ChatterBank1 min ago
Our wonderful MPs and their expenses
MPs have ignored public anger over the expenses system by quietly introducing new rules which allow them to claim up to �9,125 a year without producing any receipts.
It has been approved without any public announcement or debate in Parliament as MPs leave for their summer holidays. Instead it has been agreed by a small committee of MPs chaired by John Bercow, the new Speaker, and including Harriet Harman, the Labour Leader of the House and Alan Duncan, the Tory frontbencher.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps -expenses/5920660/MPs-ignore-public-anger-and- give-themselves-9000-expenses-deal-by-stealth. html
Can they get anymore contemptible?
It has been approved without any public announcement or debate in Parliament as MPs leave for their summer holidays. Instead it has been agreed by a small committee of MPs chaired by John Bercow, the new Speaker, and including Harriet Harman, the Labour Leader of the House and Alan Duncan, the Tory frontbencher.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps -expenses/5920660/MPs-ignore-public-anger-and- give-themselves-9000-expenses-deal-by-stealth. html
Can they get anymore contemptible?
Answers
1 to 20 of 20
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Gromit. 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.
What has, and continues to gall me about the who expenses debacle is the apparent refusal of MP's to understand why the electorate is so angry at their behaviour.
They constantly chimp on about their actions being 'within the rules', which leads me to remember the old chestnut regarding the benefits of free speech which do not entitle someone to shout 'Fire! in a crowded theatre.
It's not about 'the rules', it;s about simple morality - the ability to say that, yes, the rules do allow large amounts of abuse, but as a decent law-abiding individual with a highly developed sense of right and wrong (and are we not entitled to these basic characteristivs from our MP's?) I choose not to abuse the system even though I can, because it is morally wrong.
But no - they abuse to the max, and then bleat when they get caught.
They are an appaling bunch of ammoral money-grabbers and they should be barred from public office forthwith.
They constantly chimp on about their actions being 'within the rules', which leads me to remember the old chestnut regarding the benefits of free speech which do not entitle someone to shout 'Fire! in a crowded theatre.
It's not about 'the rules', it;s about simple morality - the ability to say that, yes, the rules do allow large amounts of abuse, but as a decent law-abiding individual with a highly developed sense of right and wrong (and are we not entitled to these basic characteristivs from our MP's?) I choose not to abuse the system even though I can, because it is morally wrong.
But no - they abuse to the max, and then bleat when they get caught.
They are an appaling bunch of ammoral money-grabbers and they should be barred from public office forthwith.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
Not exactly an independant organisation are they vivkins?
Seeing as their chief executive used to be a researcher for Tory MP Bill Cash and MEP Timothy Kirkhope.
With advisors from the Adam Smith Institute and Margaret Thatcher's centre for policy studies it's really just a loose collection of Tories - many from the right wing
Seeing as their chief executive used to be a researcher for Tory MP Bill Cash and MEP Timothy Kirkhope.
With advisors from the Adam Smith Institute and Margaret Thatcher's centre for policy studies it's really just a loose collection of Tories - many from the right wing
-- answer removed --
Fraud and fiddling are two different things.
Fiddling is within the rules and fraud is against the law.
Let us hope that those found guilty if fraud will be punished by the laws of the land the same as any other citizen.
Fiddling......MP's are human beings first and MP'S second.
Can any of you say that you have never fiddled the books, worked a flanker, played the system, whichever way you would like to put it?
I know I have.....and I know other people have.
There are no degrees of fiddling.....one either has or one hasn't.
No, I am not an MP.
Fiddling is within the rules and fraud is against the law.
Let us hope that those found guilty if fraud will be punished by the laws of the land the same as any other citizen.
Fiddling......MP's are human beings first and MP'S second.
Can any of you say that you have never fiddled the books, worked a flanker, played the system, whichever way you would like to put it?
I know I have.....and I know other people have.
There are no degrees of fiddling.....one either has or one hasn't.
No, I am not an MP.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
If you want a non political campaigning group, this one might be for you ;
http://www.38degrees.org.uk/
As to this latest twist in the expenses farrago, someone posted earlier that they just dont seem to get it, and they really dont.
Almost everyone interviewed at the height of the relevations agreed that all expenses need to be receipted - So now, as far as I can see, they have gone from being able to claim an unreceipted �20 per day whilst they are in parliament to an unreceipted �25 per day whilst they are away from home !
This is a ruling from the Members Expenses Committee, chaired by the new speaker, who claimed he was going to be a new broom and bring back some dignity and respect for the political process. Little evidence of that so far.
Is this the sort of thing that Sir Christopher Kellys review will cover?
This is cross party too - senior representatives of all parties sit on this particular committee, so Cameron and Brown must know about it.
http://www.38degrees.org.uk/
As to this latest twist in the expenses farrago, someone posted earlier that they just dont seem to get it, and they really dont.
Almost everyone interviewed at the height of the relevations agreed that all expenses need to be receipted - So now, as far as I can see, they have gone from being able to claim an unreceipted �20 per day whilst they are in parliament to an unreceipted �25 per day whilst they are away from home !
This is a ruling from the Members Expenses Committee, chaired by the new speaker, who claimed he was going to be a new broom and bring back some dignity and respect for the political process. Little evidence of that so far.
Is this the sort of thing that Sir Christopher Kellys review will cover?
This is cross party too - senior representatives of all parties sit on this particular committee, so Cameron and Brown must know about it.
Its pretty much par for the course with MPs but then the expenses scandal has taken the heat of the money lent to the banking system. Heard somewhere (might have been radio 4) that it you compare the two it would take around 4000 years worth of expenses claims to equal the amount that has been given to banks but then people can relate more to somebody buying a flat screen tv.
1 to 20 of 20
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.