MP expenses.

[Park Life 71]

Stephen Fry (as always) articulated my thoughts best when he said the only shocking thing here is that the outrage is enough to make the MP's grovell....something they'll not do over Iraq or ID cards or their reckless economic policy.

 

Let he who has not claimed a few miles extra for petrol write the first email to the sun "have your say" segment.

 

Not really on the same scale is it lanky?

[Renton 22493]

The point scoring aspect is obviously more important than the issue itself btw.

Chezzy's and Renton always do it and try to derail what is an otherwise interesting debate.

 

Rubbish, you quoted some random figure and I pulled you up on it. You then couldn't back that figure up with anything on the entire internet. And now you claim I've derailed the discussion?

 

I know my local MP quite well and although I haven't seen his bank account I know enough to suggest you're talking cobblers Fop. For the record, I think it's a pretty stressful and difficult job which should come with adequate renumeration. The present system obviously is not working or at the very least is not being seen to be working though, and needs changing. Simple.

[Renton 22493]

The point scoring aspect is obviously more important than the issue itself btw.

Chezzy's and Renton always do it and try to derail what is an otherwise interesting debate.

 

And in this case they are doing it on purpose. This is clearly an issue of breach of trust and good practice.

 

Trouble with you Parky is that analytical thought isn't your strong point. You'll believe any old cobblers if it suits your prejudices. I still love you for it though.

[Park Life 71]

The point scoring aspect is obviously more important than the issue itself btw.

Chezzy's and Renton always do it and try to derail what is an otherwise interesting debate.

 

Rubbish, you quoted some random figure and I pulled you up on it. You then couldn't back that figure up with anything on the entire internet. And now you claim I've derailed the discussion?

 

I know my local MP quite well and although I haven't seen his bank account I know enough to suggest you're talking cobblers Fop. For the record, I think it's a pretty stressful and difficult job which should come with adequate renumeration. The present system obviously is not working or at the very least is not being seen to be working though, and needs changing. Simple.

 

Who is he?

[Fop 1]

The point scoring aspect is obviously more important than the issue itself btw.

Chezzy's and Renton always do it and try to derail what is an otherwise interesting debate.

 

Rubbish, you quoted some random figure and I pulled you up on it. You then couldn't back that figure up with anything on the entire internet. And now you claim I've derailed the discussion?

 

I know my local MP quite well and although I haven't seen his bank account I know enough to suggest you're talking cobblers Fop. For the record, I think it's a pretty stressful and difficult job which should come with adequate renumeration. The present system obviously is not working or at the very least is not being seen to be working though, and needs changing. Simple.

 

 

 

Fop will ask you the same question that shut Chezzy up and made him turn tail and scuttle off:

 

 

Do you really honestly believe that £65,000 wage and expenses is all that MPs get? A simple yes or no will do.

[Park Life 71]

The point scoring aspect is obviously more important than the issue itself btw.

Chezzy's and Renton always do it and try to derail what is an otherwise interesting debate.

 

And in this case they are doing it on purpose. This is clearly an issue of breach of trust and good practice.

 

Trouble with you Parky is that analytical thought isn't your strong point. You'll believe any old cobblers if it suits your prejudices. I still love you for it though.

 

I see what you're doing here.

[Renton 22493]

The point scoring aspect is obviously more important than the issue itself btw.

Chezzy's and Renton always do it and try to derail what is an otherwise interesting debate.

 

Rubbish, you quoted some random figure and I pulled you up on it. You then couldn't back that figure up with anything on the entire internet. And now you claim I've derailed the discussion?

 

I know my local MP quite well and although I haven't seen his bank account I know enough to suggest you're talking cobblers Fop. For the record, I think it's a pretty stressful and difficult job which should come with adequate renumeration. The present system obviously is not working or at the very least is not being seen to be working though, and needs changing. Simple.

 

Who is he?

 

Alan Campbell (Tynemouth). He's a whip at present I think, no idea if he's on that Telegraph list or not.

[Guest alex]

The point scoring aspect is obviously more important than the issue itself btw.

Chezzy's and Renton always do it and try to derail what is an otherwise interesting debate.

 

And in this case they are doing it on purpose. This is clearly an issue of breach of trust and good practice.

 

Trouble with you Parky is that analytical thought isn't your strong point. You'll believe any old cobblers if it suits your prejudices. I still love you for it though.

 

I see what you're doing here.

Describing you to a T?

[Renton 22493]

The point scoring aspect is obviously more important than the issue itself btw.

Chezzy's and Renton always do it and try to derail what is an otherwise interesting debate.

 

Rubbish, you quoted some random figure and I pulled you up on it. You then couldn't back that figure up with anything on the entire internet. And now you claim I've derailed the discussion?

 

I know my local MP quite well and although I haven't seen his bank account I know enough to suggest you're talking cobblers Fop. For the record, I think it's a pretty stressful and difficult job which should come with adequate renumeration. The present system obviously is not working or at the very least is not being seen to be working though, and needs changing. Simple.

 

 

 

Fop will ask you the same question that shut Chezzy up and made him turn tail and scuttle off:

 

 

Do you really honestly believe that £65,000 wage and expenses is all that MPs get? A simple yes or no will do.

 

It very much depends on the MP and their external interests. If you mean from the taxpayer though, then yes, obviously.

[Happy Face 29]

Stephen Fry (as always) articulated my thoughts best when he said the only shocking thing here is that the outrage is enough to make the MP's grovell....something they'll not do over Iraq or ID cards or their reckless economic policy.

 

Let he who has not claimed a few miles extra for petrol write the first email to the sun "have your say" segment.

 

Not really on the same scale is it lanky?

 

er....that's the point innit?

 

The economy is COMPLETELEY fucked. We borrowed more in the last 8 years than in the history of UK banking. But the important thing for journalists to pick up an MP on is his expenses claim for a box of tampax.

 

I'd have thought you'd be all over the complicity between the government and the press in driving the main issues off the front pages and enraging white van man with a red herring.

 

They're fuckers. But I'm more concerned that the taleban are 60 miles from the nukes in Pakistan.

[Fop 1]

The point scoring aspect is obviously more important than the issue itself btw.

Chezzy's and Renton always do it and try to derail what is an otherwise interesting debate.

 

Rubbish, you quoted some random figure and I pulled you up on it. You then couldn't back that figure up with anything on the entire internet. And now you claim I've derailed the discussion?

 

I know my local MP quite well and although I haven't seen his bank account I know enough to suggest you're talking cobblers Fop. For the record, I think it's a pretty stressful and difficult job which should come with adequate renumeration. The present system obviously is not working or at the very least is not being seen to be working though, and needs changing. Simple.

 

 

 

Fop will ask you the same question that shut Chezzy up and made him turn tail and scuttle off:

 

 

Do you really honestly believe that £65,000 wage and expenses is all that MPs get? A simple yes or no will do.

 

It very much depends on the MP and their external interests. If you mean from the taxpayer though, then yes, obviously.

 

So you accept that they do get other things besides the £65,000 and expenses that they get, you just disagree on how much extra they get. Good.

 

 

 

 

 

Now out of interest how much extra do you think they get on top of that £65,000 and expenses (not just directly, but in tax breaks/tax free etc., and indeed extra parliamentary work)?

[Fop 1]

Health minister to repay £41,709

[Guest alex]

The point scoring aspect is obviously more important than the issue itself btw.

Chezzy's and Renton always do it and try to derail what is an otherwise interesting debate.

 

Rubbish, you quoted some random figure and I pulled you up on it. You then couldn't back that figure up with anything on the entire internet. And now you claim I've derailed the discussion?

 

I know my local MP quite well and although I haven't seen his bank account I know enough to suggest you're talking cobblers Fop. For the record, I think it's a pretty stressful and difficult job which should come with adequate renumeration. The present system obviously is not working or at the very least is not being seen to be working though, and needs changing. Simple.

 

 

 

Fop will ask you the same question that shut Chezzy up and made him turn tail and scuttle off:

 

 

Do you really honestly believe that £65,000 wage and expenses is all that MPs get? A simple yes or no will do.

 

It very much depends on the MP and their external interests. If you mean from the taxpayer though, then yes, obviously.

 

So you accept that they do get other things besides the £65,000 and expenses that they get, you just disagree on how much extra they get. Good.

 

 

 

 

 

Now out of interest how much extra do you think they get on top of that £65,000 and expenses (not just directly, but in tax breaks/tax free etc., and indeed extra parliamentary work)?

Not point scoring then, eh?

[Guest alex]

Stephen Fry (as always) articulated my thoughts best when he said the only shocking thing here is that the outrage is enough to make the MP's grovell....something they'll not do over Iraq or ID cards or their reckless economic policy.

 

Let he who has not claimed a few miles extra for petrol write the first email to the sun "have your say" segment.

 

Not really on the same scale is it lanky?

 

er....that's the point innit?

 

The economy is COMPLETELEY fucked. We borrowed more in the last 8 years than in the history of UK banking. But the important thing for journalists to pick up an MP on is his expenses claim for a box of tampax.

 

I'd have thought you'd be all over the complicity between the government and the press in driving the main issues off the front pages and enraging white van man with a red herring.

 

They're fuckers. But I'm more concerned that the taleban are 60 miles from the nukes in Pakistan.

Spot on, as per.

[Fop 1]

The point scoring aspect is obviously more important than the issue itself btw.

Chezzy's and Renton always do it and try to derail what is an otherwise interesting debate.

 

Rubbish, you quoted some random figure and I pulled you up on it. You then couldn't back that figure up with anything on the entire internet. And now you claim I've derailed the discussion?

 

I know my local MP quite well and although I haven't seen his bank account I know enough to suggest you're talking cobblers Fop. For the record, I think it's a pretty stressful and difficult job which should come with adequate renumeration. The present system obviously is not working or at the very least is not being seen to be working though, and needs changing. Simple.

 

 

 

Fop will ask you the same question that shut Chezzy up and made him turn tail and scuttle off:

 

 

Do you really honestly believe that £65,000 wage and expenses is all that MPs get? A simple yes or no will do.

 

It very much depends on the MP and their external interests. If you mean from the taxpayer though, then yes, obviously.

 

 

So you accept that they do get other things besides the £65,000 and expenses that they get, you just disagree on how much extra they get. Good.

 

 

 

 

 

Now out of interest how much extra do you think they get on top of that £65,000 and expenses (not just directly, but in tax breaks/tax free etc., and indeed extra parliamentary work)?

Not point scoring then, eh?

Nope, just trying to get a direct answer. So far Chezzy thought better of it.

 

 

(full marks for the subtle WUMery attempt though alex, the master as usual )

Edited May 13, 2009 by Fop

[Renton 22493]

The point scoring aspect is obviously more important than the issue itself btw.

Chezzy's and Renton always do it and try to derail what is an otherwise interesting debate.

 

Rubbish, you quoted some random figure and I pulled you up on it. You then couldn't back that figure up with anything on the entire internet. And now you claim I've derailed the discussion?

 

I know my local MP quite well and although I haven't seen his bank account I know enough to suggest you're talking cobblers Fop. For the record, I think it's a pretty stressful and difficult job which should come with adequate renumeration. The present system obviously is not working or at the very least is not being seen to be working though, and needs changing. Simple.

 

 

 

Fop will ask you the same question that shut Chezzy up and made him turn tail and scuttle off:

 

 

Do you really honestly believe that £65,000 wage and expenses is all that MPs get? A simple yes or no will do.

 

It very much depends on the MP and their external interests. If you mean from the taxpayer though, then yes, obviously.

 

So you accept that they do get other things besides the £65,000 and expenses that they get, you just disagree on how much extra they get. Good.

 

 

 

 

 

Now out of interest how much extra do you think they get on top of that £65,000 and expenses (not just directly, but in tax breaks/tax free etc., and indeed extra parliamentary work)?

 

I actually meant to say no at that point!

 

 

In any case, if you bothered reading my earlier posts my suggestion is that the system is overhauled so they work full time on parliamentary and constituency issues without external consultancies etc, and they are adequately renumerated for this. Hopefully the good thing about this latest media sensation is that it will make this happen.

[Fop 1]

The point scoring aspect is obviously more important than the issue itself btw.

Chezzy's and Renton always do it and try to derail what is an otherwise interesting debate.

 

Rubbish, you quoted some random figure and I pulled you up on it. You then couldn't back that figure up with anything on the entire internet. And now you claim I've derailed the discussion?

 

I know my local MP quite well and although I haven't seen his bank account I know enough to suggest you're talking cobblers Fop. For the record, I think it's a pretty stressful and difficult job which should come with adequate renumeration. The present system obviously is not working or at the very least is not being seen to be working though, and needs changing. Simple.

 

 

 

Fop will ask you the same question that shut Chezzy up and made him turn tail and scuttle off:

 

 

Do you really honestly believe that £65,000 wage and expenses is all that MPs get? A simple yes or no will do.

 

It very much depends on the MP and their external interests. If you mean from the taxpayer though, then yes, obviously.

 

So you accept that they do get other things besides the £65,000 and expenses that they get, you just disagree on how much extra they get. Good.

 

 

 

 

 

Now out of interest how much extra do you think they get on top of that £65,000 and expenses (not just directly, but in tax breaks/tax free etc., and indeed extra parliamentary work)?

 

I actually meant to say no at that point!

 

 

In any case, if you bothered reading my earlier posts my suggestion is that the system is overhauled so they work full time on parliamentary and constituency issues without external consultancies etc, and they are adequately renumerated for this. Hopefully the good thing about this latest media sensation is that it will make this happen.

 

So you honestly believe that all MPs get is their basic £65,000 and expenses? Not a lot more Fop can say.

[Guest alex]

Nope, just trying to get a direct answer.

If you occasionally gave one you might have more luck.

[Fop 1]

Nope, just trying to get a direct answer.

If you occasionally gave one you might have more luck.

More WUMery (not so suble this time though ).

 

But out of interest what hasn't Fop directly answered in this thread?

[ChezGiven 0]

The point scoring aspect is obviously more important than the issue itself btw.

Chezzy's and Renton always do it and try to derail what is an otherwise interesting debate.

 

Rubbish, you quoted some random figure and I pulled you up on it. You then couldn't back that figure up with anything on the entire internet. And now you claim I've derailed the discussion?

 

I know my local MP quite well and although I haven't seen his bank account I know enough to suggest you're talking cobblers Fop. For the record, I think it's a pretty stressful and difficult job which should come with adequate renumeration. The present system obviously is not working or at the very least is not being seen to be working though, and needs changing. Simple.

 

 

 

Fop will ask you the same question that shut Chezzy up and made him turn tail and scuttle off:

 

 

Do you really honestly believe that £65,000 wage and expenses is all that MPs get? A simple yes or no will do.

 

Being an hour ahead of you, i went for my lunch you knobheed.

 

Going for a coffee and a fag now, so you can wait even longer.

[Fop 1]

The point scoring aspect is obviously more important than the issue itself btw.

Chezzy's and Renton always do it and try to derail what is an otherwise interesting debate.

 

Rubbish, you quoted some random figure and I pulled you up on it. You then couldn't back that figure up with anything on the entire internet. And now you claim I've derailed the discussion?

 

I know my local MP quite well and although I haven't seen his bank account I know enough to suggest you're talking cobblers Fop. For the record, I think it's a pretty stressful and difficult job which should come with adequate renumeration. The present system obviously is not working or at the very least is not being seen to be working though, and needs changing. Simple.

 

 

 

Fop will ask you the same question that shut Chezzy up and made him turn tail and scuttle off:

 

 

Do you really honestly believe that £65,000 wage and expenses is all that MPs get? A simple yes or no will do.

 

Being an hour ahead of you, i went for my lunch you knobheed.

 

Going for a coffee and a fag now, so you can wait even longer.

 

Take your time, just remember it's this you have to answer:

 

As Renton said, thats a no. You've plucked 300k out the air.

 

I dont need google-fu to show you the benchmark either.

 

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/poli...icle2848044.ece

 

Believe what you want, it's exactly what they want you to do after all.

 

 

 

 

 

But do you really honestly believe that £65,000 wage and expenses is all that MPs get? A simple yes or no will do.

 

No, i said they didnt expense claim 235k on average, which is the difference between the average wage and the figure you plucked out yer arse.

 

 

So you accept that they do get other things besides the £65,000 and expenses that they get, you just disagree on how much extra they get. Good.

 

 

 

 

 

Now out of interest how much extra do you think they get on top of that £65,000 and expenses (not just directly, but in tax breaks/free etc., and indeed extra parliamentary work)?

[Renton 22493]

The point scoring aspect is obviously more important than the issue itself btw.

Chezzy's and Renton always do it and try to derail what is an otherwise interesting debate.

 

Rubbish, you quoted some random figure and I pulled you up on it. You then couldn't back that figure up with anything on the entire internet. And now you claim I've derailed the discussion?

 

I know my local MP quite well and although I haven't seen his bank account I know enough to suggest you're talking cobblers Fop. For the record, I think it's a pretty stressful and difficult job which should come with adequate renumeration. The present system obviously is not working or at the very least is not being seen to be working though, and needs changing. Simple.

 

 

 

Fop will ask you the same question that shut Chezzy up and made him turn tail and scuttle off:

 

 

Do you really honestly believe that £65,000 wage and expenses is all that MPs get? A simple yes or no will do.

 

It very much depends on the MP and their external interests. If you mean from the taxpayer though, then yes, obviously.

 

So you accept that they do get other things besides the £65,000 and expenses that they get, you just disagree on how much extra they get. Good.

 

 

 

 

 

Now out of interest how much extra do you think they get on top of that £65,000 and expenses (not just directly, but in tax breaks/tax free etc., and indeed extra parliamentary work)?

 

I actually meant to say no at that point!

 

 

In any case, if you bothered reading my earlier posts my suggestion is that the system is overhauled so they work full time on parliamentary and constituency issues without external consultancies etc, and they are adequately renumerated for this. Hopefully the good thing about this latest media sensation is that it will make this happen.

 

So you honestly believe that all MPs get is their basic £65,000 and expenses? Not a lot more Fop can say.

 

From the treasury? Yes, that's what I believe. You don't seem to be able to refute that from what I can tell. Are you suggesting there are 'secret' expenses on top of what the Telegraph found?

[Fop 1]

The point scoring aspect is obviously more important than the issue itself btw.

Chezzy's and Renton always do it and try to derail what is an otherwise interesting debate.

 

Rubbish, you quoted some random figure and I pulled you up on it. You then couldn't back that figure up with anything on the entire internet. And now you claim I've derailed the discussion?

 

I know my local MP quite well and although I haven't seen his bank account I know enough to suggest you're talking cobblers Fop. For the record, I think it's a pretty stressful and difficult job which should come with adequate renumeration. The present system obviously is not working or at the very least is not being seen to be working though, and needs changing. Simple.

 

 

 

Fop will ask you the same question that shut Chezzy up and made him turn tail and scuttle off:

 

 

Do you really honestly believe that £65,000 wage and expenses is all that MPs get? A simple yes or no will do.

 

It very much depends on the MP and their external interests. If you mean from the taxpayer though, then yes, obviously.

 

So you accept that they do get other things besides the £65,000 and expenses that they get, you just disagree on how much extra they get. Good.

 

 

 

 

 

Now out of interest how much extra do you think they get on top of that £65,000 and expenses (not just directly, but in tax breaks/tax free etc., and indeed extra parliamentary work)?

 

I actually meant to say no at that point!

 

 

In any case, if you bothered reading my earlier posts my suggestion is that the system is overhauled so they work full time on parliamentary and constituency issues without external consultancies etc, and they are adequately renumerated for this. Hopefully the good thing about this latest media sensation is that it will make this happen.

 

So you honestly believe that all MPs get is their basic £65,000 and expenses? Not a lot more Fop can say.

 

From the treasury? Yes, that's what I believe. You don't seem to be able to refute that from what I can tell. Are you suggesting there are 'secret' expenses on top of what the Telegraph found?

 

Just to be absolutely clear in this morass of your usual pedantry:

 

 

Are you saying MPs get no tax breaks, tax free benefits* and other perks of the job that other people don't get? Just their £65,000 + expenses?

 

 

*i.e. advantages, not DHSS

[Renton 22493]

The point scoring aspect is obviously more important than the issue itself btw.

Chezzy's and Renton always do it and try to derail what is an otherwise interesting debate.

 

Rubbish, you quoted some random figure and I pulled you up on it. You then couldn't back that figure up with anything on the entire internet. And now you claim I've derailed the discussion?

 

I know my local MP quite well and although I haven't seen his bank account I know enough to suggest you're talking cobblers Fop. For the record, I think it's a pretty stressful and difficult job which should come with adequate renumeration. The present system obviously is not working or at the very least is not being seen to be working though, and needs changing. Simple.

 

 

 

Fop will ask you the same question that shut Chezzy up and made him turn tail and scuttle off:

 

 

Do you really honestly believe that £65,000 wage and expenses is all that MPs get? A simple yes or no will do.

 

It very much depends on the MP and their external interests. If you mean from the taxpayer though, then yes, obviously.

 

So you accept that they do get other things besides the £65,000 and expenses that they get, you just disagree on how much extra they get. Good.

 

 

 

 

 

Now out of interest how much extra do you think they get on top of that £65,000 and expenses (not just directly, but in tax breaks/tax free etc., and indeed extra parliamentary work)?

 

I actually meant to say no at that point!

 

 

In any case, if you bothered reading my earlier posts my suggestion is that the system is overhauled so they work full time on parliamentary and constituency issues without external consultancies etc, and they are adequately renumerated for this. Hopefully the good thing about this latest media sensation is that it will make this happen.

 

So you honestly believe that all MPs get is their basic £65,000 and expenses? Not a lot more Fop can say.

 

From the treasury? Yes, that's what I believe. You don't seem to be able to refute that from what I can tell. Are you suggesting there are 'secret' expenses on top of what the Telegraph found?

 

Just to be absolutely clear in this morass of your usual pedantry:

 

 

Are you saying MPs get no tax breaks, tax free benefits* and other perks of the job that other people don't get? Just their £65,000 + expenses?

 

 

*i.e. advantages, not DHSS

 

I'm being direct as possible. In monetary terms, they receive a salary and their expenses. They pay their taxes like the rest of us (some may employ clever accountants like many rich people do). I'm not sure what you are getting at but clearly you're worked up about something.

[Fop 1]

The point scoring aspect is obviously more important than the issue itself btw.

Chezzy's and Renton always do it and try to derail what is an otherwise interesting debate.

 

Rubbish, you quoted some random figure and I pulled you up on it. You then couldn't back that figure up with anything on the entire internet. And now you claim I've derailed the discussion?

 

I know my local MP quite well and although I haven't seen his bank account I know enough to suggest you're talking cobblers Fop. For the record, I think it's a pretty stressful and difficult job which should come with adequate renumeration. The present system obviously is not working or at the very least is not being seen to be working though, and needs changing. Simple.

 

 

 

Fop will ask you the same question that shut Chezzy up and made him turn tail and scuttle off:

 

 

Do you really honestly believe that £65,000 wage and expenses is all that MPs get? A simple yes or no will do.

 

It very much depends on the MP and their external interests. If you mean from the taxpayer though, then yes, obviously.

 

So you accept that they do get other things besides the £65,000 and expenses that they get, you just disagree on how much extra they get. Good.

 

 

 

 

 

Now out of interest how much extra do you think they get on top of that £65,000 and expenses (not just directly, but in tax breaks/tax free etc., and indeed extra parliamentary work)?

 

I actually meant to say no at that point!

 

 

In any case, if you bothered reading my earlier posts my suggestion is that the system is overhauled so they work full time on parliamentary and constituency issues without external consultancies etc, and they are adequately renumerated for this. Hopefully the good thing about this latest media sensation is that it will make this happen.

 

So you honestly believe that all MPs get is their basic £65,000 and expenses? Not a lot more Fop can say.

 

From the treasury? Yes, that's what I believe. You don't seem to be able to refute that from what I can tell. Are you suggesting there are 'secret' expenses on top of what the Telegraph found?

 

Just to be absolutely clear in this morass of your usual pedantry:

 

 

Are you saying MPs get no tax breaks, tax free benefits* and other perks of the job that other people don't get? Just their £65,000 + expenses?

 

 

*i.e. advantages, not DHSS

 

I'm being direct as possible. In monetary terms, they receive a salary and their expenses. They pay their taxes like the rest of us (some may employ clever accountants like many rich people do). I'm not sure what you are getting at but clearly you're worked up about something.

 

The question is simple enough:

 

Are you saying MPs get no tax breaks, tax free benefits* and other perks of the job that other people don't get? Just their £65,000 + expenses?

 

Yes or no will do.

 

(although frankly you've shown your ignorance with the tax comment already - do you fancy googling to see what taxes MPs get exemptions and breaks from? )