MP's secret expenses

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-112591 6/Government-U-turn-plans-details-MPs-expenses -secret.html

At last Brown has been forced to do a U-turn over this matter of MP's expenses, due to the lack of support from the Tories.

Why did they want to keep them a secret?

Speaking at Prime Minister's Questions, Gordon Brown hit out at the Tories for withdrawing their support from the controversial move.

"We thought we had agreement on the Freedom of Information Act as part of this wider package," he said.

"Recently that support that we believed we had from the main opposition party was withdrawn.

[Gromit]

Sorry AOG,

You have fallen for the Mail's half truths again. I had to go and read it in another paper as the link you supplied was so badly written it was difficult to understand.

Anyhow, the bit they forgot to mention was it was a Tory idea in the first place...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6673989 .stm

[WaldoMcFroog]

Why? Because you look like you're seriously taking the p1ss out of the tax payer and the electorate if it comes out under FOI that you spend �1,600 a year on window cleaning like Barbara Follett claims to have done, or that you've been paying your sons for no work out of the public purse like disgraced MP Derek Conway did.

Let's not forget, the Tories only decided to declare their expenses after Conway was exposed, so they played the system as much as the other side did. Only the Lib Dems consistantly advocated disclosure.

[jake-the-peg]

And have we forgotten Den Dover Tory MEP Chief Whip sacked after paying �758,000 in expenses to his wife and daughter!

Giles Chichester another Tory MEP who had to step down as leader of the Tories after an expenses scandal!


I'll tell you why they want to keep the line items secret - because they know that certain papers will just keep going through them line by line trying to find something to pervert into a headline!

[sqad617]

AOG has got it right.

This morning No10 AND Harriet Harmon confirmed thet there would be a "whipped vote" on MP.s expenses. BUT at Prime Ministers Question Time, Gordon Brown announced it would be a "free" vote......a change in policy (u-turn) within 45mins.

AOG needs an apology.

[naomi24]

Why did they want to keep them a secret? Because they're on the fiddle. Who did it is irrelevant, whichever side of the house they're on. The fact is it's public money - yours and mine - and it should be properly and openly administered and accounted for.

[jake-the-peg]

There are allowances, there are audits, the totals are published.

Why do the individual line items need to be published?

To keep journalists in beer and fags!

[naomi24]

There aren't many business that pay employees expenses without those employees providing receipts - and if they did, the shareholders would be none too happy - and rightly so. I have a funny feeling, Jake, that if this was a Conservative government, you may think quite differently.

[sqad617]

naomi....well said, although apparently ther may well be a security risk if the "smaller" receipts are disclosed!!!!!!

Gromit....come on,an apology to AOG eh?

[naomi24]

No!!! How do they work that one out then, Sqad?

[Gromit]

You are right sqad, sorry AOG. You did say that the Tories pulled the plug on this (finally).

[sqad617]

Gromit......takes a man to apologise.........I find it difficult.

naomi...apparently they would give away those whod had acces to the house and these people would be a security risk for intruders etc............suppose it makes sense.

[naomi24]

It doesn't make sense to me Sqad. I'm not with you. Give away? What does that mean?

[sqad617]

naomi....I am only guessing, but if there was a receipt for Joe Bloggs to do odd jobs etc, then he may well have a key to the house.

Bottom line is, that they are ALL on the fiddle.

[naomi24]

Sounds like nonsense to me. You're right. That is the bottom line.

[naomi24]

I'll re-phrase that. Maybe not ALL, but it's the bottom line for many.

[Quinlad]

I'm a little torn on this.

I find the expenses that have been published quite incredible. The allowances towards basic admin work, London flats, home furnishings etc is staggering.

What pulls me to the other side is the thought that it might ward the less wealthy away from standing for Parliament so that we end up with a disproportionate amount of independently wealthy MPs, probably leaning towards one side politically - which would be unrepresentative of the UK as a whole.

We don't want highly intelligent, but non-affluent people to shy away from politics and go and work for some FTSE 100 company instead. That would be a shame.

But there HAS to be a middle ground, or tighter regulation. �1,600 on window cleaning is laughable.

[rov1200]

If they need to live in a second home why can't they rent a furnished flat? Then they won't need to buy these expensive items.

[anotheoldgit]

Gromit

You have been searching among ancient links again, to make a fool of yourself.

Even if it was a Tory idea in the first place, it goes to show that times alter and they are prepaired to bow to public opinion.

More than can be said for Brown, the fact remains that
due to lack of support from the Tories, Brown has been forced to made a U-turn once again.

Incidently I would be interested to read the report in the other newspaper you mentioned, just to see how the Mail had got it wrong.

[anotheoldgit]

Gromit

Apology accepted. thank you.