Jacqui gets a taste of her ugly snooper state

#21
tropper66 said:
We are not talking about a three bedroomed council house, these wonks are pocketing shed loads of cash that ,if was somone living in a council house pulling the same stroke would end up inside. In fact it is just the same as subletting a council house, which , of course is illegal
Exactly right, the rules would prevent them and I'm quite sure there isn't a single MP who would do so.

But your argument now seems to be class based - us workers and "them" -and I don't understand why or what you are now going on about. Care to try to explain?
 
#22
No, not class, these people don't seem to get it that we employ them, they just think that being a member of parliment gives them carte blanche to trouser as much cash as possible. If not by screwing expences, then having so many other ,very well paid jobs, that it is amazing that they even bother to turn up in the house. and I find it unbelievable that does not make them more biases for the companys that pay than their voters
 
#23
in_the_cheapseats said:
tropper66 said:
It just said on the BBC ( New labour propergander) that the inquiriery is going to be shown on the BBC Parliment chennal, this will be must see TV and I cant wait to see Darling and co trying ta explain how they rented out their houses while living in official homes paid for by us suckers
Got to ask - what else are they supposed to do with them? Sell them?

Of course not, they will need their house when they have finished their stint in whatever position gives them official accommodation. In some cases that may be only a couple of months. If they mothball their houses then there should be an allowance for essential maintenance, if they rent it out then they don't get the maintenance allowance as they pay for that in the same way as any other landlord does.

I don't like the gravy train either but let's be sensible about what we attack about it. What I would agree to that if a second home is rented out, the MP should have no further right to make claim against it in expenses. Stopping a commercial gain because of the fact that the bloke is using an age old privilege smacks of socialism at its worst - not something I will ever sign up for.

You're quite right, they are entitled to buy and sell any property they own, just as anyone else is. However, if it isn't their declared main residence then it should be subject to Capital Gains Tax.

To go that way, we'd need to get rid of all grace and favour accommodation and that would be barking. They are used for more than just living in. Functions places of work, greasing of wheels, impressing the neighbours etc. Where are you going to rent for official functions when No 10/11 or where ever needs one? Remember too that some of our esteemed leaders actually get protection. You going to pay for the sy of each private house to be bumped up whenever we get a new minister of state who is entitled to accommodation? Not cost effective at the rapid turnover of some.
Again I agree with you. Our Ministers should be entitled to official residences where one would be beneficial to the role of the minister concerned. What does need to be looked at very closely is second homes, when you get the case of London MPs getting a second home allowance you have to ask why they are allowed to do this. I know many people who commute from places like Sheffield and Leicester, on a daily basis to work in London because it works out cheaper than living in London. There should be a rule that you can't have a second house allowance if you live less than 100 miles away from Westminster. 100 miles can be covered easily in two hours drive, don't forget that MPs are always banging on about late night sittings - great, then no traffic when they are leaving equals fast trip home, absolutely must stay overnight for a bona fide reason? Central booking find you a hotel comensurate with your standing in the London area.
 
#24
tropper66 said:
No, not class, these people don't seem to get it that we employ them, they just think that being a member of parliment gives them carte blanche to trouser as much cash as possible. If not by screwing expences, then having so many other ,very well paid jobs, that it is amazing that they even bother to turn up in the house. and I find it unbelievable that does not make them more biases for the companys that pay than their voters
They have the right to claim legally anything they have been allowed by law to do so. I see no wrong with that.

I do not screw my expenses but I claim for EVERYTHING that I am allowed to. I learnt a lesson a long time ago being helped by a civil servant whose attitude was, not our money, yours if you correctly claim. It is an attitude that I was a little embarrassed about ("really, can I claim for that too?") but soon learnt to smile and get on with it.

Was I on the gravy train too? Certainly as a Crown employee, I was employed by you too but I, just like most MPs, didn't break the rules that are set; I simply used the rules correctly. Folk that don't (like our Jacqui here) certainly should be crucified. That is only proper.

Now if there is a change to what can and can't be claimed,so be it. I support the idea of a review in these days of austerity.

To your second point about MPs not turning up because of other jobs, who exactly? Are you, in fact, talking about the 3-4 Lords being done for perhaps acting as de facto lobbyists? Again no problem with them being hung. They have broken the rules. But going back to your point, who are you talking about? Be specific please rather than the general slander you are throwing around at the moment.
 
#25
There is no slander, a great number of MPs, almost as soon as they arrive in Westminster are offered jobs, and many take up these offers, and in one case a few years a member who is now in the Lords had over FORTY well paid director, and adviser positions, a number of other have remarked about such people and it is in Hansard
 
#26
tropper66 said:
There is no slander, a great number of MPs, almost as soon as they arrive in Westminster are offered jobs, and many take up these offers, and in one case a few years a member who is now in the Lords had over FORTY well paid director, and adviser positions, a number of other have remarked about such people and it is in Hansard
As long as their other jobs don't detract from their being an MP and as long as they declare those jobs on the register of interests I don't see what the problem is; many people have part-time jobs
 
#27
Markintime said:
tropper66 said:
There is no slander, a great number of MPs, almost as soon as they arrive in Westminster are offered jobs, and many take up these offers, and in one case a few years a member who is now in the Lords had over FORTY well paid director, and adviser positions, a number of other have remarked about such people and it is in Hansard
As long as their other jobs don't detract from their being an MP and as long as they declare those jobs on the register of interests I don't see what the problem is; many people have part-time jobs
How many people do you know with half a dozen part time jobs in the real world
 
#28
Smiths Husband - with a Different name to confuse any questions - is actually employed by her (on our money) to run her consituency office. He may have actually been wantkching these on taxpayers time too!!
 
#29
tropper66 said:
Markintime said:
tropper66 said:
There is no slander, a great number of MPs, almost as soon as they arrive in Westminster are offered jobs, and many take up these offers, and in one case a few years a member who is now in the Lords had over FORTY well paid director, and adviser positions, a number of other have remarked about such people and it is in Hansard
As long as their other jobs don't detract from their being an MP and as long as they declare those jobs on the register of interests I don't see what the problem is; many people have part-time jobs
How many people do you know with half a dozen part time jobs in the real world
Quite a few actually. It isn't that uncommon for successful businessmen and women to be offered other directorships, just think how many different boards the Dragons sit on. Many will be non-executive positions where they don't actually have a job to do other than lending their name and adding kudos to the company, they do, of course need to ensure that that company operates entirely properly to ensure their good name.
 
#30
Has it passed your notice that the 'slime' masquerading as MPs have 'capped' the prices of 'booze' in their bars in the Palace of Westminster?

What are the next strokes these unprincipled 'no-hopers' are going to pull.

For the cost of this mob, and the 'pretend' peers, we could increase the size of Armed Forces and get them to run the country. At least the nation would be governed by people who were 'wired' to the real world!
 
#31
lsquared said:
Has it passed your notice that the 'slime' masquerading as MPs have 'capped' the prices of 'booze' in their bars in the Palace of Westminster?

What are the next strokes these unprincipled 'no-hopers' are going to pull.

For the cost of this mob, and the 'pretend' peers, we could increase the size of Armed Forces and get them to run the country. At least the nation would be governed by people who were 'wired' to the real world!
And your point is what exactly? Officers and Sergeant's Messes have being doing the same since Adam, much to my liver's chagrin, these days :D
 
#32
Markintime said:
tropper66 said:
Markintime said:
tropper66 said:
There is no slander, a great number of MPs, almost as soon as they arrive in Westminster are offered jobs, and many take up these offers, and in one case a few years a member who is now in the Lords had over FORTY well paid director, and adviser positions, a number of other have remarked about such people and it is in Hansard
As long as their other jobs don't detract from their being an MP and as long as they declare those jobs on the register of interests I don't see what the problem is; many people have part-time jobs
How many people do you know with half a dozen part time jobs in the real world
Quite a few actually. It isn't that uncommon for successful businessmen and women to be offered other directorships, just think how many different boards the Dragons sit on. Many will be non-executive positions where they don't actually have a job to do other than lending their name and adding kudos to the company, they do, of course need to ensure that that company operates entirely properly to ensure their good name.
That's true, but the problem arises when the part time jobs become full time.

George Galloway turns up for work in Parliament about once every 10 weeks or so. He has, IIRC, 17 other jobs that keep him out of Parliament and often out of the country yet he still manages to claim full pay and expenses. If MPs want to spend weeks in the Big Brother house, or months in their Portuguese villa writing books about Che Guevara that's fine. Just dock a proportion of their pay and expense allowance.

Similar rules to apply if William Hague wants to attend board meetings for his numerous directorships. I was wondering whether to join the Tories before the election but Caroline Spelman charging her nanny to expenses just made my mind up.

Regarding publication of the expenses, I am reliably informed that the ordure is about to hit the air conditioning as never before. It's thought that a significant number of MPs will not be returning to Parliament after the summer break when their expenses are published. If the unedited list of expenses is published on Wikileaks, I heard that some MPs may be helping the police with their enquiries.

Wonderful to see some red faced old duffer of an MP threatening to use the Official Secrets Act if the unedited list is published. I expect he was red faced due to the five million pound a year subsidy that Parliament gets to provide free booze for MPs and lobby journalists.

Nothing fecking changes. We have a change of government and a load of MPs are heading for the Jeffrey Archer Suite at Belmarsh Prison.
 
#33
in_the_cheapseats said:
lsquared said:
Has it passed your notice that the 'slime' masquerading as MPs have 'capped' the prices of 'booze' in their bars in the Palace of Westminster?

What are the next strokes these unprincipled 'no-hopers' are going to pull.

For the cost of this mob, and the 'pretend' peers, we could increase the size of Armed Forces and get them to run the country. At least the nation would be governed by people who were 'wired' to the real world!
And your point is what exactly? Officers and Sergeant's Messes have being doing the same since Adam, much to my liver's chagrin, these days :D
Last mess I was in cost just about the same as the JD Wetherspoons just outside, and the mess drinks have to rise when the budget adds duty etc, the plan is to stop the members bar going up, also I am not sure but the members do not have to pay a compulsory monthly bill to drink there.
 
#34
lsquared said:
Has it passed your notice that the 'slime' masquerading as MPs have 'capped' the prices of 'booze' in their bars in the Palace of Westminster?

What are the next strokes these unprincipled 'no-hopers' are going to pull.

For the cost of this mob, and the 'pretend' peers, we could increase the size of Armed Forces and get them to run the country. At least the nation would be governed by people who were 'wired' to the real world!
And while the pub closure rate continues to accelerate the House of Commons bars are excempt from the smoking ban.

Good here isn't it?
 
#35
jagman said:
lsquared said:
Has it passed your notice that the 'slime' masquerading as MPs have 'capped' the prices of 'booze' in their bars in the Palace of Westminster?

What are the next strokes these unprincipled 'no-hopers' are going to pull.

For the cost of this mob, and the 'pretend' peers, we could increase the size of Armed Forces and get them to run the country. At least the nation would be governed by people who were 'wired' to the real world!
And while the pub closure rate continues to accelerate the House of Commons bars are excempt from the smoking ban.

Good here isn't it?
They aren't licensed either. ;)
 
#36
Ancient_Mariner said:
Markintime said:
tropper66 said:
Markintime said:
tropper66 said:
There is no slander, a great number of MPs, almost as soon as they arrive in Westminster are offered jobs, and many take up these offers, and in one case a few years a member who is now in the Lords had over FORTY well paid director, and adviser positions, a number of other have remarked about such people and it is in Hansard
As long as their other jobs don't detract from their being an MP and as long as they declare those jobs on the register of interests I don't see what the problem is; many people have part-time jobs
How many people do you know with half a dozen part time jobs in the real world
Quite a few actually. It isn't that uncommon for successful businessmen and women to be offered other directorships, just think how many different boards the Dragons sit on. Many will be non-executive positions where they don't actually have a job to do other than lending their name and adding kudos to the company, they do, of course need to ensure that that company operates entirely properly to ensure their good name.
That's true, but the problem arises when the part time jobs become full time.

George Galloway turns up for work in Parliament about once every 10 weeks or so. He has, IIRC, 17 other jobs that keep him out of Parliament and often out of the country yet he still manages to claim full pay and expenses. If MPs want to spend weeks in the Big Brother house, or months in their Portuguese villa writing books about Che Guevara that's fine. Just dock a proportion of their pay and expense allowance.

I'm not going to try to defend the indefensible AM. Either Galloway is serving his constituents to their satisfaction or he isn't. Mention has already been made about the Sinn Fein MPs saying that they apparently do a sterling constituency job so perhaps Galloway does the same. Is there a mechanism whereby a sitting MP can be ousted by his constituents mid-term? I should imagine there must be. Certainly I shall be absolutely astounded if Galloway gets re-elected but, more than likely, he'll have made enough to retire anyway.

Similar rules to apply if William Hague wants to attend board meetings for his numerous directorships. I was wondering whether to join the Tories before the election but Caroline Spelman charging her nanny to expenses just made my mind up.

Regarding publication of the expenses, I am reliably informed that the ordure is about to hit the air conditioning as never before. It's thought that a significant number of MPs will not be returning to Parliament after the summer break when their expenses are published. If the unedited list of expenses is published on Wikileaks, I heard that some MPs may be helping the police with their enquiries.

Wonderful to see some red faced old duffer of an MP threatening to use the Official Secrets Act if the unedited list is published. I expect he was red faced due to the five million pound a year subsidy that Parliament gets to provide free booze for MPs and lobby journalists.

Nothing fecking changes. We have a change of government and a load of MPs are heading for the Jeffrey Archer Suite at Belmarsh Prison.
 
#37
Carefull - Remember what happened to dear old Doctor Kelly!
 
#38
Just think, once the government have their monitoring apparatus in place (phone, text and email) if you choose to speak out against the dear jacqui, she will look you up on her computer, and 'leak' all of your personal communications and internet sites.

Ahhh, the all powerful ruling party.
 
#39
I just wonder how many of us have added extra miles when claiming for our own car use at work or added extra hours for overtime we never did.

I know I have done all the above and also charged for hotels I have never stayed in. Deciding to go home or stay in my van instead and pocketing the £75 a night hotel allowance plus the meal allowances.

I think politicians reflect society as a whole we all get away with as much as we can. Very few straight laced people exist any more.
 
#40
Every unit I worked in used to check the mileage and if you slipped a few extra - the clerk would warn you off and change the claim. If you kicked arrse out of it, it got passed to paymaster for possible disciplinary action.

Overtime?? - isn't this an Army site.

Claiming full wack for hotel and sleeping in van was outlawed decades ago. By whom? On orders of the treasury and tax office, that's right - the same scum who keep writing their own rules. Do as I say not as I do!

Meals allowances etc? Only if you incurred expense as a direct result of your duty and could produce receipt.

Other than that - yeah we're all thieving bast@rds on the fiddle!!
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top