Ministerial Revelations Keep Coming
Additional Cost (Second Home) Allowance - How it works
MPs Expenses: The Detail
- Select the appropriate tab to examine the data
Brown, Gordon: Exit Strategy
MPs' expenses
MPs' Expenses: cash secrets
- In the view of some MPs, the paying public who underwrites the payments clearly should have no right to expect sight of claims and certainly none of the detail. Tawdry little secrets should be kept as such. Typical mushroom thinking: feed on bullshit and keep in the dark.
The MPs and ministers must now read from their own script and not the one prepared by the cabinet office that toes the party line. Answers cannot be ducked or avoided. In rather a novel situation, one of these individuals could have to answer the explicit question asked if in a court of law. This is now a real possibility. The behaviour must be examined publicly by those who have been alleged to have abused the system that is paid for using public finance. This is a very important constitutional issue that must be seen to be examined seriously, fairly and properly. This is the same basic right of any accused.
The annual yield that these 'elected' people collect (maximum being £23,083 and tax free) for their Additional Cost (Second Home) Allowance amounts to the annual salary (before tax) for a great many who cannot afford even a single home. The loathsome and highly repellant politicians that manipulate the rotten system to their personal financial advantage make pronouncements that once the citizens of the UQ (aka UK) Ltd would have possibly taken seriously. Those days have ended. The minority (perhaps) of MPs and ministers that abuse the rotten system have torpedoed the futures of the possible majority that don't. A vast swathe of the country now watches very critically for the slightest mistake ready to pounce and no police force on Earth could now protect these parasites from their host.
- On it goes... now that the ball is well into play, the game should be self-perpetuating
- Stewart Jackson, a Tory MP, who grew up in Kent, has claimed in excess of £66,000 for the family home.
The Green Book
The abusers need changing. Immediately
14.05.09: £66,000 by Justice Minister Shahid Malik. There must be exceptionally good reasons to 'stand down' (resignation is denied) while an investigation is ongoing and before further details become known. The untenable situation of a senior official of the Justice Ministry being implicated in such arrangements may, however, have been enough to cause this pre-emptive action.The Ministerial Code of Conduct states
that members of the Government must not
use their position to gain any financial advantage.
It's possible that integrity could be a factor, though the fact that this still needs to be spelt out is very instructive. Nevertheless, jumping before being pushed could be interpreted as the most likely way to return to that position.
Shaun Woodward states the system is rotten and Hazel Blears insists that the system needs changing. During Prime Minister's Questions (Wednesday 12.00pm, 13.05.09), Blears was on the front benches 'nodding' as Brown was criticising second home deals. Blears is implicated in such dealings and the avoidance of Capital Gains Tax payable on the personal profiteering from the use of public funds. This has now been offered up after the event (£13,332) represents the 40% payable as though it makes everything OK, but constitutes an explicit admission of 'wrong doing' (guilt) and must be addressed. A tax return will have been submitted and any CGT liability already denied. To retrospectively make payment after such a (signed) declaration is not possible. At best a credit for any future tax liability can be allowed, but an amended submission would have to be 'agreed' with HM Revenue and Customs. This should all be regarded as being too late. The declaration was made that no CGT was liable. It wouldn't be on a main residence, but the tax authorities had been allegedly informed that the second home declared to the fees office (for expenses) was different to that declared for tax purposes. This appears to be more about tax evasion and not tax avoidance.
Maybe an easier and faster solution
is for the entire government to resign
signalling an immediate general election
is for the entire government to resign
signalling an immediate general election
- The system can be cleaned up overnight with the expulsion (not an undefined limited-time suspension that could number simply only a few days). It can be anticipated that Elliot Morley will creep back into politics quietly and unannounced 'eventually'.
- Two peers are suspended for only 6 months for misconduct. Ex-trade minister Lord Truscott and Lord Taylor of Blackburn were accused by the Sunday Times of being willing to change laws in exchange for cash. Lord Truscott told the BBC he had "done nothing wrong" and had been made a "scapegoat".
Changing laws for cash is
just misconduct and nothing
has been done that is wrong
just misconduct and nothing
has been done that is wrong
Shaun Woodward states the system is rotten and Hazel Blears insists that the system needs changing. During Prime Minister's Questions (Wednesday 12.00pm, 13.05.09), Blears was on the front benches 'nodding' as Brown was criticising second home deals. Blears is implicated in such dealings and the avoidance of Capital Gains Tax payable on the personal profiteering from the use of public funds. This has now been offered up after the event (£13,332) represents the 40% payable as though it makes everything OK, but constitutes an explicit admission of 'wrong doing' (guilt) and must be addressed. A tax return will have been submitted and any CGT liability already denied. To retrospectively make payment after such a (signed) declaration is not possible. At best a credit for any future tax liability can be allowed, but an amended submission would have to be 'agreed' with HM Revenue and Customs. This should all be regarded as being too late. The declaration was made that no CGT was liable. It wouldn't be on a main residence, but the tax authorities had been allegedly informed that the second home declared to the fees office (for expenses) was different to that declared for tax purposes. This appears to be more about tax evasion and not tax avoidance.
The most explicit and offensive tactic has involved waving the cheque to the cameras that actually belongs to the taxpayer from where it originated. The CGT is payable from the personal profit Blears made from the alleged 'misuse' of public money.
- Waving a cheque in front of the cameras is not proof of payment or proof of the intention to pay. It is purely suggestive.
- This has allegedly involved being economical with the truth and the nomination of main and second homes to the different authorities (House of Commons Fees Office and HM Revenue and Customs). The full weight of HM Revenue and Customs is expected (don't hold your breath, though).
- If a bank robber returns the proceeds of a crime, it does not excuse that crime or avoid punishment. MPs are the same and DO NOT enjoy any special arrangements.
These examples have all been found wanting
and the perpetrators must stand and face their accusers
or the principle of justice for all will be destroyed
and the perpetrators must stand and face their accusers
or the principle of justice for all will be destroyed
Remortgaging seems to be a favourite manoeuvre and to maximise the return of allowances claimed involves an interest only mortgage. No capital is involved, just the potential maximum collectible by 'buying' through the expense system using public money.
Brown, Gordon: Exit Strategy
Brown, Gordon: Exit Strategy
As far as second homes are concerned, the system was probably fair and reasonable in principle as it was designed to reimburse legitimate and reasonable expenses for residing outside the constituency when on official business in London. The abuse of that system appears to be out of control. In these particular times (or any other) of economic crisis and very severe financial hardship and job losses, these contemptible people are absolutely nauseating.
It is patently obvious what the intention was and any manipulation of the system is clearly 'out of order'. Or should be to anyone of average intelligence. It was never intended to enable dealing in property or to fund a complete lifestyle anywhere in the UQ (aka UK) Ltd (or like Margaret Moran in Spain). Alistair Darling (Chancellor of the Exchequer) played his 'joker' card by claiming for a second home (originally the main residence) in Edinburgh when officially working in LONDON (11, Downing Street). The concept of a second home is clearly accommodation in LONDON and NOT Spain or Scotland.
How this could be regarded as a legitimate and unchallenged claim is staggering. But Spain stretches and beggars belief absolutely, but it is quite within the boundary of reason that intense pressure was applied by senior ministers who took umbrage at being questioned by subordinate staff.
- Elliot Morley (profile) claimed (£16,000) for a non-existent mortgage ("an error"). Suspended by Gordon Brown
- Andrew MacKay: unacceptable expenses claim
- Quit, Resignation citations
- Voluntarily submitted expense claims to party officials and these had revealed:
"an unacceptable situation that would
not stand up to reasonable public scrutiny"
not stand up to reasonable public scrutiny"
This does suggest complacency as though nothing is wrong and all is acceptable. Well, it's
NOT EVER ACCEPTABLE
The contempt these parasites have for the British people that they represent and who elected them to the parliamentary gravy train is sickening. Deselection is only the beginning, though the obvious problem with this is that replacing one candidate with another can simply result in the same problem, but just another name. People like Moran and Morley should be tried in the courts as submitting potential 'fraudulent claims' which could constitute a criminal offence under the 2006 Fraud Act and the 1968 Theft Act.
What are these people?
What stones do they crawl from under?
Mranil Patel is being threatened with prison for using a false address and trying to get her child into a better school. The false address is real enough and is that of her mother. The 'elected' parasites have been massaging addresses for some while and simply offer to pay back money that should never have been claimed (or paid out). Prison is an obvious solution if proven.What stones do they crawl from under?
Reality of real life
The system does not need changing or sorting out, but those who abuse it certainly do: those people would like to be regarded as pillars of society. Obviously, they are nothing of the kind. They have now become parasitic pariahs. To complain of a massive blow to integrity and standing is absolutely obnoxius arrogance. Benefit fraudsters are thieves. Any type of fraud is a criminal offence. Politicians need to not only pay back what has been disbursed, but demoted or sacked. It is the only way that any credibility can possibly be restored.
Benefit Provider
The amount of benefit fraud will inevitably escalate as the example perceived to be shown by MPs and government ministers, and it's easy to understand how such a perception can be interpreted, has led the way. If these imagined good people can do this then it's acceptable for everyone to do it.
If any of the claims were actually 'inadvertently' made (or twice by accident), then payback could discourage the practice, but for many the reverse is a delusion. It won't happen. To offer up £41,709 or so is not likely to be expedited by the 'average Joe'. And even if it could, it is unlikely to be paid back, in any case. Thieves do not return their proceeds of crime. These illustrious leaders have initiated a suction bomb where the filthy lucre is lost into a Black Hole.
McLeish: Failure to Pay Back £39,122
If money is owed then it must be paid. Any failure to expedite a justified and accountable amount is actionable. The obnoxious British Gas attitude to unverified and disputed demands illustrates the serious problem for the straight-dealing taxpayer.
One effect is certain: the reputation and standing (both international and within the UQ (aka) UK Ltd) of the British constitution and parliament is at the bottom of the pit. The depths that have been reached are below the level to which these columns will descend. It is enough that the press and TV coverage have ensured the entire country is familiar with the seriousness of the issue. The loathsome and nauseating attitudes of individuals and married couples is complete. The vileness is so far beneath contempt to be off the scale of any possible restitution.
David Chaytor (16.05.09)
The MPs and ministers must now read from their own script without any prompting and not one prepared by a cabinet office that toes the party line. This should reveal a great deal and the British voters are not as gullible as these people would contemptuously believe. More delusion that will be the downfall of the many. The gravy train has crashed in spectacular form. The actions of these 'elected' individuals whether guilty or not has cast considerable doubt over all the players and trust itself has flown and many reputations and careers are now wrecked in the crash. The 'honourable' in the title was originally just an assumed respect, but now it will have to be earned from the ground and upwards and for the first time.
It is too much to expect any but the most loyal to believe that the dozens and dozens of accounting errors and mistakes are genuine. Like fairies at the bottom of the garden. As 'errors of judgement' they are at best appalling. At worst, criminal. It is a natural justice that these people should be judged by the electors who were responsible for putting them in that place from where they have fallen. Onto their collective sword. The hypocrisy has plumbed new depths when a Justice Minister is implicated in shady dealings. How a foreign country can deal with representatives that have shown such scant regard to probity and honesty beggars belief. The country has been degraded and shamed.
Brown, Gordon: Exit Strategy
Stephen Fry has lost the plot
Brown and Cameron spat
Boris Johnson 'amazed'
Cheat and Go - Cameron
Benefit Provider
The amount of benefit fraud will inevitably escalate as the example perceived to be shown by MPs and government ministers, and it's easy to understand how such a perception can be interpreted, has led the way. If these imagined good people can do this then it's acceptable for everyone to do it.
If any of the claims were actually 'inadvertently' made (or twice by accident), then payback could discourage the practice, but for many the reverse is a delusion. It won't happen. To offer up £41,709 or so is not likely to be expedited by the 'average Joe'. And even if it could, it is unlikely to be paid back, in any case. Thieves do not return their proceeds of crime. These illustrious leaders have initiated a suction bomb where the filthy lucre is lost into a Black Hole.
McLeish: Failure to Pay Back £39,122
If money is owed then it must be paid. Any failure to expedite a justified and accountable amount is actionable. The obnoxious British Gas attitude to unverified and disputed demands illustrates the serious problem for the straight-dealing taxpayer.
One effect is certain: the reputation and standing (both international and within the UQ (aka) UK Ltd) of the British constitution and parliament is at the bottom of the pit. The depths that have been reached are below the level to which these columns will descend. It is enough that the press and TV coverage have ensured the entire country is familiar with the seriousness of the issue. The loathsome and nauseating attitudes of individuals and married couples is complete. The vileness is so far beneath contempt to be off the scale of any possible restitution.
David Chaytor (16.05.09)
The MPs and ministers must now read from their own script without any prompting and not one prepared by a cabinet office that toes the party line. This should reveal a great deal and the British voters are not as gullible as these people would contemptuously believe. More delusion that will be the downfall of the many. The gravy train has crashed in spectacular form. The actions of these 'elected' individuals whether guilty or not has cast considerable doubt over all the players and trust itself has flown and many reputations and careers are now wrecked in the crash. The 'honourable' in the title was originally just an assumed respect, but now it will have to be earned from the ground and upwards and for the first time.
It is too much to expect any but the most loyal to believe that the dozens and dozens of accounting errors and mistakes are genuine. Like fairies at the bottom of the garden. As 'errors of judgement' they are at best appalling. At worst, criminal. It is a natural justice that these people should be judged by the electors who were responsible for putting them in that place from where they have fallen. Onto their collective sword. The hypocrisy has plumbed new depths when a Justice Minister is implicated in shady dealings. How a foreign country can deal with representatives that have shown such scant regard to probity and honesty beggars belief. The country has been degraded and shamed.
Brown, Gordon: Exit Strategy
Stephen Fry has lost the plot
Brown and Cameron spat
Boris Johnson 'amazed'
Cheat and Go - Cameron
- To believe that Cameron and Brown were unaware of the manipulation of the system by their MPs and ministers is difficult to comprehend, but even pigs with their snouts stuck in the trough can probably still fly...
On expenses, of course
posted by Louis Brothnias @ 12:32 am
<< Home