Wednesday, March 25, 2009

Poll : 2% Think MPs Honest About Expenses

A PoliticsHome poll finds that:

  • 2% of respondents believe “virtually all MPs are honest about claiming expenses”.
  • 86% of respondents think MP’s expense arrangements are “too generous”.

As many as 2%?  Surely that is within the margin of error?

Sunday, March 22, 2009

McNulty Should Pay Back His Fiddle

Guido went to school with Tony McNulty and it seems that some of the moral guidance he was given by the Irish priests has been lost on him after spending so long in Westminster.

The Mail on Sunday reports that the taxpayer is paying his parent’s housing costs – they live in his constituency home in Harrow (11 miles from Big Ben) while he lives in Hammersmith (3 miles from Westminster).  Note that it is about half-an-hour on the Metropolitan tube line from his constituency home to Westmnster tube station.  Why on earth in those circumstances should he need to avail himself of the second home allowance?

The remnants of a Catholic guilt complex have just about survived his years in the parliament of whores, because after being caught he told the Mail on Sunday that:

  • He was stopping claiming the allowance.
  • He thinks MPs who live within 60 miles of Westminster should be barred from claiming the mortgage subsidy.

He then tried to muddy the issue by claiming that Tory frontbenchers also abuse the allowance – true – which breaks the terms of the ceasefire on this issue agreed by whips from both parties.  He then backtracked and said “that is entirely appropriate.” They really are all at it.

McNulty has claimed over £100,000 from the allowance – despite him and his  quangocrat wife receiving an income from the taxpayers of some £1/3 million a year.  Do you think there is any chance he will repay it – if he thinks it inappropriate to claim it now – surely it was inappropriate in the past as well?  Like Spelman he should have to repay what he cheated from the taxpayers and be grateful he isn’t facing charges for obtaining monies by deception.

Guido wants to remind readers that the parliamentary committee set up to review the system – following repeated exposure of MPs defrauding the taxpayers – is recommending that the rules be changed to make the fiddle permissable.  MPs deciding MPs should continue to be able to get away with ripping off the taxpayers.  They really do like to stick their snouts in the taxpayer’s trough and crap it out on the public.

Monday, March 9, 2009

Union Boss "Wins" With 5.4% of the Vote

Unite, the union which effectively controls the purse strings of the Labour Party, had an election for leader and nobody bothered. 85% of voters were in the none-of-the-above category.

With only 15% bothering to vote, only 60,048 (5.4%) out of a claimed membership of 1,096,51 voted to keep Derek Simpson in the bling style to which he is accustomed. Not exactly a resounding endorsement.

Wednesday, March 4, 2009

Spelman Ruling Establishes Important Principle

Guido argued strongly ahead of the decision that whatever the Standards and Privileges Committee ruled exactly, Spelman should have to pay back the cash she fiddled from her parliamentary expenses to pay the nanny. Given that the Committee of MPs invariably gives MPs under investigation the benefit of the doubt it seemed likely that she would get away with some claim ignorance of the rules, cite some ambiguity, claim it was a technical or administrative over-sight or whatever. These people are politicians after all, spin and blame avoidance are their way of life.

Nevertheless, even though it was ruled that she had “inadvertently” fiddled the money, she has been ordered to pay some of the money back on the basis that the taxpayer was paying the higher rate for a nanny not the rate for a parliamentary assistant and she therefore has to repay the difference.

They gave her the benefit of the doubt. Spelman ironically contradicted herself in her own evidence and shot herself in the foot. [Full report here.]

Mrs Spelman told us that Mrs Haynes “would have been most interested in the take-home pay received for her employment as a whole.” In our view, this does not help Mrs Spelman’s case. Rather, it tends to support the Commissioner’s view that Mrs Haynes would have been unlikely to have worked as Mrs Spelman’s nanny without some separate financial remuneration. The fact that Mrs Haynes was paid nothing as Mrs Spelman’s nanny while she was also working and being paid as Mrs Spelman’s administration assistant, but after giving up the latter role was paid a salary as nanny of £13,000, is in our view telling.

Many would say that just demonstrates what a poor advocate she is, others would say she was just being honest. Nevertheless she hired her own nanny subsequently at the rate she was previously paying Tina Haynes out of our taxes.

Guido regards this as a victory over the piggies, it established the principle that wrongfully claimed expenses – even if “inadvertently” claimed – must be repaid. Take note Jacqui. So now what do we do about the Wintertons?

Tuesday, March 3, 2009

MPs Push Through Two Rule Changes to Hide Fiddles

It is a legal requirement that on the ballot paper an MP gives his home address. It is a connection that allows voters to know where their representative lives. It carries a risk of course, all celebrities would prefer nutters not to know where they live, but that is the price for being in the public eye.

The link has survived the threats of anarchist bombers, fears of Nazi invasion and IRA terrorism, survived until now. Ask yourself why MPs yesterday voted to keep their home addresses secret for the first time in parliamentary history. Is it really over fears for security? Is it actually because they want to keep things private and make it more difficult to discover that they are fiddling their expenses or have us know in what style they live at our expense? Isn’t it really because they want to keep on troughing out of sight.

That is not all, Guido wants to remind co-conspirators that because so many MPs are getting caught fiddling the main home / second home allowance – Julian Lewis is the latest – MPs are also planning to change the rules in the Green Book to make the fiddle permissible. Take a moment to take that in.

The Speaker appointed committee supposedly to look into tightening up the rules and improving transparency has recommended that the biggest and most expensive fiddle committed by MPs be made permissible. It is a Kafkaesque joke at our expense. It will no longer be a blatant fiddle by MPs defrauding the taxpayer, it will be within the rules.

Also the provision in the rules that “any allowance for overnight costs arising from Parliamentary duties in London may not be used for accommodation expenses in respect of a residence designated by an hon Member as his main residence for tax purposes” will not be included in the new Green Book. So the pigs will be able to maximise their capital gains exemption on their HMRC defined primary residence and maximise their expense claims on their self-determined primary residence for ripping off the taxpayer. Only venal MPs would fix the laws for themselves so that they can profitably legally have two different primary residences.

They might as well just spit in our faces and send us the bill for cleaning up.

Monday, March 2, 2009

Cui Bono M’Lords?

The Construction Bill passing through the House of Lords is a classic of its kind. Technical, boring and of little interest to most people, except for those in the industry who will profit or lose from amendments to the tune of millions. Lord O’Neill, the former Labour MP turned ermine-clad troughing piggy, decided to withdraw amendments to the bill after The Times’ Sam Coates spotted that he was paid by the Specialist Engineering Contractors’ Group.

Guido’s co-conspirator from the property world has now spotted that Lord O’Neill’s withdrawn amendments from the Local Democracy, Economic Development, Construction Bill have recently been re-tabled by Lord Borrie. The same exact amendments (Amendments 203A to 217A) without alteration.

Compare Lord O’Neill’s amendments to Lord Borrie’s amendments.

Guido has gone to the trouble of underling the differences between the two amendments in red. Perhaps Lord Borrie personally feels strongly about construction contracts or he’s just mates with Lord O’Neill. Either way I’m sure Lord O’Neill’s sponsors, the Specialist Engineering Contractors’ Group, are happy with the coincidence.

They really are all at it in the Parliament of Whores…

Tuesday, February 24, 2009

+++ Source : Spelman Report Not Officially Released Today +++

The Standards and Privileges Committee has received the report this morning from John Lyon, but is not expected to issue anything official until later this week.

UPDATE : Jonathan Isaby is reporting over on ConservativeHome that the committee could not come to a consensus conclusion and that the chairman, “Sir George Young, intends using the next week to take soundings from among the committee with the aim of forging a consensus by the time the committee meets again next Tuesday.”

UPDATE II : The feeling is that Spelman is in trouble. If she was only going to get a slap on the wrist, why the delay?

Spelman Should Pay Back the Nanny Cash

Whatever the Standards and Privileges Committee rule today (Guido has the whitewash removing solvents ready) Spelman should have to pay back the cash she fiddled from her parliamentary expenses to pay the nanny.

If, as Spelman has been spinning, the Lyon inquiry reports that there is no evidence of deliberate wrongdoing or a breach of Commons rules, this will infuriate many parents like Mr & Mrs Fawkes, who have to pay for childcare out of post-tax income. To pay a nanny costs middle-class parents some £40,000 a year in pre-tax income. We are expected to believe that Spelman’s nanny was actually her constituency secretary* thus paid for by the taxpayer and that in return for her childcare duties her only compensation was room and board. Who really believes that the money was not payment for her childcare duties? Unbelievable, it simply does not wash.

If anyone knows of a nanny willing to work for only room and board can you please let Mrs Fawkes know, because we have never heard of such a deal. This was a complete and utter p*ss-take out of the taxpayer. Here is the acid test – if it really was completely above board and as she claims – why did she stop the arrangement? This benefits fiddle was too much, Spelman should pay back the cash even if the Committee rules it was “not deliberate”.

Sunday, February 22, 2009

Sunday Sleaze Round-Up

The Sunday Herald reports that Chancellor Alistair Darling claimed tens of thousands of taxpayers money for his designated “second home” at the same time as renting out a flat in London. He actually has some five homes to choose from.

John Reid, the former home secretary, Charles Kennedy and government whip Tommy McAvoy exploited the same perk to build their own personal property portfolio.

You the taxpayer subsidised them building up a property portfolio. This scam is rife.

Gordon Brown faces censure by the Standards Commissioner, for failing to declare £1,600 in rent from subletting his constituency office to Labour Party allies. He claims from the taxpayer for the cost of the offices that he sublet.

David Miliband has been indulging in more creative accounting to avoid inheritance taxes – he should just wait for Osborne to become chancellor. How does the son of a Marxist professor end up living in a £1.3 million home without ever having a proper job outside politics?

Even some Labour MPs think Jacqui Smith is troughing it too much with her second home fiddle and they stay for three nights a week in London hotels for less than a £100 a night. Costing taxpayers much less than she claims to stay at her sisters…

Who Wants to be a Millionaire MEP?

No one is really surprised by MEP’s expense fiddles. The Taxpayers’ Alliance has got a leaked copy of the confidential Galvin Report into Euro-fiddles. The Galvin Report, named after Robert Galvin, the EU Internal Audit Official whose name is on its front cover, was written at the end of 2006 as an audit of the expenses and allowances claimed by a sample of more than 160 MEPs.. Some of the brazen fiddles are just complete p*ss-takes. The Taxpayers’ Alliance shows how it is possible to become a millionaire in a single term as an MEP with shrewd claiming of expenses and allowances. See the summary here [pdf]. British MEPs will be taking home 47% more after June 2009, nice work if you can get it…

Seen Elsewhere

BBC: It Was Guido Wot Won It | MediaGuido
Nick Robinson’s Britain First Selfie | Metro
Dyson: Leave German Dominated EU, Join EFTA |
How UKIP Won Rochester | Seb Payne
Labour’s Islington Problem | Harry Phibbs
Ed Lost More Than a By-Election | Labour Uncut
Labour the Biggest Losers in Rochester | Speccie
Thornberry a Gift to Farage | Nick Wood
Is Left Finally Turning Against EU? | Dan Hannan
Labour Votes Going Green | Guardian
UKIP Winning Class War | Tim Stanley


Find out more about PLMR AD-MS


Ralph Miliband on the English…

“The Englishman is a rabid nationalist. They are perhaps the most nationalist people in the world.”



Left on Left says:

The lefties are attacking because the panellist is a millionaire and lives in a London home worth upwards of two million. Someone had best tell them he’s called Ed Miliband.


Tip off Guido
Web Guido's Archives

Subscribe me to:






RSS


AddThis Feed Button
Archive


Labels
Guido Reads
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,600 other followers