I looked at the courtesy copy of the Fail in Sainesbugs cafe today (A double dose of grief).
On the inside page there was an an attack on Jonathan Ross for being homophobic (Because he made a gay joke) – Cheered me up no end.
Now this is a dilemma. If people have been fiddling expenses, then I don’t see that should be something that they are easily let off of, and yes I see a valid argument that it should be treated as fraud.
But I find myself unable to support a Daily Mail campaign…
Fair enough front page for a change (if a touch melodramatic), if anybody else was caught at this kind of thing they’d be taken to court and MP’s certainly shouldn’t be an exception.
As with the carrier bags and the Stephen Lawrence case though, it would be a bit rich for “The Mail”’s “Campaign” to claim the credit!
“Funny how 80% of the faces on that front page are Labour.”
The whole thing benefits the Conservatives. Although all parties are implicated, Labour with their dismal poll showing can be effectively destroyed with this scandal whilst the more popular Tories can use it to their advantage. Notice how Cameron was very quick to demand that his MPs stop making excessive claims and pay back money (even though he’ll have known this was going on as long as anyone else in Parliament)? The investigation was started by the Telegraph and has been enthusiastically picked-up by the nastier Tory press. For all the “nest of rats” and “bring back Cromwell!” anti-politician populism that’s come out of this, ultimately the Cameronite “New Tories” can use this to their advantage which Brown’s collapsing Labour Party will be sunk by it. It’s doubtless no coincidence that the breaking of the story happened shortly before the upcoming elections too.
Presumably the Mail would also want brought to justice all MPs who voted for the invasion of Iraq for being complicit in war crimes? Perhaps a tad more serious than the relatively small amount of money some MPs have fiddled.
The tragedy here is how this story has been used to score party-political points.
This is largely down to Cameron et al only agreeing to them going back 4yrs which obviously is going to make the party in power look the worst.
Had they gone back a decent length of time – say to 1970 – it would have cut the ground from under that sort of nonsense.
I doubt too many MPs did what they did for personal gain…..with one huge exception.
The 2nd home.
Why should the taxpayer fund an MP’s 2nd (London) home when they can later sell it and make a personal fortune (even if Capital gains was levied – and as we have seen this is by no means assured)?
Even if the taxpayer is funding a mortgage interest only loan it is highly likely that over 4, 8, 12 or more years property prices will move in such a way as to generate a huge profit.
Why should they pocket any of this?
I’d also love to know how come the likes of Cameron (personally extremely well off) managed to always come in year after year just on the limit of what was allowed to be claimed.
I do know the answer – and it’s true of most of them – they claimed everything going not for themselves but for their organisation.
I can understand the smaller parties doing this but not the likes of the tory party – or the Labour party.
I’m sure that if everything was brought out into the open it would dispel a lot of the attitude that MPs are only in it for themselves, but it would also open a can of worms about how the public is by underhand means funding the political parties.
The first time I seen this headline I thought it read, “Bring them justice,” in which case I thought that the entire cabinet had been kidnapped by the FARC and were being held hostage. Then I read it again and it said, “Bring them to Justice,” in which case I noticed that the Mail is using the same font for this front page as what it usually uses for kidnapped white kids and immigration.
Can we now make it a rule that any commentator wishing to comment on this will now have to publish his own expense claims for the last 4 years on the web the same day – may cut down the volume of largely hypocritical abuse
Clearly, they were all fucking with the system and milking it to an inch of its life, but even though none of them acted within the spirit of the rules at all, they all acted within the LETTER of the rules, and that’s all the law is concerned with.
The Mail knows this and is just playing to the peanut gallery and mob emotion to sell papers.
…also I wonder how many ‘private prosecutions’ (i.e. libel cases) The Mail is subject to every year, and how many of them are ‘bought their way out of’ (settled out of court) every year? I’d say at least 5 or 6 and 100% respectively.
Steven…precisely. You can’t arrest people for staying within the rules, no matter how stupid those rules actually are. There needs to be a genuine debate about how to deal with the resulting mess, but ultimately these claims were all allowed under the system, and no laws have been broken.
Doesn’t alter the fact that it seriously takes the piss, though, and it’s massively damaged the credibility of politicians.
You can be sure that if McBroon and ZanuLab ever arrested people for breahing the spirit of the law but not the actual letter of the law the likes of the DM would be the first to scream the place down.
Not a bad idea.
Let’s start with the DM, they haven’t actually broken the law but I’d imagine a case claiming they’d briken the spirit of the law in regards to damaging the national psyche would be a pretty open and shut case.
Up against the wall with them!
I have to agree with the Mail on this one (it does happen in a blue moon!)
You think that the way “The Fail” is carrying on they were the ones who found the story on this, not “The Telegraph”
Funny how 80% of the faces on that front page are Labour.
Thomas
Thats the Mails iidea of fair balanced reporting (my a**e)
If Littlejohn were PM his travelling expenses would be colossal.
I looked at the courtesy copy of the Fail in Sainesbugs cafe today (A double dose of grief).
On the inside page there was an an attack on Jonathan Ross for being homophobic (Because he made a gay joke) – Cheered me up no end.
How about Alex Salmonds or Sein Fenn both on par with these lot.
Mind you even MP’s expenses is less than the lost revenue the country loses in tax avoidance, isn’t it Viscount Rothemere.
Oh and Oliver Letwin, he’s pretty big (well he was) for his Tennis court.
Are you upset by all this corruption and backhanded conniving methods of free money?
If so, fill out this coupon:
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/05/15/article-1181868-04F1B768000005DC-425_306×406.jpg
And send your money to Daily Mail. We’ll sort it out. Promise.
(Yes, that is a genuine coupon found on the website.)
uh oh trial by media, quite literally it seems
For once I agree with the Mail’s stance on MPs expenses, though I’d stop short of their implicit demands to have them hung in the street!
Now this is a dilemma. If people have been fiddling expenses, then I don’t see that should be something that they are easily let off of, and yes I see a valid argument that it should be treated as fraud.
But I find myself unable to support a Daily Mail campaign…
PS – White on black, isn’t that the Daily Mail’s way of saying this is a really serious important issue?
At least they haven’t been branded Nazis though.
Fair enough front page for a change (if a touch melodramatic), if anybody else was caught at this kind of thing they’d be taken to court and MP’s certainly shouldn’t be an exception.
As with the carrier bags and the Stephen Lawrence case though, it would be a bit rich for “The Mail”’s “Campaign” to claim the credit!
Has any crime actually been committed or were people simply using a crooked system legally?
“Funny how 80% of the faces on that front page are Labour.”
The whole thing benefits the Conservatives. Although all parties are implicated, Labour with their dismal poll showing can be effectively destroyed with this scandal whilst the more popular Tories can use it to their advantage. Notice how Cameron was very quick to demand that his MPs stop making excessive claims and pay back money (even though he’ll have known this was going on as long as anyone else in Parliament)? The investigation was started by the Telegraph and has been enthusiastically picked-up by the nastier Tory press. For all the “nest of rats” and “bring back Cromwell!” anti-politician populism that’s come out of this, ultimately the Cameronite “New Tories” can use this to their advantage which Brown’s collapsing Labour Party will be sunk by it. It’s doubtless no coincidence that the breaking of the story happened shortly before the upcoming elections too.
Jesus H Christ on a bike – what a lot of ugly people we have running the country!
Presumably the Mail would also want brought to justice all MPs who voted for the invasion of Iraq for being complicit in war crimes? Perhaps a tad more serious than the relatively small amount of money some MPs have fiddled.
The tragedy here is how this story has been used to score party-political points.
This is largely down to Cameron et al only agreeing to them going back 4yrs which obviously is going to make the party in power look the worst.
Had they gone back a decent length of time – say to 1970 – it would have cut the ground from under that sort of nonsense.
I doubt too many MPs did what they did for personal gain…..with one huge exception.
The 2nd home.
Why should the taxpayer fund an MP’s 2nd (London) home when they can later sell it and make a personal fortune (even if Capital gains was levied – and as we have seen this is by no means assured)?
Even if the taxpayer is funding a mortgage interest only loan it is highly likely that over 4, 8, 12 or more years property prices will move in such a way as to generate a huge profit.
Why should they pocket any of this?
I’d also love to know how come the likes of Cameron (personally extremely well off) managed to always come in year after year just on the limit of what was allowed to be claimed.
I do know the answer – and it’s true of most of them – they claimed everything going not for themselves but for their organisation.
I can understand the smaller parties doing this but not the likes of the tory party – or the Labour party.
I’m sure that if everything was brought out into the open it would dispel a lot of the attitude that MPs are only in it for themselves, but it would also open a can of worms about how the public is by underhand means funding the political parties.
The first time I seen this headline I thought it read, “Bring them justice,” in which case I thought that the entire cabinet had been kidnapped by the FARC and were being held hostage. Then I read it again and it said, “Bring them to Justice,” in which case I noticed that the Mail is using the same font for this front page as what it usually uses for kidnapped white kids and immigration.
Can we now make it a rule that any commentator wishing to comment on this will now have to publish his own expense claims for the last 4 years on the web the same day – may cut down the volume of largely hypocritical abuse
How ridiculous!
Clearly, they were all fucking with the system and milking it to an inch of its life, but even though none of them acted within the spirit of the rules at all, they all acted within the LETTER of the rules, and that’s all the law is concerned with.
The Mail knows this and is just playing to the peanut gallery and mob emotion to sell papers.
…also I wonder how many ‘private prosecutions’ (i.e. libel cases) The Mail is subject to every year, and how many of them are ‘bought their way out of’ (settled out of court) every year? I’d say at least 5 or 6 and 100% respectively.
Steven…precisely. You can’t arrest people for staying within the rules, no matter how stupid those rules actually are. There needs to be a genuine debate about how to deal with the resulting mess, but ultimately these claims were all allowed under the system, and no laws have been broken.
Doesn’t alter the fact that it seriously takes the piss, though, and it’s massively damaged the credibility of politicians.
You can be sure that if McBroon and ZanuLab ever arrested people for breahing the spirit of the law but not the actual letter of the law the likes of the DM would be the first to scream the place down.
Not a bad idea.
Let’s start with the DM, they haven’t actually broken the law but I’d imagine a case claiming they’d briken the spirit of the law in regards to damaging the national psyche would be a pretty open and shut case.
Up against the wall with them!
Haha James that coupon is priceless!
Angry at your money being wasted for no reason? Then send it all to the Daily Mail!!!