Chinahand Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 I'm too busy to go and find all the links to the MP's expenses saga, but I think you will be able to find them pretty easily. Seems obvious to me that nearly all MPs from all Parties have seen their expenses as an entitlement which is totally unconnected with any expenses related to doing their job. The tax evasion, fiddling, claiming for chandeliers etc is in my mind pretty obviously fraudulant and nothing to do with the costs of getting down to Westminster to do their job for their constituents. What should be done? If a new election was called would it just result in a huge backlash with the BNP, UKIP and other protest parties gaining to the detriment of our democracy. I'm think it is partly due to the fact that MPs have been underpaid and there has been a nod nod wink wink culture set up where pay rises were reduced but expense claims allowed. That is wrong - it undermines the integrity of our MPs - pay them a proper wage and make everything transparent. One thing I can't abide is continuing claims that this sort of thing should be secret and not open to the Freedom of Information act and public scrutiny. Most of them claim they only did it after getting permission from the expenses authorities or whatever - that is an important issue - both sides have been keniving in this fraud. The parliamentary authorities shouldn't be let off - they set the rules - now that its all in the open they admit many claims aren't correct, but they approved them in the first place. If it was a private company the shareholders would be calling the police - all we are getting are apologies and repayments. So - how to deal with expenses - I do think they genuinely exist - an MPs hall of residence? a daily allowance to do with what they wish? Reciepts for hotels and trains only? Any thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 So - how to deal with expenses - I do think they genuinely exist - an MPs hall of residence? a daily allowance to do with what they wish? Reciepts for hotels and trains only? Any thoughts? I think the transparency is the key point here. Of course they need a living expense to do a job that's a long way from home, but if those expenses were transparent, there wouldn't be the piss taking. I've heard the 'fiddles were encouraged' argument before, but if that's the case why were so many not on the fiddle? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terse Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 SUPERB RESPONSE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 I'm think it is partly due to the fact that MPs have been underpaid and there has been a nod nod wink wink culture set up where pay rises were reduced but expense claims allowed. That is wrong - it undermines the integrity of our MPs - pay them a proper wage and make everything transparent. What a complete and utter cart-load of horse manure. The only thing that undermines the integrity of the MP's involved is their greed. So MP's need a "proper"wage. Oh yes, right. Cameron has no less than 16 multi-millionaires on his front bench alone. That's SIXTEEN. Clear enough for you? Needless to say when they get in next time around they'll have Joe Public's interests at heart - of course they will... Oh yes... MP's expenses - yet another Thatcher achievement... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted May 14, 2009 Author Share Posted May 14, 2009 P.K. I totally agree with you that this is about greed - but that doesn't undermine the point that the Common's authorities approved claims month after month, year after year which were totally unconnected with the costs of travelling between Commons and constituency. And I'm not sure your partisan point is helpful - you definitely don't want a situation where the only people who can become MPs are multimillionaires. You have to ensure that people from all back grounds can afford to maintain two residences one in London and one in their constituency. Up until now that has been left upto the individual MP to finance - most have done it using expense claims. Slims right some haven't and I admire their integrity, but it would appear to be the exception and not the rule. Does anyone have the figures - what was the average claim compared to the maximum allowed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 And I'm not sure your partisan point is helpful - you definitely don't want a situation where the only people who can become MPs are multimillionaires. So how is my point "partisan"? It's FACTUAL! That's not "partisan", it's just telling it like it is. Tell you what, pick on someone less astute if you want to denigrate their posts, it'll be less painful.. An MP's pay is still extremely generous compared to Joe Public, and that's the point. Despite their extreme wealth the likes of Letwin have claimed for "fixing a leaking pipe under his tennis court". The poor man, how he must have suffered, and no doubt it must really have dragged down his parliamentary performance so he just HAD to claim it against the common purse. Oh yes... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manshimajin Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 What's that old saying that if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and swims like a duck it probably is a duck. In this case many (not all) of the claims look like fraud and smell like fraud so probably they are fraud - why not call in the Police and conduct an investigation into those claims? A lot of work but it would give some satisfaction to the taxpayers in the UK and prevent the really greedy MPs from standing for Parliament in future or receiving a taxpayer funded pension. And to think that these were the folk who were criticisng bankers for being greedy....as Frankie Howerd used to say "it takes one to know one". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimcalagon Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 From here Steven Barker, a lawyer who specialises in fraud cases, said: “The Fraud Act was designed to deal with these types of offences. There is also a possibility of an offence of false accounting under the Theft Act.” The campaign group "Taxpayers' Alliance" are asking the police to investigate whether criminal offences have been committed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Old Git Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 An MP's pay is still extremely generous compared to Joe Public, and that's the point Really? I think a basic wage of £64k is pretty crap, especially if you have to maintain your own home and constituency office, plus some residence in London. I'd rather see them paid more and scrap most of the expenses / allowances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 Really? I think a basic wage of £64k is pretty crap, especially if you have to maintain your own home and constituency office, plus some residence in London. I'd rather see them paid more and scrap most of the expenses / allowances. Average UK wage is about £25k. And fancy having to maintain your own home, how awful! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Old Git Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 Average UK wage is about £25k. And fancy having to maintain your own home, how awful! I'd hope that someone supposedly running my county would be paid in line with a GP or maybe a plumber. My wife earns more than a UK MP. I'd imagine that having to maintain some form of residence in London would be pretty expensive, perhaps some sort of official apartment block may be the answer for MPs living outside the M25 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 I'd imagine that having to maintain some form of residence in London would be pretty expensive, perhaps some sort of official apartment block may be the answer for MPs living outside the M25 Agreed. Something along the lines of a Police Section House would suit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimbms Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 Classic, the minister for justice has been suspended due to an investigation into his expenses claims, now that what I call justice in action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manshimajin Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 Just heard on BBC World that there is going to be a Police investigation due to the number of public complaints they have received. One can only hope for it not to be a 'sweep it under the carpet' investigation. Also heard an MP saying (i was too sleepy to get a name) that his colleagues excuses that 'I was following the rules' is pretty weak - he said MPs of all people ought to be able to identify where there is an ethical line in the sand. I suspect that HMRC must be looking into issue relating to Capital Gains and to Benefit in Kind. The idea of an MPs 'hostel' sounds sensible - mind you the security implications would need to be looked into - a perfect terrorist target. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 I blame the Queen. I mean what is the point of a Head of State that's got a job for life, a roof over her head and jobs for all her kids and grandkids for life, if they don't use their position away from the hurly burly of the political life, to put a stop to them things. If the MHK's were carrying on like this the Governor would step in, and the Queen is like an Uber-Governor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.