http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8110022.stm -- Nige, BMW K1200S Range Rover Vogue Suzuki GSX-R600 Racebike
Using the patented Mavis Beacon "Hunt&Peck" Technique, Nige A great deal of time and money will be spent, and no prosecutions will result. Great. -- Wicked Uncle Nigel - "He's hopeless, but he's honest" I have already made the greatest contribution to the fight against climate change that I can make: I have decided not to breed. Now quit bugging me and go and talk to the Catholics.
Thought this is rather apt (albeit simple): http://www.fmft.net/Benefit-Thieves MPs expenses benefit fraud.jpg (Not a ginge I hope - too many similar links to check) But yes, I also think that sod-all will happen in the end. Geo
I agree - but they won't, because if they do, they lose their "entitlement" to the 'parachute payment', initially worth about £30k and with bolstering expenses and resettlement claims, up to about £80k. Golden Goodbyes for the self-confessed over-claimers.
Have a look and find out... 2nd home allowance: £0 London Supplement: £2,812 Office: £7,735 Staffing: £93,501 Central stationery: £1,185 Stationery & postage: £3,918 IT provision: £1,193 Staff cover: £0 Communcations: £9,671 Travel: £1,136 Total: £121,151 Full (albeit censored) receipts: http://mpsallowances.parliament.uk/mpslordsandoffices/hocallowances/allo wances-by-mp/keith-hill/Keith_Hill_0708_IEP.pdf
£93,501 is for staff - he didn't claim anything for a 2nd home. http://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/keith_hill/streatham#expenses He's 65 years old. He announced his retirement on May 2007 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keith_Hill_(politician)
How many people do you think you will be able to employ on a £90k budget? I'm assuming that he runs a 'drop in centre' that has to be staffed for at least a couple of hours each day then he'll need a secretary and a couple of researchers to be able to answer questions without just guessing. Given the amount IT contractors can earn he's paying his staff shit.
your comment seemed to imply his expenses are unreasonable due to his proximity to Westminster. Bonwick has provided the rest of my answer.
<waves> Mine did. £20k last year, despite living TWO WHOLE MINUTES walk from a tube station which is 40 min and one (cross-the-platform) change to Westminster.
Let us know when he's broken the law. I want to see the ones who've made illegal claims sacked and then banged up for fraud but it's the rules that need changing when it comes to the greedy bastards making claims that are legal but not justifiable.
I wouldn't want a 40 minute tube journey to some ghastly suburb, after spending the day consuming subsidised food & beverages inbetween my naps in committee rooms and walks through the division lobbies. A little pied-à- terre in Millbank would be essential to ensure efficient representation of one's constituents.
I've re-read my post a couple of times and even applying ROT13 doesn't make it say that. The use of the words "greedy bastards" and "legal but not justifiable" shouldn't suggest that I think it's ok. Yeah, right.
Given it's London I'm guessing two full timers and a couple of part timers, which probably isn't unreasonable for dealing with several hundred thousand constituents.
So let's say £30k per annum wages? Not a great salary if you're working and living in central London or working and commuting into central London. Not to worry, the MP in question was obviously taking the piss by paying such a high wage for fictitious staff doing a non-existant job.
Don't be absurd. A loaded labour rate is more than the salary paid, with employer's contributions, etc. I don't know the UK percentages, but in the US the loaded rate is 150% of salary paid. So, 90k would get you two people on 30k/year. Or one full-timer and two part-time.
Ding. This whole thing is a nonsense anyway. There have been a few who took the piss royally, but the majority didn't afaics. Problem was, it was an honour system and some representatives were sadly lacking in that. Whatever. My view is that if someone is elected MP or to any other public office, they should not be out of pocket at all. This includes second flats near their place of (public) work, but after their time in the job they shouldn't have used taxpayers' money to turn a profit on the property. They should get paid all and every expense incurred, no more, no less.
