News2 mins ago
MPs over claimed for Council Tax
Eric Illsley, the Labour MP, is thought to have made the highest phantom claim � recouping more than �6,000 over and above his council tax bills since 2004.
Over 50 other MPs have claimed more than their real Council Tax bills.
Some MPs were making 12 monthly claims when their Council Tax was paid in 10 installments.
When the rules were changed requiring paperwork to be submitted, several MPs reduced their Council Tax claim, but no one asked why the Council Tax had suddenly gone down on the same property.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps -expenses/5581934/MPs-expenses-MPs-made-inflat ed-council-tax-claims.html
Should these people be jailed?
Over 50 other MPs have claimed more than their real Council Tax bills.
Some MPs were making 12 monthly claims when their Council Tax was paid in 10 installments.
When the rules were changed requiring paperwork to be submitted, several MPs reduced their Council Tax claim, but no one asked why the Council Tax had suddenly gone down on the same property.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps -expenses/5581934/MPs-expenses-MPs-made-inflat ed-council-tax-claims.html
Should these people be jailed?
Answers
1 to 16 of 16
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.
Yes, those concerned should at least be arrested on suspicion of fraud or obtaining property by deception. However, I am well aware of the horrendous burden which this would place upon the Police and CPS, bearing in mind the recent fiascos of the cash for questions and Damien Green enquiries.
I'm fed up to the back teeth listening to their pathetic lameduck excuses, i.e.:
"All my claims were within the rules" "I acted on the advice I was given from the fees office." "I've done nothing wrong."
"The system's to blame." etc etc ad nauseum !
Are we simply to believe that the flagship of British democracy is populated by some 600 odd of the most naiive people imaginable? It makes my blood boil to think that their barefaced arrogance was such that we've been treated with downright contempt! Our intelligence has been insulted by people hell bent on feathering their own nests at our collective expense (literally).
"Wholly, exclusively and necessarily" incurred is the maxim by which their claims were meant to be guided. It's patently clear that so many of these claims fell well short of that.
I'm totally convinced that the vast majority of these leeches are desperately praying that we, the great British public, will gradually grow weary of hearing fresh revelations of the same nature on a daily basis.
I for one have not tired of them, (God bless the Telegraph) and yesterday's blacked out documentation just goes to prove how valuable and priceless those exposes have been to each and every taxpayer in the UK.
I'm fed up to the back teeth listening to their pathetic lameduck excuses, i.e.:
"All my claims were within the rules" "I acted on the advice I was given from the fees office." "I've done nothing wrong."
"The system's to blame." etc etc ad nauseum !
Are we simply to believe that the flagship of British democracy is populated by some 600 odd of the most naiive people imaginable? It makes my blood boil to think that their barefaced arrogance was such that we've been treated with downright contempt! Our intelligence has been insulted by people hell bent on feathering their own nests at our collective expense (literally).
"Wholly, exclusively and necessarily" incurred is the maxim by which their claims were meant to be guided. It's patently clear that so many of these claims fell well short of that.
I'm totally convinced that the vast majority of these leeches are desperately praying that we, the great British public, will gradually grow weary of hearing fresh revelations of the same nature on a daily basis.
I for one have not tired of them, (God bless the Telegraph) and yesterday's blacked out documentation just goes to prove how valuable and priceless those exposes have been to each and every taxpayer in the UK.
-- answer removed --
jno....of course I agree, but there are varying degrees of assessment of that point.
Example.
Someone speeding on the Motorway...........top class lawyer.
Someone speeding on the Motorway............cr@p lawyer.
Same speed, same conditions.
Would the result of conviction be the same?
M.Ps guiltty of fraud........top class lawyer.
Me guilty of fraud......cr@p lawyer.
Identical like for like situations
Would the resulft of convictions be the same?
Example.
Someone speeding on the Motorway...........top class lawyer.
Someone speeding on the Motorway............cr@p lawyer.
Same speed, same conditions.
Would the result of conviction be the same?
M.Ps guiltty of fraud........top class lawyer.
Me guilty of fraud......cr@p lawyer.
Identical like for like situations
Would the resulft of convictions be the same?
possibly, sqad; judges aren't machines.
On the subject of honest mistakes, look at Bill Wiggins MP, who claimed for a mortgage on a property that didn't have one. Criminally dishonest? He says he just accidentally entered the address of the wrong property, he meant to claim on a property that did have a mortgage. He didn't make a penny from it, and the taxpayer lost nothing. Yes, that does sound like a mistake to me.
On the subject of honest mistakes, look at Bill Wiggins MP, who claimed for a mortgage on a property that didn't have one. Criminally dishonest? He says he just accidentally entered the address of the wrong property, he meant to claim on a property that did have a mortgage. He didn't make a penny from it, and the taxpayer lost nothing. Yes, that does sound like a mistake to me.
he also claimed �68.16 for a subscription to Practical Poultry magazine, which I don't think I should have to pay. But I was just talking about his erroneous claim for mortgage payments: he entered the wrong address. It made no difference to the actual amount. That seems to be an example of a genuine mistake.
I think it's called the 'arrogance of power'....and to top it all ,it's just been reported on the news that Labour whips are 'pushing' for the election of M. Beckett to be the new Speaker of the House....apparently,she is seen as the candidate who is NOT for reform....some things never change....especially when it is in other peoples (rules) interests!!
1 to 16 of 16
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.