MPs Kanye West Kelly's Expense Review

If your not familiar with the joke link

Yo Kelly. I'm really happy for you, I'm going to let you finish, but we had one of the best scams of all time.....

37 Names

Since the last Prime Minsters Questions, 37 soldiers have been killed in Afghanistan. 37 names were read out in parliament today by one of the men that sent them there, that's 37 families that will never see or speak to there loved ones again. In other news MP's are squabbling about money again, huddling around to talk about their favourite subject, themselves.

Brown to Pay Back £12K

Brown is to repay £12,415 in expenses, I wonder what assets will he sell off to meet the bill?

MPs Expenses Are Back . . . . .

In a Parliament near you from Monday.

New Laws On MPs Expenses

Brown and Co have announced a new Parliamentary Standards Bill on MPs expenses. 93 pages of new rules, regulations and requirements, I know the government like bureaucracy yet that just sounds unworkable. The big headline grabber under these new rules is that, MPs who knowingly provide false or misleading information in their expenses, could face up to 12 months in jail or an unlimited fine, this is commonly referred to as fraud which there is already a law for.

There are also fines set out for not registering an outside interest and for "paid advocacy" – asking questions or making speeches for money, fraud as it's commonly known. Though interestingly they don't have to step down after paying the fine and discrediting themselves. Same is applicable to the fraud charge, you not banned from standing as a MP or being one with less than 12 months jail time.

Two new authorities will be setup - "Parliamentary Standards Authority" that's the fees office under a new name and apparently independence. Also a "Commissioner for Parliamentary Investigations", which will have the power to conduct investigations into MPs expenses. Though the only thing wrong with the fees office was the lack of transparency and accountability, just put receipts on-line, MPs won't make claims they can not justify to voters. It will also make people feel empowered, which is something sadly lacking in these proposals.

It just all seems so "New Labour", throw paper work over the problem, create a committee and call it an important name, job done. Yet all the public want is for MPs to be accountable, it's a job not a free ticket to do as you please. If Brown really wanted to be as historic as he announced he was, let people deselect their MPs, be accountable to voters not just once every 4-5 years.

A Redacted New Transparent System

Derek "Admiral" Conway

I knew it was only a matter of time before my already disgraced, whip withdraw MP was in the Telegraph, and there he is in the Sunday sleaze section. Derek Conway or Admiral Conway as he likes to be known after his martyr speech, in which he compared himself to Admiral John Byng. Honest comparison really, as Byng only served on the most comfortable stations, and avoided the more arduous work. Much like Conway who has happily cashed his cheque, while sitting in a safe seat and doing nothing for his constituency.

So as my local hospital closes down and I pray I don't end up having an accident, leaving me bleeding to death before I reach the next nearest. I realise now it must have been difficult finding time to fight to stop it's closure, in-between shopping on the taxpayers credit card and all that travelling back and forth to Northumberland, 330 miles away from the constituency he's meant to represent.

Some people of course would say he's a thieving, cheating, liar who used the fact he had a safe seat to subsidise his life style and line the family pocket, and I agree completely. I wouldn't mind betting that the Tories shouldn't count on it being such a safe seat now.

Man Behind Expenses Leak Revealed

We've reached the stage in society where they want to know everything about us, I think we're entitled to know about them (read more)

Can't fault his sentiment, I whole heartedly agree. We own him and whoever it was in the fees office a big thanks for whistle blowing, we wouldn't be in the position of being able to make an informed decision on voting for MPs without their intervention.

Austin Mitchell's Response to Expenses

Austin Mitchell's letter in response to his expenses, flies in the face of what other MPs are doing. About his claims for ginger crinkle biscuits, bottles of whiskey, gin, Branston pickle and claim for re-upholstering sofas. He said his sofa was:

stained with Branston pickle, whisky, and gin

Which did make me laugh, and using humour to diffuse a situation can work well. Yet I wonder under the present public feeling whether he's either; very courageous or mad to say that?

2002 Advanced Expense Warning

Hat tip to Clive Davies , this is from the Guardian letter section:

Reading Chris Mullin's excellent diaries, A View from the Foothills, I came across this entry from 1 May 2002: "Apparently, under the Freedom of Information Act, by January 2005, MPs' expenses will be subject to public scrutiny, retrospectively. Goodness knows what mayhem that will cause. 'We are in a jam,' said Robin Cook. 'Few members have yet tumbled to the juggernaut heading their way.'"

So they had enough warning to jump clear. Or even do the right thing.

David Seymour
Ponteland, Northumberland

Brown Gets "Extreme" on all MPs' Claims

Interesting that he's announced this again without talking to all parties concerned, and two senior MPs told the BBC:

The committee only agreed to examine the idea of an independent audit, that there was no "firm or final agreement" and would meet again on Wednesday after seeking advice on whether it was possible.

Could this be another saga within a saga?

David Cameron - Lib Dems Next

With the lack of leadership within Downing Street at the moment, Cameron could have stumbled on stage drunk today, shouting I've got a whip and I would have been impressed. Tory supporters are claiming a victory for Cameron actions today, yet he didn't have any choice but to limit the damage. In doing so he gains moral high ground over Brown, hopefully rendering the phrase "do nothing party" useless, as I can't bare hearing it much more.

It was good tactics from Cameron, better tactics would've been having expenses rules outlined within the party to begin with. Thus limiting the damage when it all hit the fan. I just hope Sir Kelly's proposals truly address this. With the spot light turning to the Lib Dems, it's getting ridiculous. I do wonder though with the cabinet minsters being as quiet as they are, whether the Telegraph are saving the most damaging for last.

Senior Tories Expenses - Stephen Fry

More Tories in the spotlight. Their claims are certainly a better class of expense, swimming pools, a moat, country estates, garden renovations, third and fourth homes. I've nothing against people being or getting rich. Yet I do have a problem subsidising their life style choices, when they have more than enough money to pay for manure themselves. What really disappoints me though, is to see David Davies among the line up.

Amid this saga however, Stephen Fry raises a good point about perspective. Though I don't agree with all he says, this stood out:

let's not confuse it with what politicians get really wrong, things like wars, things were people die.

Can you imagine, the kind of Health Service we would have if they showed the motivation for reform they have over expenses?

Speaker Martin - Hypocrite, Amoral and Greedy

When the audacity of these expenses couldn't get worst Michael Martin comes along, to prove why MPs thought it was fine. The man meant to be in "charge" of the commons gave a statement on expenses. He said that MPs should consider 'the spirit of what is right' in their claims. He would know all about that, after all he's only claimed hundreds of thousands on his subsidised life style.

The speaker read his statement from a piece of paper in his emotionless weak voice, that was until Kate Hoey raised a point: doesn't the Metropolitan Police have better things to do than investigate leaks, isn't it an awful waste of money? Good point, why waste police time and more money when you can conduct your own inquiry? Not a legitimate point though for Martin, he became vocal for once about something he does care about, those who criticise him and someone releasing the expense claims before black markers were used on them.

He really does represent what's wrong with the whole system, MPs who are hypocritical, amoral and greedy.

Two Sorry's and Lots of Wrongs

Morten Morland cartoon

The Telegraph turned their focus to the Tories today. A lot of the Tories claims are similar to Labour; second home flipping, luxury goods brought, trivial claims, rich MPs claiming for things that they could pay for. The Independent have put together the main claims. I lack the motivation to type and comment on them all.

After their publication however, David Cameron was the first leader to do something, other than close the curtains and pretend no one was home, he said that:

We have to acknowledge just how bad this is. The public are really angry and we have to start by saying, look, this system that we had, that we used, that we operated, that we took part in - it was wrong and we're sorry about it.

At least he has some understanding of public dismay, makes him come off better than Brown, who three days after the Telegraph reports on expenses and after Cameron's sorry, says to an audience of Nurses:

Just as you have the highest standards in your profession, we must show that we have the highest standards for our profession.

I want to apologise on behalf of politicians on behalf of all parties for what has happened in the events of the last few days.

He is so sorry he waited three days to comment? The man has no idea how to take responsibility, if he stood to be praised though, I wonder if it would've taken three days to speak up.

Paul Waugh has a post that sums up parliament priorities well.

Expenses, Expenses, Expenses

The Telegraph expense "name and shame" campaign doesn't make for pleasant reading. Particularly for a profession that you would be forgiven for thinking, some degree of moral judgement was needed. I could laugh it off if it wasn't for the fact that, what sort of people will want to be a MP, with this bad smell hanging over parliament? It's just self for filling.

There's something so depressing not only about the endless sleazy headlines, but MPs reaction. No one forced them to make the claims they did, they choose to. The official line being echoed by minsters that, claims were "entirely in accordance with the rules" is groundless. I fail to see cat food, nappies, loo seats, iced gem biscuits and tampons as an expense of doing their parliamentary duties. So instead of spinning like they always do, here's a shocking idea, stop blaming a system they created, be an adult and take some responsibility.

What really underlines this for me, what are they even doing for people or for the country? If they gave back more than they took, this wouldn't be so insulting.

Telegraph To Expose MPs Expense Claims

This will be a political armageddon, they're starting with Brown and his minsters tomorrow. One of the posted taster stories:

Paul Murphy, the Welsh Secretary, splashed out more than £3,000 on a new hot water system for his second home, explaining in a letter to the parliamentary fees office that his water was too hot.

Amazing what is he Goldilocks or perhaps he's just not heard of "cold water", I'm already getting angry.

Lady "Two Homes" Uddin

The audacity of this "lady" is incredible. Baroness Uddin claimed allowances intended for peers living outside London although she lives only four miles from the Lords. The flat in Maidstone she brought and claims is her main home, neighbours say has never been lived in. Until coincidentally "Lady" Uddin got a call from the Sunday Times challenging her on the claims.

The very next day her BMW zoomed along to Maidstone, lights were switched on, curtains put up and mat placed outside the front door, which is a homely touch indeed. Her claims and actions pocket her £30,000 a year. Yet it gets better, Lady Uddin's home in London is Housing Association owned. The association’s housing is for people needing affordable homes and the average rent for one is £500 a month. The baroness is claiming more than £2,000 a month for running and maintaining a house in London.

What's the different between a "lady" claiming false benefits and anyone else? The Lady won't be prosecuted.

Mps' Expenses "vote" Reform

What a show parliament was today; squabbling, finger pointing, accusations, waving a bath plug, just a circus. All for the government to accept Sir George Young's amendment which refers everything to the Committee on Standards in Public Life, yet then go ahead pre-empting the whole inquiry by voting on some measures any way.

The proposals that were voted on were; cutting allowances for outer London MPs, getting MPs to declare full details of outside jobs, making them submit full receipts and changing the way staff are employed. The government won the vote on these proposals, yet it's unclear what will happen if they're not agreed by Sir Kellys' inquiry.

Which is a bit of a mess, Brown could have easily have gained cross party support by talking to the party leaders before making an announcement on YouTube. Or heaven forbid talking to Sir Kelly and agreeing proposals to put in place before July. Why must this be so theatrical, all for what? Brown to be able to claim he cleaned up politics.

Brown can hardly claim that victory today, he just avoided a battle and used Harriet Harman as a human shield. MPs knew they had to vote in favour of these individual proposals, they couldn't be seen doing otherwise. That doesn't equal reform for me, yet it does raise the question of just how bad the expense claims due to be released in July will be, given the frenzy today.

Two U Turns and New Labour Snubbed

Two U turns and a snub in a day, nice to see Labour are clear and confident in what they're doing.

Brown has dropped his flat rate expense proposal and will only include the safe options that he knows MPs are likely to vote on. Which means his pay off didn't work, and what does that say about the state of New Labour, if MPs won't take a bribe to vote for Brown. Paul Waugh is reporting though that Sir Christopher Kelly is being asked to come up with proposal that looks a lot like Browns.

Jacqui Smith has decided that creating a mega database of information, might be going to far, in doing so she wins the award of "stating the bloody obvious". She's changed the proposal to have service providers retaining the data, every internet user will be given an unique ID code and all their data stored. So essentially if the government don't have it, it's not a privacy issue in her "mind".

Brown was snubbed by the Pakistani president when he cancelled the press conference scheduled between them. Which goes to show that when you point your finger and shout terrorist, it's not very diplomatic. Particularly when it's essential that we work with Pakistani. They do have nuclear weapons and the Taliban 65 miles from them.