Police investigating MPs expenses leak

[Hymie]

I see that our MPs have asked the police to investigate who leaked their expense details to the press, no doubt with a view to the person responsible being prosecuted.

Isn't this a bit like a burglar, caught red-handed, asking the police to investigate and prosecute the person who reported him to the police?

Have our MPs no shame, as well as no honesty?

[squarebear]

Surely, this is all available under the "Freedom of Infrmation" Act anyway?

[paraffin]

And if identified, what are the Police meant to charge the "miscreant" with? The heinous crime of "Looking after Joe Public's Misappropriated Money"? OR "The Curious Case of the Spat Out Dummy"?

And who might be paying for this enquiry? No prizes for guessing!

[olddutch]

Yes youre spot on - many many MPs are a lot like a burglar - or worse a banker - no shame and no honesty.

Just waiting for MPs expenses enquiry to eventually announce that MPs expenses will be abolished and MPs ( poor hard done by darlings) will receive banker type bonuses instead - and, like the bankers, will receive these bonuses no matter how badly they mess up the Country !

[rov1200]

If the information was available why wait until July to publish it. The cynic would say the MP would have time to put his house in order by then instead of being caught with his hand in the till.
Even their defensive actions smell of sleaze!

[TCL-MUMPING]

Are any of the claims the subject of an official investigation? If not, how can you say they have been dishonest?

[jno]

If anybody stole my pay and expenses details, I'd quite like them prosecuted. If anyone else feels happy to have their own ones published, well, feel free to post them here.

[tiggerblue10]

Why were they claiming for Kitkats, tampax and a �10 bag of manure etc anyway? Do they not earn enough to buy such items out of their own pocket like the rest of us?

[CJ242]

Olddutch, I'm officially offended.
I am what you would class as a 'banker'
I am very honest and I certainly feel shame.
Stereotyping is unfair and ignorant.
I work at least 5 times the amount of hours that the boss of my company does and I earn at least 10 times less of a bonus!!
As do most of my colleagues, so you think we aren't p****d off that fat cat CEO's and politicians use our money to pay for their petty luxuries.

[ludwig]

jno, your pay and expense details should be a private matter between you and the people who pay them.
It's exactly the same for MPs. In their case of course the people who pay them is us.

[ludwig]

TCL-MUMPING - '...how can you say they have been dishonest?' Easy , like this..'They have been dishonest.'

Claiming that your sister's back bedroom is your main residence is dishonest. It's untrue.
The simple fact is that the rules haven't been broken because the rules allow dishonest statements to be made.

[Panic Button]

They are not breaking any rules.

.... because they wrote the rules.




Something tells me Hazel Blears is a gonner.

[TCL-MUMPING]

"The simple fact is that the rules haven't been broken because the rules allow dishonest statements to be made"

What are the rules then?.

[olddutch]

CJ

Not unfair or ignorant - Im not talking indians but chiefs like those who have been "retired" - honest banker a contradiction in terms in much of upper banking echelons - your profession at the very top is generally a disgrace to society because its selfishness reckless incompetence dishonesties and the difficulties it has caused and is causing to ordinary workers and families in the UK and global economy - top bankers are greedier and worse than politicians - Such bankers, who have caused the financial mayhem we are all suffering from, deserve all the offence and anything else you can throw at them. They should be prosecuted and made to repay their ill-gotten bonuses if there was any moral justice - all honest underlings in unsubsidised banks exempted.

[ludwig]

I don't know them all off by heart TCL, but one of them is that you can make a dishonest claim such as 'My sister's back bedroom is my main residence' (don't laugh - this actually happened), in order to maximise the allowance money that you can claim for having a second residence.

As I said, I'm not sure of the exact wording, but I'm pretty sure this dishonest claim doesn't infringe any rules because no disciplinary action has been made against the person that made it in the case I mentioned above.

[TCL-MUMPING]

Ah, so what you're mumping about is someone you agree has broken no rules?

[jno]

not really, ludwig. My expenses were always a matter between me, my immediate boss, who authorised them, and the pay department. This certainly didn't entitle the entire board of directors to see them - let alone the customers who paid the money that the pay department granted me. People are still allowed privacy.

(I'm not arguing in favour of the current MPs' system, I'm arguing against theft.)

[ludwig]

TCL - Yes, that's exactly right. That's what I'm mumping about. Say what you like, we both know that just because no rules have been broken doesn't make it ok.
And they all know it too, which is why the system is going to change.

[rov1200]

This is the little green book the MPs give reference to. Should this be used in a court of law to put them all in the nick? I believe there are some telling paragraphs inside it

http://www1.sky.com/news/GreenBook.pdf