And another thing…

Now we’ve established that 300 odd thieves are paying their ill gotten gains back, next step is eGovernment for the people, by the people.

If you agree, press the red button on your remote….etc,.

And those who prefer Old Stokie to be despatched by our mystery gunner just continue to support his proto revolutionary verbal knitting party while Old Sobranie takes over.

How very droll, Tom.

Interestingly, droll rhymes with troll. Whatever could had made me think of that….

That was a headline worth waiting for!

Ann Widdecombe and Dennis Skinner are unlikely bedfellows in both finding fault with Legg’s arithmetic and the report’s general sloppiness. Skinner felt with some justification that the Telegraph was particularly digging for dirt on Labour MPs such as himself.
http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/5346/legg_got_his_arithmatic_wrong_says_dennis_skinner.html

Ann Widdecombe added that it had been ‘lazy, incompetent and illogical’.
‘It was lazy because he didn’t answer the points that were put to him individually; it was incompetent because he got so much arithmetic wrong; and it was illogical because he applied retrospective limits to some things but not to others.’
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1248422/Sir-Thomas-Legg-orders-MPs-repay-1-3million-overclaimed-expenses.html#ixzz0eZ2pJCn4

Widdecombe hasn’t a personal axe to grind, since she was one of the MPs described by the Torygraph as a ’saint’ (ie no expense abuse dug up on her). She was much more annoyed than flattered by this hollow plaudit.

Over ?

Nope – the Legg investigation has missed out some obvious people, namely, those being looked at by the Serious Fraud Office.

Secondly, as Parliament, in it’s wisdom, appointed another body to report on reforms. So no-one has a clue what the end result will be.

If a sitting MP is on the list I will bank on it being mentioned in the election campaign locally.

Basically, this won’t go away until the worst are before a judge and the electorate get a say in whether the rest should be allowed back in the Commons.

The report says:

Mr Harris has no issues.

Can I beg to disagree?

The Dully Tele daren’t stigmatise Ann Widdecome for fear of losing readers of its hard copy.

But she famously did object to the suggestion that she repay expenses for mowing her lawn.

“Who was to have done it?” She exclaimed, “The cat?”

Her accusation that Legg is lazy suggests that he may not be over yet, as per:

John Rentoul has taken up Tom’s headline:

http://johnrentoul.independentminds.livejournal.com/

Is Legg over yet?

Too much legover will make you itch.

I hope it is over as many MPs have had the hump over this.

So. Total cost of Legg report = £1.16m
Total amount to be repaid after appeals = £1.12m

Net saving to public purse = £40k.

Number of MPs covered = 752.

Saving per MP = £53.20

Total amount of acceptable claims = £55.5m

Net saving as a %ge of acceptable claims = 0.07%

Entertainment value of the above = priceless.

@me: I am a moron. Above should read “net *cost* to public purse = £40k”.

It isn’t over until the election, and this Rump parliament is dispatched

The Governing party has reacted by ensuring that all things necessary to combat the issues won’t be finished this side of the election, and yet Mr Brown stands at the despatch box and utters his convictions about the need to “clean up parliament”

I find myself thinking that it will be very convenient for someone else to have to clean up the mess left, so that macavity can not be blamed.

On top of which this isn’t yet finished because those police investigations and appearances in court haven’t been completed yet, nor has all the money been repaid…and meanwhile the matter will drip, drip, drip

It is a suitable epitaph for this government that “peer” pressure could not assert itself over those who brought shame on all the rest. All those who have “no issues” are just as guilty as those that took the money because “they allowed” it to happen and saw no need to ensure that the processes were water tight. Now the MP’s must reap what they sowed with guilt by association

The point about Legg SHOULD be that justice is seen to be done.

But as his retrospective changes to the rules don’t make much sense the only positive is that the ignorant will applaud the repayments, but as they will decry the costs, Legg is toast.

Just some advice needed really. Mrs (Dr) Weasel works in the Public Sector, and in order to do this, we have to live in Scotland. While we are here, in our second home as it were, I wonder if it would be possible to buy a new set of duvet covers and charge it to the NHS? Also, our chicken house is in dire need of replacement. What we propose to do is to make these purchases and charge them to the NHS. And also running repairs to the MG. And while we are at it, maybe a box of Quality Street?

Is there a form of words that will ensure success in our claim?

Re Mrs Weasel:

I seem to recall she had quite a big increase which should cover some PC&A (Political Correctness & Acumen) lessons at your local Adult Ed classes. Hasten.

MPs seem to have missed out on such increases for quite a while, Mrs Thatcher and subsequent PMs being very big on setting good examples (hubby being a millionaire may have helped in her case, Cherie being a big earner when Tony Blair was i/c) and “allowances” and then “expenses” being touted as substitutes until 2005 or so.

Another case of monocular telescopic vision being the default perspective of the right.

Tom
I’m surprised you choose to joke about a matter that personifies the gap of trust between voters and their reps in parliament. While the obvious headline is amusing, there is a quite serious issue below th surface that i’m sure you recoignise. I thought you might comment on that

But maybe youre happy to take quitezapples view that as long as its done ine new labours name, its fine .. he/she is clearly nothing but a mouthpiece for the unthinking – i’d be surpirsed if you just went along with it in that waym – I thought you were morte independent

In fairness, MP’s aren’t paid that much, neither are MSP’s, and some public-sector employees should have their pay levels dropped massively.
No way a glorified Town Clerk should be paid £100k. And the old argument about “well, we must hire the best people and the private sector pays very well” can be dumped as well. It’s called “public service” for a reason, and in any case, if they can run off and find a job in the private sector, not to mention a better paying job than, say, £75k, good luck to them.
With all the saved cash, we can spend some on hospitals, schools, services, and with what’s left over, pay for a nice big hotel in london to be bought and managed for MP’s to stay in whilst on business.

Maybe even give them a pay rise and scrap non-office expenses. If it’s sending out letters, give franking privileges, stationary and equipment can be handed out at stores like any other company, and staff hiring can be done through an HR. OK, so the Member should have the decision on whom, but salary, contracts etc. should be equal and fair, no more horrific internships.
Now, if I can see all of this is crystal clear, there’s really no excuse for MP’s not to. So either they’re incompetent (and need replaced in May) or dishonest (and need locked up in May).

over…yeah i am sure the many mps who are resigning ‘for personal reasons’ at the next general election will be delighted with that fat pensions and large golden handshakes.

nothing on you tom personally but has anyone actually lost out here?

i read today that one mp, who incidentially is married to a multi-millionaire, was claiming for her (i assume his) art collection to be insured.

is she seriously having a laugh when she says that felt that she had acted as the rules stated.

i can just see my hr managers face when i walk into his office and justify my claim for the insurance of my roy of the rovers comic collection….

dear oh dear…

thats what leaves such a sour taste in the mouth on this expenses trip, nobody actually seems to have paid a real cost for it…and by that i mean a cost i mean a cost a normal law abiding citizen of the uk would have had to have paid.

that is loss of one’s job, without severance pay and a dirty great blot on ones cv….and possible criminal procedures brought in by the company themselves.

instead we see a few mps being hoiked before the cps and yet still no charges.

and what about those tax dodging cgt avoiders…again any law abiding citizen would have been dragged before the inland revenue and forced to pay up, face a prison sentence or a huge fine.

instead some of those very ‘honorable’ members get rewarded with a seat in the cabinet (i mention no names) and actually continue to make the rules that govern us in the first place!

total tosh the whole thing…and the funny thing is that most of them (rule breakers, law breakers) still come on tv and blame the rules and how they werent clear and how we must all learn from it and how everyone has let politics down…no not everyone you and by you i mean the person who is actually being interviewed in the first place…talking about widening the spotlight!

no such thing as personal integrity then?

legg over…i could think of a far better word to place before ‘over’ but i understand you do not allow the use of profanities on this website so i shall just leave you with the word ‘ducked’ to help you along….

right i am off to fill in my expenses claim…do you think i can get away with claiming for my wifes 20 a day habit?

“Re Mrs Weasel:

I seem to recall she had quite a big increase which should cover some PC&A (Political Correctness & Acumen) lessons at your local Adult Ed classes. Hasten.

MPs seem to have missed out on such increases for quite a while, Mrs Thatcher and subsequent PMs being very big on setting good examples (hubby being a millionaire may have helped in her case, Cherie being a big earner when Tony Blair was i/c) and “allowances” and then “expenses” being touted as substitutes until 2005 or so.

Another case of monocular telescopic vision being the default perspective of the right.”

Ah what a revealing post from Mr ‘zapple. Would you like salt & Vinegar or Ketchup with those chips?

The power to see things from another’s point of view is something I prize, but clearly an alien concept to some.

Fun to be quoted, of course, I’m tempted myself . . .

Oh, prlright.

Not quite, Tom. Will you be blogging about the criminal charges. A quick check of the Labour bloggers seems to suggest none of you will!!

Sorry – it has not ended the expenses affair. It might have helped if MPs had not given interviews to the media yesterday. It was wrong to blame the enquiry team for making a few errors given the amount of documentation they had to peruse. Further, many MPs asked us to forgive their clerical errors in making erroneous claims. I did as we are all human and make mistakes! Secondly, I cannot rely on an MP whose wife is threatening to pursue legal action if MPs are banned from employing spouses giving an account of his situation. It smacks of somehow saying let me get on with how things have always been done.

I am shocked by some of the explanations from MPs as to why they should not repay money. Whilst some “won” their appeal, they were still morally wrong in my opinion for making the claims in the first instance. I am shocked too at how some MPs believe that they have been treated unfairly. One MP whom I have always held in great esteem has shocked me with his justification for excessive housekeeping costs.

The abuse of the ACA is perturbing. However, the report does not of course cover the more serious exploitation of the rules by many MPs. I refer to the constant flipping of homes which permitted many MPS to climb the Housing Ladder. By flipping they were able to claim for furnishings and improvements which meant they were making financial gain. I have not forgotten this.

Added to which, we will no doubt be having a prolonged debate on Parliamenary Privilege in the months to come as criminal proceedings have been iniated. I am sorry but I feel the public will find this astonishing and it will further reduce the status of the House of Commons.

To further complicate the matter, we have so many investigations that it all seems a mess. I have responded to an online survey relating to expenses and already it has back tracked on what an earlier report recommended. Can the government not simplify how it conducts its business? We have so many “hands” in the investigation, it appears to be permitting some MPs to believe themselves to be victims! Too many MPs are totally out of touch with the public mood. Humility is a trait that many do not understand.

Tony Wright (Newsnight 4 Feb) is the only MP who seems to be in touch with what we are all feeling. I believe that MPs should receive a fair wage (do not tell us how much you gave up to become an MP – not on given that we know the huge number of people who apply for vacancies – 300 in my area), having the necessary accommodation to fulfill their duties, and travel costs between constituency and Westminster. I want them to have all the technological aids they require, staff to support them etc etc. I want to trust them, respect them even if I do not agree with their politics. I want to feel that somewhere within them is the concept of public service too. Am I expecting too much????

Tom, is there much “surprise” in the village that Morley at al are to be prosecuted?

(and how on earth did Baroness Udin get away scot-free??)

[...] Is Legg over now? [...]

Anything but – looks like you mates are going to try to claim Parliamentary Privilege against their expense fraud.

That will go down well with the electorate, won’t it – we know already that the law treats politicians very leniently, but to claim that they are above the law is beyond belief.

Or maybe not after the past couple of years. Maybe Brown WILL need the army on the streets if there is much more of this.

A Devine post,but I don’t think it’s over.

I find it very hard to imagine that the Wintertons, whose fiddle gave their daughter a home at public expense (Parliamentary Standards Commissioner concluded that they misused their MPs’ expenses to pay rent for a flat that they had already bought outright) or Caro “Nannygate” Spelman, who paid her children’s nanny out of her clerical allowance, were less “guilty” than those whom the police have investigated, whatever the result of these prosecutions.

The Loans for honours (so called) Inquiry, the Police investigation of the police inquiry into the Damien Green affair and this matter (so far) seem to have shown police anti Labour bias on the whole.

@Math Campbell
Thursday 4 February 2010 at 8:24 pm

In fairness, MP’s aren’t paid that much, neither are MSP’s, and some public-sector employees should have their pay
//

Their pension perks make their salary the equivalent of £83k pa. I think that that around 3 1/2 the average UK salary.

Very nice, thanks.

well at least now we have some of the ‘nieve’ people being brought to task by the police themselves…but…..

where is baroness uddin in all of this?

is she going to get away scot-free….one would hope not because she is another one who blames everyone else but him/herself.

and what about lord paul?

and how come none of the ‘big beasts’ of parliament were brought to task…lets hope the 4 that are, are not simply scapegoats presented to the general public as sacrifical lambs.

personally i dont think it matters what happens the simple fact is that many of these people simply blame the system and by doing so will always be in denial to what actually really racks people of about it all.

its all about integrity and yes expenses should be paid but to try and suggest that you made a mistake in claiming for mortgage interest payments for a mortgage that ceased 13 months previously is just a joke and it is simply unforgivable to blame anyone but yourself.

furthermore the labour mp’s who have brought shame to their party cannot even justify that they know ‘what it is like’ for the ordinary people out there and tories are simply looking after the rich….

i mean if you are owning two houses, insuring art collections, buying lcd tvs…etc..etc…and getting it paid for, how can you then go the electorate and possibly say “we know how it feels….”

no you dont know how it feels because you get everything paid for or rather you expected everything to be paid for and yet you still sung the tune “the tories are the party for the few”

you must feel totally let down Tom by your colleagues because i know if it I would…

and dont think the tories can walk away from it without disgrace…some of these people are loaded financially so what the hell gave them the right to fleece the taxpayer…penny pinching fraudsters.

the right for mp’s to have the word ‘right honorable’ before their names should be immediately ceased….and replaced with the words “right….”…well i will leave it you to decide what word should go in there…

nothing personal to you tom…the ones who did it took a mighty dam big paint brush and tarred the lot of you…shame on them all.

Ho hum!

Politics of envy, is that the phrase?

@Quietzapple Saturday 6 February 2010 at 9:55 am

Ho hum!
Politics of envy, is that the phrase?
//
For Socialism, yes. Well spotted that man, you got there in the end

Plodder admits to conforming to his “vision” of socialism viz “politics of envy”:

“Their pension perks make their salary the equivalent of £83k pa. I think that that around 3 1/2 the average UK salary.

“Very nice, thanks.”

Nonsense, of course, because socialism is principally about justice, and this should not be confabulated with revenge.

Carry on.

QZ, I am not envious of MPs; you don’t seem to have clocked that I was responding to a poster who said that they weren’t that well paid. Pointing out that they are does not make me envious. You are very simple at times you know, without wishing to kick you.

Just think Harman if you want to know what I was talking about.

Scheesh. Some mothers…

Plodder: If you think that your phrase: “Very nice, thanks” conveyed the guardedly neutral tone you claimed you wished, then I suggest a few lessons in idiomatic English.

As ever, their descriptions of their opponents “failings” reveal their views of themselves . . .