MP's snouts in the trough again..whats the answer
Discussion
ClaphamGT3 said:
First of all, to compare the responsibilities and skills required of even a back-bencher with the jobs you mention is facile. They are important jobs and should be valued but to put them in the same league as framing our legislation, representing the people in Parliament, running the machinery of Government and ensuring that the will of the electorate shapes our domestic and foreign policy is absurd.
Secondly, if you start saying that politicians are going to be unpaid/paid expenses only/paid the minimum wage/paid a token salary, you're only going to get the following types of people going into politics:
Like now then.Secondly, if you start saying that politicians are going to be unpaid/paid expenses only/paid the minimum wage/paid a token salary, you're only going to get the following types of people going into politics:
- The independently wealthy (David Cameron)
- Those who have a spouse with a meaningful income (Tony Blair/Margaret Thatcher)
- Those who are too unemployable to get a meaningful job anywhere else (Gordon Brown)
REALIST123 said:
Digga said:
oyster said:
Lunches are allowed.
Thanks, you're right.And the reason I was so adamant was that an engineering firm we've done business with for decades got done by a tax inspector (sometime after 2000) for buying all the employees (and visiting clients
)fish & chips every Friday lunchtime.... So either the rules changed or the guy was a class 1, grade A b
d.ETA Chapter 5, page 11 here: http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/guidance/480.pdf All it says is an exemption for "free and subsidised meals on the businesses premises"
Edited by Digga on Thursday 18th October 16:37
oyster said:
I am fully aware of those rules as I have staff claiming for some of them all the time.
I cannot think of any legitimate MPs' expenses that fall foul of those HMRC rules. Can you?
I'm advised that there are prescribed "acceptable" limits for subsistence each day you're away (can't recall what it is - a tenner?). And also that there are strict rules around what constitutes your usual daily journey, and hence what you can and cannot claim for with respect to travel (and lodgings) costs...and I wouldn't have thought MPs flik flakking which of their properties they wish to claim for follows those rules?I cannot think of any legitimate MPs' expenses that fall foul of those HMRC rules. Can you?
Also, is it possible for a mortal individual to claim for the redecoration of a nominated second home? Or services such as gardening?
rogerthefish said:
Building a travel lodge residence (not in the million pound an office style of portcullis house though) and one train ticket a week would put an instant stop to these parasites.
Agreed. Pay should be the UK average (UK does better, you get more, UK does worse, you get less), expenses should be limited to free postage and unlimited use of the 'hotel' laser printer (for constituency work), and we'll even throw in a free email address.MPs should be limited to 2, maybe 3 terms, Cabinet ministers an extra 2 terms, and PM 2 terms maximum. This would address all the people who think politics is a career, and get rid of stalwarts like the odious Wedgwood Benn, Ted Heath, and so forth, hanging round Parliament like a bad smell. It would also mean that Blair and most of his cronies have no option but to retire.
JDRoest said:
rogerthefish said:
Building a travel lodge residence (not in the million pound an office style of portcullis house though) and one train ticket a week would put an instant stop to these parasites.
Agreed. Pay should be the UK average (UK does better, you get more, UK does worse, you get less), expenses should be limited to free postage and unlimited use of the 'hotel' laser printer (for constituency work), and we'll even throw in a free email address.MPs should be limited to 2, maybe 3 terms, Cabinet ministers an extra 2 terms, and PM 2 terms maximum. This would address all the people who think politics is a career, and get rid of stalwarts like the odious Wedgwood Benn, Ted Heath, and so forth, hanging round Parliament like a bad smell. It would also mean that Blair and most of his cronies have no option but to retire.
The ballot box is the mechanism for deciding how long a politician gets to serve not some arbitary formula
I think the whole party idea has to end - when I elect (or vote for)an MP I would like to think he/she would hold regular mass meetings in the constituency then go to Parliament and represent the views of the people not those of a particular party.
The government will be formed from the MPs who get the most votes as a percentage in their constituency - taking the top 4% perhaps to reduce the number to a manageable level but this will be the most popular MPs in the country, not MPs who have sucked up the the leader of a party for a few years. They elect a leader from amongst themselves and if they fail to do so within 2 days they get dumped and the next most popular 4% get in.
Any expense to be subject to the same rules as HMRC expect from a private company (so VAT receipts for everything except mileage) and no second homes and maximum amount for overnight accommodation which must be supported again by a receipt.
Everybody gets the same salary - probably £75k or so with office staff provided by the Government for each MP - one member of staff, one office with two rooms and basic bills.
The government will be formed from the MPs who get the most votes as a percentage in their constituency - taking the top 4% perhaps to reduce the number to a manageable level but this will be the most popular MPs in the country, not MPs who have sucked up the the leader of a party for a few years. They elect a leader from amongst themselves and if they fail to do so within 2 days they get dumped and the next most popular 4% get in.
Any expense to be subject to the same rules as HMRC expect from a private company (so VAT receipts for everything except mileage) and no second homes and maximum amount for overnight accommodation which must be supported again by a receipt.
Everybody gets the same salary - probably £75k or so with office staff provided by the Government for each MP - one member of staff, one office with two rooms and basic bills.
It's system that is wide open to abuse and while some say MP's saleries are too small they are nearly three time average earnings. That said I am all for a better pay but no expenses package.
What's the chance that Ed balls lives in a home owned by yvette cooper with a nice rent claim and visa versa? It is a system that could massively benefit married couples.
ETA That is just wishfull thinking on my part and I dont believe that thye would do what I asked the chance of.
What's the chance that Ed balls lives in a home owned by yvette cooper with a nice rent claim and visa versa? It is a system that could massively benefit married couples.
ETA That is just wishfull thinking on my part and I dont believe that thye would do what I asked the chance of.
Digga said:
AJS- said:
66k plus accommodation is far from bugger all.
And they're in London to represent their constituents in parliament, then go back there, not to go swanning around expensive restaurants with their mistresses and partying with billionaire playboys.
I understand the argument that paying them more reduces their need to find alternative sources of income like fiddling expenses and other forms of corruption, I just don't think it really applies here.
^All of this.And they're in London to represent their constituents in parliament, then go back there, not to go swanning around expensive restaurants with their mistresses and partying with billionaire playboys.
I understand the argument that paying them more reduces their need to find alternative sources of income like fiddling expenses and other forms of corruption, I just don't think it really applies here.
And yes, I also agree with Murph7355 in making them submit reciepts - like the rest of us have to - for all their expenses and that this cannot include lunch. They can live by the rules they impose on every other working person or leave their office AFAIK.
hornet said:
Some sort of zonal system would seem reasonable? Scrap expenses entirely and simply pay a salary based on zones defined by distance from Westminster. Further out you are, the more you receive. Much easier to administer and far less opaque than the current situation.
Maybe make them do like most other folk when living elsewere in the UK and looking at a job that involves some time in the capital, accept its part of the job!!!!!£60K plus is alot more than most peoples salarys!!! yes even people who travel distances to work in the Smoke.... 
Cabinet ministers get loads of perks that senior staff in the private sector can only dream of (unless they take the hit to the companies profits).
Free houses
Slaves.....staff
More Slaves........staff
Free cars,driven by slaves...staff.
Thousands of public school educated slaves to do all their work for them...staff
Junior roles have no responsibility as no one in the press (let alone the public) even know their jobs exists.
And what skills do they need? Superb brown nosing, square dress sense, middle of the road ideas.
There is a reason hundreds of civil servants get paid more than the PM, and that is that the PM (and the rest of the ministerial roles) is an unskilled job, show me the job description and prove me wrong.
Frankly if they don't like the salary they should not have taken the job, it's not like the remuneration is a secret.
Free houses
Slaves.....staff
More Slaves........staff
Free cars,driven by slaves...staff.
Thousands of public school educated slaves to do all their work for them...staff
Junior roles have no responsibility as no one in the press (let alone the public) even know their jobs exists.
And what skills do they need? Superb brown nosing, square dress sense, middle of the road ideas.
There is a reason hundreds of civil servants get paid more than the PM, and that is that the PM (and the rest of the ministerial roles) is an unskilled job, show me the job description and prove me wrong.
Frankly if they don't like the salary they should not have taken the job, it's not like the remuneration is a secret.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2219886/La...
Halifax MP Mrs Riordan, a member of the Socialist Campaign Group, rents out her £400,000 London flat to fellow Labour MP Iain McKenzie.
Mr McKenzie pays her £1,560 a month in rent – equal to £18,720 a year – which he claims back from the taxpayer.
Official records show that Mrs Riordan’s mortgage fell to £562 a month in 2009 when interest rates hit their current low level.
Assuming the rate is unchanged, she is now making £1,000 a month in clear profit from the rental payments to supplement her MPs’ salary of £65,738.
At the same time, Mrs Riordan, 59, claims £1,473 a month – equal to £17,676 a year – from the taxpayer for renting a separate flat in London for herself. She also has a home in Northowram, Halifax, which she has owned outright for more than 20 years.
The arrangement means she now has three properties, two of which are funded by the taxpayer.
Mrs Riordan, a widow, also employs her 51-year-old partner Stephen Roberts as a ‘senior researcher’ on a taxpayer-funded salary of up to £42,000.
She did not respond to calls last night and Mr Roberts declined to comment.
Halifax MP Mrs Riordan, a member of the Socialist Campaign Group, rents out her £400,000 London flat to fellow Labour MP Iain McKenzie.
Mr McKenzie pays her £1,560 a month in rent – equal to £18,720 a year – which he claims back from the taxpayer.
Official records show that Mrs Riordan’s mortgage fell to £562 a month in 2009 when interest rates hit their current low level.
Assuming the rate is unchanged, she is now making £1,000 a month in clear profit from the rental payments to supplement her MPs’ salary of £65,738.
At the same time, Mrs Riordan, 59, claims £1,473 a month – equal to £17,676 a year – from the taxpayer for renting a separate flat in London for herself. She also has a home in Northowram, Halifax, which she has owned outright for more than 20 years.
The arrangement means she now has three properties, two of which are funded by the taxpayer.
Mrs Riordan, a widow, also employs her 51-year-old partner Stephen Roberts as a ‘senior researcher’ on a taxpayer-funded salary of up to £42,000.
She did not respond to calls last night and Mr Roberts declined to comment.
PlankWithANailIn said:
Cabinet ministers get loads of perks that senior staff in the private sector can only dream of (unless they take the hit to the companies profits).
Free houses
Slaves.....staff
More Slaves........staff
Free cars,driven by slaves...staff.
Thousands of public school educated slaves to do all their work for them...staff
Junior roles have no responsibility as no one in the press (let alone the public) even know their jobs exists.
And what skills do they need? Superb brown nosing, square dress sense, middle of the road ideas.
There is a reason hundreds of civil servants get paid more than the PM, and that is that the PM (and the rest of the ministerial roles) is an unskilled job, show me the job description and prove me wrong.
Frankly if they don't like the salary they should not have taken the job, it's not like the remuneration is a secret.
Yes and on a more general note its high time we questioned how much a lot of people in the public sector and PLCs are paid?? once it gets over about £75kFree houses
Slaves.....staff
More Slaves........staff
Free cars,driven by slaves...staff.
Thousands of public school educated slaves to do all their work for them...staff
Junior roles have no responsibility as no one in the press (let alone the public) even know their jobs exists.
And what skills do they need? Superb brown nosing, square dress sense, middle of the road ideas.
There is a reason hundreds of civil servants get paid more than the PM, and that is that the PM (and the rest of the ministerial roles) is an unskilled job, show me the job description and prove me wrong.
Frankly if they don't like the salary they should not have taken the job, it's not like the remuneration is a secret.
its way over what they are worth , seems the more people are paid the less responsibilty they will take and the more greedy and selfish they become!! thinking bankers and heads of goverment departments, if you build up a sucsesfull business you deserve the reward but if you are a 3rd rate acountant with a brown nose ?????
porridge said:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2219886/La...
Halifax MP Mrs Riordan, a member of the Socialist Campaign Group, rents out her £400,000 London flat to fellow Labour MP Iain McKenzie.
Mr McKenzie pays her £1,560 a month in rent – equal to £18,720 a year – which he claims back from the taxpayer.
Official records show that Mrs Riordan’s mortgage fell to £562 a month in 2009 when interest rates hit their current low level.
Assuming the rate is unchanged, she is now making £1,000 a month in clear profit from the rental payments to supplement her MPs’ salary of £65,738.
At the same time, Mrs Riordan, 59, claims £1,473 a month – equal to £17,676 a year – from the taxpayer for renting a separate flat in London for herself. She also has a home in Northowram, Halifax, which she has owned outright for more than 20 years.
The arrangement means she now has three properties, two of which are funded by the taxpayer.
Mrs Riordan, a widow, also employs her 51-year-old partner Stephen Roberts as a ‘senior researcher’ on a taxpayer-funded salary of up to £42,000.
She did not respond to calls last night and Mr Roberts declined to comment.
Ah some pigs are more equal than others!!! as you were !!! this is typical brass neck socailist behavior that's what they do!!, whats yours is mine whats mine is my own and someone else should pay for me and my ideas...Halifax MP Mrs Riordan, a member of the Socialist Campaign Group, rents out her £400,000 London flat to fellow Labour MP Iain McKenzie.
Mr McKenzie pays her £1,560 a month in rent – equal to £18,720 a year – which he claims back from the taxpayer.
Official records show that Mrs Riordan’s mortgage fell to £562 a month in 2009 when interest rates hit their current low level.
Assuming the rate is unchanged, she is now making £1,000 a month in clear profit from the rental payments to supplement her MPs’ salary of £65,738.
At the same time, Mrs Riordan, 59, claims £1,473 a month – equal to £17,676 a year – from the taxpayer for renting a separate flat in London for herself. She also has a home in Northowram, Halifax, which she has owned outright for more than 20 years.
The arrangement means she now has three properties, two of which are funded by the taxpayer.
Mrs Riordan, a widow, also employs her 51-year-old partner Stephen Roberts as a ‘senior researcher’ on a taxpayer-funded salary of up to £42,000.
She did not respond to calls last night and Mr Roberts declined to comment.
powerstroke said:
Ah some pigs are more equal than others!!! as you were !!! this is typical brass neck socailist behavior that's what they do!!, whats yours is mine whats mine is my own and someone else should pay for me and my ideas...
It's breathtaking really - like the Conservative husband and wife couple, the Wintertons: Once the taxpayer had cleared the mortgage on their flat they put it into trust in their sons' names and then claimed rent to pay into the trust "because they had to to satisfy the trust rules".Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff