NIK

Another pig with its snout in the trough!

44 posts in this topic

Following on from Jacqui Smith, and countless others, another cabinet minister ,Tony Mcnulty has his snout deep in the expenses trough.

Once again of course he's not broken any rules - apart from those of morality.

And once again the other parties are conspicious by their silence, as of course if they drew attention to it we'd find that they're all at it too!

And these people dare to try and moralise and legislate for us. :D

It's time they were given a good pay rise and ALL expenses, together with second jobs were abolished. The pay rise being on condition not only that they have only the one job but that they attend a certain number of commons sittings or they don't get paid.

They really are absolute scum. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's time they were given a good pay rise and ALL expenses, together with second jobs were abolished. The pay rise being on condition not only that they have only the one job but that they attend a certain number of commons sittings or they don't get paid.

I agree with you. The problem is it is never a good time for a government to increase the salary of MPs. As a result they have come to see the allowance system as something that it is fine to milk to the limit, as compensation for being denied a salary commensurate with the resposnsibility and pressure of the job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We already know that the other parties are at it, or at least some of them. It is hard to see why Derek Conway (Tory) was not thrown out of Parliament for his disgraceful behaviour.

If I was sitting in judgement, he would forfeit his pension too :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NIK, the problem is that what they are doing is not illegal, they are simply taking advantage of a badly flawed system.:D:(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's time they were given a good pay rise and ALL expenses, together with second jobs were abolished. The pay rise being on condition not only that they have only the one job but that they attend a certain number of commons sittings or they don't get paid.

QUOTE]

Don't agree: this will give us more of the professional politicans with no experience outside politics. Better to cut the Parliamentary job to 2 days per week & pay for an hotel each of those nights, leaving them to do whatever they want for the rest of the week. That would (a) be cheaper than at present and (:D reduce the amount of time that they can spend whittling away our liberties on everything from hunting to smoking in pubs and hiring call-girls..... &, no, I neither hunt nor smoke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i thought people went into politics for the common good

now they just seem to be in it for the money

no wonder they are divirced from reality

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i thought people went into politics for the common good

now they just seem to be in it for the money

no wonder they are divirced from reality

I had always thought they went into it for their own good, common to them, and as a result they are richer and having a good larf too at the ordinary people's 'expense(s)' :D:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would scrap their pension scheme, why should the taxpayer ie us have to fund their pensions????????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe their pensions should be linked to how often they attend Parliament. Then they might actually bother to attend the Commons and they'll have less time to out in fraudulent/ethically dubious, expenses claims.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see Brown has now ordered a 'wide ranging enquiry' which will look into expenses and second jobs.

However it seems it will take years and enquiries are often nothing but a whitewash.

I suppose it does at least show he is finally becoming aware of just how negatively the electorate now percieves the whole lot of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I see Brown has now ordered a 'wide ranging enquiry' which will look into expenses and second jobs.

However it seems it will take years and enquiries are often nothing but a whitewash.

I suppose it does at least show he is finally becoming aware of just how negatively the electorate now percieves the whole lot of them.

How can something like that take a YEAR???! I'm sure most of us could do it in a couple of months at the most!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's time they were given a good pay rise and ALL expenses, together with second jobs were abolished. The pay rise being on condition not only that they have only the one job but that they attend a certain number of commons sittings or they don't get paid.

QUOTE]

Don't agree: this will give us more of the professional politicans with no experience outside politics. Better to cut the Parliamentary job to 2 days per week & pay for an hotel each of those nights, leaving them to do whatever they want for the rest of the week. That would (a) be cheaper than at present and (:D reduce the amount of time that they can spend whittling away our liberties on everything from hunting to smoking in pubs and hiring call-girls..... &, no, I neither hunt nor smoke.

Agree to a point, but what "profession" did most of the "current bun(ch)" have before entering the house. Lawyers, the "odd" journalist or PR guy.

They are on a different planet from the wealth creators, as lawyers they protect the position of others. As journalists they tell stories, as PR people, they spin.

None of their chosen professions create wealth, they leach wealth and vamp us through taxes.

Lets get people like Boris J,Hessaltine, Felix Dennis, Alan Sugar, Richard Branson, Philip Green, etc to teach them business 101.

Please lets do something before Gordon borrows more of my future earnings to pay to the banks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I see Brown has now ordered a 'wide ranging enquiry' which will look into expenses and second jobs.

However it seems it will take years and enquiries are often nothing but a whitewash.

I suppose it does at least show he is finally becoming aware of just how negatively the electorate now percieves the whole lot of them.

And what is the point of the enquiry. At the final stage it is the members of parliament who vote on their salary and on their expenses. A commentator said today, the only time this can change is when there is a new parliament and a whole new bunch of fresh faced MPs who have not grown fat on their expense claims.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And what is the point of the enquiry. At the final stage it is the members of parliament who vote on their salary and on their expenses. A commentator said today, the only time this can change is when there is a new parliament and a whole new bunch of fresh faced MPs who have not grown fat on their expense claims.

An MP's salary of £63K is not very high, but it is unfortunate - and inevitably open to abuse - that this has to then be made up through a system of allowances of up to about a further £200K. The lack of auditing of these allowances on the basis that MPs are honourable men (and women) is laughable!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although these "abuses" of priviledge are not illegal they certainly are immoral! Perhaps they should get a higher salary, fund their own pension and only get travel expense provn by receipts or mileage driven!

It would also be a great education if each MP had to spend 1 week with either a police unit or ambulance crew and get an insight of the real social issues!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So an MPs salary of 63k is not very high??? Its a damn site more than i get and I suspect most people on this board. And I still cant see why MPs should get a pension.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So an MPs salary of 63k is not very high??? Its a damn site more than i get and I suspect most people on this board. And I still cant see why MPs should get a pension.

I really don't think it's that high considering the job they do - although we'll obviously differ on that.:mad: But why shouldn't they get a pension just like you and me? :cool: Admittedly their pension accrual rate is pretty good, but comparable with that of much of industry until a few years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So an MPs salary of 63k is not very high??? Its a damn site more than i get and I suspect most people on this board. And I still cant see why MPs should get a pension.

What you have to remember is most MP's gave up a salary in excess of £100k as solicitors etc - a GP earns that nowadays! I would love a salary of 63k but haven't done the years of study etc.

Not defending them but just trying to show where I am coming from!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What job do they do exactly? And Scottish, Welsh and Northern Ireland MPs do a damn site less than their English counterparts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this came up on BBC1's Question Time last Thursday (26.3.09)

the usually loquacious Tory MP Eric Pickles put up a less than articulate defence of housing allowances

roundly condemned by audience members and some fellow panelists alike

Caroline Lucas from the Green Party was oddly mute though

hardly surprising, as an MEP, they are the worst of the lot for travel and accommodation expenses

gravy train doesn't begin to describe it, and MEPS are an atrocious waste of our money

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I dont know why any MP with a constituency with say a 60 mile radius of London needs a second home.

Some of you may remember David Steeles attempt to get on the gravy train when he became presiding officer of the Scottish parliament(or as Blair called it a parish council). The git only tried to get an offical residence funded of course by the taxpayer!! Unfortunately for him the scottish parties banded together and told him where to go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So an MPs salary of 63k is not very high??? Its a damn site more than i get and I suspect most people on this board. And I still cant see why MPs should get a pension.

It may well be more than you get, but I don't believe it is high for the responsibility and pressure of the job, including lack of privacy, and for most, little job security. If you pay peanuts, you get monkeys. Having said that, I do not believe that most politicians go into it for the money. As public servants they have as much right to a pension as anyone else employed by the state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have to ask why they gave up being a solicitor or barrister to become an MP, I think with a lot of them they werent particuarly good at being lawyers!

As for the "pay peanuts get monkeys" well as Im on a lot less than them an I a monkey? And far too many MPs fail to hold the executive to account and do indeed behave like the three wise monkeys, not seeing or hearing evil. But they do tend to speak evil when spinning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What responsibilty does a back bench MP have???? And as an MP they are not working a five day week as such. Yes they have surgeries (mine has one a fortnight!) but do Scottish Welsh or N Ireland MPs have them? After all Westminster has devolved almost all powers to the parliaments/assemblies except for foreign affairs, defence and fiscal matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What responsibilty does a back bench MP have????

They are responsible for making our laws. £60k is about what a half-decent IT Systems bod would be on in London.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now