Total Recall

Lately I am liking more and more the idea of being able to recall Members of Parliament, or in laymans terms, kick them out if we get sick of them.

It's how Arnie got in in California: a percentage didn't like the existing Governor and forced a new election, and he won.

This would be particularly useful right now with all these expenses related resignations, or rather steppings down. As you will know, all of those MPs that have been caught with their snouts in the trough are "stepping down at the next election", although they all say they were intending to step down and that the expenses scandal is nothing to do with it. Right.

They are hanging on because they will receive a £70,000 "readjustment" payment if they simply quit being an MP.

Had they gone now, they wouldn't get it. Had they been recallable, they would most certainly not get it, and I think there should be an option to recall their pension to spend it on something more useful.

I hate Ruth Kelly

Yeah, this snooty pompous Brown "babe" is on the expenses gravy train too.

She claimed thousands of pounds for damage to her second home caused by flooding.

If my house were flooded and damage ran into large sums of money, the first thing I would think is to contact my insurer about it.

But, like all MPs, Ms Kelly first thought "I'll claim it on expenses".

I also find it quite interesting how MPs from all parties are coming out in support of the change in the rules to permit Gurkhas to live in Britain. If they have all supported this for a long as they claim, why does it only happen when support for the Government is at an all time low? Answers on a postcard..

They are all ripping us off

So, finally the grand old tale of how much of our money the Members of Parliament are creaming off to feather their nests is exposed. After all, in a system that allows you to fund a second life on expenses it is not surprising to see all members taking part in it.

The News of the World came up with a cracking promotion this week; just collect tokens to enter a competition to "live like an MP" - food bills paid, mortgage paid, gas and electric paid, home improvements paid. The only downside was that they were only offering £75,000 - about half what an MP claims on expenses every year.

I find it quite funny that over the weekend a special hotline was set up for MPs to come clean about expenses that they feared would be exposed and pay them back before they were. It's a whole web of deceit, and certainly a very very long gravy train. Why is our entire so-called democratic system so institutionally dishonest?

The MPs that have been caught are all coming out now claiming that they never supported the system and how they believe it should be changed. That is mightily convenient. They didn't seem to think about that when they were milking it dry for things such as sit on lawnmowers, under soil heating for their tennis courts and trimming of foliage around their helipad.

One in particular that I despise is Barbara Follett, who apparently is the Tourism Minister (although I would hedge not for long). She happens to be married to a best selling author who himself earns around £15million per year from his books. She claimed £25,000 for security patrols at her second home because she "didn't feel safe".

Some of them are paying the money back but it is important to note that this is only happening because they got caught.

Blame, according to MPs, is planted firmly at the door of the Fees Office for approving claims made, however the Fees Office in turn blames the MPs for submitting claims for frivolous items and says it is not their job to decide whether something can be claimed for or not. Hardly the shock of the century, I know.

Both are at fault.

There is also group of MPs that switch their second home repeatedly around the multiple homes in their property empire in order to claim expenses on each one for renovations. It is a disgrace.

I for one cannot believe Hazel Blears is still an MP after her cynical switching of homes both for expenses purposes and tax avoidance purposes. If it were anyone else they would have been arrested for tax evasion, but since she is Member of Parliament she will no doubt get away with it scot free, disappearing to the back benches in a reshuffle.

The salary for being a MP is hardly paltry, yet I would not be surprised if in the case of most of them their salary goes directly into the bank, unspent. The ease with which some of these MPs are able to pay back tens of thousands of "misclaimed" expenses tells you that most of them have feathered their nest. Mind you, the fact that even unknowns have multimillion pound country retreats and live like aristocracy tells you that.

There was a classic interview on Sky News with former MP Lord Foulkes yesterday where his agenda was clearly to ignore the fact that MPs are lining their pockets and ignore the fact that the Speaker Michael Martin is also doing it and trying to block publication of further expenses claims, but instead assault the interviewer and tell them they don't offer as much value as an MP.

Foulkes is also Scottish and clearly he is friends with the Speaker as he spewed out some rehearsed nobody-to-somebody rhetoric about the Speaker being from Glasgow, where according to him not many people get to the "top". More like he is trying to appease the hard working people from Scotland because he knows they will be livid to see a so called hard Labour man from a Labour heartland living the life of riley at their expense and trying his utmost to prevent anyone finding out about it.

When Foulkes was interviewed on the BBC, he was told the presenter earned £92,000 which according to him is almost twice as much as an MP. He does sort of have a point there in that the BBC is also funded by taxpayers albeit by an optional tax. However, she is not stealing money to supplement her earnings whereas all MPs are. To say an MP earns £67,000 is not the whole story - that all gets banked, and their living costs and any luxuries are all claimed on expenses.

If I got a job in London, I'd have to move there and buy a place to live. If you're a MP, you get it all for free. In fact even if an MP already lives in London, they can and do still claim for another house. That in itself tells you that it's "worth it" for them to do so, if only for the giant profit that they will pocket when they sell it. And it should not be.

They should be provided with a flat in London and the second home allowance should be scrapped. All current second homes should be sold and the profit split in proportion between the public purse and the MP. Paying for food should be scrapped, and paying for any furniture or renovations should be scrapped. This would remove any second home switching in order to abuse the system for more gains.

Even Gordon Brown has made an apology about all this; but why now? He knew about it all along and indeed he was part of it. Same for David Cameron: apparently he went ballistic at some of his party for their expenses claims.

He will have known about it, so please "Dave", give up with the publicity stunts.

The heat is on!

Speaker of the House of Commons Michael Martin is today under intense fire because his wife has been claiming taxi expenses for get-togethers that may not have been related to official business.

Indeed, from what I have heard she had claimed over £4000 in taxi fares to basically pay for her mates to come round to their house for a piss up.

If this is true, Martin must go. His position would become untenable: particularly since he is supposed to be leading an enquiry into MPs bogus expenses claims.

However given that Martin is fighting tooth and nail to stop expenses breakdowns being revealed I think it's reasonable to suggest that there is no smoke without fire on this issue. After all, why else would he be so bothered about it..

Expenses... again

They are at it again. This time the MP's are scrambling to block publication of second home expenditure - and they are spending our money to do it.

A group of MPs led by the Speaker of the House have decided to continue fighting against this publication by taking the issue to the high court. Apparently they were advised by lawyers that they didn't have a leg to stand on and almost everyone thought they would drop it but they haven't.

It seems to me inevitable that they will have to disclose this information. Firstly it's in the public interest and secondly its our bloody money. However the MPs have been bleating that they don't want their addresses published for fears of harassment.

Fine by me, just publish how much they are creaming off to pay for their marble kitchens and plasma televisions. I don't think anyone is bothered where they live.

Of course, we know the real reason they don't want this information in the public domain. The BBC's political editor Nick Robinson (the guy that looks like Judge Jules) summed it up pretty well when he talked about the possibility of several resignations if/when the figures are published.

Whilst MPs operate under a shroud of secrecy with regards to the amount of freebie money they are siphoning off for their own pockets, nobody will trust them.

Secrecy is only needed when there is something to hide.

Con your way, Derek

Derek Conway has today been suspended by the Conservatives after getting caught funding his son with his expenses: your money.

Good. But there are still plenty of others that need to go. Like these greedy bastards (sourced from Sky News/Bloomberg):

£185,421: Shahid Malik, Labour MP for Dewsbury
£178,116: Liam Byrne, Labour MP for Hodge Hill
£173,691: Joan Ryan, Labour MP for Enfield North
£172,733: Dan Norris, Labour MP for Wansdyke
£172,327: Tim Farron, Lib Dem MP for Westmorland & Lonsdale

I'm not surprised they are trying to become exempt from the Freedom of Information Act so they can conceal their expenses. It's mad that they can even consider this: expenses should be transparent and honest but as we all know it's anything but. They seem to want to keep it as muddy as possible so nobody can track how much public money they are siphoning off to fund their families' champagne lifestyle.

Check this one out: last year Barry Gardiner, the environment minister, claimed mileage equivalent to driving his own car to Delhi and back. He has an official government car and is a London MP. Unreal.

David McLetchie, the Scottish Tory leader, could not account for why he had claimed £5000 in "personal" taxi fares. He resigned, but only because he was caught.

This is what these bastards get (from timesonline.co.uk):

Staffing allowance

£84,081 To pay for employees’ pay, pensions and perks

Additional costs allowance

£21,634 To cover mortgage interest for a second property, utility bills, grocery bills, council tax and insurance

Incidental expenses allowance

£20,000 To pay for office and surgery costs. MPs can also pick up £250 every month in petty cash from this allowance

Travel expenses

No maximum(!)


The Capitalist Nightmare

I don't blame them for taking everything they can within the rules. Why not? You'd be a fool not to. We are not in a society where morals matter any more, it's the capitalist pinnacle, or rather the capitalist nightmare. Things admired just because they are expensive. People respected based on earnings and status. Greed and wealth above all else.

Why do young girls all want to be Posh Spice? Is it because she's talented and intelligent? No, it's because she wears expensive clothes, has an expensive lifestyle and is married to someone talked about more because of the money they earn than the sporting talent they have.

Why is Tony Blair being talked about lately? Is it because of his role as a United Nations ambassador? Is it because of the things he has done in his career as a MP and Prime Minister? No, it's because he's now being paid half a million per year by JP Morgan and probably a similar amount by Zurich for basically doing nothing and bullshitting about the global hysteria that is "climate change".

His wife's no different. All we know about her is that she's unattractive and gets paid £300,000 per year defending asylum seekers.

Anyway the rules for MPs expenses must be changed.

Currently they state that employees must be: “employed to meet a genuine need in supporting you, the member, in performing your parliamentary duties; [be] able and (if necessary) qualified to do the job; [and] actually doing the job.”

I've decided that MPs should simply be banned from employing their own family. It's quite clearly wrong that MPs can turn their expenses allowance into their own household income, in many cases doubling their money. It stinks.

Take the housewife that would otherwise be doing nothing; perhaps she answers the phone once in a while? Here's £40,000 a year plus pension and perks for your trouble, love.

Unqualified son studying geography full time at uni? £40,000 over 3 years, son. Shame on you Conway.

MPs are set apart from everyone else. They are in it to win it and take as much cash as possible and do as little as possible for it. There are too many examples of greed and arrogance to deny it so there needs to be a crackdown and anyone caught siphoning money unnecessarily should be out.

The UK is bordering on the Italian style Government where as soon as someone gets on the gravy train so do their whole family. Corruption city. The British Government used to have an integrity that it has now lost with scandal after scandal of outright arrogance and in some cases criminality - whether found guilty or not it does not matter.

Once the smoke starts to billow, it no longer matters whether there is a fire. If you think about Blair and the cash for honours for example, does anyone actually think it didn't happen?

All aboard the gravy train

I was really glad to see Peter Hain (right) fall on his sword the other day. I'd been clamouring for him to be booted out by Gordon since the story that he'd not declared over £100,000 in donations hit the news. At the time Bottler Brown didn't have the guts to get rid of him but once the Police stepped in and started the investigation there was only one possible outcome: especially when it was discovered that over half of it had come channeled through the dodgy "Progressive Policy Forum" think tank.

Not that long ago Harriet Harman was also rumbled for accepting donations via a third party, as was Hilary Benn. Both should have gone. Now we hear that Wendy Alexander and Alan Johnson are being investigated for yet more undeclared donations. Johnson's on the ropes a bit at the moment but I think he might just be able to hang on. His line is that he knew nothing about it, thought it was a genuine donation and is blaming the Electoral Commission for making admin errors. One wonders who will be next. Personally I find this hilarious because this is only happening due to reforms brought in by His Holiness the Right Reverend Tony Blair.

Even if Johnson goes, theres nothing to suggest he wont be back. Same with Hain. Handy Mandy went for undeclared loans from Geoffrey Robinson and he'd already been sacked and brought back once!

Supermarket Sweep

The Harman and Benn cases are unusual. Well they're the same case really. David Abrahams - a very rich property developer - had been pumping money to them for 4 years using false identities. This of course is entirely against the rules and Peter Watts, the general secretary of Labour, admitted that he knew what was going on but told everyone it was OK. So he bit the bullet.

Abrahams wanted to build a business park on a stretch of Green Belt land near Durham and had applied for permission. He made donations to Labour using the identities of the "directors" of the development. The Government had initially objected to Abrahams' plans but then, all of a sudden, the objections were retracted. It has quite an unpleasant smell about it and a cynic may suggest that Abrahams was attempting to influence decision making without anyone knowing who he was. If this is the case the Government are just as guilty in being influenced by cash. Who's surprised about that though?

We've had cash for honours which put a black cloud above the Labour party after several rich businesspeople that gave secret loans to Labour were nominated for honours. Nobody was surprised to see the Police draw a blank, even though they went through the high profile drama of questioning Tony Blair three times. I suppose this was some attempt to convince people that they were actually investigating an alleged crime!

I've heard politicians bleating on about how the system needs to be changed because so many are being caught by it. No. Whats the point in having rules if you're going to change them when people start getting caught breaking them? If politicians cant be bothered to abide by them then they should lose their jobs and be locked up like anyone else would be for money laundering and fraud. Dave Cameron has already castigated them for arrogance which is quite right. One or two forgetful ministers might be overlooked but when they are queueing up to be investigated by the Police I think what Dave said is absolutely true.

Labour have irreparably harmed the public trust in Government. I know, sleaze was a factor in the Conservatives losing office in 1997 (so were all the Conservative policies that Labour stole) but Labour has really taken sleaze and outright corruption to a new level where only those with no more lives left get booted out. You work in a bank, you launder money, you're out of a job and landed in court. You work in the Government and you can easily spin and squirm your way out of it.

This aside many Members of Parliament are simply cash siphoning non-entities that exist only to profit from you. The myth that MPs are local people that are fighting for your rights is exactly that - a myth. I remember in the mid 1990's when my brother used to be involved with the local Conservatives and I somehow ended up meeting our MP at the time which was Harold Elletson. Elletson was incredibly posh, wasn't from our area at all and quite honestly I would have had no idea who he was. I'd never even heard his name before. He was typical ivory tower material. The stereotypical Tory Boy from Harry Enfield & Chums.

Since the Tories were voted out and kept appointing hopeless leaders (apart from Hague) he jumped ship to become a bleeding heart Liberal Democrat and sits on one of those pointless committees these days. He is clearly mad because he went from a party with not many policies to a party with loads of unworkable "taxation nation" ones. On second thoughts, someone that can get paid £70,000 for doing nothing must have some grey matter between their ears.

I've not made a point here yet, I know. Well the point is that Mr Elletson may well have been their MP but nobody knew, nobody cared and he didn't really seem to do much. He took his massive amount of cash per year, probably siphoned a large chunk of expenses and sailed away into the sunset. Lovely.

I've just Googled Mr Elletson and it shows that his successor in 1997 was Joan Humble of Labour. I didn't know this. I don't know how to contact her. I don't know what she stands for. Of course, Mrs Humble is not even from this area and being a Yorkshirewoman will probably be supplying information to Government on how best to extract further tax from us Lancastrians to give to former mining villages in Yorkshire. Such is my cynicism but I make no apologies for it.

Democracy: Power to the Pillocks

It baffles me that people are suckered in to the belief that politicians do things for them or that MPs listen to local peoples' hopes and concerns and try to push them through with a passion. This isn't the case. How can it be the case? As I have already mentioned, MPs are rarely from the local area: they are professionals. If there's a place with no MP or candidate, they go and try their luck. They cry some crocodile tears about local issues, get their face in the newspaper and then disappear. Nothing ever happens that can be attributed to the MP, they are forgotten about and sit there on a pile of money until the next election. Best job ever.

Rt. Rev "Teflon" Tony won such a landslide because he managed to convince people that they were voting for him and not some former coal miner on an anti-Thatcher crusade. An undeniably good move. Check out their 1997 manifesto cover on the left: You're not voting for Prezza you're voting for me!

I've watched Prime Ministers Questions and the House of Commons is packed with mostly disinterested morons. The questions and answers are all pre-set and everyone is reading from a script including Bottler Brown. One Labour MP asked a question and had to keep pausing as she struggled to read her little sheet of notepaper - it must have been an issue that she was really passionate about then! Or maybe she was one of the true Old Labourites that can empathise with the Jeremy Kyle generation: flunked school, can't read and wants the state to provide everything by taking money from those that have a job.

On normal days the House of Commons is empty apart from one person speaking and a couple of half asleep overweight people listening and occasionally grunting a question. What are the MPs doing to justify the enormous salaries and pensions they get? Why are they allowed to pay their own family with their massive expenses budget?

Money for Nothing and your Pension for Free

The Conservative MP Derek Conway was today hammered for using his expenses money to pay his son just under £12,000 a year as well as dishing out bonuses of a few thousand despite his son being on a full-time university course. He's also paying his wife £40,000 per year from his expenses. She must be some office assistant. Conway should have been booted out immediately for this.

Some might suggest this is typical behaviour and I would tend to agree: there there is a history of MPs with their hands in the till reported in the press. We have already seen Scottish MEPs being probed for claiming full rent on property they have sub-let as well as MPs being rapped for paying relations to "work" for them when the work is in doubt. Even the infamous IDS (former Conservative leader Iain Duncan Smith) resigned due to allegations that he was paying his wife a salary for no apparent reason. He was eventually found to have done nothing wrong.

This is a bit of a running theme with politicians, but no smoke without fire I say!

I believe it's 100% wrong that MPs can pay members of their family excessive salaries for menial jobs such as secretarial work, especially since we know that they will do far less work than someone employed by a company to do the same work. There should be limits on what is allowed for certain jobs, or alternatively there should be someone that can make judgements on claims for expenses. There probably is, but unsurprisingly I have no idea who it is or what claims they have ever quashed. Probably none.

Labour have been a source of far more sleaze than John Major's Conservatives were in the 1990's and I think the unrequieted devotion by some to Labour is dissipating - especially now that the Rt. Rev Blair has left and in the true spirit of Labour has taken a £500,000 per year position at JP Morgan in the USA as well as another position as some eco warrior with Zurich group.

The taxes, more taxes and even more taxes ethos brought in by New Labour has caused many staunch Labour voters to lose their affinity with Labour and look for alternatives. This is another article for another day, but I think many people would agree that given the conduct of the representatives of the Government there must be some concern as to their real motives when handling the taxes we work so hard to pay.