Username: Password:

Author Topic: MP expenses  (Read 2967 times)

Bradock PI

  • Featherweight
  • ***
  • Posts: 336
MP expenses
« on: May 12, 2009, 10:42:03 PM »
Anyone see if any of those rockblock houses of parliament guys claimed for a guitar, amp or pedal seems totally legitimate to get an axe for your second home?

mecca777

  • Bantamweight
  • **
  • Posts: 186
Re: MP expenses
« Reply #1 on: May 13, 2009, 12:35:10 PM »
Honestly, that's not the kind of axe I'm thinking they need.

ailean

  • Welterweight
  • ****
  • Posts: 1357
Re: MP expenses
« Reply #2 on: May 13, 2009, 01:32:19 PM »
Is it just me?  or does it appear that every time they get given the chance to show moral fortitude they don't?

Anyone see if any of those rockblock houses of parliament guys claimed for a guitar, amp or pedal seems totally legitimate to get an axe for your second home?

I think every home needs a wall covered in guitars and another wall hidden by amps, and a floor hidden by pedals. I'll see what my boss says about me claiming that on expenses.

Do Diezel's count as works of art?
Gibson LP std + Nailbomb set
Diezel VH4 & Orange Rockerverb 50

dave_mc

  • Middleweight
  • *****
  • Posts: 9796
Re: MP expenses
« Reply #3 on: May 13, 2009, 06:07:10 PM »
Is it just me?  or does it appear that every time they get given the chance to show moral fortitude they don't?

nah, that's pretty much what happens.

JDC

  • Welterweight
  • ****
  • Posts: 1604
Re: MP expenses
« Reply #4 on: May 13, 2009, 07:39:52 PM »
the jacqui smith's hubby's porn watching cost the tax payer 10 if anyone didn't know

if any MP thinks they are under paid of course they are going to claim anything they can, I read yesterday that years ago, employees at some newspaper could claim a hot sunny day expense, but their man in Africa couldn't because he didn't visit the head office

blue

  • Welterweight
  • ****
  • Posts: 2212
    • http://www.bebo.com/blue1million
Re: MP expenses
« Reply #5 on: May 15, 2009, 01:23:04 PM »
a lot of these mp's have made quite outrageous claims, but the thing is, they've gotten away with it for many years, and honestly, in the same position, most of us would have done the same. 

the DUP's Peter and Iris Robinson claimed 30,000 over two years for food! that's a lot of burgers!

i don't think there's any excuse for the guy that got 16,000 for a mortgage that was already paid off
cry HAVOC!! and let slip the pigs of war!!!

Nadz1lla

  • Welterweight
  • ****
  • Posts: 1465
    • Arcanum Plectra
Re: MP expenses
« Reply #6 on: May 15, 2009, 02:54:13 PM »
These guys are just crims with a license, gets my goat. Interestingly this gave me some fuel for some lyrics I wrote recently. I guess MP's do have a use: fuelling the imaginations of songwriters.   :D

Will

  • Welterweight
  • ****
  • Posts: 2599
Re: MP expenses
« Reply #7 on: May 15, 2009, 03:13:40 PM »
The problem is the fact that its legal for them to do this.
When I was doing politics A level, I was completely disgusted to learn this. The rest of my class believed that they should earn atleast 150 000 a year, but have no expense claims.

Although I do not agree with it, their perspective was:
People that are this intelligent could easily earn that much money as city bankers, they need encouraging.

A political thread that hasn't gone to ideologies! Congrats!

dave_mc

  • Middleweight
  • *****
  • Posts: 9796
Re: MP expenses
« Reply #8 on: May 15, 2009, 03:25:50 PM »
i dunno. i understand the argument that if they aren't paid more they'll likely be more corrupt, but looking at that from the other angle you're basically rewarding them for being corrupt. I mean, in any other job if you tell your employer that if he/she won't pay you more you'll start embezzling, you're liable to be told where to go, if not fired on the spot and possibly reported to police.

I also disagree that they're that intelligent (ditto about a lot of the city bankers), and also that I'd be up to the same gip if i were one. I wouldn't be one in the first place because I wouldn't want to even be in the position to have the opportunity to do such gip.

Ian Price

  • Welterweight
  • ****
  • Posts: 4571
Re: MP expenses
« Reply #9 on: May 15, 2009, 03:31:36 PM »
Anyone see Margaret Beckett on TV last night? Apparently she got a bit of a roasting.

Edit - she got a bit of a verbal roasting  :oops:
I think I hate being indecisive.

Philly Q

  • Light Heavyweight
  • ******
  • Posts: 18109
Re: MP expenses
« Reply #10 on: May 15, 2009, 03:44:04 PM »
MPs should certainly have a higher basic salary.  You could argue that people should enter politics out of a sense of duty or vocation - and therefore they should be paid like charity workers or priests! - but who's going to take on that much grief for a pittance?  No one should be going into politics because it pays well, but on the other hand it's a hugely responsible job (if they do it properly) and should be adequately rewarded. 

But even if they did have a higher salary, there have to be some expense claims - if you have a Cabinet or ministerial post and need to travel abroad, for example, you can't be expected to pay for your own flights and accommodation.  No-one in an ordinary job would do that.

The existing rules shouldn't really need much changing if they were actually applied properly.  MPs are only supposed to be able to reclaim expenses incurred "wholly, exclusively and necessarily" in performing their duties.... but clearly that test hasn't been applied in practice!!

The big problem is the second home allowance - they're entitled to claim up to about 23,000 a year and the culture basically seems to be to claim it as a matter of course, as if it's additional salary.  Added to that, MPs are obviously playing the system by deciding which home to nominate as their "second" home, in order to get the maximum benefit.  I don't know how they're going to get round that.
BKPs I've Got:  RR, BKP-91, ITs, VHII, CS set, Emeralds
BKPs I Had:  RY+Abraxas, Crawlers, BD+SM

Ian Price

  • Welterweight
  • ****
  • Posts: 4571
Re: MP expenses
« Reply #11 on: May 15, 2009, 04:50:09 PM »
The big problem is the second home allowance - they're entitled to claim up to about 23,000 a year and the culture basically seems to be to claim it as a matter of course, as if it's additional salary.  Added to that, MPs are obviously playing the system by deciding which home to nominate as their "second" home, in order to get the maximum benefit.  I don't know how they're going to get round that.

Yep - that's a problem. Maybe a big halls of residence would go down well, or a lot of suitably priced homes selected by the government. I have no idea how the system works currently, and I don't really have any care about how it works as long as it's all above board and run to a frugal budget and controlled by professionals not afraid to say no to MPs.

Andrew Mackay was my local MP when I was at school. He definitely knew he was playing the game and should be duly punished - I don't think just losing his job is enough for what he was reportedly up to with his wife (no pun intended).

I agree that they should be paid more though, it's a tough job and I wouldn't want to do it.
I think I hate being indecisive.

38thBeatle

  • Middleweight
  • *****
  • Posts: 6098
    • http://www.myspace.com/alteregoukband
Re: MP expenses
« Reply #12 on: May 15, 2009, 07:05:29 PM »
I am as angry as anyone and can't help feeling that if the story hadn't have been broken, they would have happily have  continued carrying on and it is that that irritates me more than anything else. I saw Stephen Fry criticizing the press for being holier than thou- fair enough but we didn't vote for the press.
One of the sad things about this is that all politicians are now being tarnished and yet many of them are not implicated in any way and many, of whatever political persuasion, are there for the best reasons and a few jerks have let them down.
I agree that they perhaps ought to have salaries commensurate with their responsibilities. I can honestly say that I have never ever fiddled my expenses. I am not clever or brave enough to get away with it and I know of people who have lost their jobs when they have.
A sad time for British politics but I suspect the same kind of thing goes on all over the world.
I do love British traditions but there are times when we could really do with modernising the way we do things and if it is the case that we cannot rely on integrity then something clearly needs to be done.
Send three and fourpence we're going to a dance
BKP's: Apache, Country Boy, Slowhands.

Philly Q

  • Light Heavyweight
  • ******
  • Posts: 18109
Re: MP expenses
« Reply #13 on: May 15, 2009, 07:35:57 PM »
One of the sad things about this is that all politicians are now being tarnished and yet many of them are not implicated in any way and many, of whatever political persuasion, are there for the best reasons and a few jerks have let them down.

I never thought I'd say this, but I actually felt a bit sorry for Margaret Beckett when I watched Question Time last night.

You could see her frustration that suddenly the whole nation thinks ALL MPs spend their ENTIRE LIVES working out how to fiddle their expenses.  Which obviously isn't the case.

I am worried that this will play into the hands of fringe parties (especially the BNP) at the European elections.  Maybe even at the general election next year.  This country is in a bad way.
BKPs I've Got:  RR, BKP-91, ITs, VHII, CS set, Emeralds
BKPs I Had:  RY+Abraxas, Crawlers, BD+SM

Bradock PI

  • Featherweight
  • ***
  • Posts: 336
Re: MP expenses
« Reply #14 on: May 15, 2009, 09:35:45 PM »
The big problem is the seriously corrupt - two years on a mortgage he had forgot he had paid but not only that he just used bank statements to claim for the money which was going into savings, people do not forget mortgages and they may wonder when they get savings account statements with 16000 plus in them that they didn't know they were saving. In addition he was the one claiming for mortgage on a flat which he had rented to another MP who was claiming the rent on the same flat.

Almost as bad were the husband and wife who had two properties both of which were second homes one for him and one for her.

Then there are the stupid ones it's obvious an MP needs a moat and a tennis court and massage chairs and big TVs or they can't do their jobs.