Westminster gravy train hits buffers

By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics and access other forums reserved for members. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today by clicking here.

Master of Master Baiters Joined: 06 Feb 2008 Posts: 720

Are non British baiters getting coverage of the expense scandal?

Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 5:30 pm

Here in the US if it's the American Idol finals or there's a missing white chick, we don't hear about anything else. Wink

Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 5:46 pm

Well, in California, the whole 2-1/2 hours of news time can be taken up with a car chase or a brush fire. (The brush fire I understand, especially when homes are in danger; the car chase not so much.)

Otherwise, we have our own political scandals to fill our news shows.

Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 7:46 pm

Hard to cover this without getting into politics. Not locking, just saying.... Wink

The Lord who claimed for having his moat cleaned is obviously a man of the people, and as for all the MPs who are rushing to pay back anything they might have claimed 'inadvertantly', would that work if they caught me shoplifting in Boots?

Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 8:06 pm

I dont know why we mortals get upset at a member of the Aristocracy abusing taxpayers money. I mean it was their ancestors that invented tax on the peasants.
And TBH you wouldn't want your local lord to have a murky moat would you?

Laughing

Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 8:20 pm

Can someone explain this to me:

The BBC World News wrote:

Mr Morley has not had the whip withdrawn Shocked

, which would effectively expel him from the Parliamentary party

Where exactly is he hiding this whip? And why won't he withdraw it?

Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 8:26 pm

Roycropper wrote:

Hard to cover this without getting into politics. Not locking, just saying.... Wink

They are all at it, so it's not really political.
There is a wonderful item about Elliot <strike> Mortgage</strike> Morley at www.dailymash.co.uk

Quote:

MP BECOMES FIRST EVER PERSON TO FORGET HE HAD PAID OFF HIS MORTGAGE

Baiting Guru Joined: 19 Apr 2007 Posts: 3123

I think I shall refrain from commenting, although please do use your imagination to invent a response I might come up with.

** Retired ** Joined: 14 May 2007 Posts: 750 Location: Air

^^^ take his response, add a heap of swearing and shouting, and thats my lot.

Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 9:07 pm

I reckon British MP's could teach the lads a thing or 2 about scamming.

Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 9:15 pm

i think the newsworthiness of the british mps' expenses scandal in the foreign press depends on culture.

i heard a radio item today or yesterday about an indian politician called mayawati,
who receives a huge amount each month from her supporters.
she pockets a percentage and uses the rest to fund her campaign,
and she is quite open about what she does.
she's so popular, she might even get to be president one day (and might get a cabinet seat this time round).

Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 1:55 pm

@bohigal,

Basically MP's who were in olden days Independant wealthy landowners did their own thing. They were not members of a political party.They voted in their own interest rather that a party's interest.

Then political parties came on the scene, MP's were no longer Independant (although recently we did have one who was - campaigned on an anti-sleaze ticket to oust the sitting MP), they no longer there as landowners.

Then in more recent times, as transport links became better, MP's decided it was too much to expect them to return home between sitting, so it was agreed to pay expenses. The idea was to compensate them for overnight accomodation, as usual, they managed to make the rules so vague and loose, you could drive a bus through them. They then discovered that they could claim expenses to provide themselves a "second" home for use during the parlimentary week and then return to their "first" home at the weekend. The UK tax system requires anyone owning more than one residential property to register on as their first - or main - place of residence. This is because any other proerty is deemed an asset and is subject to Capital Gains tax on the profit when sold.
The intention of the expenses was to assist in buying or renting the second home.
Gradually it became acceptable to claim for running costs - aimed a general maintainence - but MP's started to take advantage and claim for everything, furniture, light bulbs, dog food, basically anything they could get away with.

At somepoint one MP must have discovered that by bending the rules, he could claim his "London" second home as his first or main residence and use his expenses allowence to pay for his original first home. Others then jumped on the bandwagon (or Gravey Train) and soon they were all doing it. At least one is accused of having a 2nd home, which was purchased with the aid of expenses (mortgage interest), renovated, the buying a 3rd property, which was declared to be the 2nd home, the old 2nd home became the 1st home and was sold for a large profit which was exempt from Capital Gains Tax, then making the new property the 2nd home thus allowing the mortgage interest to be claimed back, along with the renovation costs - and so on.

Anyway back to the subject in hand, once the MP's grouped together in party's they were expected to agree to vote along the party line. So you had a party that represented the well off, one for the working man, etc.
This worked well, until issues came up that cause MP's to question their own thoughts and some rebeled and voted against the party line. Well! In a democracy, you can't have MP's voting like that, so the office of Whip was introduced. The whip or whips were MP's who could be relied on to ensure the other MP's toe'd the party line. In return the MP's get the "protection" of the party. A bit like joining a trades union. Obviouly those who "take the whip" get the right to expenses, they can progress to Ministerial office.

When an MP mis-behaves (gets caught cheating, defrauding etc) or refuses on point of priciple to vote the party way, he can have the whip withdrawn. This means he remains an MP, but is temporaly not a member of the parlimentary party, has no right to claim expenses, gets no support from the party offices. He still retains membership of the party, as in he is still a card holder, can continue to run his constiuency office, attend local meetings, but is not considered to represent the party itself in parliment.

Should an MP commit Gross-Misconduct, something that really does bring the party's reputation into dispute, then he can be rejected by the party in total. This means, he cannot represent the people oh his constituency as a party MP, only as an independant MP, he will not be available for nomination by the party, in the next election and therefore, unless he has a very very reputation in his constituency, he has no chance of retaining he seat and is effectivly out of a job.

I don't think whips actually carry whips, but who knows? Some of the old traditions of parliment may allow it. Certainly they are allowed to bully the ordinary MP's.

And as we say over here "how do you tell when a politician is Lying?"

When you can see his lips move!

Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 2:22 pm

Craig007 wrote:

please do use your imagination to invent a response I might come up with.

I imagined your response, and was shocked by it. Shocked

We came up with the answer to the problem in the pub last night (as you do, I don't know why they bother with Parliament, just adjourn to the Dog & Duck Smile

). Give them all a Travelodge card for now, after the 2012 Olympics they can have the Olympic village to stay in. If they don't like it, then they can buy a London home at their own expense.

I enjoyed the Daily Mash article, I know exactly when my mortgage becomes paid off. If there was ever an open and shut case of fraud, it has to be Elliot Morely.Even batty Boris has said "I think, frankly, looking at some of these cases it looks to me as though plod needs to come in"

Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 4:14 pm

I thought the moat claim was priceless. Laughing

Glad to see all this dumbing down nonsense we have to endure these days hasn't spread to parliamentarians.

I wouldn't be surprised if the solution they come with is ten times more complicated, riddled with loopholes, and costs three times as much to administer. My faith in them is boundless.

Master of Master Baiters Joined: 06 Feb 2008 Posts: 720

Moor a prison hulk alongside the Houses of Parliament and let them reside there Evil or Very Mad

Baiting Guru Joined: 19 Mar 2007 Posts: 2628

I suspect Craig's reply would involve manure.
Another thing claimed on expenses, though you'd think they'd generate enough of their own

Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 4:39 pm

Doodle Bug wrote:

Are non British baiters getting coverage of the expense scandal?

It's been all over in the media here too .. talk left, grab right seems to be the overall idea.

Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 4:55 pm

This whole farce reminds me of that joke Woody Allen tells at the beginning of Annie Hall.

About the two women at a holiday resort and one says: "The food in this place is really terrible". And the other says: "Yes, and such small portions".

Well, our government are on the fiddle, and for such pitifully small amounts. Waits for hysterical applause to die down...

Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 5:01 pm

HitchHiker wrote:

he can have the whip withdrawn. This means he remains an MP, but is temporaly not a member of the parlimentary party, has no right to claim expenses, gets no support from the party offices. He still retains membership of the party, as in he is still a card holder, can continue to run his constiuency office, attend local meetings, but is not considered to represent the party itself in parliment.

not quite.
he/she remains an mp, so can run a constituency office and claim (or do i mean overclaim?) expenses.

Quote:

Should an MP commit Gross-Misconduct, something that really does bring the party's reputation into dispute, then he can be rejected by the party in total.

those are not the only grounds for resigning from or being ejected from a party.
ken livingstone and winston churchill (twice, i think) left their parties and survived politically.
but they only survived by virtue of their individual standing with the voters, as you said.

Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 5:50 pm

Thank you Hitchhiker and R2D2 for clearing that up! We do have party Whips in the US Congress as well but as far as I can tell, they are making sure their party members show up for important votes.

Posted: Thu May 21, 2009 11:16 am

Another true man of the people, Sir Peter Viggers, has been told to feck off at the next election, after claiming back £1645 for a floating island for the ducks in his lake, as well as 28 tonnes of manure, amongst his £32,000 of gardening claims. Shocked

LINK

If he had a moat, we'd have paid for that too.

Posted: Thu May 21, 2009 11:36 am

Dear Friend,

It is my pleasure to contact you for a business venture which I intend
to establish in your country.Though I have not met with you before but
considering the happenings in my environment, I believe one has to risk
confiding in success sometimes in life. I am British MP and have been fiddling
my expenses for several years. There is a sum of fifteen Million
U.K pounds(£15,000,000.00) which i deposited in foreign Account in
Europe. Now I have decided to invest these money in your country or
anywhere safe enough outside England for security and political reasons.

Posted: Thu May 21, 2009 11:39 am

That paragon of English loveliness Joanna Lumley has just stuck one on the government over the Gurkhas rights to live here issue.

The bookies will give you 1000/1 on her becoming the next speaker of the house. If there was a way that could happen, she'd win any vote.
Esther Ransen is tipped to become an MP. It's been staring us the face all the time and we didn't see it. What we need is more celebs running the country.

Edit to add. Esther Ransen was a consumer rights champion among other good things.

Posted: Thu May 21, 2009 11:44 am

^^^^ I can just see the ballot paper for the next general election

[ ] Chantelle from Big Brother (Conservative)

[ ] The blond one from that boy bank that split up 5 years ago (Labour)

[ ] Some bloke who appeared as an extra in Emmerdale in 1979 (Liberal)

Posted: Thu May 21, 2009 11:51 am

^ Anythings possible at the moment. A monkey would walk it against most of the incumbents. Laughing

Joking aside, I think we'll get a lot of independents coming through in the next general election. That should stir things up.

Westminster gravy train hits buffers	View next topic View previous topic