• We'd like to take this opportunity to wish you a Happy Holidays and a very Merry Christmas from all at Golf Monthly. Thank you for sharing your 2025 with us!

Their Snouts are Back in the Trough

Yerman said:
Ministers and those with positions of responsibility already get paid more for over seeing the ritual re-disorganisation of public services that follows every election
Click to expand...

This is assuming that Public services were ever organised. Bit of an oxymoron. ;)
 
Do you know that if 4 mps travel in the same car they can all claim mileage expenses? And at a rate way higher than we can claim! How does that work?
 
How many Mps does it take to change a lightbulb?

Answer: Eleven. One to change the bulb and the other ten to go on a 14 day fact finding mission to Jamaica to see how they change theirs.
 
Instead of selling of the Olympic village to a hotel chain etc surley it could have been used to house mp's etc when they need to stay in London? Saves any expenses etc job done and all paid for by the Olympics. Sorted.
 
Hacker Khan said:
No it will not stop their genuine expenses as they are entitled to them, much as just about everyone else is if you are using your own money to perform a task for an employer. But the proposal will cut down on the 'silly' expenses that rightly cause so much outrage with the public.
Click to expand...

But there shouldn't be silly expenses in the first place! Cleaning moats, sunday papers and hotel porn are not expenses for doing their jobs!
 
Evesdad said:
But there shouldn't be silly expenses in the first place! Cleaning moats, sunday papers and hotel porn are not expenses for doing their jobs!
Click to expand...

I agree, and from what I understand of these reforms to pay, these are the type of expenses that they will lose.

And speaking from experience it is sometimes difficult to separate out the hotel porn from the whole bill when claiming exes so sometimes they just slip through.;)
 
Evesdad said:
Instead of selling of the Olympic village to a hotel chain etc surley it could have been used to house mp's etc when they need to stay in London? Saves any expenses etc job done and all paid for by the Olympics. Sorted.
Click to expand...

And a tube line straight to Westminster, how convenient; oh hang on, the tube is another place where they're not in it together with the rest of us..... And whilst the Olympics paid for it, who paid for the Olympics? Yup, that will be us again! My old man used to say that the only man that ever entered Parliament with decent intentions was Guy Fawkes, and the longer I live the more truth I see in it.
 
In_The_Rough said:
They are all useless though, if they actually did a good job then I would not have much of an issue with this but they are all a bunch of muppets
Click to expand...

Which is just not true - how many of the 650 or so MPs do you actually know or have read about that enables you to form this conclusion? But as those wishing to curry favour with the electorate will say anything to the easily led if it helps their cause - then yes - you can call all MPs useless, corrupt and simply in it for themselves if you wish. And if the gullible believe you then great - result! I myself believe that the majority try and do a good job for their constituents and the country - the evidence that they are all charlatans that I'd require to convince me otherwise just doesn't exist.

So I'd pay them £120K and get rid of all allowances - with normal business expenses claimed as incurred or on a fixed amount per diem basis.
 
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
Which is just not true - how many of the 650 or so MPs do you actually know or have read about that enables you to form this conclusion? But as those wishing to curry favour with the electorate will say anything to the easily led if it helps their cause - then yes - you can call all MPs useless, corrupt and simply in it for themselves if you wish. And if the gullible believe you then great - result! I myself believe that the majority try and do a good job for their constituents and the country - the evidence that they are all charlatans that I'd require to convince me otherwise just doesn't exist.

So I'd pay them £120K and get rid of all allowances - with normal business expenses claimed as incurred or on a fixed amount per diem basis.
Click to expand...

Heard and met enough, I could give you an endless list of crooked MP's and general incompetance from all parties. If you are happy with them and would pay them in excess of 2k per week then great. I personally am not and nobody can convince me otherwise.
 
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
Which is just not true - how many of the 650 or so MPs do you actually know or have read about that enables you to form this conclusion? But as those wishing to curry favour with the electorate will say anything to the easily led if it helps their cause - then yes - you can call all MPs useless, corrupt and simply in it for themselves if you wish. And if the gullible believe you then great - result! I myself believe that the majority try and do a good job for their constituents and the country - the evidence that they are all charlatans that I'd require to convince me otherwise just doesn't exist.

So I'd pay them £120K and get rid of all allowances - with normal business expenses claimed as incurred or on a fixed amount per diem basis.
Click to expand...

I've dealt directly with 3; my own, and I received a very nicely individually signed letter which said everything and nothing, and got nowhere near addressing the points raised, never mind dealing with them. The two others were through work; one wanted the timings of a level crossing barrier changed because one of his constituents had difficulty walking across if the barriers started coming down (because the constituent not using it as designed, but that would have meant walking further).

The other one was from an MP writing to the council on behalf of a constituent who was complaining about "speed humps"; the specifics of the complaint were that the traffic calming that her constituent referred to did nothing to stop the ordinary motorist from speeding, leading to dangerous speeds in the road, yet these very same speed humps were preventing emergency service drivers getting to calls on time, and what were the council going to do about it. Yes folks you read that right, the MP complained about traffic calming that only calmed trained emergency service drivers, not the average driver. What I can't remember is if the MP in question was actually the Secretary of State for Transport when they put their signature to the letter, a post they seem singularly unsuited for on the basis of the content.

So between those 3 and the stupid pronouncements of Eric Pickles in relation to street parties, they're 4 for 4 in my book. Maybe the other 646 are better, maybe you've had better service from your MP, but on what I've personally seen, they leave me singularly unimpressed, particularly in light of how they tell others what is good for them whilst doing precisely the opposite themselves.
 
Blue in Munich said:
I've dealt directly with 3; my own, and I received a very nicely individually signed letter which said everything and nothing, and got nowhere near addressing the points raised, never mind dealing with them. The two others were through work; one wanted the timings of a level crossing barrier changed because one of his constituents had difficulty walking across if the barriers started coming down (because the constituent not using it as designed, but that would have meant walking further).

The other one was from an MP writing to the council on behalf of a constituent who was complaining about "speed humps"; the specifics of the complaint were that the traffic calming that her constituent referred to did nothing to stop the ordinary motorist from speeding, leading to dangerous speeds in the road, yet these very same speed humps were preventing emergency service drivers getting to calls on time, and what were the council going to do about it. Yes folks you read that right, the MP complained about traffic calming that only calmed trained emergency service drivers, not the average driver. What I can't remember is if the MP in question was actually the Secretary of State for Transport when they put their signature to the letter, a post they seem singularly unsuited for on the basis of the content.

So between those 3 and the stupid pronouncements of Eric Pickles in relation to street parties, they're 4 for 4 in my book. Maybe the other 646 are better, maybe you've had better service from your MP, but on what I've personally seen, they leave me singularly unimpressed, particularly in light of how they tell others what is good for them whilst doing precisely the opposite themselves.
Click to expand...

Well said pal. Lip service that is all most of it is. Do as I say not as I do is their motto.
 
Blue in Munich said:
I've dealt directly with 3; my own, and I received a very nicely individually signed letter which said everything and nothing, and got nowhere near addressing the points raised, never mind dealing with them. The two others were through work; one wanted the timings of a level crossing barrier changed because one of his constituents had difficulty walking across if the barriers started coming down (because the constituent not using it as designed, but that would have meant walking further).

The other one was from an MP writing to the council on behalf of a constituent who was complaining about "speed humps"; the specifics of the complaint were that the traffic calming that her constituent referred to did nothing to stop the ordinary motorist from speeding, leading to dangerous speeds in the road, yet these very same speed humps were preventing emergency service drivers getting to calls on time, and what were the council going to do about it. Yes folks you read that right, the MP complained about traffic calming that only calmed trained emergency service drivers, not the average driver. What I can't remember is if the MP in question was actually the Secretary of State for Transport when they put their signature to the letter, a post they seem singularly unsuited for on the basis of the content.

So between those 3 and the stupid pronouncements of Eric Pickles in relation to street parties, they're 4 for 4 in my book. Maybe the other 646 are better, maybe you've had better service from your MP, but on what I've personally seen, they leave me singularly unimpressed, particularly in light of how they tell others what is good for them whilst doing precisely the opposite themselves.
Click to expand...

Do you think it reasonable that an MP should fix every issue submitted to them by their constituents. Do you really believe every MP is only in Parliament to be on the make and to persue self interest?

I have known a few and they have worked very hard for people. One of them was Wedgewood Benn, I man I had little in common with regarding politics but he was a fantastic worker for his constituents. Another is my current MP, Harriet Baldwin, she spends a great deal of times supporting local business and good causes. She also is the MP that has put forward the Members Bill on the West Lothian Question.
 
Last edited:
I had excellent service from Cheryl Gillan a few years ago when I had a 6 month driving ban for spurious medical reasons, she even got the DVLA up in front of the parliamentary Ombudsman for Administration, she was an absolute star

She needs to work a bit harder to kill HS2, but is still a good un in my book

I have also met 3 others through work and sometimes they are between the devil and the deep blue sea,

Some nutter comes in with a silly complaint, if they tell him to go away, he runs to the papers, so the MP writes to those concerned, knowing it wont go any further, but at least he can say he tried, problem is they are too concerned with not upsetting anyone, and so nothing gets done.

Its all too PC
 
SocketRocket said:
Do you think it reasonable that an MP should fix every issue submitted to them by their constituents. Do you really believe every MP is only in Parliament to be on the make and to persue self interest?

I have known a few and they have worked very hard for people. One of them was Wedgewood Benn, I man I had little in common with regarding politics but he was a fantastic worker for his constituents. Another is my current MP, Harriet Baldwin, she spends a great deal of times supporting local business and good causes. She also is the MP that has put forward the Members Bill on the West Lothian Question.
Click to expand...

No I don't but nor do I believe that they should submit such spurious & stupid questions that tie up and waste resources in other departments, which said MP's then slag off for their "inefficient service". I expect a degree of common sense from them, which is so clearly missing in the issue of the traffic calming that it beggars belief, particularly coming from someone with responsibility for transport.

I am happy to concede that there are some that provide good service to their constituents, but my experience and belief is that they are in a minority.
 
SocketRocket said:
Do you think it reasonable that an MP should fix every issue submitted to them by their constituents. Do you really believe every MP is only in Parliament to be on the make and to persue self interest?

I have known a few and they have worked very hard for people. One of them was Wedgewood Benn, I man I had little in common with regarding politics but he was a fantastic worker for his constituents. Another is my current MP, Harriet Baldwin, she spends a great deal of times supporting local business and good causes. She also is the MP that has put forward the Members Bill on the West Lothian Question.
Click to expand...

^^^And not for the first time it seems I agree with you on your post above @SocketRocket.

My MP is Jeremy Hunt - Sec State for Health. A decent guy and a very good constituency MP - though I might not agree with all his proposals for the NHS etc. and he was 'unwise' on some of his expense claims. But I don't damn him personally for either of these things and I am as confident as I can be that he is not in it for himself.

Many will view him differently as will some on this message board - but he is my MP, and have spoken with him on a number of occasions and had many Email exchanges with him. On these grounds alone I believe that I am better positioned than most to form an informed judgement of him as a person than many, if not most, others - to the extent that I would defend him as a person and an MP though I might not vote for him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Crazyface
Train Tickets
Replies
1
Views
164
Lord Tyrion
Lord Tyrion
H
The hype around caddies
2 3
Replies
44
Views
1K
jim8flog
jim8flog
Orikoru
Worst Ryder Cup Captains?
2 3 4
Replies
66
Views
3K
craigstardis1976
C
Crazyface
Mobile Phones HELP !!!!!!!
Replies
14
Views
658
Robster59
Robster59
C
No concession query
2
Replies
27
Views
2K
Steven Rules
S
Top