MP's Expenses Round Two!

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by trelawney126, Oct 10, 2009.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. The rules are not unclear. The problem is that too often rejected claims have been challenged by MPs with subsequent rulings, usually in favour of the complainants. Successfully intimidating low ranking employees has led to a belief that the rules are there to be manipulated. You can get all this information by carefully reading all recent statements and admissions by some very senior people indeed in the last 4 months. At least, rather late in the day, two senior MPs had the integrity to say as much, just before the Summer recess.

    It will be interesting to see if the new body does not encounter similar problems. I'm not optimistic.
  2. I too am not optimistic that there will be anything like the number of prosecutions necessary to assuage the public's anger at the misuse of rules for expenses by MP's.There are a few with little room to manoeuvre and may be forced to resign or even be prosecuted but the vast majority will escape with the "it was within the rules"or "I didn't do anything wrong" excuse.If there were any at the top table I suspect it would all have been kicked into the long grass until next year.
  3. Only 100 are involved?Yeah thats a likely story!Sack the lot.
  4. Let's hope that they name and shame these thieves.
  5. The only thing those bandits are sorry about is the fact that they have been caught redhanded and the public now know them for what they are.
  6. The fact that the public know what they are puzzles them. They really don't understand that they are held in such disregard.

    "I'm an MP, what right do you have to question me?", they ask.
  7. Anyone who watched Paxo on BBC2 this evening can surely not have any doubt that these people are so far removed from reality as to be almost unreal. The two specimens portrayed, together with our late lamented Home Secretary, seem to have no appreciation of how low is the regard in which they are held by Joe Public.
    I have a pristine copy of the "Telegraph" front page which gave the details of all MP's expenses, which will be held in reserve until the election date is announced. I shall then tape it to the glass panel in my front door, and woe betide any politician, or representative of such, who then has the temerity to ring my door bell!

  8. I detest politicians. I do feel, though, that yer man Legg has gone rather too far. I do have some sympathy with the argument that he’s moved the goal posts. I really do think that his “audit†should be based on the “rules†as they were and not his opinion as to what they should have been. Giving the buggers what for is one thing; injustice is something very different. It’s too easy to confuse justice with revenge.
  9. Fair point POL, but where's the sport in that?

    For me I think it may be a good idea to twist the knife a bit while it is in there! The sooner the appeal of the gravy train/pig trough is trimmed and those politicians who are only in it for the money get the message and bugger off the better it will be for all concerned.
  10. Of course a lot of this is down to how you perceive the rules of engagement for the enquiry, from where I stand not only have some MPs misunderstood them, much as they misunderstood what the old rules were (the reports of pressure on fees office clerks to approve are legion) and as they misunderstand exactly what the voters think of them.

    I have no sympathy at all for those MPs who feel aggrieved by the outcome of the enquiry, they should have paid more attention earlier and they wouldn't be in that position now. Call me Dave seems to have the correct approach, "pay up or leave the Tory Party", perhaps my MP might get a little more support if he took the same approach, but the reality is that he has been creaming off shed loads of cash ever since he became chancellor, and still gets second home allowance despite having free accomodation at our expense in London.

  11. That's as may be ... but this is what this government seems to have done to the taxpayer for years isn't it?

    And their latest goalpost move ? --- to attempt to take back some of the compo awarded to the wounded soldiers.
    Obviously to cover more 'cleaner's ' expenses, or duck houses perhaps ?

    I have no sympathy with these thieving, lying cretins, who were elected by their constituents to represent them, not for the MPs to fill their snouts at the trough at our expense.

    Are you old enough to remember the Catering purge of the 70s ? - public money being stolen (for that is what people in the these Houses have done and are doing even now) by some in the Catering Branch, I don't recall any of those being asked to apologise, and then go back to doing their job.

    I think he did the right thing. And they should all, if they were honourable, which we know they are not, should pay back all of it, and then resign from politics completely.
    But then, we know they aren't, and they won't -- until someone with some cojones takes the bit and acts.

    Off soapbox - until the next time !!
  12. Legg actually followed the remit he was given by the government, but interpreted the rules in the legal strict sense, which is how the rules would be interpreted were the recipients other public servants, including Forces personnel. That is, IMO, the cause of the complaints. MPs have been able to very loosely interpret their own rules as they decide via the House of Commons Commission, how the former Fees Office (now the Department of Resources) apply the rules. With Legg they have not been able to do this. Nor can they appeal to the Commons Commission to overrule Legg. Now if IPSA has the same powers as Legg and the Commons Commission cannot interfere with how it applies the rules, it will be effective. I fear however, that it, like the former Fees Office, will only have the appearance of being in control. That way MPs control how the rules are applied whilst the employees of IPSA will get blamed when it all goes pear shaped again. :evil:

    Or am I simply being extraordinarily cynical? :roll:
  13. :notworthy:

    The problem is that the clerks are employees of the Commons Commission, who in turn are controlled by MPs. If an MP or Minister threatens to have an employee's contract terminated or their promotion prospects curtailed if they don't comply, what do you expect? What is needed is a truly independent office where MPs have NO control over its staff whatsoever, either directly, or indirectly.
  14. I am well awaree of that Thingy, hence my statement. After all it is now publick knowledge that the last speaker Lor Martin on several occasions instratcted that MPs were right and thus the fees office had to accept their claims.

    The reality is that our Jaqui just did what all her mates in the cabinet were doing, just she was a trifle more crass about it. And for me the worst part was not the porn her hiubby got off sky, but the fact she thought it was OK to claim for pay per view entertainment in the first place.
  15. Just for you Peter....

    Lord Martin of Springburn is currently being introduced in the Lords..... :roll:

    Sorry for any offence caused.
  16. No offence at all, mind you on one hand Gordon goes on about B(W)ankers being rewarded for failure and then enobles hios old mate Mike, simply reinforcing the concept there is one rule for us and the rest of youy can go xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

    It seems that Gordon is blessed with one of the biggest death wishes in history, he only has to open his mouth and anothe slump in the polls. Not even Vague and the Major were ever as bad.
  17. Brown also doesn't have Spitting Image chiselling away his authority.
  18. I am not sure that spitting image actually did chip away at their authority, in many ways it merely reinforced existing opinion. For example I suspect Tebbit was jsut as much a hero to right wing tories as he was a hate figure for the left with or without spitting image.

    Equally making Major the Grey Man actually livened up any thing he did do.
  19. Another sad fact to add is that the rules governing expenses were conceived and enforced retroactively, in a mad rush that would appear to hide the probable fact that there were no real rules for claiming in the first place. At least, any 'rules' that existed then were definitely not enforced. :(

Share This Page