to hon. Members, and that this would result in no necessity for claim forms, as all legitimate expenditure would thus be controlled from a central authority; considers that henceforth hon. Members' pay rises should be linked to the lowest pay rise awarded in the Civil Service; and further believes that if such new arrangements were to be in place, then it would remove the necessity for any Independent Parliamentary Standards Agency or Speaker's Committee, thus saving more taxpayers' money by not having to pay wages or fees to finance another non-departmental or parliamentary body.
Complain about this comment
59#
I wouldnt mind anywhere near as much if he mentioned any of those other players, let alone the quangocrats and local authority CEO's and councillors who are partaking in an equally lucrative racket.
In that sense, you're right.
But all he ever bangs on about is Cameron, as if Cameron is a totem for every other trougher in public life. And he knows its a lie, but cant bring himself to admit it for fear of losing face.
Hence my put a sock in it comment. Hope this clears up any confusion.
Complain about this comment
it matters not what is said or done any dishonest MP will find ways around the new rules.
there needs to be stiffer penalties for defrauding the public over expenses to curb any attempts at fraud.
wouldnt it be wise for potential MPs to be tested to see if they understand english and can use maths reliably.
Complain about this comment
65Fubar
I wouldnt mind anywhere near as much if he mentioned any of those other players, let alone the quangocrats and local authority CEO's and councillors who are partaking in an equally lucrative racket.
Do you really think people go into public service to make money? Why would they? There are so many easier ways of lining your pockets at the public's expense. Bankers are the obvious example du jour but big business has its fair share of backhanders and bungs. Hearing people drone about MPs' snouts in the trough, you'd think nobody in the private sector had ever feathered their own nest.
Remind me, what was Fred Goodwin's pension again? How many McNulties would you get to a Goodwin? Let's keep things in perspective.
Complain about this comment
calm @ 60
"Such a tired and flogged to death piece of smearing"
No; "smearing" involves the circulation of something which isn't true - there's plenty of it about, that's for sure ... both inside and outside politics ... but it's not the right word for things like this where the facts are both well known and undisputed; the only question to be answered is how do we FEEL about it? how do we feel about that behaviour from our probable next PM - it's a matter we each of us must contemplate as individuals ... using our own moral compass ... and our answers will differ just as we ourselves differ in the "Moral Compass" department
Complain about this comment
The sad part about all this is we probably don't need so many MPs anyway.
Votes in the House of Commons are often a forgone conclusion with MPs simply going through the lobbies when they are told. Increasingly, legislation is not properly debated or scrutinised and just goes through on the nod.
Then there is the increasing use of secondary legislation, where Ministers take powers to introduce new measures in the future without any further discussion.
But by far the biggest worry is the European Tidal Wave, where new rules and regulations can simply be imposed.
It used to be the case that a government could not bind a future government - any legislation could in theory be revoked. Thanks to Labour, not any more!
No doubt at the Proms there will soon be a new song to sing; Rule Europa!
Complain about this comment
#63 Susan-Croft
'... as far as I know, Cameron has done nothing wrong...'
Yes, he didn't break any of the rules that MPs had written for themselves. Woop-de-doo.
Complain about this comment
Saga
I can speak for the British public who do not have an inherent and disagreeable distaste for those who are better off than ourselves.
We are quite comfortable with our next PM's conduct over his expenses.
As is the whole of Westminster.
The press.
Etc.
Just a few flag wavers who are desperately trying to clutch at the only straw they have available left.
Complain about this comment
67
Quicker, yes.
Better, certainly.
Easier?
Not too sure about that. We are talking about keeping hold of a receipt and handing it in. Apparently not even that half the time.
Admittedly we are not talkin "filthy rich". But many of them have certainly helped themselves to money they are not entitled to for their own uses.
Complain about this comment
sagamix..
and where has Gordon Brown's moral compass disappeared given his recent interview in GQ claining to find himself hard up on his £195,000 salary, three homes two of which grace and favour, fleet of Daimlers, cleaners and satelite tv all paid for by the taxpayer?
Up his on backside?
Call an election.
Complain about this comment
#43:
"Actually, I don't share the general disdain for our MPs and think it's missing the mark to label them corrupt."
Yes, you're right, it's unfair to label them all corrupt. Some MPs are perfectly honest.
Trouble is, the other 99% of them give the honest ones a bad name.
Complain about this comment
So
1 Cameron will no longer be able to carry out his current practice with his mortgage. It is no longer acceptable. He had to be told this by a senior civil servant. Why did he not realise this before.
Why should the state subsidise rich people making money?
It is amazing that the tories on this site cannot see that this shows a difference between his activity and what he has been saying.
2 MP's will be able to have as many jobs as they like and spend as little time working for the country and their community as they like.
Again amazing value for money that tories.
Kelly has ducked out of really reforming the commons and - the Telegraph that spent so much time exposing the abuse of taxpayers money will say nothing either.
what a great shame and a missed opportunity.
Complain about this comment
Finbarr
you have got the wrong end of the stick the reason why people refer to David Cameron is because he has been saying one thing and doing another. He is putting himself forward to be the Prime minister of this country, and making capital out of being holier than thou.
He said it was all about the spirit of the law whilst claiming the max he could on expenses for a mortgage on a huge house.
he is the epitome of what has been going on in the commons.
Complain about this comment
Unbalanced:
Cameron is not making a penny from his expenses arrangements.
he is claiming back the interest, which goes straight to the bank lending him his mortgage.
Why don't you check your facts first next time.
Complain about this comment
Ok saga I'll admit it smearing wasn't the best phrase to use there. The point still stands though that while camerons may not have been the most moral claim ever, there are numerous examples of equally unmoral claims by the party that is currently IN power. And for some reason you never bring that up, doesn't it bother you?
Complain about this comment
We keep being told about the 'legacy' of the 2012 Olympics.
Given the amount of public money going in, perhaps one use would be to set aside part of the athletes' village accommodation for MPs who feel the need to stay in London. There will be good transport links. If they wanted to live anywhere else MPs would have to pay for it themselves. It seems to work in other countries.
Better still, why not move parliament out there as well. The site at Westminster must be worth a few million!
Just a thought.
Complain about this comment
Giant Hayestacks - wow you speak for everyone - thinking it is ok for David Cameron to use the opportunity of expenses to leverage a massive mortgage which he would be able to sell off at a huge profit.
Well Kelly thought it was not right and that is why he has banned it.
Every attempt to discuss it has been sat on by tory sympathisers because they believe it will make people think less of him.
Complain about this comment
54. At 2:48pm on 04 Nov 2009, sagamix wrote:
interesting (isn't it?) that David Cameron managed to get his mortgage claim in before these changes ... you know, back when it was all "within the rules"
===
As did about 640 other MPs, so what?
Get a life and move on!
Complain about this comment
#64 drdavidlowry
Dai Davies beat me to it. I was just about to type pretty much the same thing, good job I checked your post first ;-)
Actually, he makes a lot of sense with that, all taken care of and with minimal cost to the public purse.
So on that basis, it stands no chance!
Complain about this comment
Giant hayestacks
(remember David Cameron has been claiming more than any other parliamentarian for this in many of his years as an MP)
now let me explain the reason why Kelly has now banned the use of expenses to make huge capital gains is this.
What you do is buy a big house with an interest only mortgage. You get the state to pay for this, whilst you sit on the asset.
The house then appreciates in value.
Some years later you sell the asset without having put any money in yourself.
You have then made a huge capital gain.
That is one way in which rich people make money out of property.
Perhaps if you realised this rudimentary way of making money you would not think that 1.20 per day is a lot of money to use the gym, swimming pool, and running track at Willesden Sports center.
Complain about this comment
mps that profited out of flip flopping, should be in front of a judge,to explain exactly why they should keep the money(not because it was with in the rules)but real reasons,that money made on tax payers contributions to the house they have sold for a profit,surly after a sale all monies put into so called property,by the tax payer should be returned to the public purse,its funny before these people became mps most of them had modest houses with modest morgages went to work just like you and me,but as soon as they get the mp job its nothing but the best for them nothing else will do,that's because they are not paying for it out of their own pocket.all become wealthy, hows that done on a wage of approx £65thousand per year,its not possible, so there must be some sort of corruption going on,and the mps know it ,and now we now it.and no doubt continue to abuse the system,and these are the men and women that we are to look up to,thieves,abusers,and lie rs,.
Complain about this comment
67. At 4:17pm on 04 Nov 2009, pdavies65 wrote:
65Fubar
I wouldnt mind anywhere near as much if he mentioned any of those other players, let alone the quangocrats and local authority CEO's and councillors who are partaking in an equally lucrative racket.
Do you really think people go into public service to make money? Why would they? There are so many easier ways of lining your pockets at the public's expense. Bankers are the obvious example du jour but big business has its fair share of backhanders and bungs. Hearing people drone about MPs' snouts in the trough, you'd think nobody in the private sector had ever feathered their own nest.
===
Not using taxpayers' money, they haven't, that's the difference.
If the shareholders don't like it, they can vote as such once a year at their AGM.
Complain about this comment
Rock robin -
Call a referendum?
Complain about this comment
by a similar token severly unbalanced our PM spent £12,457 of our money that he was not entitled to. OK he has paid it back. Hazel Blears paid her CGT has Hoon and various other Rt Hon members. I doubt it. If you are going to rake muck then at least be even handed. I do give credit to Ms Blears for her prompt action, I now understand why she felt so agrieved by her boss' reaction.
Complain about this comment
75#
Frankly, I'm getting sick to the back teeth of this politics of envy crap. If you were in any way balanced in your thought, you'd be equally hacked off at the flippers, including the current serving chancellor and prime minister, at the former defence secretary who has amassed a one million pound plus property portfolio by using expenses and are now rich as a result.
But you dont.
You keep on banging on about Cameron, because you're jealous of him because he and his wife were born into money and you were not.
Its a pathetic argument that is as weak as a watered down Labour manifesto promise.
Dont you dare pretend to lecture me with your sanctimonious left leaning garbage about the epitome of everything thats wrong with politics.
You dont know the half of it.
Complain about this comment
balanced its not a case that any possible tory supporters on here are trying to suppress anything, I certainly wouldn't want to suppress anything. The thing that has got to well everyone on here who attacks saga, is because he routinely trys bringing up one instance with cameron and ignoring the fact that many just as well of labour front benchers were doing exactly the same thing.
The whole system is corrupt and needs cleaning out, however focusing on one person won't help clear it out.
This report while it has good intentions, won't stop any corruption. There is always going to be corruption in every walk of life, its a sad fact but its true. Saga going on about cameron is not as big a issue as he is making it out to be. There are people who have activly been corrupted in both the Labour party and Tory over the last few years yet he focus's on essentially a non story.
Complain about this comment
Well now the BBC and the newlabour apologists have their answer:
He also promised a sovereignty bill if the Tories win the next election to "lock in" the supremacy of UK laws.
And the Tory leader vowed to repatriate powers on the Charter of Fundamental Rights, employment and criminal law.
So Cameron is a man of his word and will place the words 'never again' in the tory party manifesto.
You got you dividing lines newlabour; you are a bunch of toadying yes men, the tories will stand up the the EU.
Let's have an election
Complain about this comment
I know that it wasd a 'skim read', but why a skim comment? One other blogger read into what you, very briefly said as not as to allow MPs to take second jobs, not how I read it.
Please explain what is meant by 'snouts in troughs have reason to fear'. I am not the only one to query this, so kindly explain what is indicated by this phrase.
I can only assume that you had too little time to read and inwardly digest before rushing to print. Unfortunately this allows some bloggers to impose their own version of what is said, not what was truly intended.
Complain about this comment
ghm @ 71
"We (the British Public) are quite comfortable with Mortimax's conduct over his expenses"
like I say, it's a Moral Compass thing
if one's MC is fully aligned with his then, you know, pas de probleme
and the British Public? ... yes, well
Complain about this comment
Unbalanced
He will not make a penny from the taxpayers.
If the property market happens to improve, he may make a profit should he ever sell. Or he may not. Any money he makes will be from the buyer, not the taxpayer.
Thats really all there is too it.
Complain about this comment
68#
Man, you dont 'arf like playing with fire dont you mate?
Complain about this comment
balancedthought 75
Sorry, again not a very balanced post.
As far as I know Brown delegated responsibility to Kelly chairman of the Committee for Standards to find a workable reform for MPs expenses. The Conservatives had very little to do with any decisions he made. Therefore any complaints should be laid at Browns door.
As far as Cameron is concerned, he acted properly, so I understand, within the rules at that time. However a lot of other MPs did not. If the rules are different now and Cameron accepts them, really I do not understand your problem.
As to your other point second jobs, all MPs including Labour MPs, have the same opportunity to have second jobs. It is hardly the Conservatives fault that they are more in demand than Labour ones. I believe however, that Cameron has said that none of his Cabinet can have second jobs.
Personally, I prefer MPs to have a wider interest than just being a career politician. Otherwise we end up with dreadful people like Balls whos only talent is to undermine and smear others.
Complain about this comment
balancedthought
sagamix
In case it had passed you both by, FIVE servicemen were killed today in Afghanistan trying to carry out Blair & Brown's grubby war, where they seem to be on some sort of crusade, trying to impose our values on a people who clearly do not share them.
I would have thought that would be a more appropriate place to aim your anger, than on a politician who has done nothing wrong regarding his expenses claims.
I know where MY anger is directed!
Complain about this comment
83. At 5:05pm on 04 Nov 2009, balancedthought
Did you pick up that valuable info from Geoff Hoon, (former Defence Secretary with blood on his hands) and property magnate?
Complain about this comment
balancedthought 83
There you go again, not everyone who is fair minded is a Conservative, you have been told this and yet you still keep saying it. I defended Cameron because it is right to do so. He has done nothing wrong, as greatHayemaker says he made nothing out of the expenses. Others have made money deliberately by actions that would make them money from the tax payer. Furthermore they have got away with it. You would do better to concentrate on these people from which ever party they come.
Complain about this comment
A maximum salary of 5 times the UK minimum wage should be set for anyone paid from the public purse and expenses should conform to HMRC rules.
Those individuals whose salary currently exceeds the maximum should have their salary frozen until the rest catch up.
The maximum should be reduced over time (say 20 years) to 4 times minimum wage.
Family members should not be directly employed as this can create a conflict of interest (supposing as an MP you find your spouse has been fiddling the books ?)
Nothing stoppping a good current employee who also happens to be a family member going to work for another MP.
These recommendations to be implemented in the new session (not the one after)
Move parliament to Milton Keynes.
Complain about this comment
calm @ 78
"And for some reason you never bring that up, doesn't it bother you?"
it does, of course it does, but I focus on Cameron for the following reasons
(1) he's putting himself up as our next PM and will probably win; so he merits particular scrutiny
(2) I think the claim itself was a clear example, and a bad one, of "playing" the system not just using it
(3) he added the sin of hypocrisy by immediately coming out and posing as Mr Angry About It All, and running around desperately (and rather pathetically) trying to look good
(4) he then added the sins of naked opportunism, shallow judgement and venal ambition by sacrificing a fair few of his own people; people who had done very little wrong in the grand scheme of things ... again, let's try and "look good" and who cares about anyone else?
(5) he's been getting an easy ride on this issue and I want to see that change; it's not a resigning matter ... no way is it that ... but let's see him squirm a little, don't you think?
(6) hundreds of you guys on here can be counted on to point relentlessly to expense "problems" on the Labour side
and finally ...
(7) I don't like him
... used to, but don't any more
look, there are ONLY two possible defences:
- the Technical Defence ... Within the Rules
- the Distraction Defence ... Others were as bad and worse
heard the both of these ad infinitum (and I guess someone, Mr Yellow Belly probably, will feel the need again)
Complain about this comment
67#
"Do you really think people go into public service to make money? Why would they?"
I give you the former Member for Glasgow East, who is on record as having said "'I did not come into politics not to take what is owed to me."
Ask the Kinnocks.
Ask Mandelson.
Ask Geoff Hoon.
Ask the Chief Information Officer of the Youth Justice Board, on 350 grand per year.
Ask the former CEO of Coventry City Council who was on over 200 grand per year.
Ask them why they did it.
Simple reason is that they are so ineffective anywhere else that no self respecting private sector business would give these leeches a job wheeling the tea trolley, let alone running a damned government department or a major city.
Complain about this comment
Yellow @ 85
bankers haven't "used" taxpayers' money?
World Class political blogging!
Complain about this comment
92. At 5:15pm on 04 Nov 2009, sagamix wrote:
ghm @ 71
"We (the British Public) are quite comfortable with Mortimax's conduct over his expenses"
like I say, it's a Moral Compass thing
if one's MC is fully aligned with his then, you know, pas de probleme
and the British Public? ... yes, well
===
Just so long as he doesn't use Brown's moral compass for reference, or else he would be in trouble!
Complain about this comment
La Croft @ 62
you've gone all cold and formal on me, Susan
is it over between us?
Complain about this comment
Until all MPs expenses are reviewed by HMRC against HMRC rules, in the same way as all other taxpayers in the UK have to comply, I will have no faith in our parliamentary system.
Complain about this comment
yellowbelly1959 96 97
For me yellow, those two posts were the most appropriate and important ones, I have seen in a very long time.
Complain about this comment
102. At 5:35pm on 04 Nov 2009, sagamix wrote:
Yellow @ 85
bankers haven't "used" taxpayers' money?
World Class political blogging!
===
Thank you.
I learned to defend the indefensible from you!
Are you being deliberately obtuse, by the way?
I never mentioned bankers if you check. There is more to the private sector than banks you know. The comment I made was with reference to big business, do check your facts.
Complain about this comment
103 sagamix
Thought you had promised (on several occasions) to drop the Mortimax tag?
Or is your promise like a Labour manifesto promise, not worth the paper it was written on, as successfully argued by them in court!?
Complain about this comment
second and third jobs,so being a mp is only a part time job then,if they are not in it for the money,then don't pay them,they can survive on there other incomes,if being a mp means you have a calling to do something good for your country,then these people can do it for free then,after all they can fit us in at any time ,that's what they do any way,just fit us inbetween there outside interests.and only lobbing when it benefits them,and there out side interests,£65+ =full time ,one out side interest=£37,ooo two out side interests=£18,500 three outside interest=£9,000,etc the more out side interests the less they get.that sounds fair to me.after all most of there other job hire the mp ,not because they have great knowledge of that business ,its because they are a mp,and the mp takes job because they are paid handsomely to work for that business interests,that alone sounds corrupt to me,we voted for them to represent us,not big business,giving that business a head start over and above another business etc, no need for any member to have second homes,unless payed out of own pocket,surely the palace of Westminster has plenty of room so as to let a few mps that might have to work late stay,grace and favour homes are fare to big and grand for just one mp to stay in,they also could be modified so as to accommodate a few mps that have to stay over in London.thus no extra expense to the tax payer,as both are payed by us anyway,travel expense should be stopped if you stay close to Westminster,a couple off mini buses could be bout to shuttle them around,mind you most have cars,so have a option to us the bus at no expense to them or use their cars at the expense to themselves, food no way ,pack lounch would be at there own expense
Complain about this comment
Sagamix 104
If you are going to be left wing, I want to hear left wing policies from you, that live up to that name. Not this elite left wing nonsense that you have come out with lately. I admire a revolutionary person, but all I hearing from you is the usual politics of envy based on nothing. I have said it before this type of politics is a disgrace to the movement of core values on which the Labour movement was founded.
Complain about this comment
64 Following on from the EDM
With the Scottish Parliament and Welsh Assembly why not cut down the number of MP's from those countries, e.g in Wales now 40 MP's reduce to 22, one for each Local Authority, their constituency office can be provided in council offices as can the staff, no need for family.
Just in case you missed this bit an investigation by BBC Wales highlighted a number of MP's constituency offices were rented from their own party, thereby swelling their own party coffers.
Complain about this comment
107 Yellow
And where do you think big business gets its money from? The ether?
Ever calculated how much extra tax we ordinary folk all have to pay because the country's biggest retailer avoids paying theirs? No AGM is going to vote against that, though - the shareholders have their noses in the trough too!
Complain about this comment
susan @ 110
"I want to hear left wing policies from you"
do you - how excellent!
right, you're ON babe
we'll start now and keep a count ... don't worry about whether you support the policy, you just tell me if you think it's Left Wing
okay?
ONE - no more private schools
Complain about this comment
yellow @ 107
"The comment I made was with reference to big business, do check your facts"
yes ... with reference to Big Business and with the specific example highlighted of the Banks
never get my "facts" wrong Yellow, you know that
Complain about this comment
sagamix 68
Let's deal first with the prime dishonesty in your post 68 re Cameron's mortgage:
"facts are both well known and undisputed".
You and I discussed the facts of the case only a few weeks ago. In short, your mortgage story depends absolutely on the perception that Cameron had sufficient cash to buy his constituency house outright, and that he chose to have a mortgage instead to make a packet on his expenses. You quoted Cameron's personal wealth at £25 to £30 millions.
In fact the story of the £30millions comes from the Daily Mail. They retracted the story here
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1191155/Claims-David-Cameron-30m-fortune-sit-uneasily-taxpayers-So-truth-money.html
I also pointed out to you that if Cameron has wealth on that order, then the income from it would show up in his entry in the Register of Members Interests (unless he keeps the money in an old sock under the bed, of course!). It does not - I have checked.
Finally, Cameron told Andrew Marr, when he was interviewed and asked about his wealth, that £30 millions was well wide of the mark and that the family houses were his and his wife's predominent assets.
Are you saying he lied on the Marr show and in the Register of Members' Interests?
So, first, your "facts" are not "undisputed". Second, without this gargantuan wealth, which you cannot prove and which firmer facts tend to disprove, your Cameron mortgage story is dead. What's more, it has been dead since we had that previous exchange, because it was at that point that you knew it was dead.
Repeating a story that you know to be untrue in order to try to gain political capital is a smear (at least). Why do you keep on with the story?
Over to you saga: I think an explanation and an apology is due.
Complain about this comment
employing family no way ,how about sharing the wealth,let some new graduate or a sectary who has worked most of there lives on a pittance get the jobs,keeping it in the family is not right,not when you are a member of Westminster,OK if you have your own business.how much money would it cost the tax payer, if mp employs wife/husband,daughters/sons,all going into one family ,its not because they are the best at the job,i don't buy it at tall,its greed,its corrupt,itselfish,dose one not have to advertise for such jobs by law, or am i mistaken.
Complain about this comment
sc @ 106
"For me yellow, those two posts were the most appropriate and important ones, I have seen in a very long time"
well yes, sure - for YOU
but what about US? ... don't you care about the rest of us?
how very typical of the selfish "me me me" Tory attitude to life
Complain about this comment
yb @ 108
"Thought you had promised (on several occasions) to drop the Mortimax tag?"
and indeed you don't see it so much these days do you, Yellow? - to be fair
just that it's a bit like a demotivated smoker in a boring job in a boring office
it "slips out" every now and again
Complain about this comment
112#
"Ever calculated how much extra tax we ordinary folk all have to pay because the country's biggest retailer avoids paying theirs? "
Legal under a tax regime devised by who precisely??? You still think Labour's the party of the working man, when they engineer a tax system that allows Corporation tax avoidance on a jaw dropping scale, but doesnt blink when it comes to taking the 10p band off the very poorest??
Complain about this comment
Several posters seem to have missed the point about Cameron. I would like him to apologise for his behaviour.
Not because he is rich.
Not because his behaviour was the worst in the house.
Not because labour was any better.
Not because Gordon Brown (who I like less) was any better.
I would like him to apologise because:
1. All mortgage expense claims will now be disallowed; a clear implication that they were not a reasonable expense to claim.
2. He is almost certainly our next PM, and subject to a higher level of accountability. (Note: I would also like other party leaders to apologise for any claims now considered unacceptable).
Dont make the same mistake as we did with Tony Blair; thinking that because Cameron is the best man for the job (I think he is) he must be the best thing since sliced bread. Such blind faith will always come back to haunt you in the end. When the voting public put blinders over their eyes, we end up paying a high price. Think of the servicemen who died recently, and over the past several years. Think of their families.
Complain about this comment
112. At 6:36pm on 04 Nov 2009, pdavies65 wrote:
107 Yellow
And where do you think big business gets its money from? The ether?
===
No, shareholders.
Such as Lloyds BANKING Group are about to do.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/investing/6492607/Lloyds-rights-issue-what-investors-need-to-know.html
Complain about this comment
12. At 6:36pm on 04 Nov 2009, pdavies65 wrote:
107 Yellow
And where do you think big business gets its money from? The ether?
Ever calculated how much extra tax we ordinary folk all have to pay because the country's biggest retailer avoids paying theirs? No AGM is going to vote against that, though - the shareholders have their noses in the trough too!
===
No, but if you have the figure I would be interested to know.
Thank you.
Complain about this comment
114. At 6:49pm on 04 Nov 2009, sagamix wrote:
yellow @ 107
"The comment I made was with reference to big business, do check your facts"
yes ... with reference to Big Business and with the specific example highlighted of the Banks
never get my "facts" wrong Yellow, you know that
===
In that case show me where I highlighted the banks.
Complain about this comment
Is it workable?
Is it clear and understandable by the public?
Is it fair to the MPs and those who elected them?
More importantly, by whom and how will they be enforced?
Complain about this comment
jr perry @ 115 re Mortimax (yawn)
I usually know how to answer you, JR, but in this case I'm struggling because you're just about the only person left on the Board who's still making out that this is a "smear" - but anyway, pls see my C post where I give a full and fair explanation of (a) what the problem is, and (b) why it mustn't be brushed under the carpet
anyway, to more interesting matters; did you catch on the other blog (at 188, I think) where our good friend "I Despise Labour" announces that he's doing the Clown to UKIP shuffle? ... you know, the phenomenon that's keeping you awake nights at the moment - mmm
and Robin's worried about the very same thing (not about Europe per se, but about this mass defection to everyone's favourite extreme right wing anti Europe party that isn't the BNP) - he IS worried for sure - (1) you can tell from his rather raggedy prose today, and (2) he's pretending that Cameron's promise to make "UK law trump EU law" is actually a practical proposition (I know, I know!)
Complain about this comment
118. At 7:02pm on 04 Nov 2009, sagaga wrote:
... some more sa-garrulous rubbish ...
Is blogging your entire life?
Complain about this comment
No110 Susan
Sadly another display of ignorance in associating me with a political party (earlier posting). Could I suggest that you do some serious reading, it may help you to avoid regurgitating( it means repeating information without understanding) tabloid trash.You are a real novice Susie.
Complain about this comment
yellow @ 123
"In that case show me where I highlighted the banks"
oh honestly - come on, stop wriggling - it's really not that important, babe - you're "guilty" but there's no Jail Time or anything!
whip back and check your comment ... at 85
you don't highlight anything; you just say "they"
and you're replying to a comment (which, as is your wont, you've copied in full so it's all there) which specifically highlights the Banks
QED
Complain about this comment
CTP @ 126
"Is blogging your entire life?"
it's a kind of therapy ... the Doctors say it's better than the alternative
don't you like ANY of my stuff then?
Complain about this comment
sagamix 125
It won't do, saga, completely inadequate. And no, I won't be drawn onto another subject.
Yes, I saw your post 100. The entire logic of it falls over if you can't establish point 2:
"(2) I think the claim itself was a clear example, and a bad one, of "playing" the system not just using it"
And that's just the thing. You can't establish that point and in my post 115 I show clear reasons why the "playing the system" argument fails. And because you also know you can't make point 2 stick, and therefore you can't make anything that depends on point 2 stick either, and you knew that when you wrote it too, then your story is a smear.
So, stop mucking about trying to save face, either address the points I made, or retract and apologise.
Complain about this comment
121 Yellow
You choose the Lloyds rights issue as your example? Aren't you the one who wasn't talking about the banks?
Actually, rights issues are not that frequent. If businesses generally relied on shareholders for their income, they'd struggle to find investors, wouldn't you say?
Complain about this comment
120#
Some posters are using it as a shield to hide behind whilst demanding no such apologies or retractions from their own side though, GT.
Complain about this comment
90 rR7
You got you dividing lines newlabour; you are a bunch of toadying yes men, the tories will stand up the the EU.
The surrender monkeys versus the bulldogs, eh? Let's hope it convinces the Tory rank and file. That's who you're trying to convince, I assume. I suspect it won't work though.
Let's have an election
Funny, that's exactly what my Tokyo-born urologist said to me this morning.
Complain about this comment
131. At 7:58pm on 04 Nov 2009, pdavies65 wrote:
121 Yellow
You choose the Lloyds rights issue as your example? Aren't you the one who wasn't talking about the banks?
Actually, rights issues are not that frequent. If businesses generally relied on shareholders for their income, they'd struggle to find investors, wouldn't you say?
===
I wasn't when sagamix falsely insinuated I was, I am now specifically to show that even banks raise money from their shareholders, and because it is topical.
Businesses don't rely on shareholders for their income, that's what they trade for. They rely on shareholders for CAPITAL and in return the shareholders get INCOME called dividends.
Complain about this comment
134
I wasn't when sagamix falsely insinuated I was, I am now specifically to show that even banks raise money from their shareholders, and because it is topical.
Great flipping! An MP would be proud of it.
Complain about this comment
jr @ 130
I will not retract and apologise!
neither you nor I know for sure what Cameron's financial position is and that's not going to change anytime soon, is it?
could he have comfortably bought that house outright?
would that be the normal thing for a man of his means to do?
I'd say ... not beyond all reasonable doubt (OJ innocent) but on the balance of probability (OJ guilty) ... the answers (in no particular order) are YES and YES
you do think OJ did it, don't you?
Complain about this comment
braveScouter 127
I do not know why you write to me because your opinion has, as I said to you earlier no importance to me. You display your ignorance every time you write, so as I have said to you earlier, earn some respect yourself before you criticise others. I know which party you favour Scouter. You are very transparent, pretending you have hidden depth is a waste of time.
Furthermore I do not read tabloids, therefore, it must be your own problem you are talking about.
I am sincere in my assertion that I do not read your posts if I can avoid it and their content is nonsense and full of insults, not the sort of posts I appreciate or would waste time on.
Complain about this comment
susan @ 137
"Furthermore I do not read tabloids"
bet you look at the pictures though
Complain about this comment
sagamix 136
No, again I won't be diverted into irrelevancies. Your message is terminally inadequate, so let's just pick at it a bit.
"neither you nor I know for sure what Cameron's financial position is"
Well, that's an interestingly nuanced position from you. At long last, you drop the certainty that Cameron actually could have afforded to buy that house outright. You should note the end of that Mail article - they conclude in fact that he couldn't. But it's interesting that even without that certainty any more, you still feel that you should keep going with the story. Think about it saga - you're admitting that it is quite possible that the facts don't support the story, but you are still promoting the story. That sounds to me like you are admitting to smearing - which, of course, you are.
"could he have comfortably bought that house outright?"
Well, he says no, the Mail says no, the evidence from the Register of Members Interests says no. So I say no. You on the other hand say yes, but you can't say why. What's more, in order for it to be a yes, Cameron would have had to be lying in his Marr interview and lying in the register, but you shy away from admitting that point. You really are very feeble on your facts, aren't you?
"would that be the normal thing for a man of his means to do?"
Well, obviously, yes, because we have established that it is quite likely that his means did not extend to being able to buy the house outright.
And to end where you started.
"I will not retract and apologise!"
Well, I knew that from the outset. You are clinically incapable of coping with the loss of face that will come from admitting that your Cameron mortgage story has no factual basis, and that is not going to change however many times the crumbly nature of the story is pointed out to you. But that's your problem, not mine, because you are the one doing the smearing.
Have another think about that retraction and apology, before your reputation sinks into the dust.
Complain about this comment
#135 pdavies65
Thank you.
And I know the difference between income and capital as well, so double credits to me!
Complain about this comment
We should all let our MP know that they intend to vote for any amendmants to Kelly's proposals i.e. watering down, then they will not get their vote at the election.
Complain about this comment
No137 Susie,
Are you really a clairvoyant? Try not to mention John Maynard, coming from you, it is an insult to his memory,have you still got your copy of 'The General Theory'?
Complain about this comment
#32 Fingertapper
I agree. What’s more, if Churchill was resurrected today I reckon he would have Nick Robinson’s job rather than be an MP. He would have much more political influence and earn a lot more.
I blame the messenger.
Complain about this comment
101 fubar saunders
"Do you really think people go into public service to make money? Why would they?"
Ask the Kinnocks.
You seem always ready to judge people by what presumably are your own standards. by using the Kinnocks you have blown your argument, I have watched the career of Neil since he was a very young man and when he first became a MP and I can assure you and anyone else that makes feeble attempts to discredit either him or his wife that you will not find two more dedicated people to the cause of helping the plight of the working class, in respect of the work that they have done they have been recognised and have been fortunate enough to have been given positions that in turn have brought some wealth, in much the same way as Chris Patten who was thrown out on his neck by the electorate but was given a plum job by Tony Blair had that not have happened he would have faded into obscurity fortunately for him as I think he's not a bad guy he has become a peer and has become quite wealthy.
I don't agree that people go into politics for money,there are some exceptions I agree, but I like to think that most go into politics from all sides because they care about the country, the others usually fade away after a few years, to be replaced hopefully by someone more dedicated but don't tar them all with your biased opinion
Complain about this comment
117. At 6:57pm on 04 Nov 2009, sagamix wrote:
sc @ 106
"For me yellow, those two posts were the most appropriate and important ones, I have seen in a very long time"
well yes, sure - for YOU
It really does make you want to puke, doesn't it Saga
Since she has made so many enemies of late with those who dare to disagree with chairperson SC and in the process has told them that she doesn't want to exchange views with them its not surprising that she now finds yellow belly so interesting being as he is one of the founder members of the mutual admiration society along with SC,
Complain about this comment
104. At 5:54pm on 04 Nov 2009, sagamix wrote:
La Croft @ 62
you've gone all cold and formal on me, Susan
is it over between us?
138. At 9:10pm on 04 Nov 2009, sagamix wrote:
susan @ 137
"Furthermore I do not read tabloids"
bet you look at the pictures though
Saga these two posts have finally convinced my wife that you are Captian Jack Sparrow of "Pirates of the Carribean fame,she says only he has that rather strange but perceptive type of humour, which incidently we both find hilarious.More power to your elbow lad keep shooting down the pompous.
Complain about this comment
grandantidote 145
It seems I am not the only person that does not want to exchange views with you, I read recently.
Let me get something straight with you, so that you understand. I write posts which are my own opinion, no one elses, they represent no other Party, they represent me. Now a long time ago, I do not know if you remember Sicilian he gave me the good advice not to argue with people who have nailed their colours to a particular party because you get no where. You just spend a lot of time with claim and counter claim. No point. I do not have a following, I do not care who my posts upset by their content, just because it differs from your opinion or anyone elses. Do you realise how childish it sounds when an elderly person talks about enemies and puke when people are merely giving their opinion. Grow up, and they say it is the young who are a problem.
The two posts yellow presented were on our troops, it is an issue I care very much about. 5 died yesterday as yellows post was in reference to. For me everything else is insignificant in comparison to that and he made us all think, I hope, just for a moment how important this issue is. I would not want to die at such a young age for nothing and I do not want to see others do that. Obviously it did not have this effect on you, you would rather carry on with your petty arguments.
I am starting to think however that the people who represent Labour on here are people who have no where to go with their arguments except to insult.
If you do not like my posts do not read them, that is fine by me. The idea on here is to have a view, not to make friends and enemies as you seem to think, depending on which camp you are in.
I work hard, I have very little time unlike yourself, therefore I write a post when I can. I do not want to spend what time I have wasting it on answering people who just want to cause trouble.
Complain about this comment
Scouter 142
I am being very candid with you, I do not know what you are talking about. First its tabloids which I never read and would not even if I had time, now its Keynes. If that is who you are referring to, though where it comes in post 137 I have no idea.
Same thing to you Scouter if you do not like my posts do not read them.
Complain about this comment
144#
"you will not find two more dedicated people to the cause of helping the plight of the working class"
The Kinnocks?????
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.
Good heavens.....
And I was brought up never to mock the afflicted and to respect my elders.
Kindly refrain from lecturing me about biased opinions Grandy, you're in no position to accuse me - or anyone else come to think of it - of bias. Give the sanctimonious Victor Meldrew treatment to someone else.
Complain about this comment
149 fubar saunders
# The Kinnocks?????
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.
Good heavens.....
Well to be quite honest I didn't really expect anything else from you othe than the ageism bit, What a sad individual you must be to resort to that sort of thing on a blog principly for debate.
Complain about this comment
sc @ 147
"I write posts which are my own opinion, no one elses, they represent no other Party, they represent me"
BNP "fellow traveller" party, Susan ... that's what you represent
and they're doing well
Complain about this comment
147 susan croft
As my old mum would say "What a long tale our cats got"
#If you do not like my posts do not read them, that is fine by me.
But I do Susan it lights up my day to read your posts There full of understanding and a acceptance of others opinions. Some times I feel that I want to sit and cry when I hear your utterence of compassion.
Please keep writing when you have the time, you would be such a great loss to these bloggs, I don't know what we did for a laugh before you came along. As for my old adversary Sicilian don't take him too seriously he had his colours nailed to the conservative mast and he wasn't even entitled to a vote, but I liked him and his lady,I hope that he's well as his health was not to good.
Complain about this comment
grandantidote 152
I least we have one thing in common then I hope Sicilian is well as well. Actually I have tried to find out but have not been very successful, I know he was very ill.
The rest of your post you should be ashamed of, however I think those are wasted words. You know I do some work with the elderly when I can, thank goodness they are not all like you otherwise I would give it up.
Complain about this comment
150#
Sorry Grandy, but if the left want to play dirty, then fine, thats the way we'll go. Dont think your age can allow you to lecture the rest of us, throw in your snidy remarks and then hide behind it when the flak comes the other way whining about "you wouldnt pick on an old man would you?"
You cant have it both ways. Play nice or get caught in the crossfire.
Or, we can do what your mate pdavies is doing.... "I think what you mean is, you don't agree with me and you don't like the fact that I am saying it.... tough"
Choice is yours mate.
As for the Kinnocks... they probably were working class.... once. Many, many years ago. The closest they get to the working class now is stepping over them on their way into the theatre of an evening. They're just another pair of troughers. Didnt Neil have the girl who couldnt/wouldnt sign off the EU's accounts sacked? The one who went to UKIP?
So, not only is he a trougher but party to widescale corruption and financial mismanagement as well. And he's ennobled as well! Yep, real working class hero him! He's just like one of us!!!!! ROTFLMMFAO!!!!
Kitchen door is that way if its getting too hot in here... >>>>
151#
You cant help it can you mate? Just cant help yourself. LOL...
Complain about this comment
sagamix 151
And they will do even better if you keep blogging, because anyone reading your posts will think anything except what he represents. So actually Sagamix you are the BNP fellow traveller, and you are doing a grand job for them.
You an even better fellow traveller when you think there is safety in numbers arent you. Dont do so well on your own though do you as we saw on AN. Might think about getting you moderated myself if you send me another post like that.
Sad.
Complain about this comment
147 susan croft
So here we have another of you espousing ageism
#Do you realise how childish it sounds when an elderly person talks about enemies and puke when people are merely giving their opinion. Grow up, and they say it is the young who are a problem.
So I gather there are certain words that as you get older chairperson that your not allowed too use perhaps so that I don't incur you wrath you should give me some idea of what age I am allowed to say ,Puke,and enemies, that should be interesting, but you won't answer you will just make yourself look silly by trying to denigrate me futher. I thought ageism was a criminal offence.
Complain about this comment
153 susan croft
#You know I do some work with the elderly when I can, thank goodness they are not all like you otherwise I would give it up.
Much to the relief of those you claim to help I imagine.That is if your pounding their heads with your strange ideas.
Complain about this comment
154 fubar saunders
#Sorry Grandy, but if the left want to play dirty, then fine, thats the way we'll go. Dont think your age can allow you to lecture the rest of us, throw in your snidy remarks and then hide behind it when the flak comes the other way whining about "you wouldnt pick on an old man would you?"
I have no trouble with my age it was you that brought that up
#Give the sanctimonious Victor Meldrew treatment to someone else.
-------------------------------------
I my friend have never in my life hid behind any remarks least of all if they could be deemed snidy,and I have certainly never and would never whine about" you wouldn't pick on an old man would you, so it seems that your the guy with the snidy remarks don't try to lay your failings on me. and if you as you say feel that you would like to play dirty then as they say in the modern vernicular"bring it on, [Is it alright for me to say that susan]
Complain about this comment
154 fubar saunders
Kitchen door is that way if its getting too hot in here... >>>>
Its never been to hot for me old chap.and never likely to if your the opposition.
Complain about this comment
155. At 3:03pm on 05 Nov 2009, Susan-Croft wrote:
sagamix
so now your resorting to threats
#Might think about getting you moderated myself if you send me another post like that.
very sad.
Complain about this comment
sc @ 155
"Might think about getting you moderated myself if you send me another post like that"
why would you do that?
you're not ashamed of your views, are you?
90 pc overlap
Complain about this comment
Re comment 64 By davelowrie on Dai Davies MP.
Is this the same Dai Davies who claimed £100 per week food allowance for the year when he was in parliament for half the year or the Dai Davies that claimed for specs and an eye test for his secretary or on 30th April 2009 voted against recommendations to reduce from £25 to zero the value of receipts, or voted against changes to the green book, voted against depositing staff contracts with the dapartment of Resourses or voted against furniture and other goodies be scrapped?
Is this the samed Dai Davies that claimed for office newspapers from the taxpayer or claimed for tax advice from his accountant or has cost taxpayers over £150,000 for his written questions or spends all his time signing or submitting EDM's or written quesions in parliament or actually pays the author of the artiole 64 to do most of his work or
who complained about mortgage payments made to MP's yet still bought a property in London or complained to the commons about the different take home pay for somebody earning £40K at 22% tax to someone on £60k at 40% tax. If this is NOT Dai Davies MP for Blaenau Gwent then I apologise but if it is I certainly do NOT. Perhaps The Kelly report needs to look a little deeper than before especially when certain MP's are proclaiming to be whiter than white.
Complain about this comment
grandantidote #145, #146
I see you are forming your own mutual admiration society.
Hypocrite!
Complain about this comment
grand @ 160
hey, you won't believe this!
check out the main "expenses" blog
I did a post on Cameron and expenses (a perfectly reasonable one) and the "Big Bluster" (a.k.a. Fubar Saunders) has referred it as being "Defammatory" and got it removed
talk about self importance - talk about hypocrisy
amazing
they can dish it out these people, can't they? ... dish it out to Brown, left right and centre
and do we ever refer them?
no way
but a little something in the other direction?
aw diddums
Complain about this comment
Sagamix 161
Is that the only thing you have left in your armoury to smear people. Sagamix I thought you were better than that.
Complain about this comment
163 yellow belly
#I see you are forming your own mutual admiration society.
Hypocrite!
Well I'm not absolutly sure but I think that thats the first two posts that I have addressed to sagamix in a very long time, so I guess if two posts are forming a mutual admiration society, then you and SC must be inexorably linked and have slit your palms and clenched hands to become blood brothers or brother and sister. You two have been extolling the virtuous of each others posts since practically the first day SC arrived on the scene, there was a little intervention when ghost world joined in for a while but the competition was to much for him and he retired a beaten man,
I could accept perhaps anyone on these bloggs referring to me as a hypocrite, but coming from you thats too much.
Complain about this comment
159#
Good. We know where we stand then. No whining like a girl then when the long grass gets up past your knees.
Complain about this comment
164##
Ha, LMAO.... Blimey Saga, run off to get your dad to beat me up.... Good greif.... how old are you, to be telling tales???
Dear me.....
Complain about this comment
fubar @ 168
well you know ... when you something funny happens you want to share it with people, don't you?
and it IS funny, believe me
still, like you say, you could have not owned up ... kept it your little secret, as it were ... and you get a credit for that
'cos I'd never have guessed, babe - no way
the other thing ... BNP are no worse than Labour ... was no big surprise to me but I never had you down as the censoring type
ah well
Complain about this comment
No166 Grand,
I know that Susie is a clairvoyant because she ' knows what party I favour', only a fool would make that assertion, but what evidence do you have to support your claim that she is a woman?
Complain about this comment
susan @ 165
oh god yes! ... I owe you some proper "left wing" policies, don't I?
watch this space
Complain about this comment
167. At 5:18pm on 05 Nov 2009, Fubar_Saunders wrote:
159#
Good. We know where we stand then. No whining like a girl then when the long grass gets up past your knees.
My God You are a self opinionated supercilious piece of work aren't you, and you have the bare faced nerve to come out with that nonsense just after referring Sagamix, what a cr--p, we now know who's the whiner now and we have the measure of you and you have been found wanting.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
164 sagamix
#they can dish it out these people, can't they? ... dish it out to Brown, left right and centre
and do we ever refer them?
no way
but a little something in the other direction?
aw diddums
your absolutely right Saga,
And this is the same man that wrote this,
#167. At 5:18pm on 05 Nov 2009, Fubar_Saunders wrote this to me and while he was writing this he was planning to whine like a little girl to the blog police. what a wimp.
159#
Fubar_Saunders
#Good. We know where we stand then. No whining like a girl then when the long grass gets up past your knees.
Are you now trying to tell us that your brave enough to go in the long grass, Oh!come on.
Complain about this comment
174#
Save the outrage for someone who gives a tinkers cuss, GA. If you cant take it, dont dish it out. Simple.
You've not exactly trod on eggshells around anyones sensibilities, especially Susan. You're not afraid to get mouthy and then hide behind your age, so you're in no place whatsoever to lecture me or anyone else for that matter.
I'm perfectly prepared to go into the long grass, if thats where you want it.
Bit childish if thats all we're going to end up doing is flinging yao-boo, ad-hominem insults at each other and passing innuendo and prejudice off as fact instead of indulging in rational political discussion.
But, if thats your bag, then game on. I can do that as good as anyone can.
Saga and balancedthought were repeatedly asked over numerous threads to back up their accusations in fact. They refused to do so, until Saga has done over on the latest thread. Now, you go spreading lies about someone and pass them off as fact, rather than your own opinion, that is defamation. I referred them and I admitted it and told them why, after initially mis-identifying one wind-up merchant. I made no attempt to hide it.
Brown gets it in the neck for one main reason. His well known propensity for using political dirty tricks to get what he wants. Such flagrant dishonesty warrants all the opprobrium that he gets.
If any of you, either yourself, or Khrystallar or whoever want to refer any of the rest of us for what we say, its a free world.
But as JRP said, a blogger can only bring what they think is a transgression to the moderators attention. It is up to the moderator as to whether there is a case to answer or not and whether the post gets pulled.
So maybe think about what you write before you hit the post comment button.
Are you happy with the level of lying in politics, Grandy? Both by those who practise it and those of us who take an active interest in it?
You'd rather be a liar than a snitch, is that it? Is that what upsets you?
I'll not make a presumption on your answer, if you do answer. Whichever you choose will speak volumes about you.
Complain about this comment
grand @ 174
he makes out he used to be a soldier
you heard that one?
Complain about this comment
176#
I dont make out I used to be a soldier Saga, I spent 16 years in the RAF.
Complain about this comment
oh was it? sorry ... that's not good, confusing flying with soldiering - flying's better, isn't it?
bit like confusing Hampstead with Hampstead Garden Suburb
you shouldn't do that R thing again, Fubar, unless it's YOU who's being "defamed" (like being called an ex soldier for example!) - it's not the way to go
Complain about this comment
braveScouter 170
If you are going to throw mud, then think about what you are saying will you. Only someone such as yourself, would be daft enough to believe that a boy would use a girls name. Was that the only argument left in your armoury as well, hoping I was a boy which you think will make yourself look better.
I see you did not get any respect on the next thread either.
Typical.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
178#
No mate, I didnt say one was better than the other. And I didnt fly either.
Simple answer about referrals mate, is dont give me reason to, and I wont.
Unless you prefer a gloves-off free-for-all? I'd have thought we could all have risen above that.
There are certain jokes you can make about Hampstead and others you cant. I'll leave it at that.
Complain about this comment
Fubar_Saunders 181
No the debate has not risen above that, and I do not believe amongst some people it ever will.
Saga has no reason to complain about referrals he has and does do plenty of that himself. If you note the above.
Just sometimes I would like the right to reply and my post was very polite in comparison to the others on this thread.
Complain about this comment
sc @ 182
"Saga has no reason to complain about referrals he has and does do plenty of that himself"
never
Complain about this comment
fs @ 181
now you're sounding all Big Man and threatening again!
I wouldn't dream of referring one of your posts - even the ones when you started circulating all that "you know what"
if I hate something you've come out with, I respond to it, I don't just try and get rid of it
recommend you follow that approach
Complain about this comment
184#
But JRP and I did that mate. Most of the time quite politely as well. And as time went on, we got more and more exasperated.
You and "balanced" wouldnt listen. You just kept on full steam ahead.
Didnt leave me with any real alternative.
If you hate something I've written mate, you insult me. Now, I can live with that. Its your choice if you insult me or refer me, if I write something that bad. Rarely do you answer/critique something directly.
By gloves off free for all, its just an analogy. I used Guido as an example where it really is a free for all. Theres no need for that to happen here. But insults and cheap shots are very rarely one way. If we can all still remain open, honest and upfront and if we dont agree with something just say so rather than calling each other reactionaries, soft heads, champagne socialists, whatever, then maybe the moderators job would be made that little bit easier.
Complain about this comment
175 fubar saunders
#Save the outrage for someone who gives a tinkers cuss, GA. If you cant take it, dont dish it out. Simple.
As I have said many times on these blogs, this is entertainment to me, you don't honestly think that anything that you or I have to say is of any importance in the great scheme of things do you, this is the problem that Susan has, she writes and portrays herself as if the world were waiting for her pearls of wisdom, which they are patently not.The same thing applies to you but not quite to the same degree.
If you honestly believe that anything, and I mean anything, that you say, could outrage me then your living in cloud cuckoo land and for goodness sake get of the age thing the only one here who is using my age as a weapon or defence for that matter is you.
#
You've not exactly trod on eggshells around anyones sensibilities, especially Susan. You're not afraid to get mouthy and then hide behind your age, so you're in no place whatsoever to lecture me or anyone else for that matter.
The reason that I give susan very little respect these days is because she started being very offensive to me. you could say hiding behind the fact that she apparently is a girl, that was OK I can happily deal with that but then she chose to lie about something that she constructed that I apparently had said which I certainly had not said . No apology was forthcoming. so I am afraid that left open season on Susan.
As for lecturing anyone thats nonsense I give my opinion on many things as we all do, if someone says something that I think is particularly stupid then I nmay remonstrate with them as we all do.
#But, if thats your bag, then game on. I can do that as good as anyone can.
It was you that started the long grass nonsense not I as you did the ageism.
#If any of you, either yourself, or Khrystallar or whoever want to refer any of the rest of us for what we say, its a free world.
#But as JRP said, a blogger can only bring what they think is a transgression to the moderators attention. It is up to the moderator as to whether there is a case to answer or not and whether the post gets pulled.
It was and I hope still is a unwritten law between bloggers on here that you do not refer, this was the fact before you came on this blog and hopefully remains the status quo, we believe in free speech and those that step out of that line on here are generally considered pretty unpleasant, if a moderater removes a post that fine if a blogger refers because he does'nt like something someone else says, then thats out of order, so perhaps you should think before you press the referrel button.
incidently as much as you like to think that the moderater reads and then sometimes returns the post you will find thats rarer than hens teeth.
#Are you happy with the level of lying in politics, Grandy? Both by those who practise it and those of us who take an active interest in it?
I am vehemently opposed to lies from any quarter not only in politics but in life generally, I am also apposed to those who like some bloggers who think that becaue they say something that it should be considered gospel, also those when proved wrong will not admit the mistake.
#You'd rather be a liar than a snitch, is that it? Is that what upsets you?
I would rather not be either, and I sincerely hope that I am not.
Complain about this comment
Thought you might like to no Saga, I have been moderated as
well, which of the two suspect do you think did that, and I was only answering a question put to me. Ars you know we have had spates of referrals before I guess the answer would be to reciprocate, but I am afraid that my regard for the right of free speech prevents me from doing that, Once they start down that path they gradually disappear into the ether, as we've seen before.
Complain about this comment
187 know not no, as not ars either, sorry.
Complain about this comment
I have a poem i would like to submit, the title is Red Rose your Blue.
It concerns the role of labour mps, regarding the expenses scandal. And i believe it would make, a good anthem for all mps. Could you please let me know how to submit my poem.. David McClarty...
Complain about this comment
MP's salary should be pegged at the level of a head teacher/police commissioner/doctor. And council leaders, advisors, quangos and all public servants should be at 75% of that number.
Complain about this comment
g @ 186
"It was and I hope still is an unwritten law between bloggers on here that you do not refer"
yes, that's key - the Mods are there to make sure this board doesn't go all "Guido" - other bloggers mustn't take that role on themselves - it's game over, really, if they start doing that - to be fair to Fubar, I don't think he makes a habit of it - he gets a bit over stimulated, now and again, about my stuff and I think he just got a bit carried away this time ... did "The Bad Thing" whilst the balance of his mind was disturbed, as it were - plus he owned up, and that was creditable - we move on!
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS