Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Guest KingCharles1st

Mps' Expenses Scandal -

Recommended Posts

On Newsnight they are suggesting open primaries to elect candidates. "Democracy" they claim.

Ok so that might possibly be nearer to democracy but the problem they failed to recognise is that these days democracy stops at the door of the Houses of Parliament.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brown on GMTV when asked about Blears;

"what she did was unacceptable, but not unlawful, though she is going to pay it all back. I was very disappointed and Hazel was very disappointed when......when......when this became an issue"

She was "disappointed" because she got caught, you complete cretin ! paying it back whilst pretending to be as disappointed as everyone else at her "mistake" is not the answer !!

They're going to get away with this, aren't they?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a hidden expense that is as outrageous as any other of the fraudulent claims made by MPs.

Speaker Michael Martin set to collect £2m pension pot

MPs' expenses: Speaker Michael Martin set to collect £2m pension pot

The Speaker Michael Martin will retire with one of the most lucrative pensions in the public sector, worth up to £2 million.

By Holly Watt

Last Updated: 6:58AM BST 20 May 2009

He has a unique arrangement which allows him to receive half his salary every year throughout his retirement. In total, the scheme would cost between £1.5 million and £2 million to purchase privately.

Mr Martin’s salary is £141,866 a year, of which £78,575 comes from the Speaker’s entitlement.

He will therefore receive almost £40,000 from the Speaker’s pension, as well as up to £39,000 a year from his pension as an MP.

Only the Prime Minister and Lord Chancellor were previously offered such retirement arrangements. However, both Gordon Brown and Jack Straw have pledged to surrender their pensions – a move which Mr Martin has successfully blocked for his own package.

Mr Martin is likely to be promoted to the House of Lords after 30 years in the House of Commons.

According to the TaxPayers’ Alliance, the average private sector worker retires with a pension pot worth just £25,100 or about £1,700 a year.

And their pensions are going to cost us millions more:

MPs gold-plated pensions will cost taxpayers millions more

Taxpayers will have to pay millions more towards MPs' gold-plated pension scheme, it has emerged.

By James Kirkup, Political Correspondent

Last Updated: 5:24PM BST 31 Mar 2009

The Treasury will pump more money into the scheme – which some experts regard as the most generous in the country – even as many private sector workers see the value of their pensions plummet.

In a report published on Tuesday, the Government Actuary said that there is a £50.9 shortfall in the pension scheme, and said the Treasury must increase its payments into the fund over the next 15 years as a result.

Gordon Brown has called for curbs on the parliamentary pension scheme and promised to limit taxpayers' contributions.

The Government has said that the Exchequer contribution to the pension will be capped at 20 per cent of the £46.1 million Commons wage bill.

But on top of that, the Government is now paying money equal to another 8.7 per cent of the payroll - £4 million a year - to close the shortfall.

In all, taxpayers will now pay £13.2 million a year to the parliamentary scheme, up from £12.4 million.

To prevent the public's contributions rising even higher, the Government has proposed that MPs themselves would pay another £15 a week to the retirement scheme.

If that change is approved by MPs, their total annual contributions will be £5.5 million a year.

Recent changes have made the parliamentary scheme even more generous.

In 2002, MPs voted to increase their pension accrual rate to one fortieth of salary for every year worked. Advocates of the change argued that the change was justified because parliamentary careers are shorter than most workers.'

By contrast, even those private sector workers lucky enough to retain a final salary pension only accrue benefits at a rate of around one-sixtieth a year.

The result is that after 20 just years' service, an MP can retire with annual pension of half their £65,000 salary.

A worker in the private sector with a defined-contribution pension could have to build a pension pot worth more than £500,000 to enjoy a similar retirement.

Some estimates say the average private sector pension pot is worth around £25,000

Steve Webb, the Liberal Democrat pensions spokesman, said increasing public contributions to MPs pensions would only add to public anger over parliamentary allowances and perks.

"The pensions of MPs and other well-paid public sector workers have to be brought in line with reality," he said.

"With members of the public losing their jobs and seeing their pensions plummet, MPs cannot insulate themselves from the harsh realities of the recession."

Matthew Elliott, Chief Executive of the TaxPayers' Alliance, said: "It is deeply unfair that MPs' pensions are so costly for taxpayers, whilst most ordinary people can't even afford pensions for themselves.

"The Parliamentary pension scheme is simply unaffordable, and if MPs want to balance the books they should either pay more themselves or move onto a more affordable scheme. There is no way taxpayers should have to pick up this bill."

Harriet Harman, the Commons leader, announced the changes in the scheme and insisted they were fair.

She said: "The Government is committed to providing public service pension schemes that are affordable and sustainable in the long-term, consistent with the principle of fairness for all taxpayers."

There needs to be a public outcry about this hidden expense - it's outrageous that MPs should award themselves such generous pensions at taxpayer expense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here is a hidden expense that is as outrageous as any other of the fraudulent claims made by MPs.

Speaker Michael Martin set to collect £2m pension pot

And their pensions are going to cost us millions more:

MPs gold-plated pensions will cost taxpayers millions more

There needs to be a public outcry about this hidden expense - it's outrageous that MPs should award themselves such generous pensions at taxpayer expense.

Excellent just read that, more reward for failure it's the NuLabour way.

Success is not the only way to riches.

I think this time they may have slightly misjudged public opinion.

This tw@ should have got nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"what she did was unacceptable, but not unlawful, though she is going to pay it all back. I was very disappointed and Hazel was very disappointed when......when......when this became an issue"

What a stupid, stupid answer from Brown. Maybe they need to get some legal person to investigate Blears' conduct: lovely Hazel failed to pay capital gains tax on the sale of her second property - is Gordo now suggesting that not paying your taxes is "unacceptable, but not unlawful"?

They're going to get away with this, aren't they?

If they're not sacked by their own party, then we need to pray that their constituents send them packing at the next election.

Maybe we should have a load of Martin Bell-esque anti-sleaze candidates at the next election to stand directly against troughers and thieves like Hazel Blears and Shady Shahid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tory MP Eric Pickles let the cat out of the bag on BBC2 Question Time today when he admitted MPs should move away from the culture of leaving parliament each week at "7pm ON WEDNESDAY".

It was shocking when he then said there was no time in this parliament for reform. Why not just ask them to work Thursdays and Fridays.

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The House of Lords has voted to suspend two Labour peers from Parliament for six months for misconduct, the first such action since the 17th Century.

Lord Truscott and Lord Taylor of Blackburn were found by a Lords committee to be willing to change laws in exchange for cash.

Lord Truscott said he followed the rules as they were at the time and had been the victim of "Soviet-style" summary justice.

Lord Taylor's explanation that he was aware the lobbyists were in fact journalists and he had continued to meet them in order to discover the truth was dismissed as "inherently implausible".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8060003.stm

More records being broken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And it continues

MPs' expenses: Ex-cabinet minister billed taxpayers instead of insurance

The Telegraph will disclose the expenses of at least eight more MPs, including a former cabinet minister who billed thousands of pounds to the taxpayer for home repairs instead of claiming on a buildings insurance policy.

By Nick Allen

Last Updated: 7:07PM BST 20 May 2009

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics...-insurance.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The sh$t really hitting the fan in the Cabinet. Grab some popcorn, somehow i knew this was going to happen. Ferrets in a sack, its each man or woman for themselves, they know the game is up and prepared to knife Brown openly.

Looks like a “if we go, you go”

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11...ht-survive.html

Brown faces cabinet revolt as Hazel Blears and senior ministers fight to survive expenses scandal

Gordon Brown was facing a cabinet in revolt tonight as Hazel Blears and other senior figures took a defiant stand against moves to shift or demote them in the Prime Minister’s next reshuffle.

Friends of Ms Blears made clear that she is prepared to embarrass Mr Brown if she is ill treated.

‘She knows where the bodies are buried, that’s certainly true,’ one said.

But it is not just Ms Blears who will fight to keep her job, potentially derailing Mr Brown’s efforts to reshape his team. The Chancellor is also resisting any move amid Whitehall talk that the Prime Minister would like to replace him with his most trusted ally Ed Balls, the Schools Secretary.

The Foreign Secretary David Miliband is also fighting behind the scenes to resist a campaign by Business Secretary Lord Mandelson, who has long dreamt of taking his post.

An ally of Mr Miliband added: ‘David doesn’t want to move and he’s not the only one.’

The source warned that Mr Brown might find several cabinet ministers prepared to wreck his reshuffle rather than accept a demotion or sideways move.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Foreign Secretary David Miliband is also fighting behind the scenes to resist a campaign by Business Secretary Lord Mandelson, who has long dreamt of taking his post.

you know at a time like this we could really do with someone who actually wanted to be Business Secretary, rather than that self-seeking ten faced worm

some of the comments on there are excellent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Daily Mash makes sense of it all as usual :lol:

NICK Brown, the Labour chief whip, has defended his £19,000 food bill, insisting it is not cheap to feed a pet cheetah these days.

Mr Brown keeps his London cheetah chained up outside ParliamentMr Brown said the bill, paid for out of the public purse over four years, reflected the needs of a modern, hard-working MP and his big, fast cat.

He added: "A typical week involves eight legs of lamb, two boxes of fish fingers, a selection of family sized trifles and a case of Jacob's Creek. And the cheetah needs a whole cow."

Mr Brown, who purchased the animal in 2003 using the controversial Additional Cheetah Allowance, said: "This is my second cheetah. As a government minister I have to designate my small, London cheetah as my main cheetah.

"I work long hours in the House of Commons and then I go back to Newcastle at the weekends to meet with my constituents and make sure my second cheetah gets plenty of exercise.

"And by the way, you've really got to see this thing chase down a frightened jogger. Christ on a ******ing bike."

As the Daily Telegraph's expenses saga enters the dangerous animals phase, House of Commons Speaker Michael Martin once again refused to resign and warned angry backbenchers that if they did not co-operate they would have to answer to his baboons.

Meanwhile Mr Brown said he would not be paying the money back but promised he would deliver a saving to the taxpayer by eating the cheetah when it died of old age.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It really is a case now of one out all out! these miserable wretches are not going to "moved" if broon get's to keep his job!

Imagine the conversation" yes! yes! I know we were all caught with are fingers in the till but someone has to be seen to be sacrificed or I will get more sh*t. So as prime minister i'm asking you to take one for the team Hazel...PWEEEEEEASE!"

Reply.."f*ck you and your mother too!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics...e-payments.html

can anyone explain the rather bizarre picture accompanying the latest fraudsters? (far right)

edit - found it

• Sir Peter Viggers claimed for a £1,645 floating “duck island” in the garden pond at his Hampshire home. In a statement, the Conservative Party said: “Sir Peter Viggers has confirmed that he will retire as MP for Gosport at the next election. He will do so at the direct request of David Cameron”;

2nd edit - did ruth kelly used to be a man?

Edited by MSWHPC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics...e-payments.html

can anyone explain the rather bizarre picture accompanying the latest fraudsters? (far right)

edit - found it

• Sir Peter Viggers claimed for a £1,645 floating “duck island” in the garden pond at his Hampshire home. In a statement, the Conservative Party said: “Sir Peter Viggers has confirmed that he will retire as MP for Gosport at the next election. He will do so at the direct request of David Cameron”;

2nd edit - did ruth kelly used to be a man?

they said on Newsnight it was to stop the foxes getting at the ducks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nadine Dorries apologises over second home: MPs expenses

Nadine Dorries, the backbench Tory MP, has apologised to her constituents for keeping the location of the house she designates as her main home a secret.

By Rosa Prince

Last Updated: 7:03AM BST 18 May 2009

Nadine Dorries Photo: JOHN ROBERTSON

Last week, The Daily Telegraph disclosed that Miss Dorries had designated a house she rents in her constituency of Mid-Bedfordshire as her “second home” for the purposes of her expenses, even though she sleeps there during the week and her daughter attends a nearby school.

The former nurse used her internet blog to rebut any suggestion that the house was in fact her “main home”, but would say only that she spent some of her free time at an unspecified “other” address.

The youngest of her daughters lives with her during the week in Bedford and the pair sometimes go to the Cotswolds at the weekend. She apologised to her constituents, saying that she had “hoped that I could retain some of my private life” but adding that this had become “impossible”. “By trying to protect my girls and keeping the circumstances of my marriage break-up private I realise that I am in fact arousing suspicion,” she said.

“So, to my constituents and no one else, I am sorry. My crime is that I haven’t owned up to you that I don’t always live here – that I have a private life, which has not always run smoothly.”

A Conservative insider said that the MP would “inevitably” have to explain her arrangements to the party’s scrutiny committee, which is putting all suspicious claims to the “smell test” to see if they are acceptable to the public.

In her blog, Miss Dorries said she commuted to the Bedford designated second home – where she admits her dogs live full time – during the week, going to the Cotswolds some weekends

She went on: “Yes, I do have another home. It was where I went to after I had finished my parliamentary and constituency work and changed into a mother and looked after my girls.

“I never wanted my constituents to think that I had another prime responsibility other than Bedfordshire and Parliament.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics...s-expenses.html

Does that mean Nadine Dorries has done nothing wrong? I am so confused. I heard her on Radio 5 defending herself the moment the Telegraph pointing the finger at her - I was almost convinced...

James

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics...s-expenses.html

Does that mean Nadine Dorries has done nothing wrong? I am so confused. I heard her on Radio 5 defending herself the moment the Telegraph pointing the finger at her - I was almost convinced...

James

I only ask as she is not included on a list of Tory MPs that the Telegraph has compiled regarding expenses...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics...e-mps-expenses/

I remain confused.

James

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I only ask as she is not included on a list of Tory MPs that the Telegraph has compiled regarding expenses...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics...e-mps-expenses/

I remain confused.

James

The Telegraph's criteria may perhaps vary slighlly depending on the party of the MP? Cynical suggestion I know, but they do have any obligation to be impartial and may have a preference as to who they decide to absolve.

They put her in their initial list so presumably they thought she had done wrong, and it certainly sounds like there is potential for it being wrong.

And next we have the Tory whip who claimed for a mortgage on a house that had no mortgage - but says he meant to claim on his other home. Difficult to see how you can mix up which house has a mortgage. Nice to know the people who pass all these laws pay so much attention to detail, now we know why bills keep coming back on the same topic year after year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok, so MPs, the police and various other statists threaten you/your family with incarceration if you don't pay their protection money ("tax").

an MP then uses £2000 of this stolen money to have his moat cleaned.

what difference does it make whether this £2000 is labeled as 'salary' or 'expenses'?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 354 The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.