On 18 Dec 2011 at 10:05am jrsussex wrote:
"MP's call for a return of the second home allowance claiming it offers value for money"
A cross-party committeee has suggested that MP's should no longer be required to provide receipts to back claims for housing and travel.
Back to the bad old days, proof in my opinion, that the expenses and allowances were of such a financially beneficial level that MP's are determined to get them back as part of the gravy train of Westminster politics
What do you think?
On 18 Dec 2011 at 10:16am metatron wrote:
Will they never learn.
On 18 Dec 2011 at 11:08am DFL wrote:
And they wonder why riots happen !!
On 18 Dec 2011 at 5:11pm Clifford wrote:
People have said over and over how to resolve this problem. Give the MPs free hostel accommodation in London and let them pay for their constituency accommodation themselves. Let them have free travel to and from their constituencies, either through vouchers or mileage allowances. On top of that they can have free postage and stationery for constituency business and secretarial staff seconded from the civil service. Then they can live on their wages, like the rest of us. And the wage, of course, should be no more than the average wage of their constituents.
On 18 Dec 2011 at 5:16pm bastian wrote:
given mps will retain their final salary pensions long after all others have lost theirs will they include the second home expenses as part of their final salary?
On 18 Dec 2011 at 6:59pm cyclist wrote:
Work out a budget based on distance from London and number of constituents. Give them half what is actually needed. This is how much of the public sector is expected to work. Expect them to manage their budget like everyone else.
On 18 Dec 2011 at 7:53pm Fairmeadow wrote:
It would be nice to see MPs taking a lead for the rest of the public sector - ensuring, for example, that they get the same expenses, pay the same percentage pension contribution, and get a pension on exactly the same terms, as public sector workers such as teachers, police & nurses.
Until they do that, they will find it difficult to get the respect from us that many of them (NOT all of them) do actually deserve.
On 19 Dec 2011 at 8:20am DFL wrote:
Do you really think ANY of these suggestions are going to get an airing in the H.O.P ! ALL MPs are just in it to screw joe public for as much as they can get. Maggie is at the root of all our problems, and the millions of offspring that she spawned !!
On 19 Dec 2011 at 9:47am Fairmeadow wrote:
You are obviously a youngster DFL. There were plenty of people like Maggie around before the 1970s - they just ran local councils rather than the government.
The aristos who led the Tories before Heath & Thatcher had such nice manners, acquired on the playing fields of Eton, that the greed hardly showed at all.
I also disagree that they are ALL in it JUST to screw Joe Public. There are quite a few idealists around in the house (mostly rather dissatisfied with their lot), and even more who started off that way befor letting the culture absorb them. And then there is Denis Skinner.
On 19 Dec 2011 at 10:05am jrsussex wrote:
Fairmeadow - You have touched on what I believe proved to be a disaster for the UK. At the 1997 General Election mnay of the elected MP's came from local council backgrounds which is why there was such an explosion in the numbers employed within the public sector both in central Government and local authorities.
Back to MP's expenses, Clifford is somewhere close to the solution, there is absolutely no way that MP's should be allowed to purchase properties essentially funded by the tax-payer that they can then, at a later date, sell and retain the profits. A ridiculous situation, one has to asked how it ever began.
On 19 Dec 2011 at 11:12am DFL wrote:
Dennis Skinner is next to God !! and I also agree with JR and Clifford, tax payers money should not fund MPs' Expenses end of.
On 19 Dec 2011 at 11:23am jesussex wrote:
DFL - Just to clarify my argument, I think we must accept there are expenses incurred by MP's that need to be met but in no way should that include the purchase of property that that is under their ownership when part of the payment (in fact the majority as it is interest) is made by the British tax-payer.
On 19 Dec 2011 at 2:29pm DFL wrote:
And an example would be JR ?
On 19 Dec 2011 at 3:30pm jrsussex wrote:
DFL - Very Good question but we have to accept that a lone MP cannot do his work unaided. He/she does need a secretary to keep up with the constituents concerns/queries etc and of course some, but by no means all, will have quite costly travelling expenses to attend the Parliament. I personally accept that type of expense. It is the purchasing of accomodation, the decoration of that accomodation, the buying of their food and clothing etc that I am vehemently against, which includes duck houses.
On 19 Dec 2011 at 6:05pm bastian wrote:
only MPs from a distance away need living expenses, say further than York (3 hours by train from Kings cross)As for furnishings etc, absolutely not.Why can't parliment buy a hotel which can be run for its own members at areduced rate which we, the tax payer would fund, but it would be alot less than individual bills.
On 19 Dec 2011 at 10:31pm mickyboy wrote:
the problem was the rather low salary attached to being an MP. in years gone by either an MP was somebody who had made it in business or academia, or the second/third son of a wealthy family, it was looked upon as civic duty, not realy as a profession.
now a days things have changed and many younger people and those from modest back grounds become MPs the salary is not in keeping with the average earning of a talanted solicitor, banker or advertising executive, the expenses system was used as a top up and it got out of hand, we expect our elected representatives to do a job and be above reproach, we must be prepared topay for it. it is simply a question of how to befair to all mps and how to ensure the public purse, our money gets spent wisely
On 20 Dec 2011 at 7:30am Annette Curtin-Twitcher wrote:
Glad to see other Dennis Skinner fans on here! One of few MPs with real integrity imo.
I've had the pleasure of meeting him a couple of times, and he's a great bloke.
They should build a block of council flats for the MPs who represent constituencies too far away for daily travel to London. The 2nd home lark was the biggest scam going.