Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

MPs expenses - what should they get

JHE said:
I want the MP to be in charge of his or her staff and offices and I think it is fair enough to recruit people who are politically sympathetic to the MP's party and indeed to that particular MP. I don't want some Tory foisted on Dennis Skinner, for example. A convenient way of arranging this is to continue having the MP as the employer.
Click to expand...

As long as they're not employing their son's girlfriend's sympathetic fucking cat to sign off the paperwok whilst divvying-up the entire family with the loot then I suppose it's reasonable enough.
 
Caroline-Flint-fashion-Ca-003.jpg



:eek: - :eek: - :eek:

Caroline-Flint-fashion-Ca-004.jpg
 
Corax said:
There seems to be an assumption here. Democracy = all that is good and holy? :confused:
Click to expand...

I am in favour of democracy. I want more of it, not less.

(I'll try to ignore your silly talk of democracy being "all" that is good and your silly talk of it being "holy".)

I'm afraid I know next to nothing about the tenets of your creed, "fluffy anarchism", but if it proposes a way of organising our lives without democracy, I'm agin it!
 
dennisr said:
"workers mp on a workers wage" :D
Click to expand...

Yes, a good old slogan!

(For the young people here, it should be explained that this was the line of the Militant, forerunner of the Socialist Party, and the Millies did indeed manage to get members elected as Labour MPs.)

Dennis,

1. How much did Fields & Nellist take when they were Labour MPs and how was the sum decided?
2. What (roughly) do you think would be the right amount now?
 
Citizen66 said:
As long as they're not employing their son's girlfriend's sympathetic fucking cat to sign off the paperwok whilst divvying-up the entire family with the loot then I suppose it's reasonable enough.
Click to expand...

Yes, there has been a bit of shit like that. Nevertheless, I wouldn't ban the employment of friends, spouses & relatives.
 
I would. They can always employ their comrades sons and daughters.

Why wouldn't you? And please, i don't care about your technical answer "it's easier blah blah fucking blah" - don't disgrace either of us by posting that shit.
 
What if their employment is shown to be part of a culture of corruption? Which is it has. Clean the stable but leave a load of shit smeared on the kitchen wall.
 
Let MPs choose whoever they want for their little teams. The people chosen have got to be people the MP trusts loads and are quite likely either to be old comrades or new ones with whom there is a high level of political and other co-operation.

Sometimes that will mean employing a husband or wife. There's not necessarily anything corrupt in that.

Margaret Beckett's husband works for her, IIRC. Why shouldn't she be allowed to employ him?
 
The moat cracks me up the most. I've gone beyond anger now, the tories expense revelations are too stereotypical to keep a straight face. Moats and Chandeliers FFS.

lol
 
DotCommunist said:
The moat cracks me up the most. I've gone beyond anger now, the tories expense revelations are too stereotypical to keep a straight face. Moats and Chandeliers FFS.

lol
Click to expand...

I've been guffawing thinking about the dinner party conversations.

"So, what have you got lined up on Sunday then, Peregrine?"

--"Oh, taking the neighbours on a tour around the moat...."
 
JHE said:
Margaret Beckett's husband works for her, IIRC. Why shouldn't she be allowed to employ him?
Click to expand...
Because there is blatant potential for a conflict of interest. Hiring a family member in any organisation in the world, private or public, is pretty much unheard of, unless you actually own the company.
 
Hotels or apart-hotels would be a good idea - but not all the same building, because that would go kaboom the first night the commons had a late vote. These places should also provide free food - even a packed lunch if necessary. Assistants should be able to stay over too.

Money for assistants, but a set sum.

Money for office supplies such as stationery, computers (a reasonable sum), TV licence, tea and coffee and maybe fresh fruit, and so on.

Free public transport travel for the MP and their assistants, and/or mileage costs paid for - not everywhere is accessible by public transport, after all.

JHE said:
I want the MP to be in charge of his or her staff and offices and I think it is fair enough to recruit people who are politically sympathetic to the MP's party and indeed to that particular MP. I don't want some Tory foisted on Dennis Skinner, for example. A convenient way of arranging this is to continue having the MP as the employer. If it can still be done under the system you suggest I don't mind, but I think it might be tricky.

I agree that campaigning expenses should come from the MP or his or her party, not from the taxpayer. However, allowing the MP to do the job involves allowing the recruitment of political supporters to work in the MP's offices etc.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

I'm not sure about hiring friends and family members; what if that person really is the best person for the job? I guess you could have to have some sort of vetting system: a load of tickboxes for all the job skills and experience that every MP's assistants should have, along with proof of such skills and experience.
 
JHE said:
Yes, there has been a bit of shit like that. Nevertheless, I wouldn't ban the employment of friends, spouses & relatives.
Click to expand...

I would ban the employment of relatives. That's the classic MP's expenses scam, employ a spouse as a "secretary", "researcher", or "assistant" thereby significantly increasing the family income whilst providing less of a service for constituents. Nepotism at its worst.
 
Why can't they just build housing complexes specially for MPs to live in as a "second home" if they live in places in scotland or up north or whatever, together with an allowance for paying staff, and that be it?
 
They built them Portcullis House, to the tune of a cool £235 million. Each MP gets a reclining chair to the sum of £440.
 
frogwoman said:
Why can't they just build housing complexes specially for MPs to live in as a "second home" if they live in places in scotland or up north or whatever, together with an allowance for paying staff, and that be it?
Click to expand...

Because they would take the piss in the same way that they did with Portcullis House, and because having to stay in a Travelodge day in and day out would go some small way to punish them for their misdeeds.
 
butchersapron said:
People keep saying Portcullis House, i don't actually know what that is - can someone fiull me in?
Click to expand...

If you go over Westminster Bridge towards Parliament Square, its the modern building on your right. There is a Wikipedia entry on it here, and to say it is somewhat plush would be an understatement.
 
It's a party house then with us paying for it.

165 million for 210 MPs, ok do it again twice, or better buy property cheap as now and then they're done.
 
Or sell the real estate and have the Right Honourable Members set-up camp beds in the Palace of Westminster -- on expenses, naturally. They can supply their own paraffin stoves.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

crossthebreeze
Sex work: attempt by Labour MPs to bring in 'Nordic Model'
Replies
4
Views
862
Lotte
L
S
Help needed to get off the ground please
Replies
0
Views
131
stronggirl
S
Cloo
  • Poll Poll
If Reform got into government, would they make it four whole years?
Replies
13
Views
652
Rebecca Riot
Rebecca Riot
tim
MPs beating people up.
3 4 5 6 7
Replies
202
Views
7K
tim
tim
Aaronf
  • Poll Poll
What people/politicians do you think about and/or dislike the most?
2 3
Replies
85
Views
2K
Aaronf
Aaronf
Back
Top Bottom