MPs told to repay £1.35 million overclaimed expenses.

[D_Hailsham]

Everybody will have heard about this on the TV news programmes or read about it in the papers.

But how many of you know:

1. The cost of the investigation was more than the amount to be repaid.

2. The total amount claimed in expenses over the period investigated was £55.5 million, so the amount to be repaid is only 2.34% of the total claimed.

Was it really worth all the fuss and expense?

 

[Bodgeit and scarper ltd]

If we stole from our place of work we would be sacked and may end up in prison. these scum seem to get away with anything.

 

[Trazor]

These scum seem to get away with anything.

It appears that four of them, may not do so.

 

[D_Hailsham]

If we stole from our place of work we would be sacked and may end up in prison. these scum seem to get away with anything.

So you have never "borrowed" a paper clip or a sheet of paper from work??

The real culprits are not the MPs but the staff of the "Fees Office", whose job was to monitor the claims and check that they were allowed. Many of the amounts to be repaid are for duplicated or over payments, which would have been picked up by the office staff if a proper control system had been in place.

 

[Steve]

The real culprits are not the MPs but the staff of the "Fees Office", whose job was to monitor the claims and check that they were allowed. Many of the amounts to be repaid are for duplicated or over payments, which would have been picked up by the office staff if a proper control system had been in place.

At the end of the day, the staff in the fees office are in a lower job than the MPs. Is it really their place to tell an MP "you cant have/do this" or "pull the other one"?

And stealing from work, IMO is totally different. Who pays your wages? Customers who CHOOSE to do business with you. Who pays for MPs expenses? Taxpayers, who are FORCED TO. I'm not saying its ok to steal from work, but its not as bad as what these crooks are doing.

Get shot of all property allowances totally.
Put up MPs who wish to remain close to their work in a big hostel.
If they really want to do the job (and arent just in it for the money), then they wont mind.

But the country is run by these crooks, they arent going to change the system if it leaves them more out of pocket!

It a no-win situation.

 

[D_Hailsham]

At the end of the day, the staff in the fees office are in a lower job than the MPs. Is it really their place to tell an MP "you cant have/do this" or "pull the other one"?

You could apply that reasoning to any similar situation where staff are submitting expense claims which have to be checked by junior staff in the accounts office. The only real difference is that claims usually have to go through managers for approval before submission. This does not happen as MPs do not have "managers".

Who pays for MPs expenses? Taxpayers, who are FORCED TO.

Yes; and you have to pay less than £1 a year towards the total expense bill of the MPs. Big deal. I suggest you deduct it from your next Income Tax payment if you feel so strongly about it.

 

[Deluks]

Do you really think that 55.5 million people in this country pay income tax?

 

[RedHerring]

1. The cost of the investigation was more than the amount to be repaid.

2. The total amount claimed in expenses over the period investigated was £55.5 million, so the amount to be repaid is only 2.34% of the total claimed.

Was it really worth all the fuss and expense?

I think that you've completely missed the point.
For instance, if some toe rag stole the radio from my car I would expect the police to expend more money in apprehending the villain and punishing him than the worth of the radio.
It's all part of the prevention of further crime.

What really annoys me is that criminals are required to compensate their victims, to a degree. All that these fidddling bu99ers have to do is apologise and repay the money. Justice for all? I don't think so.

And I don't accept the argument about retrospective judgement has been applied. Maybe it was 'part of a culture' when the claims were submitted but that doesn't make it foregivable.

Some, IMO, have not learned anything.
For instance the to55pot that claimed to represent Erdington, the one that did the web send-up of David Cameron and was nearly disowned by his own party:
Well, he was dead set against an elected Mayor for Birmingham. Now he's had to repay some expenses, probably doesn't fancy his chances in the forthcoming selection process and election. So, guess what? He's now decided the elected Mayor of Birmingham would be a good thing so he's going to campaign for that job now. The real annoying thing is: He's arguing that Westminster does nothing for Birmingham so he wants to be the Mayor. Well, he didn't think like that when he was fiddling his expenses!

 

[ellal]

These scum seem to get away with anything.

It appears that four of them, may not do so.

it appears that they are to claim 'immunity' from prosecution...one rule for us, one for them.

Link

 

[RedHerring]

I think the complete culture of expenses needs some radical re-thinking, not just for MPs but for all public servants. Many years ago I became aware of other staff, of the same level as me, making journeys that I deemed unneccesary, in order to bump up their expenses. I know of at least one occasion when I required some paperwork from another site and the manager offered to deliver in person. I said that a fax would do and he admitted that he'd prefer to bring it in order to help with the cost of the car via increased expenses. He brought the original and when I arranged for it to be delivered back, by post, he made some excuse for it to be collected, by him.

Later, in a higher role, I argued and won, for a level playing field on expenses. Not, as you inccur expenses, but a grant of the same value to all required to travel as part of their role. My argument was that the managers that travel more were actually spending more time driving, therefore not working, as much as their counterparts. We all had a similar geographical range of responsibilty. I demonstrated that some managers were spending a whole day each week driving. If the expenses were a grant of equal value it would encourage managers to expend it wisely, not to mention the time saved in completing and checking expenses forms.

That system was instigated but only remained in force for two years before some managers argued and won for the previous system to be re-introduced. It was obvious why.

 

[JohnD]

So you have never "borrowed" a paper clip or a sheet of paper from work??

you are drawing a parallel between taking a paper clip, and repeatedly fiddling your expenses to the tune of many thousands of pounds?

 

[Steve]

I think the complete culture of expenses needs some radical re-thinking

Exactly, it does. But like I said earlier, they are the ones running the system that they exploit to its full potential for their own benefit. It will never be reformed. Its a racket.

IMO the PM should take decisive action. Close down the expenses office and re-write the rulebook. Then re-open the expenses dept.

New rules:

No more second home allowance. If MPs wish to continue their duties but live too far away to commute, they must reside in the communal halls or selected (budget) B&B's close to parliament.

No fuel allowance for commuting to and from parliament. It is to be considered a permenant place of work, and as in most professions, no fuel allowance will be paid for this. Overnight accomodation will be provided close to parliament so that commuting shall be reduced.

 

[Bodgeit and scarper ltd]

If we stole from our place of work we would be sacked and may end up in prison. these scum seem to get away with anything.

So you have never "borrowed" a paper clip or a sheet of paper from work??

no

paper would be no use to me as i do not write

when i left school i was told not to look for a job as no one would employ me.

always got people to work for me

 

[Norcon]

As always once the media storm dies down it will be back to their bad old ways.

The toffs are in control so just get used to it and keep paying you're taxes diligently.
I've just had an asessment done going back 5 years and the IR have managed to scrape the barrel a bit cleaner and have billed me for £720.
With the usual pay up or pay the consequences blah blah blah.

The corrupt fekkars are broke and are grabbing dosh any which way they can!

Civil servants and public sector workers should be denied the vote as they cowtow to the party that delivers them the most ££££££'s and fat gold plated pensions IMO thus in effect holding the country to ransom.
I'd reckon not many of them don't vote as they know which side their bread is buttered on.

 

[noseall]

£1.35 million, what a joke.

Comparatively it's peanuts.

I would not do their job for the money they get no way.

Everyone is greedy these days no one excluded. Most acted within the rules. We pay politicians to be unscrupulous. We want them to be what they are. We vote for them.

Far greater amounts than £1.35 million are squandered, fiddled, wasted, stolen from Joe public EVERY DAY.

If the British public are going to flex their muscles then do it with the benefit cheats, tax dodgers, fat people, smokers, blah blah blah.

£1.35million, ffs.