MP expenses - Our Greg's - Page 4

Neil · 10-06-2009, 07:14

One thing that annoys me is that MP's have second homes in London when their own homes are close to Westminster anyway.

There should be a minimum distance before they can claim for a second home.

jaysay · 10-06-2009, 09:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neil

It does not affect his standing with me at all. If it was within the rules then it is ok with me. If the rules need changing then change them.

If he has broken the rules or made fraudulent claims then I want him out and in court if fraudulent.

Has he broken the rules or made a fraudulent claim?

Well then there was clearly no need to apologies on the front page of the Observer

cashman · 10-06-2009, 09:14

what beats me wi that link rindy, is how can ya vote "Strongly","Very Strongly",or "Moderatly"???

yer either for or against in my book.

entwisi · 10-06-2009, 10:10

I've said that I think each constituency more than 60 miles from London should have to purchase a 3 bed house within 60 miles. Then whatever party or MP is representing that constituency uses that house for teh period of their service. It would have to be decorated in neutral colours and when a new occupant takes over they get a new bed and 3 piece suite, all other contebst are replaced when broken or worn out out of a central gov pot with 'standard' options, i.e. no huge american fridges/50 " plasmas etc

Then there would be no claims of profittering from subsidised mortgages, etc.

The simple fact is if I took a contract in London I would have to pay my own accomodation out of my salary, why doe MPs not, its not like they don't know where the job is now is it? To be given free use of a property would be a very generous offer IMHO.

katex · 10-06-2009, 10:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neil

One thing that annoys me is that MP's have second homes in London when their own homes are close to Westminster anyway.

There should be a minimum distance before they can claim for a second home.

Don't they get less Neil if they are within a certain distance of Westminster ?

I still have no objection to M.P's spending their expenses on furnishing their second home myself .. they spend a lot of their time down there and should be comfortable tantamount to some of the comforts they have at home.

garinda · 10-06-2009, 10:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by cashman

what beats me wi that link rindy, is how can ya vote "Strongly","Very Strongly",or "Moderatly"???

yer either for or against in my book.

I suppose voting patterns of MPs aren't always consistent. On equal rights for example, an MP might vote in favour of some, and not others, hence the grading system.

According to the site Greg Pope has never voted on issues concerned with a more transparent parliament, because on those ten times he's been absent.

http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/mp.php?mpid=1650&dmp=996

I've been informed, by a third party, that his staff refute the claims made in the Observer.

Personally if that is true, rather than silence, I'd be using every possibe medium at my disposal to clarify the matter, and pacify the many very disappointed constituents here in Hyndburn.

jaysay · 10-06-2009, 11:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

I suppose voting patterns of MPs aren't always consistent. On equal rights for example, an MP might vote in favour of some, and not others, hence the grading system.

According to the site Greg Pope has never voted on issues concerned with a more transparent parliament, because on those ten times he's been absent.

Greg Pope compared to 'Transparency of Parliament'

I've been informed, by a third party, that his staff refute the claims made in the Observer.

Personally if that is true, rather than silence, I'd be using every possibe medium at my disposal to clarify the matter, and pacify the many very disappointed constituents here in Hyndburn.

Well if they refute the claims why did he apologies, must have thought he had a case to answer

Neil · 10-06-2009, 12:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaysay

Well then there was clearly no need to apologies on the front page of the Observer

When I think about these MP's who do aplogise I can't help wondering if they are doing it because they think they did wrong or because the public expect them too.

jaysay · 10-06-2009, 16:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neil

When I think about these MP's who do aplogise I can't help wondering if they are doing it because they think they did wrong or because the public expect them too.

Well if I thought I'd done nout wrong wild horses wouldn't get me to apologies, irrespective of what the public think, the apology would be window dressing and nothing else

andrewb · 18-06-2009, 09:20

Greg's expenses have now been released to the public. You can view them here UK Parliament - Allowances by MP - Greg Pope

Tealeaf · 18-06-2009, 09:32

Unfortunatly, there is not much to view - the censors got there first. Unless you have a pair of those magic X-Ray specs, you won't be able to see through all the black paint that has been liberally applied over the gritty detail.

From what can be seen, Greg's expenses don't look too bad, certainly in comparison to that of the Dingle's MP, Mrs "Fill Up My Kitty" Usher. When the poor sods in Burnley get a good look at that lot I doubt if she will be welcome in the town again.

derekgas · 18-06-2009, 09:39

There is still too much misty grey surrounding all of this, either they were working within the rules, and the rules should be changed, in which case nobody need resign, or pay back, but if it is fraudulent, then I'm with Neil, there should be sackings for gross misconduct, payback plus interests and all related costs, and a heavy fine/prison. As it is, the rules are pathetic, and as such, could you then rob a bank, using the excuse 'they provide loans. I didnt realise you had to apply, I thought you could just take it'!

jaysay · 18-06-2009, 10:01

Well I only looked at the first link, think I quit while I'm winning, £200 for food seemed a quite regular expense. I don't know about you lot but £200 a month for grub at the tax payers expense seems a bit rich to me,

Tealeaf · 18-06-2009, 10:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaysay

Well I only looked at the first link, think I quit while I'm winning, £200 for food seemed a quite regular expense. I don't know about you lot but £200 a month for grub at the tax payers expense seems a bit rich to me,

If beer can be classified as food, then this seems quite reasonable to me, given that a pint of bitter is now three quid or more in the capital.

jaysay · 18-06-2009, 10:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tealeaf

If beer can be classified as food, then this seems quite reasonable to me, given that a pint of bitter is now three quid or more in the capital.

But why should the tax payer pay for food Tealeaf, be it bear or anything else, we both have to eat to sustain life and we don't get to claim on expenses. I don't have a problem with mortgage payments, travel etc, but come on food is taking the P***