No need to alter MP perks.
Posted by: u5227470736789439 on 11 May 2009
It seems that a minority of MPs have managed modest or very modest claims against costs, which are entirely unobjectionable.
I would argue that MPs have given themselves enough rope to hang themselves with the current self-enacted system.
This is a very good thing as it has allowed some of them to make proper fools of themselves, and thus demonstrate their true colours in a way their dissembling mouths do not adequately seem to do.
This is a very useful information and should be used in helping memebrs of the electorate form a judgement about whom they choose to vote for at the next election.
What is splendid is that the Daily Telegraph has had the bravery to publish these details, and thus once again demonstrating that the real guardians of democracy in the UK are not the elected Memebers of Parliament, but the free press.
What we need is not a change in the rules, but to leave this self hanging rope there so that the free press can trap greedy pigs with their snouts in the trough!
Discuss, ... if you like!
ATB from George
PS: I am inclined to think that a greater turn out at the election would be likely if there were one more line than traditionally on Ballot Papers. One which read
"None of the above."
If the "None of the aboves" formed the largest single block of votes than all the candidates selected by their sponsering parties would be rejected and a new election of a different set of candidates should be sprung following deselection of the existing crew and selection of a new collection more worth voting for.
Thus there would be no reason why people like Gordon Brown should ever darken the gangway of the House Of Commons again, which I would consider to be a very good thing ...
Posted on: 31 May 2009 by Don Atkinson
quote:
"I confirm that I incurred these costs wholly, exclusively and necessarily to enable me to stay overnight away from my only or main home for the purpose of performing my duties as a Member of Parliament."
worth your while buying a cd player to stop the record that is stuck in the groove.
Cheers
Don
Posted on: 31 May 2009 by Don Atkinson
quote:
Why should they get special treatment? MPs are not above the law & those guilty of crime(s) should be treated like any other person.
Read what I said. the guilty should be prosected. Those who feel, with hindsight, that the "spirit" might have changed due to recent events, can opt to refund. No real obligation. No legal requirement. No guarantee of re-selection.
cheers
Don
Posted on: 31 May 2009 by u5227470736789439
quote:
No guarantee of re-selection.
No political party is going to leave those who are seen to have shown pooor judgement in this issue to be rejected by the electorate. De- and re-selection is going to be on a precautionary basis, I am sure.
Thus the justice may actually be a little tough in some cases, but I have already explained [earlier in this thread] that this is fairer than much else in life, and much fairer than poor people paying taxes to keep greedy bastards in the life to which their lack of conscience has allowed them to become accustomed.
Good job too, I say ...
ATB form George
Posted on: 31 May 2009 by Don Atkinson
quote:
much fairer than poor people paying taxes to keep greedy bastards in the life to which their lack of conscience has allowed them to become accustomed.
Good job too, I say ...
OOOhhh!
Sour grapes? Most unlike you Fredrik
If they ARE guilty of a crime, prosecute.
Cheers
Don
Posted on: 31 May 2009 by u5227470736789439
No Don,
Certainly not sour grapes, but rather the wrath of frustration that the actions of MPs who have insufficient scruples will cause idiots from Parties like the BNP to get more votes, among other rather important issues like the lowered standing of the UK in the World as being at least a bastion against corruption [etc].
The issue is far more important than the politcal careers of a few morally feeble people who failed to demonstrate the understanding of the difference between the moral right and the moral wrong. People have been excecuted for less without an outcry in the past.
For not knowing the difference between right and wrong.
Yes for our political servants I will make that comparison.
We have the right to expect and insist on these people displaying a knowledge of the difference between right and wrong. We have the right to insist that they are people who are respectable. We have the right to insist that those who are not respectable leave office and find a job somewhere where their mercenary methods will do less harm to the country.
Ultimately we have the right to force change until we have what we need as a system of governance that is good for the country.
After all if the system and the people who opperate it are not fit for the purpose then we would, as a people, be remiss to fail to act to put things right.
If things get worse due to the general population having not acted to ensure things improve then we shall have no one to blame but ourselves.
It is not just our right to insist that things are put right, that currupt and scruple-free people are removed from office [and so on], but our absolute responsibility.
ATB from George
Posted on: 31 May 2009 by Christopher_M
Good stuff George.
Best, Chris
Posted on: 31 May 2009 by 555
"I confirm that I incurred these costs wholly, exclusively and necessarily to enable me to stay overnight away from my only or main home for the purpose of performing my duties as a Member of Parliament."Worth repeating until you grasp it Don.
Posted on: 31 May 2009 by QTT
You voted these people (read jerks) into office so you would of course accept all the consequences of your decision, would you not?
Posted on: 31 May 2009 by u5227470736789439
The trouble is that assessing whether any of them are much use takes the risk of electing them in the first place.
What would be really silly would be to return the corrupt ones after learning of the lack of scruples.
Better to give someone else a chance than return those that we know are useless ...
ATB from George
Posted on: 31 May 2009 by Guido Fawkes
quote:
You voted these people (read jerks) into office
I didn't.
Don't vote - it just encourages them.
Posted on: 01 June 2009 by tonym
So what happens next? The despicably corrupt MPs go, to be superceded by a new crop of MPs who presumably are lilly-white, but of course (and quite rightly) will be operating under a new set of rules.
Would they, operating under the old "Guidelines", somehow be free of the temptation to pop in the odd dubious claim? I very much doubt it, but we'll never know. Meanwhile, chances are we've lost more than a few MPs who were actually very good at their jobs in the clear-out.
Posted on: 01 June 2009 by 555
Posted on: 01 June 2009 by Guido Fawkes
quote:
So what happens next? The despicably corrupt MPs go, to be superceded by a new crop of MPs who presumably are lilly-white
That sounds a good plan - hope it works.
Posted on: 01 June 2009 by tonym
Dream on ROTF...
Posted on: 01 June 2009 by 555
Posted on: 03 June 2009 by 555
So farewell Hazel Blears.
We'll always miss you, but you were a bit of a fcuk up!
Posted on: 08 June 2009 by 555
Posted on: 08 June 2009 by u5227470736789439
Seems to me that this affair has affected both main parties going on the European elections at least.
Certainly the damage done to the reputation of the class we generally call politicians is going to take a while to be repaired.
However, the eclipse of the Labour Party looks to be all but complete.
And in spite of all the spin from Blair and Brown. they have finally been seen for the masters of situation that they certainly were and are not.
It might have been predicted that things would go rapidly wrong once Blair left office - a rat always knows when to leave a sinking ship. I wish I had seen it.
Seems that in this instance Blair's instincts were on the ball.
ATB from George
Posted on: 09 June 2009 by Don Atkinson
George,
Local elections and European elections are used by (the few) voters who bother, as a very British way of "protest".
The General Election will paint a different picture.
Cheers
Don
Posted on: 09 June 2009 by u5227470736789439
Dear Don,
Who has your money on winning the GE and what will their majority be?
My guess is that, at the least, the Labour Party will become a rump not so much larger than the current Lib-Dem group in the House of Commons, and this would be nothing but a good thing in my view.
The Labour Party really needs to sort itself out in my view ...
Unfortunately I think the Tories also need to sort themselves out. I hope the Lib-Dems manage a role either as largest opposition Party or as the Party of Government.
ATB from George
Posted on: 18 June 2009 by Christopher_M
Well the report's out today with the relevant address sections blacked out (as foreseen by 555), so we wouldn't have become aware of 'flipping'.
And yet still some will say the Telegraph's journalism was bad journalism. I wonder if comparison of their list with the House of Commons' list will yield further interesting points?
Best, Chris
Posted on: 18 June 2009 by u5227470736789439
The entire Telegraph report will appear as a supplement on Saturday.
I would tend to give it more credance than anything put out by politicians of whatever stripe.
I thought journalism was dead in the UK but this proves otherwise ...
It is probably the most significant piece of journalism in the UK this century.
ATb from George
Posted on: 18 June 2009 by Christopher_M
Thanks George for that. Though not a Torygraph reader by inclination, I will be snapping one up.
Best, Chris
Posted on: 18 June 2009 by u5227470736789439
Yes,I shall be getting mine as soon as the shops open.
Not a publication to miss for anyone who wants to know about the moral rectitude [as opposed to ability to work to rules to advantage] of their current MP.
It should be distributed free to every voter in my view.
ATB from George
Posted on: 18 June 2009 by Don Atkinson
quote:
It should be distributed free to every voter in my view.
I can't see the Telegraph being that generous, no matter how much advertising space they have managed to sell!!
I suggest that anybody on here who considers any MP has broken the law should bring a private prosecution (or 643 prosecutions) rather than just whinging. i can't see very many being successfully prosecuted by any of the usual agencies.
If their MP (or any of the others for that matter) have simply broken some "moral code", well, whinge away for 12 months then make your vote count. eg Vote in the BNP candidate who promises not to "milk" the system.!
To be honest, I am deeply disappointed that no prosecussion has been brought to date - it would help clarify what the "rules" really are.
Cheers
Don
