Prime Minister pulled into the expenses row

#2
Ssssh, they have done nothing wrong. Everything is within the rules.
Must be nice to write the rules yourself and allow unlimited raiding of the public purse.
Thieving, bottom feeding leeches to a man (and woman).

I see Harriet Harman has come out and squarely blamed the system for these liberties with out money. She admits the system is wrong but nobody has done anything wrong as its all within the rules. Can't be the politicians fault if the rules are wrong now can it?
The rules didn't force the thieving cnuts to claim did it?
 
#3
Many MP's "blame" Brown for this.

By keeping MP's base pay down for headlines he "forced" them into exploiting their expenses system.

Oh the suffering :roll:
 

Biped

LE
Book Reviewer
#4
jagman said:
Ssssh, they have done nothing wrong. Everything is within the rules.
Must be nice to write the rules yourself and allow unlimited raiding of the public purse.
Thieving, bottom feeding leeches to a man (and woman).

I see Harriet Harman has come out and squarely blamed the system for these liberties with out money. She admits the system is wrong but nobody has done anything wrong as its all within the rules. Can't be the politicians fault if the rules are wrong now can it?
The rules didn't force the thieving cnuts to claim did it?
Precisely. Whatever happened to honour and decency? There's that cnut Gordon Brown talking about people 'abusing' tax loopholes to keep him away from their money, even though these people are working 'within the rules', and then he and his bovine class of cretinous liars steal as much as they can get away with from the 'Public Purse' because THAT'S within the rules.

Double standards? You decide.
 

Biped

LE
Book Reviewer
#6
A controversy erupted over how the information leaked out. Sir Stuart Bell, a member of the House of Commons Commission, said: "If this was received by unauthorised means, it is disgraceful that a national newspaper should stoop so low as to buy information which will be in the public domain in July. It undermines the very basis of our democracy."
The EVIL LEAKING B'STARDS!!!!! This is a stain on our decent democracy that some low-life scumbag with the morals of a rattlesnake could even DARE, DARE I tell you, to spuriously leak this story.

And as for a newspaper actually paying money for, AND publishing the information in this shameful, underhanded way is beyond the pail.

Get the police and the anti-terrorist-meisters in and let's see someone smeare . . . dead in a fie . . . prosecuted for this outrage to decency!!!!
 
#8
More in The Scotsman
Mr Brown was among 13 ministers whose expense claims were scrutinised.

Receipts submitted by the Prime Minister to parliamentary authorities between 2004 and 2006 disclosed that he paid his brother Andrew – a senior executive at EDF Energy – £6,577 for cleaning services.

The Prime Minister's office said he shared a cleaner with his brother and reimbursed him for his share of the costs.
Cyclops didn't reiburse his brother - the taxpayer did - luckily for Brown it is within the rules (as he understands them) :x
 
#10
Would you trust this man to fill in a truthful expenses claim ?


 
#11
I also loved the interview with some Roy Hattersley-sounding parliamentary figure on the Today programme this morning (didn't catch the name as I was only on my first cup of coffee).

In it he suggested that the public start to respect MPs as they deserve and all this issue would go away.

Now I'm sure at Sandhurst we were taught that respect is earnt, not given on demand...
 

Alsacien

MIA
Moderator
#12
Biped said:
A controversy erupted over how the information leaked out. Sir Stuart Bell, a member of the House of Commons Commission, said: "If this was received by unauthorised means, it is disgraceful that a national newspaper should stoop so low as to buy information which will be in the public domain in July. It undermines the very basis of our democracy."
The EVIL LEAKING B'STARDS!!!!! This is a stain on our decent democracy that some low-life scumbag with the morals of a rattlesnake could even DARE, DARE I tell you, to spuriously leak this story.

And as for a newspaper actually paying money for, AND publishing the information in this shameful, underhanded way is beyond the pail.

Get the police and the anti-terrorist-meisters in and let's see someone smeare . . . dead in a fie . . . prosecuted for this outrage to decency!!!!
If I understand correctly, they would all get a chance to "review" their expenses before publication in the summer, this is obviously the un-edited version.

I blame Brown also.

MP's should get paid more. Without an attractive package you will not get the better people, but it has to be transparent, completely. Not just for expenses, but for executive directorships, public[private] appearances and all the other potential conflicts of interest.

Maybe they should also be culled at the end of their useful working lives to prevent any abuse of knowledge or influence.
 
#13
Alsacien said:
MP's should get paid more. Without an attractive package you will not get the better people, but it has to be transparent, completely. Not just for expenses, but for executive directorships, public[private] appearances and all the other potential conflicts of interest.
You pay more money you get better people? That's how Fred Goodwin et al justify their mind-numbing packages, if you were paid twice as much would you be twice as good?
How would you attractive package square with Lord Gould's 22yr old daughter being given a safe seat? A quick look at the MPs being returned in the West of Scotland since the war will tell you that even if you found the job attractive you have no chance unless you had the right connections in the labour party.

There are plenty of people more than capable of doing the job without getting a package worth over 4 times the average wage. I would limit the MPs package to a multiple of the the average of the entry level salary of a Nurse/Teacher/PC/Private. Say seven times?
 

Alsacien

MIA
Moderator
#14
GoodIdeaAtTheTime said:
Alsacien said:
MP's should get paid more. Without an attractive package you will not get the better people, but it has to be transparent, completely. Not just for expenses, but for executive directorships, public[private] appearances and all the other potential conflicts of interest.
You pay more money you get better people? That's how Fred Goodwin et al justify their mind-numbing packages, if you were paid twice as much would you be twice as good?
How would you attractive package square with Lord Gould's 22yr old daughter being given a safe seat? A quick look at the MPs being returned in the West of Scotland since the war will tell you that even if you found the job attractive you have no chance unless you had the right connections in the labour party.

There are plenty of people more than capable of doing the job without getting a package worth over 4 times the average wage. I would limit the MPs package to a multiple of the the average of the entry level salary of a Nurse/Teacher/PC/Private. Say seven times?
Ask yourself this.
Why are successfull professional people not leaving their professions for even a career break in politics?
When you wiegh MP or ministers salaries against corporate equivalents, you would always go private unless; A. You are not good enough; B. Are dreamy eyed do-gooder; C. Have an inflated ego; D. Like the badge and trimmings.

If you pay for tat, you get tat
 
#15
Alsacien said:
GoodIdeaAtTheTime said:
Alsacien said:
MP's should get paid more. Without an attractive package you will not get the better people, but it has to be transparent, completely. Not just for expenses, but for executive directorships, public[private] appearances and all the other potential conflicts of interest.
You pay more money you get better people? That's how Fred Goodwin et al justify their mind-numbing packages, if you were paid twice as much would you be twice as good?
How would you attractive package square with Lord Gould's 22yr old daughter being given a safe seat? A quick look at the MPs being returned in the West of Scotland since the war will tell you that even if you found the job attractive you have no chance unless you had the right connections in the labour party.

There are plenty of people more than capable of doing the job without getting a package worth over 4 times the average wage. I would limit the MPs package to a multiple of the the average of the entry level salary of a Nurse/Teacher/PC/Private. Say seven times?
Ask yourself this.
Why are successfull professional people not leaving their professions for even a career break in politics?
When you wiegh MP or ministers salaries against corporate equivalents, you would always go private unless; A. You are not good enough; B. Are dreamy eyed do-gooder; C. Have an inflated ego; D. Like the badge and trimmings.

If you pay for tat, you get tat
... and we have the best tat that money can buy.
 

Alsacien

MIA
Moderator
#16
Mr_Deputy said:
Alsacien said:
If you pay for tat, you get tat
and if you promote a culture where people are encouraged to act like t1ts then they will. We have that now. People don't serve in govt out of a sense of honour or belief, in many cases. We need people with genuine class and distinction, confidence in who they are and what they are about.

Look at this lot now I can't even be bothered to call them Champagne Socialists - its not fair on Champagne or Socialists. Turncoats. Lazy cowards many of them.

We should encourage the promotion of successful people to these posts not let them grow up in the sordid rats nest they do now. We need to start that now.

We are so politically complacent in this country is is UNTRUE. Amazing.
We let this bllshit happen.

We dont need career politicians filling all the posts - we need natural leaders and people of distinction.
I agree with you entirely - but it is optimistic to believe you will get those sort of people at a discount (unless of course they are independantly wealthy and looking for a hobby).
 
#17
Can't see what was wrong with the old system. Broadly:

House of Lords: largely conservative, but because there by an accident of birth can be fiercely independent & therefore act as a brake on the excesses of the Governing party.

Tories: Business people & landowners who had done something productive & probably had some experience of leading others.

Labour (bear with me here): Proper working people who have worked their way up & have some experience of leadership & who by dint of education & sponsorship by the Unions represent the interests of their own communities.

All: have a desire to serve the nation, not themselves.
 
#18
CaptainPlume said:
Can't see what was wrong with the old system. Broadly:

House of Lords: largely conservative, but because there by an accident of birth can be fiercely independent & therefore act as a brake on the excesses of the Governing party.

Tories: Business people & landowners who had done something productive & probably had some experience of leading others.

Labour (bear with me here): Proper working people who have worked their way up & have some experience of leadership & who by dint of education & sponsorship by the Unions represent the interests of their own communities.

All: have a desire to serve the nation, not themselves.
Thats the idea but bears no relation to what our political institutions have become.

Bloated,insular,corrupt,ineffective and myopic.

The expenses are just a symptom of a more ingrained and fundamental malaise within our democracy.Our system of governance is an anacronism that needs reform urgently.

The problem

The solution
 
#19
Dave Nelllist (ex Cov MP) took only his constituents wages as salary. I think he gave the rest to the Labour party. Shame he was a trot. If MPs are in it for the money they need a serious word with themselves re their career choice. I think it is a big problem that we have career politicians who have never done anything else.
 
#20
i-c-h

That's why I said the old system - I was thinking pre-WWII.

Not that politics was entirely clean then, consider Lloyd-George & the Marconi scandal or the sold peerages.
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads