MP's - disgusted

CrapHacker

Blackballed
Banned
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
2,920
Location
East Sussex
Visit site
That sounds like the words of a politician, i'm allowed to voice my thoughts and thats what i think end of story... :mad:

Do you think I could be a politician ?

Brill !!

Where do I sign up ?

Can I get a new set of Titleist on expenses ?

:cool:
 

SS2

Tour Rookie
Joined
Oct 9, 2007
Messages
1,100
Location
Glasgow, Scotland
scoresaver.co.uk
It is both appalling and hugely funny at the same time. The problem is that human beings are involved in the governing and decision-making process and most are flawed, self serving and greedy.

What we actually need to do is abolish government and appoint a decent dictator. Now, let's see who we can get for the job:

Colonel Gaddafi: in a job already

Saddam Hussein: dead and therefore unlikely to apply for the job

Robert Mugabe: over qualified and would be more expensive than all the MPs put together

Benito Mussolini: dead (and really really bad at the job as well)

Alex Ferguson: too demanding, would want 110% from everyone all the time

Prince Charles: No, would require 100s of lackeys and assistants so would cost more than 639 MPs

Hmm, so it looks like we either keep the "I claimed for the cost of the condom because it was used wholly in the course of my parliamentary duties" lot or ask Richard Branson or SirAlan to take over.
 

CrapHacker

Blackballed
Banned
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
2,920
Location
East Sussex
Visit site
It is both appalling and hugely funny at the same time. The problem is that human beings are involved in the governing and decision-making process and most are flawed, self serving and greedy.

What we actually need to do is abolish government and appoint a decent dictator. Now, let's see who we can get for the job:

Colonel Gaddafi: in a job already

Saddam Hussein: dead and therefore unlikely to apply for the job

Robert Mugabe: over qualified and would be more expensive than all the MPs put together

Benito Mussolini: dead (and really really bad at the job as well)

Alex Ferguson: too demanding, would want 110% from everyone all the time

Prince Charles: No, would require 100s of lackeys and assistants so would cost more than 639 MPs

Hmm, so it looks like we either keep the "I claimed for the cost of the condom because it was used wholly in the course of my parliamentary duties" lot or ask Richard Branson or SirAlan to take over.

Stalin would get our industry back on track
 

stevek1969

Money List Winner
Joined
Jan 14, 2008
Messages
5,155
Location
dundee
Visit site
That sounds like the words of a politician, i'm allowed to voice my thoughts and thats what i think end of story... :mad:

Do you think I could be a politician ?

Brill !!

Where do I sign up ?

Can I get a new set of Titleist on expenses ?

:cool:
How would you cover up getting a new set of Titleist on expenses maybe put down security patrols in its place then you could get them for your whole family as well :D :D :D
 

madandra

Money List Winner
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
5,536
Location
The land of the Jock Frock
Visit site
I think the last straw came when that MP's husband 'SPLASHED OUT' on a mucky movie ;)


In America the polititians are there with the sole purpose is to represent the people. Over here they want to fill their boots and squeeze as much as possible out of the system as they can for their own gain. The problem now is that their is no class or morals within parliament.
 

Cernunnos

Journeyman Pro
Joined
Jul 15, 2008
Messages
2,393
Location
Burton. Staffs (Near WulfricPoint)
Visit site
If there is a system there that can be abused there are always people who will abuse it, no matter what the moral implications of that may be.

As much as it disturbs me & as much I am also discusted with the way Politicians abuse the system. I can understand them wanting to get the best deals for themselves & their families out of the current system. And I think a great percentage of the population would act exactly as these MP's are doing.

I would feel very guilty If I did what they do. Infact I wouldn't do what they do. But as I say many would do. But it strikes me that many people who are discusted by how the MP's are abusing the system, would themselves do exactly that in their position. Which strikes at double standards in my book.

So until these current loopholes are fixed & a better set of rules areimplimented, then this sort of thing will continue to go on.

On a subplot... how many people here would if in the shoes of an MP want to help family members by employing them if they thought that family member would doa good enough job towarrent it... On that point & that alone I would agree. Problem being in the way some MP's have gone about it & the sorts of salary they have awarded to family members for quite minor roles... Now that is wrong.
 

jammydodger

Tour Winner
Joined
Feb 9, 2009
Messages
2,856
Location
Norwich
Visit site
I've said it before about these mp's...The rot started when the job became a career and not a tool to help your local constituents.

They now have to toe the party line on votes in the house or else they'll not get promotion or a cushy job for 10 years before they get their scandalous pensions. So theres pretty much no point having a vote cos theyre told which way they have to vote in the first place....totally pointless.

What sort of people want to be politicians in the first place ? It used to be someone who thought they could make a difference to their local schools/childcare/local jobs/old peoples homes etc etc , now they just want to toe the party line and sign up to the gravy train. Greed , greed and more greed , self-important lying wind-bags is all we've got these days

I remember one group of workers being on strike a few years ago trying to get a decent wage rise and the mp's calling them traitors/ disgraceful/ mercenaries and the mp's voting on their own payrise and giving themselves a 31%, YES ,31% pay rise

sums it up IMO
 

madandra

Money List Winner
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
5,536
Location
The land of the Jock Frock
Visit site
In my job my expenses allow for up to £150 per night hotel accommodation, £30 for dinner, £20 drinks and £10 breakfast...
Total available £210 per night.


Here is a look at what I spent last week;

£35 B&B, £12.50 dinner in restaurant, £5.00 for a Cola and Beer.
Total spend £52.50

Make do or mend I say.

Just because you CAN spend doen't mean you HAVE to spend.
 

stevek1969

Money List Winner
Joined
Jan 14, 2008
Messages
5,155
Location
dundee
Visit site
What happens to the rest Andy do you get to keep it. Where i used to work you got £100 a day expenses and if you only spent £50 the rest was yours.
 

viscount17

Money List Winner
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
8,704
Location
Middle Earth,
Visit site
I think the last straw came when that MP's husband 'SPLASHED OUT' on a mucky movie ;)


In America the polititians are there with the sole purpose is to represent the people. Over here they want to fill their boots and squeeze as much as possible out of the system as they can for their own gain. The problem now is that their is no class or morals within parliament.

oh dear, a bit of naivety here. US politicians are as bad as any. They certainly manage their annual fact finding trips to the best locations - like the bunch that went to South Africa and never made it out of Sun City. They also get free air travel and are entitled to use the Presidential air fleet, although that one tends to depend on seniority.

as far as our own lot are concerned, there is a big difference between what the system allows you to do and what it is ethical to do. the current bunch certainly make sure they know their rights, something they have encouraged in the yobs on the street who get away with murder.

the reporting has also been a little ott, the 'millionaire mp' technically isn't - her writer husband is and I strongly suspect that the security would have been in place even had she not been an mp.

about time 'we' bought up one the many sets of 60's Mandela Towers and made these the MP's London accommodation - use that or pay for your own. (Oh and if your so fat that you can break two sets of toilet seats - fix it yourself)
 

USER1999

Grand Slam Winner
Joined
Mar 9, 2007
Messages
25,671
Location
Watford
Visit site
Maybe they aren't paid enough. 68 grand to run the country is not that much.

A flat rate of 150k, no expenses? That would be transparent.
 

haplesshacker

Money List Winner
Joined
Jan 18, 2008
Messages
5,257
Location
Verwood, Dorset.
mid-life-crisis-man.blogspot.co.uk
With reference to the nepatisum(sp), it happens in the private sector. The company that I used to work for, that was bought out. The previous owners family and direct friends were 'protected'. So no difference.

I'd agree with Murph on the salary front. How can you expect to get the best people for the job with a (relatively) low salary. After all they are expected to run GB plc.

For accomodation. Why not just have a few apartment blocks, fully protected and paid for by the taxpayer. No living expenses required. It would save on the protection costs being spread all over London.

With tongue placed almost in cheek. I'm not against having a dictatoship to sort this whole fine mess we're in. Problem is historicaly, they've always been in it for themselves.

Good thread though. It's been interesting reading.
 

rgs

Tour Rookie
Joined
Mar 14, 2007
Messages
1,493
Location
Dublin Ireland
Visit site
Over here we are having a similar debate over our TD/MP salaries and expenses.

Our TDs are the best paid in the EU and still get expenses for attending Parliament, are allowed a significant overnight allowance and other expenses.
 

M1tch

Head Pro
Joined
Apr 26, 2009
Messages
452
Location
Essex
Visit site
In my job my expenses allow for up to £150 per night hotel accommodation, £30 for dinner, £20 drinks and £10 breakfast...
Total available £210 per night.


so does your company pay for that ? and per night mean per day ?
 

Atticus_Finch

Journeyman Pro
Joined
Mar 22, 2007
Messages
1,566
Location
Heartlands
Visit site
A dictatorship might not be such a bad idea. Just not sure about a Mugabe type one though.
A benevolent dictator I'm not totally against, although there has to be a system in place to get rid if power corrupts.
 

Cernunnos

Journeyman Pro
Joined
Jul 15, 2008
Messages
2,393
Location
Burton. Staffs (Near WulfricPoint)
Visit site
With reference to the nepatisum(sp), it happens in the private sector. The company that I used to work for, that was bought out. The previous owners family and direct friends were 'protected'. So no difference.

I'd agree with Murph on the salary front. How can you expect to get the best people for the job with a (relatively) low salary. After all they are expected to run GB plc.

For accomodation. Why not just have a few apartment blocks, fully protected and paid for by the taxpayer. No living expenses required. It would save on the protection costs being spread all over London.

With tongue placed almost in cheek. I'm not against having a dictatoship to sort this whole fine mess we're in. Problem is historicaly, they've always been in it for themselves.

Good thread though. It's been interesting reading.

Not to mention Bricks & mortar are agood investment. Essentially instead of the individual MP's owning the property it would be owned essentially by the country.
 

madandra

Money List Winner
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
5,536
Location
The land of the Jock Frock
Visit site
In my job my expenses allow for up to £150 per night hotel accommodation, £30 for dinner, £20 drinks and £10 breakfast...
Total available £210 per night.


so does your company pay for that ? and per night mean per day ?

Yes, I am given a float when I started and it will be deducted if I leave. I don't keep the rest of the monies not used. To be honest I think keeping expenses not used is wrong.
 

medwayjon

Tour Winner
Joined
Aug 22, 2007
Messages
4,594
Location
Chatham, Kent.
www.snodhurstcarsales.co.uk
I have had jobs in the past where expenses could be claimed.

When I worked for Simon Jordan he would put us all up at Le Meridien at Heathrow (because close to slough) and breakfast, dinner & the evenings boozing would be charged to the company and some really took the pee. We had people ordering double blue-label smirnoffs and redbull at £16 a go, charging pay-per-view porn to the room, pulling birds and buying them booze on the firm all night and some who lived not too far away even invited mates up for a session on the firm.

This was soon stopped and those pee-takers were always overlooked for promotion, bonusses, perks etc, funny that.

We ended up all being sent to travelinns/premierlodges in slough after that and there was a breakfast and a fair meal-allowance (£14) per evening, that was it.

Luckily I was very friendly with SJ & the director of training & staff development so when I was in town I was given a company credit card for "entertainment" it was nice to be given the responsibility and TBH it wasnt abused either, the biggest excess was taking 20 or so delegates 10-pin bowling before a nice ruby.

When I worked for The Halifax people knew how to rinse expenses, blimey I saw some downright thieving going on to be honest but when the directors were the chief offenders of course the staff would do the same.
 

RGDave

Money List Winner
Joined
Mar 4, 2009
Messages
8,410
Visit site
The revelations coming out about what MP's have been claiming as expenses from the taxpayer is imo absolutley disgusting.

I had very little faith in any of them before but after this I have zero.

These people are supposed to be our leaders and set an example particularly in the current economic climate.

Instead its take take take and exploit a ridiculous system that has some of them claiming for 3 homes, barbeques, tv's, razors, wet rooms, blue movies and god know what all else.

What these gormless people do doesn't usually interest me but this has really got me wound up.

What a sleazy shower of unscrupulous spineless self important creeps.

I sincerely hope there is mass resignations when all details are revealed. We the public should not stand for it.

Politicians used to be well meaning, upstanding people, this current lot are the lowest of the low. :mad:

Well said.

£141,000 is not enough for these folk so they claw back a few more grand on expenses.

I tell you what.....for JUST £41,000 I'll appoint myself the "expenses tzar" and throw out anything even vaguely "cheeky".

If I want to claim on a self-assessment for glasses, clothing and food, it's disallowed, the reason being, I'd have to get those things anyway. (yeh, right, so some homemade sandwiches are the same cost to me as a lunch from Greggs or, god forbid, Pret).

One rule for some, another for these leeches......
 
Top