Listener 4848 Return By Dysart
Crosswords0 min ago
MPs Expenses (Again).
My MP has claimed �23,000 in second home allowances.
I work in London, not far from Westminster in fact, and I quite often have fairly late nights and some early mornings.
My train journey to Waterloo East takes approximately 45 minutes and from there it is two stops on the Jubilee Line to Westminster, so total journey time is about an hour.
I find it perfectly manageable to do this and just have one home, so I'm struggling to understand the justification for �23,000 in second home expenses.
Given some of the claims that have been published (moat clearing, duck houses, sister's back bedroom is main residence etc...) am I being naive in being shocked?
I work in London, not far from Westminster in fact, and I quite often have fairly late nights and some early mornings.
My train journey to Waterloo East takes approximately 45 minutes and from there it is two stops on the Jubilee Line to Westminster, so total journey time is about an hour.
I find it perfectly manageable to do this and just have one home, so I'm struggling to understand the justification for �23,000 in second home expenses.
Given some of the claims that have been published (moat clearing, duck houses, sister's back bedroom is main residence etc...) am I being naive in being shocked?
Answers
1 to 11 of 11
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by flip_flop. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Well, if you had found this out before all this scandal stuff you wouldn't have been, but now nothing should surprise us. have you written to your MP c/o his constituency office or his Westminster office asking him for an explanation? Put the man under pressure I say, these thieves have to be rooted out and got rid of.
The most shocking thing about this, flip_flop is the attempts that were made by MPs to deliberately suppress the information concerning their expenses. It had to be prised from them using the Freedom of Information Act (after they had tried to declare the Act was inapplicable to them), when in fact it should have been in the public domain anyway. (Of course we now know why it was not).
Whilst the public is rightly outraged by these revelations, it ought to be outraged to a far greater degree by other scandals of much greater magnitude. Taxpayers� money has been haemorrhaging from the Treasury at an increasingly alarming rate over the past twelve years. Vast sums of revenue have been sucked from taxpayers and wasted with no appreciable benefits. Huge sums have been thrown at public services (Health and Education in particular) with no commensurate improvement in results. GPs have seen their pay doubled in less than five years � is the service your GP provides twice as good as it was? Local Councils, Quangos and Government Departments increase their headcount as if the recession does not exist.
Meantime MPs arrive at Westminster from their London watering holes or their mistresses� (taxpayer funded) apartments when summoned by the Whips, to pass through the division lobby and vote on a matter about which they have no knowledge at all. And another law which will bully, harass impoverish or inconvenience individuals and businesses passes quietly on to the Statute Books.
Who can prevent this happening? MPs of course. But they have become just lobby fodder for the Whips who act on behalf on an increasingly powerful executive which has shown complete contempt for Parliament and democracy.
It has taken the expenses scandal to make some of them to re-think their arrogant and contemptuous attitudes and all power to whoever got hold of the details.
Whilst the public is rightly outraged by these revelations, it ought to be outraged to a far greater degree by other scandals of much greater magnitude. Taxpayers� money has been haemorrhaging from the Treasury at an increasingly alarming rate over the past twelve years. Vast sums of revenue have been sucked from taxpayers and wasted with no appreciable benefits. Huge sums have been thrown at public services (Health and Education in particular) with no commensurate improvement in results. GPs have seen their pay doubled in less than five years � is the service your GP provides twice as good as it was? Local Councils, Quangos and Government Departments increase their headcount as if the recession does not exist.
Meantime MPs arrive at Westminster from their London watering holes or their mistresses� (taxpayer funded) apartments when summoned by the Whips, to pass through the division lobby and vote on a matter about which they have no knowledge at all. And another law which will bully, harass impoverish or inconvenience individuals and businesses passes quietly on to the Statute Books.
Who can prevent this happening? MPs of course. But they have become just lobby fodder for the Whips who act on behalf on an increasingly powerful executive which has shown complete contempt for Parliament and democracy.
It has taken the expenses scandal to make some of them to re-think their arrogant and contemptuous attitudes and all power to whoever got hold of the details.
>Taxpayers� money has been haemorrhaging from the >Treasury at an increasingly alarming rate over the
>past twelve years.
Agreed. As I pointed out on here recently, Gordon Brown's tax credit system have cost us BILLIONS of pounds in fraud and overpayment since he introduced it.
In the same way that if you allow MPs to claim whatever they like they will abuse it, did it not occur to anyone that if you allow the public to say how much they earn or how many children they have (without needing to prove it) then people might lie.
More here
http://tinyurl.com/om5btt
>past twelve years.
Agreed. As I pointed out on here recently, Gordon Brown's tax credit system have cost us BILLIONS of pounds in fraud and overpayment since he introduced it.
In the same way that if you allow MPs to claim whatever they like they will abuse it, did it not occur to anyone that if you allow the public to say how much they earn or how many children they have (without needing to prove it) then people might lie.
More here
http://tinyurl.com/om5btt
Interesting news article from August 2008 here:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1552018 /Freedom-of-Information-vote-places-MPs-above- law.html
MPs voted to STOP their expense claims being released under the Freedom of Information Act.
No we know why they voted for that dont we.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1552018 /Freedom-of-Information-vote-places-MPs-above- law.html
MPs voted to STOP their expense claims being released under the Freedom of Information Act.
No we know why they voted for that dont we.
Yes VHG, quite so.
Interesting to see that one Tony McNulty, MP, was one of the supporters of the FOI Act exemption for MPs. (Mr McNulty was exposed as having claimed a �second home� allowance for a house, eight miles from his own, where his parents live).
It was also interesting to note that although the MPs voted four to one for their exemption, only 96 of them voted at all. (I thought they would have all been in the H of C to try to maintain their privileged position).
Mr Brown�s much lauded (but utterly ludicrous and over bureaucratic) tax credit system was always bound to overpay its recipients. Claimants are assessed at the start of the financial year and the payments made under the system cannot be changed for the duration of the year. This means when a claimant�s employment income increases (as does most people�s rather than it decrease) they are overpaid. This issue was pointed out when the matter was going through Parliament, but the concerns were dismissed. The whole system is unnecessary anyway because a perfectly acceptable way of adjusting tax allowances was always available via PAYE. But that system did not give the impression that the government was giving money away, only that it was allowing workers to keep more of their own money.
Interesting to see that one Tony McNulty, MP, was one of the supporters of the FOI Act exemption for MPs. (Mr McNulty was exposed as having claimed a �second home� allowance for a house, eight miles from his own, where his parents live).
It was also interesting to note that although the MPs voted four to one for their exemption, only 96 of them voted at all. (I thought they would have all been in the H of C to try to maintain their privileged position).
Mr Brown�s much lauded (but utterly ludicrous and over bureaucratic) tax credit system was always bound to overpay its recipients. Claimants are assessed at the start of the financial year and the payments made under the system cannot be changed for the duration of the year. This means when a claimant�s employment income increases (as does most people�s rather than it decrease) they are overpaid. This issue was pointed out when the matter was going through Parliament, but the concerns were dismissed. The whole system is unnecessary anyway because a perfectly acceptable way of adjusting tax allowances was always available via PAYE. But that system did not give the impression that the government was giving money away, only that it was allowing workers to keep more of their own money.
Yes, jake, VAT is a bad system. It is the sort of system which, if you wanted to design the most complex way to collect a tax on goods, would be hard to beat.
It places a ridiculous burden on businesses which have to go through the rigmarole of paying the tax then claiming virtually all of it back. It adds huge overhead costs for the businesses and enormous administration costs for the taxpayer, who has to fund HM Revenue and Customs to sort it all out (fraud and all).
The only people who ultimately pay VAT are end users. If goods must be taxed at all at the point of purchase a simple Purchase Tax (remember that?) would be far more efficient, less costly to administer and (or maybe but) would require far fewer civil servants to collect.
Oh, and purchase tax might just throw up fewer opportunities for fraud.
But the imposition of VAT is decreed by the EU, so Westminster MPs have no say on the matter.
It places a ridiculous burden on businesses which have to go through the rigmarole of paying the tax then claiming virtually all of it back. It adds huge overhead costs for the businesses and enormous administration costs for the taxpayer, who has to fund HM Revenue and Customs to sort it all out (fraud and all).
The only people who ultimately pay VAT are end users. If goods must be taxed at all at the point of purchase a simple Purchase Tax (remember that?) would be far more efficient, less costly to administer and (or maybe but) would require far fewer civil servants to collect.
Oh, and purchase tax might just throw up fewer opportunities for fraud.
But the imposition of VAT is decreed by the EU, so Westminster MPs have no say on the matter.
I do not think you are being naive. What you see with the MPs expences is just the nature of how selfish some of the people in power in this country were everyone is out for what they can get are.This is a direct consequence of the Thatcher years and the thatcherite ideology it is the reason that the banks went into so much trouble for instance look at what the interest rates are at the moment now look at what interest pepole are being charged for their overdrafts,credit cards and loans. Behaviour like this from people in power leads to some quite extremist political parties gaining power eg look at the rise of the BNP if we are not careful we will find ourselves going down a political road which everyone will regret
1 to 11 of 11
Latest Posts
News0 min ago
ChatterBank5 mins ago
Crosswords5 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles5 mins ago
Crosswords6 mins ago
