Hang on: We're paying for an MP to have his MOAT CLEANED ?

[Wilf]

I thought it was Gummer who did that? Or did Hogg do it too?

She's buried in the moat.

 

[gosub]

...1 fucker to have his . . . moat cleaned.

To be fair the papers would have a field day if a constituent caught Weil's disease whilst trying to get to see his elected representative.

 

[19sixtysix]

I have always said I want a moat.

I had one round my tent at glasto 2 years ago. 'Tis overated.

Clearly the upkeep of the moat is of vital importance to the ability to perform properly as an MP.

As for the swimming pools, how can they relax properly if it's full of sludge?

The moat will be essential to keep the protesting hoards out so within the rules on claiming for security

You can still rant here - I just have! I'm just trying to stop duplicate threads appearing.

I demand a second thread allowance.

 

[Wilf]

Joined up Government...

... why oh, why oh why couldn't Barbara Follett get a moat. She's have been perfectly safe behind that.

 

[danny la rouge]

I thought it was Gummer who did that? Or did Hogg do it too?

I may have them slightly confused, but here is a relevant link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/370863.stm

Like John Gummer, Hogg declared that he was keen for his children to eat British beef.

 

[Doctor Carrot]

I think we should cut the guy some slack. A moat is perfect for shutting out us hoards of peasants, at least he's keeping it clean for us so it's nice to look at.

Douglas Hogg and his entourage tomorrow afternoon

 

[toblerone3]

There's also something quite comical about John Prescott's toilet seats.

 

[danny la rouge]

I've just checked. It was Gummer who had a daughter called Cordelia.

 

[Wilf]

I've just checked. It was Gummer who had a daughter called Cordelia.

Did he serve in that blasted heath government?

 

[_pH_]

Did he serve in that blasted heath government?

oh very good!!!!

 

[danny la rouge]

Did he serve in that blasted heath government?

You know, I watched the clip, and she didn't tell him she loved him.

 

[Wilf]

You know, I watched the clip, and she didn't tell him she loved him.

Lack of ketchup. Relish on is the opinion of the pupil.*








* M Rowson, 'Scenes from the lives of the Great Socialists'

 

[treelover]

Its incredible stuff, the country is literally in uproar, but there is no one to take advantage of it, except perhaps for the far right.

 

[London_Calling]

And this is before the Committee hearings begin. Watching them squirm under questioning should take the fun factor up a notch or two.

 

[treelover]

Its strange but perhaps the real progenitor of all this sleaze, the one who sent NL on its way to neo-liberalism, greed, and PFI, one 'Anthony Charles Lynton Blair' is hardly mentioned, lets stick some blame on him as well

 

[Hocus Eye.]

I think that £2,000 is a very reasonable price to have your moat cleaned. Mine costs me much more than that. The thing is, if anybody falls in your moat and catches some horrible disease and/or dies, you are liable. You could end up paying millions. Your insurance company would not pay up if you had not had your moat cleaned in the last year. I know that there are people who live in 'affordable housing' who sometimes don't have a moat, but this is a reasonable expense for anybody who is anybody. I didn't get where I am today...

 

[London_Calling]

£2,000 is a very convenient amount to spend on your moat not least because it coincides with the value of a second hand car under the scrappage policy. Now, if only they’d extend the scrappage idea to Tory castle moats the mass unemployed could be back in work tomorrow digging fresh defensive positions for those who need them.

Perhaps we could extend the scrappage scheme to include less defensive tools, suits of armour . . . how about two grand off your next Trebuchet or siege tower or catapult?

 

[London_Calling]

Its strange but perhaps the real progenitor of all this sleaze, the one who sent NL on its way to neo-liberalism, greed, and PFI, one 'Anthony Charles Lynton Blair' is hardly mentioned, lets stick some blame on him as well

Nice to be able to pin it on him but it does go way back. I did look at some stuff a few days ago that suggested Mandelson put a lid on all of this in 2002 when things looked like they might get out of hand then.

In its recent form the expenses gig went back to Thatcher, which is a result in a way, but obviously further in different guises.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

A fucking moat?!?!?!?

Love the way the parties are sticking to sterotypes, bog seats and bath plugs for labour, swimming pools, tennis courts and moats for the tories

 

[JTG]

A fucking moat?!?!?!?

Love the way the parties are sticking to sterotypes, bog seats and bath plugs for labour, swimming pools, tennis courts and moats for the tories

kind of shows up the differences - Labour are greasy pole climbing career politicians whilst the Tories still have a lot of independently wealthy types in their ranks

 

[agricola]

And this is before the Committee hearings begin. Watching them squirm under questioning should take the fun factor up a notch or two.

no chance of that happening, after all who sits on the committee....

 

[pk]

A fucking moat?!?!?!?

Love the way the parties are sticking to sterotypes, bog seats and bath plugs for labour, swimming pools, tennis courts and moats for the tories

Enough public pressure and the greedy fat inbred fucks would be forced to pay it all back.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

Enough public pressure and the greedy fat inbred fucks would be forced to pay it all back.

Hmmm, I wonder what the 'Court Of Public Opinion' makes of this, Ms. Harman?

 

[_pH_]

Hmmm, I wonder what the 'Court Of Public Opinion' makes of this, Ms. Harman?

I think that court was adjourned when all this kicked off

 

[tangentlama]

There's also something quite comical about John Prescott's toilet seats.

Decidedly less comical was John Prescott's 2005 £60,000 house challenge:

Plans for £60,000 homes became a reality today as the successful bidders for the first four sites were announced, one of which is Oxley Park in Milton Keynes.

Following tough competition from all six bidders involved at this stage, George Wimpey UK have been selected by national regeneration agency English Partnerships to build their Design for Manufacture homes on the publicly-owned competition site at Oxley Park. This follows the advice of an independent panel of experts.

Design for Manufacture is part of the Government's commitment to deliver decent, affordable homes for everyone - whether to rent or buy - in sustainable communities where people will be proud to live. There is mounting evidence that young couples, families and key workers are finding it increasingly tough to get a place of their own:

* Over the last 30 years we have seen demand for new homes increase by 30% - people are living longer, and choosing to live alone - but house-building rates have dropped by over 50%.
* The mismatch between supply and demand undermines economic stability. There are currently 150,000 fewer workers than jobs in the South East and if nothing is done, that figure will treble by 2027.
* Until the mid 1990s a First Time Buyer paid around 2.5 times their annual income to buy their first home. First time buyers now have to pay more than four times their salary to buy a property, rising to as much as seven times their salary in London.
* By 2026 the proportion of thirty something couples able to afford to buy is set to fall to approximately a third, compared to half of couples today and two thirds in the late 80s, if the country carries on with current building rates.

Announcing the first successful bidders, Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott said:

"People's sons and daughters are finding it increasingly difficult to get a foot on the housing ladder and we need to do all we can to make sure they are not denied the opportunity of a decent, affordable home of their own in future. The £60,000 home competition is breaking new ground, bringing down construction costs and using publicly-owned sites for development. As well as the new homes that will be delivered through the competition, the lessons learned will influence thousands more developments in future.

"We set the bar very high to ensure the winning bids are of the highest calibre in terms of design, cost efficiency and environmental standards. All the finalists have responded well to a very tough challenge, proving it is possible to design affordable, quality homes for £60,000. I am impressed with the way they have all refined and improved their plans during the final stage of the competition and I congratulate the successful bidders who can now bring their designs to life."
http://www.gos.gov.uk/gose/news/newsarchive/338367/

And his 2002 £1bn housing plan: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2135057.stm

And where are we today with it all?
Does anyone know how much these '£60k' houses actually went for in the end? £200,000?

And where are these hundreds of thousands of new homes?

Can't seem to find any evidence of them anywhere

 

[London_Calling]

And you have to wonder what happenes to all the John Lewis stuff when they sell the second homes.

 

[tangentlama]

John Prescott's £60k 'affordable' homes went on sale for £175k.
Total sham.

John Prescott's flagship scheme to build affordable homes for just £60,000 was last night exposed as a sham after the first properties went on sale - for at least £175,000 each.

The Deputy Prime Minister challenged developers to construct more than 1,000 homes on ten State-owned sites at a cost of £60,000 each to help first-time buyers on to the property ladder.

But last night Crest Nicholson, the builder of the first project, admitted that the homes were never going to be sold for £60,000 and that the project had been a victim of Government 'spin'.

'This was never a competition to provide cheap housing,' said a spokesman. 'It was to improve construction efficiency and design and we are satisfied that Crest Nicholson met that criteria. It was John Prescott who linked the £60,000 price to affordable housing. We never gave that impression.'

Mr Prescott had claimed the properties on land chosen by English Partnerships - the Government's housing regeneration quango - would give people on low incomes a chance to buy their own homes.

He said: 'As well as enabling more families and first-time buyers to have a decent, affordable home of their own, the £60,000 housing challenge is raising the bar for the quality of developments.

'By separating the cost of the land from the construction price, we have shown that it is possible to build a home that first-time buyers can afford.'


The 16 properties, being built on an old hospital site at Newport Pagnell, are a mix of two-bedroom flats and houses and are on sale for £175,000 and £195,000 respectively.

State-owned land (i.e. 'ours') - sold off at enormous profit by the Government housing regeneration quango.

Utter sham. Absolutely disgraceful.

 

[stowpirate]

On one side you have a load toffs doing what they know best - capitalist scum! Then you have socialists making buckets full of dosh in property deals. I do not know what is worst? Probably the socialist scum that have sold their souls to the devil. I will possibly not vote again.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

On one side you have a load toffs doing what they know best - capitalist scum! Then you have socialists making buckets full of dosh in property deals. I do not know what is worst? Probably the socialist scum that have sold their souls to the devil. I will possibly not vote again.

Brook cartoon in today's metro had a couple of tories, "Second homes and tax avoidance? That's our party policy!"

 

[tangentlama]

The homes' scam sham is probably worth going to the police over.
Breach of contract and all that. When a government promises hundreds of thousands of new homes, promises £60 affordable new urban houses AND DOESN'T DELIVER whilst it's own quango makes shedloads of profit from the scam, then the government should be held accountable in a court of law.