Mark Menzies MP campaign funds
Discussion
sugerbear said:
I will ask the Tory supporters again - Did Mark Menzies pay income tax on the £14,000 money he took from his donations fund?
Dan Neidle gives an answer to your question. Dan is a tax expert (who also likes to pass himself off as "independent" but he is actually a life-long Labour party member and supporter). He says not taxable. However, that does NOT make what Menzies did right (if the allegations true). He could well have broken other laws. This only relates to the tax question.https://twitter.com/DanNeidle/status/1780942633319...
Edited by EddieSteadyGo on Thursday 18th April 20:00
Gareth79 said:
"In March 2014, Menzies resigned as Parliamentary Private Secretary to Alan Duncan, then the International Development Minister, after a report in the Sunday Mirror that Menzies had paid a Brazilian male escort for sex and asked him to supply the illegal drug mephedrone. Menzies said a number of the claims were "untrue".[4][14][15] "
Pound Shop George Santos.pocketspring said:
Couldn't have claimed it as expenses?
Was he moonlighting as a washing machine seller?tangerine_sedge said:
Good old Twitter :
Reading between the lines, and reading a litany of other linked incidents, I think he's got alcohol problems which leads him to make very bad decisions late at night...
He's not alone, although my bad decisions generally revolve around thinking walking home 5 miles is perfectly fine and a kebab is much more important than a cab ride.Reading between the lines, and reading a litany of other linked incidents, I think he's got alcohol problems which leads him to make very bad decisions late at night...
Mikebentley said:
I don’t normally get involved in politics but her you go. There are crooks and scum in both the major parties. It at this stage is all about discrediting the opposition as it always is but more so. Why don’t you all stop frothing and just accept it will always be the case.
After 14 years of Tory criminality“they’re all the same”
Standard deflection
S600BSB said:
119 said:
You appear to have experience of this.
No, but I can read. If only you had gone to a decent school too. 
Well sweetheart, i am certainly not going to admit where i went, but it's very well known and no doubt will set off the ultra spaffers in here.
Edited by 119 on Thursday 18th April 20:18
DeejRC said:
Cocking up, more like.
Andy is correct though. £85k simply isn’t v much. If you wish to attract the calibre required, then you need to dbl the money. Can you imagine the outrage across the country though if that was suggested? It is simply not a viable political solution.
Do you really believe that say, doubling the MP salary to say £170k (what about expenses and hiring family members btw?) would truly result in a far higher calibre of parliamentarians? You'd just have the same unpleasant incompetent bunch but paid rather more (or perhaps not if expenses and such get clamped down on bit that'll never fly if so anyway)....Andy is correct though. £85k simply isn’t v much. If you wish to attract the calibre required, then you need to dbl the money. Can you imagine the outrage across the country though if that was suggested? It is simply not a viable political solution.
Earthdweller said:
S600BSB said:
Surely this is one for the police to investigate - bad people, drugs, extortion etc etc. Odd that it has been known about for a few months and they aren’t already conducting an investigation.
For the Police to be involved you need a victim and a complainant No victim, no crime
They don’t magically suddenly become involved
EddieSteadyGo said:
Dan Neidle gives an answer to your question. Dan is a tax expert (who also likes to pass himself off as "independent" but he is actually a life-long Labour party member and supporter). He says not taxable. However, that does NOT make what Menzies did right (if the allegations true). He could well have broken other laws. This only relates to the tax question.
https://twitter.com/DanNeidle/status/1780942633319...
Surely the CGT is just a bit of silly mischief making, I’d have thought that if the stories are true he’ll face charges for embezzlement, which I imagine would then involve the police. I still struggle to understand how we end up with so many dysfunctional idiots becoming MP’s, in percentage terms it’s frightening. https://twitter.com/DanNeidle/status/1780942633319...
Edited by EddieSteadyGo on Thursday 18th April 20:00
Blue62 said:
Surely the CGT is just a bit of silly mischief making, I’d have thought that if the stories are true he’ll face charges for embezzlement, which I imagine would then involve the police. I still struggle to understand how we end up with so many dysfunctional idiots becoming MP’s, in percentage terms it’s frightening.
Yeah, I think income tax or taxation on this money in general is the least of his issues. As to why there are so many caught for this type of thing, at the risk of being an amateur psychologist, I think there is often a trait of some form of narcissistic personality disorder i.e. "I'm special, I'm important, I deserve to do [insert whatever behaviour]" they have done.
119 said:
S600BSB said:
119 said:
You appear to have experience of this.
No, but I can read. If only you had gone to a decent school too. Well sweetheart, i am certainly not going to admit where i went, but it's very well known and no doubt will set off the ultra spaffers in here.
Edited by 119 on Thursday 18th April 20:18
isaldiri said:
DeejRC said:
Cocking up, more like.
Andy is correct though. £85k simply isn’t v much. If you wish to attract the calibre required, then you need to dbl the money. Can you imagine the outrage across the country though if that was suggested? It is simply not a viable political solution.
Do you really believe that say, doubling the MP salary to say £170k (what about expenses and hiring family members btw?) would truly result in a far higher calibre of parliamentarians? You'd just have the same unpleasant incompetent bunch but paid rather more (or perhaps not if expenses and such get clamped down on bit that'll never fly if so anyway)....Andy is correct though. £85k simply isn’t v much. If you wish to attract the calibre required, then you need to dbl the money. Can you imagine the outrage across the country though if that was suggested? It is simply not a viable political solution.
I’m a chap, so I’ve referenced chaps btw, if a lady wishes to post, by all means reference ladies.
And Isa, I said the idea was a non starter. I also phrased it as “ if you wish to…” not that it would happen.
DeejRC said:
Most probably not, but it makes the career a viable option to blokes who earn in that region for their professional abilities. £85k means it isn’t, so you basically remove all the higher earning, professionally experienced and competent chaps - the guys you want involved adding their knowledge - from the selection pool.
I’m a chap, so I’ve referenced chaps btw, if a lady wishes to post, by all means reference ladies.
And Isa, I said the idea was a non starter. I also phrased it as “ if you wish to…” not that it would happen.
I was disagreeing with the 'if you wish to' bit as well actually and not anything about whether it would happen....I’m a chap, so I’ve referenced chaps btw, if a lady wishes to post, by all means reference ladies.
And Isa, I said the idea was a non starter. I also phrased it as “ if you wish to…” not that it would happen.
plenty of MPs manage to combine 'normal' jobs along with that £85k stipend. Add in copious expenses and ability to hire family members as, the total monetary value (even ignoring the greasing of palms for contacts and jobs later) is well in the region of what higher earning, professionally experienced and competent chaps are getting.
And even if you did attract that segment of people, by the time they get through the selection process to get to being chosen as an MP, they would have turned into the very same cynically self serving, grasping and vainglorious bunch as now. Just being paid twice as much....
isaldiri said:
I was disagreeing with the 'if you wish to' bit as well actually and not anything about whether it would happen....
plenty of MPs manage to combine 'normal' jobs along with that £85k stipend. Add in copious expenses and ability to hire family members as, the total monetary value (even ignoring the greasing of palms for contacts and jobs later) is well in the region of what higher earning, professionally experienced and competent chaps are getting.
And even if you did attract that segment of people, by the time they get through the selection process to get to being chosen as an MP, they would have turned into the very same cynically self serving, grasping and vainglorious bunch as now. Just being paid twice as much....
I think this is too cynical. plenty of MPs manage to combine 'normal' jobs along with that £85k stipend. Add in copious expenses and ability to hire family members as, the total monetary value (even ignoring the greasing of palms for contacts and jobs later) is well in the region of what higher earning, professionally experienced and competent chaps are getting.
And even if you did attract that segment of people, by the time they get through the selection process to get to being chosen as an MP, they would have turned into the very same cynically self serving, grasping and vainglorious bunch as now. Just being paid twice as much....
I was in my late thirties when I was considering it. The pay was one factor for me deciding against it. It was already going to be a pay cut despite the 'perks' you mention. And I see expenses as reimbursement for money spent doing a job, rather than hidden remuneration. And taking another job at the same time always seemed like a piss-take, rather than something which would be necessary to pay the bills. And you might be able to employ your partner in a low-level clerical work job, but they would also then need to do that low-level clerical work job. Many people with decent careers will also have partners with their own professional career who wouldn't be interested in an 'office manager' role (effectively a glorified secretary).
And let's say you dedicate your best earning years in your 40's to being an MP. There is a good chance your party won't be in government whilst you are an MP. And so that means, even the most talented MPs will never make it into government. So good luck trying to sell yourself afterwards as a 'consultant'. And you can lose your 'job' of course ever 4-5 years, regardless of whether or not you personally have done a good job.
Plus you get all the haters, the people who think you are 'on the take', who think its fair game to insult you (or worse).
Having said all of that, increasing the pay isn't the main solution to solving the quality of MPs as it still leaves all the other stuff which makes the job toxic imho.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff