Jaguar Forum banner
1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,281 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
After all the bad press over the expenses scandal involving false accounting, second homes, property switching and the resulting resignations and sackings, not to mention prosecutions, you would have thought that IPSA would have got it all under control to reduce the outlay and the ridicule since 2009.

After all, that was supposed to be their raison d'être. But not a bit of it, the MPs are still at it big time!

Annual so-called 'business costs' for the year 2016/17 have just been published admitting a spend of £109.9 million! Now I grant you that's down from £113m last year but a significant increase over the 2010/11 total of £79m.

Added to which the IPSA boss is reputedly on an annual salary in excess of £70k pa for just a 2-day week! Probably plus expenses! Nice work if you can get it.

In my book any watchdog that is going to be in any way effective must be independent, which IPSA certainly is not.

Howsabout increasing MPs annual salaries from the current £75k to £125k and say right, that's it, you claim no expenses on top of this salary, the only exception being travel to and from Westminster from your Constituency, for which only public transport receipts will be refunded, NOT first class, plus low mileage 'local' London taxi journeys.

Aside from the office they have available by allocation at Westminster, if they require staff and/or other 'business' expenses then it comes out of their own salary.

The taxpayer to fund (by private purchase not rental) blocks of 1-bed flats to accommodate each qualifying MP whose Constituency border is outside a radius of 10 miles from Parliament and to charge an appropriate fixed rent to the MP if the individual wishes to take up the offer.

So no more claiming for second homes (flipping) or accommodation in London or elsewhere and certainly no mortgage/refurbishment/improvement expenses.

No more bureaucracy. No more fiddling.

I'm sure some of you far cleverer than I might find fault with such a cunning plan?

What say you? ... :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,042 Posts
I quite like the idea of a barrack block for MP's,will there be a seperate one for each type?

ie
Male
Female
Cannot make their mind up...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,642 Posts
You rotter, what a spoilsport!! What is the point of becoming a politician if you can't feather your own nest and fill your pockets with all that lovely loot! After all the poor darlings have a limited lifespan at it and then they have to move up to the House of Lunatics, sorry Lords.

Let them be I say :twisted:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,377 Posts
If you give them a rise to £125k, they will have to pay 50p in the pound over £80k if Labour get in so it wouldn't happen. The put them in barracks has been mentioned but it would make such a good target for terrorists they scrapped it. Aren't there more MP's now? They are looking to reduce the numbers so hopefully reduce the cost of keeping them.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,744 Posts
MP's would never accept the same rules as the serfs. They are Special.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,619 Posts
I gave you a like Rowley because I agree with your thoughts on IPSA but the rest I simply scanned through ,
thats not to denigrate the validity nor disagree with anything you say in fact I suggest that my reaction is probably
part of the problem . In this 24/7 ever-changing Media Merrygoround , the Topics change so quickly and the man
on the street is bounced on relentlessly to the next Topic . I think the Public would now take the view " its not as
bad as it was , IPSA are keeping an eye on it " which is quite wrong in my opinion .
As I get older its almost like that Sinatra song " The Autumn of my Years ", the days just whizz past in an absolute
blur ever shorter and your constantly reflecting , is this 24/7 thing ageing us all quicker , pushing us along to the next
Topic and preventing anything from ever being remedied and do governments take advantage of that fact ?
In other words are we always beaten before we start in Topics such as MPs Expenses . Sorry for the slight derail Rowley
but thats my thoughs on it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,281 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
On reflection and accounting for Chesh's valid comment, perhaps a fixed salary of £200k pa might be more appropriate on the condition that the number of MPs be reduced to nearer 500.

As for IPSA, yes Paul, any internal self-regulating policing system is by definition bound to be viewed with suspicion by outsiders but in this case I look upon it as particularly hypocritical as MPs of all Parties are constantly professing about how things should be 'transparent' and the Government 'accountable'.

Alas Jim I doubt that MPs financial advisers/accountants are privy to the reclamation of Parliamentary expenses rather they would prefer to leave that can of worms and dubious responsibility to IPSA, a suspicion that is reinforced by the terms of "The Scheme of MPs' Business Costs and Expenses" - origin IPSA.

Extra to 'essential expenses' each MP is provided with a 'Government Procurement Card' which is in effect a company credit card holding to a monthly limit of £4,000, the bill for which is settled direct by IPSA.

Receipts are not always required when using this card and it is down to IPSA to check each and every entry to ensure proper legality of usage, in itself a level of admin that I would suspect is extremely tedious not to mention both vagarious and undependable.

The above Scheme rules document, all 56 pages of it, is actually quite encompassing but it does fall down on several counts principally surrounding many areas of ambiguity, too much use of the word 'contingency' (allied to words like 'Fund' and 'payment'), no apparent restriction on employing partners/relatives and inordinately high budget limits that doubtless encourage MPs to claim the absolute maximum by using family as employees, without fear of criticism.

It's all very shady and I do wish that those who hold such high office on our behalf could more often practice what they preach.

But hey-ho, 'twas ever thus I guess ... and 'twill ever be so for the foreseeable, as far as I can see at least?! :-|
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22,331 Posts
That's the people I meant, Rowley, not the MP"s own accountants.

I didn't know the name, thanks.

So why aren't they in the spotlight beam, since they paid out without validity and justification checks?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,281 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
So why aren't they in the spotlight beam, since they paid out without validity and justification checks?
I fear Jim that it's much to do with MPs claiming 'data protection' or 'Parliamentary Privilege' within the Westminster inner circle of which both they and IPSA are integral parts.

They cannot be fully investigated, which is why they don't want expense policing to be monitored independently.

Ambiguity is rife in both Places, we all see and hear it every day, they absolutely thrive on it.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,744 Posts
If you give them a rise to £125k, they will have to pay 50p in the pound over £80k if Labour get in so it wouldn't happen. The "Put them in barracks" has been mentioned but it would make such a good target for terrorists they scrapped it. Aren't there more MP's now? They are looking to reduce the numbers so hopefully reduce the cost of keeping them.
Never understood why they "scrapped" the barracks idea. Well, I do, it would have cost the MP's too much.

Here we have Buck palace. Owned by the people, over 750 rooms, and located in the most secure part of the country with Army barracks to left and rear, Heli pads, no doubt gun emplacements tucked away within the grounds, and probably tunnels to local escape routes as well...

Equipped with soldiers that actually have ammunition in their weapons. The ideal place to put the MP's. Even now, whilst the HoP is refurbished. But not even considered. Wonder why?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,744 Posts
I think there's laws against over crowding though. Lots of space in Buck House.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,744 Posts
I think it's called "banter".

I'm on courses all week.... Bored stupid.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,744 Posts
Still under discussion. My lot have got wind of it and are now looking to "sweeten my package". Just offered me a chunk more dosh and a job at London City Police. My Project Manager left his job last week, if I go, they are losing someone who know's all of his jobs... So I think I'm going to have to think long and hard on this one, because as Red said, I'm getting on and my potential to earn isn't going to last much longer...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22,331 Posts
I know what you mean, it's initially a worry about fitting in and producing what's needed, but usually it's just a passing low confidence.

OK, so if the money won't be too different and there's a firm job now, will you still enjoy staying with them in London with that daily journey?

Or is the other job in London anyway, I've forgotten if you mentioned?

.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,281 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
Oi you two banterers ... perhaps you would rather rename the thread 'Oldies Job Centre' ?? :-D
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top