MP's expenses released

[Saracen]

.....

If you don't believe me, ask Saracen. He will confirm this logic.

Pretty much, yeah.

It's certainly hard to see how Labour can end up not losing more than the Tories. They're currently in power, and look pretty likely to lose it. The Tories aren't, so can't lose what they don't have.

It's also often the case that the incumbent loses elections, rather than the opposition winning them. As a species, humans (IMHO) tend to go with the flow, to resist change. There's an inertia factor that supports the incumbent initially, and certainly while things are going well. It kept the Tories in power for a long time last time, and kept Blair winning elections too. But as soon as things start going badly, or when governments start getting arrogant and complacent in their power, the pendulum swings. Labour will take the blame for a whole series of things, from resentment over ID cards, to the drip-drip corrosive effect of losing our data on CDs, to the 10p tax farce, to the Iraq war, to posin emails from Brown's own staff, to .... and so on. Individually, probably none of these would lose elections, but when they seem to lurch from disaster to disaster, the cumulative effect, sooner or later, is terminal. I think Labour have well and truly tipped over that the now. I think they almost certainly had before this expense scandal, but that'll do for them.

Unless something unexpected crops up between now and the next election. But for that to happen, it needs to be something pretty seismic to devastate the Tories.


And another thing. The way I'm reading it, most Labour MPs have pretty much accepted that the next election is pretty much lost. Most of them won't say that publicly (though a few have), but many do privately. That means that individual Labour MPs are now going to be going into butt-saving mode. They are going to be more worried about their personal situation than the party situation, because it's looking more and more like they can't rely on getting elected because they're members of a party that looks likely to lose. That means they're likely to start growing a pair of gonads and standing up to party whips, like we saw with the Gurkha vote. The result is a considerable weakening in Brown's position and authority, and he's looking like he will need to Tory support to get some policies past his own rebels.

Cameron, on the other hand, benefits from a party that, whatever their personal opinions, know that their best chance of not screwing up their chances of getting into power reside in presenting a united front. Ask yourselves why Ken Clarke is biting his tongue over Europe? He seems to have acquired a serious case of dontrocktheboatitis.


And finally, yes, Cameron has looked decisive, like a leader, over this expenses business. When things came to light, he jumped on his own party hard, and immediately. Brown, by contrast. seemed to be dithering, trying to work out which committee to commission a report from. And when he did finally get going, it was after Cameron and Clegg, and looked v ery much like a "me too" afterthought that had been dragged out of him because the others had acted. Regardless of the facts of it, that's how it looked.

Finally, in regard to who appears to be most damaged by the expenses thing, well, I haven't done any statistical analysis of which party seems to have it's members snouts most firmly in the public though, but my gut feeling is that it looks to be Labour. There has certainly been a number of incidents on both sides, but my sense of it is that Labour have been much more seriously exposed to it, both in terms of the size of the typical abuse, and more especially, in the number of high profile MPs (i.e. Ministers) facing accusations.

Certainly none of the main parties can hold their heads up high (which accounts for why they're not lobbing accusations at the guilty), and of course the revelations aren't over yet, so the situation may not stay as it is right now, but currently, that's how it feels to me.

[Tzarbo]

In my eyes, this is just jealousy from the public as far as I'm concerned

No mate, it's not jealousy, it's anger and outrage.

They have expenses, and they take full advantage of it like any other person on this board, because you would, and that's it, if you could buy a £2000 TV on "expenses" and not on your own salary, you would, without any doubt in your mind.

Yes, but they set their own rules on these expenses. Also, they are not working for Barry's Laptops in Worthing... they are MPs, elected to serve the people of Great Britain, in the mother of all parliaments. They are there to serve, and are elected to high office.

It's not as simple as getting a free TV if you can.

Tens of thousands of people do it with businesses i.e. Laptops being bought by companies for their workers, the worker choses the model, and they get it, I know loads of people who do this on other things as well.

Again, the people you know are not the elected representatives of the people of this country, and are not there to serve in a democratic system of government. It's not the same as working at Barry's Laptops and working a fiddle to get an iMac £200 off.

Don't single out MPs for the sake of it, it's just ignorant, because if you was in their shoes, you'd do it as well.

No, your post was entirely ignorant of the context of the situation.

[Clunk]

Then Sir, I shall explain it to you again.

The Government of the day, the Labour party, will get hit hardest by this scandal, as they are the seat of power, the one's who the voters will most see as to blame. Rightly or wrongly.

This lessens the already slim chance Labour had of winning the next general election from almost impossible, to completely impossible.

If Labour do not win, the Tory party wins, as no-one else can or will.

A popular and successful government lessens the chance of the opposition getting in. An unpopular and unsuccessful government increases the chance of the opposition getting in.

And which of those is this current government?

Short of some sort of mad situation where enough people protest vote UKIP or Green, or the Lib Dems going from also-rans to the government of the day, Cameron is home and dry.

So long story short, this whole affair, whilst making the Tory party less popular overall, the same as all other parties, will make it more likely they will be in government come the next election.

If you don't believe me, ask Saracen. He will confirm this logic.

It's not that I don't believe you, I just don't see it as a Labour government issue as such, it's much bigger than that as all the parties are affected and if I see it like that, then I would think that other people do too? At the moment, I feel that there's very few people left in the house of commons that are worth my vote.

[Saracen]

Oh, and that "snouts in the public trough" remark I made .... some of you may remember an argument a few months ago with a member who accused me of alleging politicians were "corrupt" because I said many of them had their snouts in the trough. He ended up getting suspended and, as far as I know, never came back. Which is a shame, because now I'd be saying "see what I meant yet?"

For the record, as I said at the time, I didn't accuse anyone of being "corrupt", because to do so in relation to identifiable public officials like MPs would probably be defamatory .... unless it could be problem. But I've ranted before about MPs and their expense claims and allowances, including over such things as Ms Beckett and her infamous pergola and hanging plants.

Much, probably nearly all, of what's been going on is within both the law and Parliamentary expense rules. There might be exceptions, such as claiming for non-existent mortgages perhaps, and maybe that will end up with criminal charges. Maybe. But most of it, while clearly ethically wrong, is technically legit.

It's the RULES that really suck. They have been designed, and used by successive governments, as a way to deliberately deceive the public about MPs remuneration. The system was designed to permit MPs the be remunerated via the expenses back door, because governments couldn't and wouldn't face trying to get the equivalent pay rises past us openly and honestly.

That's why MPs are in this mess now - because they have been collectively and deliberately conning us over their remuneration for several decades, as a matter of choice and policy.


And now they have been caught red-handed ..... despite their best efforts, orchestrated by Speaker Martin, to block information release at every stage.

And a price will be expected, IMHO. I think that before too much longer we will see heads roll, however nicely it's dressed up, because party leaders know that if they don't do it voluntarily, the electorate will do it for them.

[Tzarbo]

It's not that I don't believe you, I just don't see it as a Labour government issue as such, it's much bigger than that as all the parties are affected and if I see it like that, then I would think that other people do too? At the moment, I feel that there's very few people left in the house of commons that are worth my vote.

It's a political issue, and political issues that make MPs unpopular will hit Labour hardest. Not because they are Labour, but because they are the government.

The political history of this country shows this to very clearly be the case, so unless this has changed completely in recent years, this is still the case, even if you personally don't see it that way.

This scandal will hurt all parties, but it will hurt Labour the most. That's how the masses think.

Look at it like this - a football team loses 10 games in a row. Who gets the blame, and who takes responsibility, and who gets the boot at the end of the day?

The manager.

Even if it's the striker who can't score to save his life. You don't sack the striker, you sack the manager.

The fans call for the managers head, not the goalkeepers.

So the fans (voters) will kick out the manager (Labour government) because the team (country, economy, MPs popularity) are not doing as good as they would like. Managers fault or not, this is how it will be.

[mediaboy]

In my eyes, this is just jealousy from the public as far as I'm concerned.

Jealously? Of what? Being hated? That's a strange one... If you mean of breaking rules perhaps? Or getting away with it? Although it's all very well saying that it's jealousy, I would say it's more outrageous than that... I would compare it to something, but the only thing that comes to mind is discovering that your best mate has had a credit card to take away 50% of your money and is spending it on frivolities that he could pay for with his own salary.

That would, though, imply that MPs are our friends. After this I doubt it.

They have expenses, and they take full advantage of it like any other person on this board, because you would, and that's it, if you could buy a £2000 TV on "expenses" and not on your own salary, you would, without any doubt in your mind.

Don't like TVs. Disgraceful things. I have a computer. I game. And, before you jump in and tell me that I'd buy a computer, I wouldn't. If I'm claiming something on expenses - which I do - I ensure that my reasons are valid and understood, that I have some degree of support in what I'm doing from the person who I'm claiming them off of, and that the money is going to be there when I hand in my receipts.

Well yes, they had some degree of support in what the were doing from their own rulebooks. But just because something is in the rules doesn't mean that it's justice. It certainly doesn't mean that it's right.

I'm sure the money was there. They took it off of you.

As for their reasons being understood? Well.. if they were valid and understood I'm sure that we wouldn't be arguing. We are arguing, therefore they aren't valid and understood.

Tens of thousands of people do it with businesses i.e. Laptops being bought by companies for their workers, the worker choses the model, and they get it, I know loads of people who do this on other things as well.

There's a slight difference between a worker and a MP. MPs are supposed to be our representatives. I see that my MP spent about £150K on his expenses. Admittedly, 90K or so of that was spent on staffing, but he forgot my sister's 18th birthday. Presumably his secretary missed that someone was turning 18 or something. Can't be that good staffing

More seriously, there's a large difference between getting your company to pay for a new £800 laptop and getting the people underneath you to pay up large amounts of money to pay for a few frivolities.

I'm sure that it's generalising to say frivolities, and that some of them are justified - as someone corrected me on the first page on this thread, thankfully enough - but you cannot seriously tell me that all MPs can entirely justify their expenses.

Don't single out MPs for the sake of it, it's just ignorant, because if you was in their shoes, you'd do it as well.

No I wouldn't. Why would I spend someone else's money when I could spend my own? It isn't the right thing to do, and I lack the lack of conscience to do the wrong thing.

[Saracen]

There should be no expenses.

MP's should be paid a salary and that salary should be enough for them to live on. End of.

Butuz

No, not really,

The thing is, like the rest of, they're not supposed to live on expenses, and they're not supposed to be expected to pay for genuine expense items themselves.

If your boss said "photocopier needs a new toner cartridge. Nip down to Office World and buy one" you wouldn't expect to pay for it out of your own salary, would you?"

If he said "you need to go to the New York office for a week on business", you'd expect to be able to claim the flights and hotels, and if you're like me, you'd expect to be able to claim the cost of eating out while there. So should MPs.

That's the problem. The expenses SYSTEM has been used to supplement income, and many of them have ended up treating it like an entitlement, rather than as a way to reimburse genuine expenses incurred.

Salary is supposed to be remuneration for your time and expertise in doing the job. Expenses are supposed to reimburse you for costs you necessarily incur in doing it, if you pay for them yourself. Sadly, that's not the way it's been run, and that, IMHO, is why people are so angry.

Whilst giving MPs a pay rise to £90k would have caused a stink, it'd be nothing like the stink this scandal has caused, by paying them (in round figures) £65k in salary, and topping it up to £90k (or whatever) using expenses as a back door pay rise.

[Clunk]

It's a political issue, and political issues that make MPs unpopular will hit Labour hardest. Not because they are Labour, but because they are the government.

The political history of this country shows this to very clearly be the case, so unless this has changed completely in recent years, this is still the case, even if you personally don't see it that way.

This scandal will hurt all parties, but it will hurt Labour the most. That's how the masses think.

Look at it like this - a football team loses 10 games in a row. Who gets the blame, and who takes responsibility, and who gets the boot at the end of the day?

The manager.

Even if it's the striker who can't score to save his life. You don't sack the striker, you sack the manager.

The fans call for the managers head, not the goalkeepers.

So the fans (voters) will kick out the manager (Labour government) because the team (country, economy, MPs popularity) are not doing as good as they would like. Managers fault or not, this is how it will be.

But this hasn't ever happened before, so it's not something that you can look back on and say who'll be worst affected?

I'm not with your footballing analogy, sorry This isn't about a team (Labour vs Conservative) failure, it's about a system failure (The rules of football ), so maybe we could think of MPs as FIFA.

Right, I'm giving up now

[Tzarbo]

The voters will still punish who they see as most to blame, and the most to blame are the people in charge, and the people in charge are... you can fill the rest in yourself.

Didn't you read Saracens post on the subject?

[Clunk]

Roll on the next election

[santa claus]

Oh, and that "snouts in the public trough" remark I made .... some of you may remember an argument a few months ago with a member who accused me of alleging politicians were "corrupt" because I said many of them had their snouts in the trough. He ended up getting suspended and, as far as I know, never came back. Which is a shame, because now I'd be saying "see what I meant yet?"

Oi, stop lording it. You were right, that should be enough .

Salary is supposed to be remuneration for your time and expertise in doing the job. Expenses are supposed to reimburse you for costs you necessarily incur in doing it, if you pay for them yourself. Sadly, that's not the way it's been run, and that, IMHO, is why people are so angry.

Spot on. Next election I will be voting Saracen

[MadduckUK]

saracen for king!

[santa claus]

Chancellor of the Exchequer?

[MadduckUK]

is that shadow? his eyes seem more... normal?

[santa claus]

Yup, it's Shadow. His bra was too tight.

[Andy3536]

Yep, but only now they've all been outed as cheats and charlatans. Cameron knew what was going on, all the MP's knew what was going on and now he's desperately trying to claw back some credibility by going all "hard line". Too little too late I'm afraid.

It's absolutly right to say he's trying to claw back some credibility, but too little too late?

The origional point i was trying to make is although all partys have been hit bad, Cameron by his actions has managed to claw back that little more that the others. Let's face it, Browns youtube apperance has achived nothing but to see him be the butt of a good few jokes and he's hardly been sen since.
I'm not saying he's going to do well out of this as such, as many that would have voted conservative will now not, but mabee they won't loose as many voters as Labour?


What still bafles me though out of the whole thing is the amount that are still employed. Surely those that have payed back the money are admitting thier guilt? And despite what expences have been passed, luxurys were against the rules of the expences. Many of these polotitions should be arrested for fruad and those that approved these claims shouls be sacked and investigated.