MP expenses - Our Greg's

[Tealeaf]

Well, most companies will allow employees working away from home to claim for food either on an actual expense or on a per diem basis. The interesting question - given that all MP's appear to have claimed lump sum food expenses - is why were those country MP's who flipped their main home to London allowed to claim?

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by Tealeaf

Well, most companies will allow employees working away from home to claim for food either on an actual expense or on a per diem basis. The interesting question - given that all MP's appear to have claimed lump sum food expenses - is why were those country MP's who flipped their main home to London allowed to claim?

Ya their on double bubble Tealeaf, but to me at most an MP is away 20 days every month, £200 for food, don't think many firms pay that out on top of accommodation exes too

[Tealeaf]

I agree with you Jaysay....I'm just trying to get inside an MP's head to work out how they justified what they did. Anyway, looks like Usher is also quitting as an MP...."in order to spend more time with her family". You would have thought that by now one of 'em would have come up with a different excuse for going. Wouldn't it be refreshing for one of 'em to just own up and say "I'm quitting because I'm guilty of thieving from the taxpayer".

[garinda]

Originally Posted by jaysay

But why should the tax payer pay for food

I don't remember you saying that when the local Conservative councillors recently voted to award themselves massively increased food allowances, whilst on overnight council business.

I have no beef with anyone claiming justified expenses, whilst carrying out the work of public office, though it should be open to public scrutiny, and those expenses should be set by an independent body.
Which they were in the case of H.B.C., but were then superciliously ignored by the ruling council group.

[Taggy]

Why do MP's need to spend so much time in London in this media savvy, technological age?? Surely most of their "London business" could be done in a couple of days per week. Most of their time should be spent in their consituencies, doing the work they've been elected for. There would be no need whatsoever then for second homes, and a more "normal" expenses system could be set up, as in the business community. Parliament needs a radical reform to reflect the times and the abilities of being able to effectively communicate and debate without the need for people to be all in the same location. All MP's should live in their constituencies for at least their parliamentory lives. The main effect that spending so much time in London seems to have had on our MP's, is that they are concentrating more on issue's that are of benefit to themselves and their individual party rather than of the people who made it possible for them to be there!

Best Regards - Taggy

[Tealeaf]

Originally Posted by Taggy

Why do MP's need to spend so much time in London in this media savvy, technological age??
Best Regards - Taggy

To get away from their wives.

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by garinda

I don't remember you saying that when the local Conservative councillors recently voted to award themselves massively increased food allowances, whilst on overnight council business.

I have no beef with anyone claiming justified expenses, whilst carrying out the work of public office, though it should be open to public scrutiny, and those expenses should be set by an independent body.
Which they were in the case of H.B.C., but were then superciliously ignored by the ruling council group.

Massive £10 to £25 Rindi, you've got to remember that MPs have their own homes in the capital, well Greg seemed to have he was claiming for a mortgage, they won't be eating out every night or shouldn't be that's the all purpose of having a home, if you're in London for one night it hard to find a descent meal, it was okay for you whilst you were living there you find these things out, but even so do you think its right to claim £200 a month for food, that's £10,000 bloody pound a year for gods sake, nice work if you can get it

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by Taggy

Why do MP's need to spend so much time in London in this media savvy, technological age?? Surely most of their "London business" could be done in a couple of days per week. Most of their time should be spent in their consituencies, doing the work they've been elected for. There would be no need whatsoever then for second homes, and a more "normal" expenses system could be set up, as in the business community. Parliament needs a radical reform to reflect the times and the abilities of being able to effectively communicate and debate without the need for people to be all in the same location. All MP's should live in their constituencies for at least their parliamentory lives. The main effect that spending so much time in London seems to have had on our MP's, is that they are concentrating more on issue's that are of benefit to themselves and their individual party rather than of the people who made it possible for them to be there!

Best Regards - Taggy

You can say that about every country in the world Taggy, they all have a parliament were they do business, we have local councillors and country councillors to attend to local issues Westminster is about running the country, I now we ain't seen much of that over the last few years but that's the way it was meant to be

[garinda]

Originally Posted by jaysay

Massive £10 to £25

When people, whose income and expenses aren't funded from the public purse, are settling for pay cuts, in order to try and safeguard their jobs, then pecentage wise those figures do equate to a massive increase, in all but an idiot's eyes, or those totally blinded by party political allegiance.

The most amusing, if it wasn't so sickening, of the recent half publications of expenses, surely has to be from George Osborne, the Conservative Shadow Chancellor.

'A trawl through the receipts published today revealed that the shadow chancellor, George Osborne, claimed £47 for two copies of a DVD of his own speech on value for taxpayers' money in 2005.'

David Cameron to repay wrongly claimed expenses | Politics | guardian.co.uk

[Neil]

Originally Posted by jaysay

but even so do you think its right to claim £200 a month for food

No that is wrong. They should pay for food from their wages. Food while on business in hotels etc if different and should be receipted, but normal everyday is wrong.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by jaysay

Massive £10 to £25 Rindi, you've got to remember that MPs have their own homes in the capital, well Greg seemed to have he was claiming for a mortgage, they won't be eating out every night or shouldn't be that's the all purpose of having a home, if you're in London for one night it hard to find a descent meal, it was okay for you whilst you were living there you find these things out, but even so do you think its right to claim £200 a month for food, that's £10,000 bloody pound a year for gods sake, nice work if you can get it

Odd you should be so dismissive about the massively increased expenses we've seen voted in at local government level, against the recommendations of an independent body, when I remember you agreeing with me, in another thread re: the expenses scandal, that what is fuelling the public's anger isn't so much the actual amount of money, but the principle of doing the right thing, or not, as witnessed in so many cases.

Surely we should expect highly principled politicans locally, just as we do nationally?

Otherwise it would be easy to label someone guilty of gross hypocrisy.

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by garinda

Odd you should be so dismissive about the massively increased expenses we've seen voted in at local government level, against the recommendations of an independent body, when I remember you agreeing with me, in another thread re: the expenses scandal, that what is fuelling the public's anger isn't so much the actual amount of money, but the principle of doing the right thing, or not, as witnessed in so many cases.

Surely we should expect highly principled politicans locally, just as we do nationally?

Otherwise it would be easy to label someone guilty of gross hypocrisy.

At local level there was just an upper limit set for overnight expenses and meal allowances which to my knowledge has not been met or is likely to, but its there as a safe guard. Unlike down in Westminster where they have nearly all climbed the maximum for accommodation around £22,000 a year. I've just spent 1 hour looking through these expense accounts and the mind really does boggle, I think the best one really was made by Lib/Dem Lemsip who claimed £19-95 for a super duper wig

[Tealeaf]

The bad news is that the pay review body yesterday reported that MP's were underpaid by 10-15% and that a pay rise of this magnitude would now be in order.

The good news is that come the election, few of the buggars will be around to receive it.

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by Tealeaf

The bad news is that the pay review body yesterday reported that MP's were underpaid by 10-15% and that a pay rise of this magnitude would now be in order.

The good news is that come the election, few of the buggars will be around to receive it.

Buggars Tealeaf, shouldn't that be buggers
A £10,000 rise is in the offing, so its a case of screw the system and get a huge big increase, this just don't happen in the real world only on Planet Westminster

[garinda]

Originally Posted by jaysay

this just don't happen in the real world only on Planet Westminster

Is Hyndburn not in the real world?

Or is the 20% increase in our council leader's allowances, which some councillors voted to award him, too much to comprehend?

Expenses rise sparks fury in council chamber - News - Accrington Observer