MEPS expenses .......

[ellal]

Which is what EU bureaucrats do, leave, cross over the road and go and work for one of the 30,000 lobbying companies with offices in Brussels.

Which is what MP's do - and even before they have left office!
(Check out Hunt and and his family links to private healthcare providers for example)

But what point are you trying to make?

A bizarre theory that corrupt EU elected representatives are worse than corrupt UK elected representatives?

 

[GhostofRedHerring]

Would you advocate the same for your own business expenses here then?

That is exactly what I did.
A few years ago, we had to complete a monthly expenses claim, mainly for travelling. This was subject to checking etc, thus wasting time.
From some claims it was obvious that some were 'boosting' their earnings by spending an inordinate amount of time travelling, and therefore not working effectively.
I argued that a) travelling was not an effective use of one's time and b) each should receive a set amount and it should be left to the individual to work most effectively, as they see fit, i.e. use of phone or conference calls, and other communications, rather than always travelling for face to face meetings.

It was trialed for a while before the obvious individuals (those who wasted so much time travelling) veto'd it for a return to monthly expenses claims.
I can fully understand why an organisation would adopt a similar policy of a fixed sum for expenses.

 

[Brigadier]

And how does that sit with HMRC?

I appreciate the efficiency, but it sits counter to the general principle of transparency in their dealings.

 

[noseall]

what ever business model works I guess.
I would rather everyone had £5 grand rather than a few greedy bastads milking the entire budget with £50k each.

 

[Brigadier]

what ever business model works I guess.
I would rather everyone had £5 grand rather than a few greedy bastads milking the entire budget with £50k each.

However, the HMRC deal with what they'd rather, rather than what you'd rather.

Sorry about the rathers.......

 

[Brigadier]

what ever business model works I guess.
I would rather everyone had £5 grand rather than a few greedy bastads milking the entire budget with £50k each.

Plus, some have no need for £5k in genuine expenses, whereas others may have for £50k.

 

[GhostofRedHerring]

And how does that sit with HMRC?

Genuine expenses for carrying out their vocation. Plenty of previous genuine claims to support that argument.
Also promotes efficient and greener practices.
What's not to like?

I appreciate the efficiency, but it sits counter to the general principle of transparency in their dealings.

If transparency is more important than efficiency, so be it.
But the same applies to plenty of other types of expenses, e.g. some organisation will pay an overnight subsistence allowance if the employee is, say more than 100 miles from office (not home) at the end of the day. otherwise it is travelling expenses. Usually that allowance is a fixed sum, if the employees chooses to stay at the Ritz, or in some hovel they still receive the same amount. In some cases, if a stay in a cosmopolitan city is required, either a properly audited expense claim is required or the organisation makes (and pays direct) the booking.

There are so many examples of fixed rate expenses.
Another example, for entertaining, say clients, if the client is not really important at all the venue might be Smokey Joe's cafe. Otherwise the venue might reflect the importance of the client. If the same fixed expense applies regardless, it is swings and roundabouts.

Another example, Car hire expense, if one wants to arrive in style to impress, one hires a classic car, or a helicopter, otherwise it is a budget rental.

I don't know who introduced the issue as a point of order, but from my experience it is common practice and a preferred, more efficient approach.
If employees/politicians choose not to utilise that expense allowance and pocket the cash, they should not be employees/politicians in the first place!
Unless, of course, they have driven the model of efficiency to the limit.

 

[GhostofRedHerring]

Plus, some have no need for £5k in genuine expenses, whereas others may have for £50k.

One makes the assumption that we are talking about the group of people all on the same pay grade, or more or less doing the same job.
Obviously a minister of state will require a greater budget than a backbench MP.

 

[ellal]

Obviously a minister of state will require a greater budget than a backbench MP.

The budget of a state official is down to the relevant department.

An MP's constituency funding requirement should be no different whether they be a minister or a backbencher!

 

[Notch7]

But what point are you trying to make?

I was merely responding to your point:

But there should be no second/third/fourth jobs, and no switching to a private company in a related field for 5 years after losing/resigning a seat.

 

[GhostofRedHerring]

The budget of a state official is down to the relevant department.

An MP's constituency funding requirement should be no different whether they be a minister or a backbencher!

Sorry, yes I was referring to their ministerial role, not their constituency funding.

Incidentally, one can hardly complain about high administrative overheads, and complain about administrative efficiency savings at the same time.

 

[ellal]

I was merely responding to your point:

But do you think that corrupt EU elected representatives are worse than corrupt UK elected representatives?

Yes or no?

(After all you have only pointed out EU figures whilst not even paying lip service to our own home grown problems)

 

[noseall]

others may have for £50k.

I guess those people need to look to streamline their working practices or try a different job.

 

[noseall]

But do you think that corrupt EU elected representatives are worse than corrupt UK elected representatives?

This thread is a dig at the EU and not particularly about expenses. Most of which is fantasy.

 

[GhostofRedHerring]

They may not be corrupt just because their expenses go into their own account.
I cannot possibly imagine that their expenses are precisely £4,000 per month.
A politicians expense claims are only partly predictable (on diarised election dates).
Therefore, if they see an expensive month arriving in a couple of months time, it is absolutely natural that they may accrue some additional expenses. What to do with the spare expenses in the meantime?
Swings and roundabouts.