More on the "expenses" of MP,s
Most of the MP's have missed the crucial point. It is not just that they are clearly working the system but that the system is fundamentally flawed.
When we pay their mortgage repayments, when we buy their furniture, they end up owning it. That is why renting is a more satisfactory option, their is no financial gain for the MP.
It is not as complicated as they wish to pretend and flipping is clearly fraudulent if there is no change in circumstances. Charles Clarke changed when he became a minister, the point being that he now felt that he was spending more time in London. That is probably genuine. It is also plausible that if an MP has children and when they leave home they might well change their main place of residence. However the number of times that that will occur will be rare.
Again the issue with Ian Gibson, he probably felt he owned the flat so letting his daughter stay there was no problem. If you had a flat in London most parents would not feel they had done anything wrong by letting family members use it at no cost. The converse would be true, if you charged them that would seem very unkind as a parent.
Clearly legitimate & reasonable expenses should be allowed but funding the purchase of property is not reasonable.
Another important point is that what is reasonable for a "second" home. No one needs a house with a moat or a duck island for their "second" home. In my view that is also fraudulent. But is all part of a culture of greed and mutual support. Most communities stick together, doctors don't like reporting on other doctors, lawyers are reluctant to admit that their colleagues are cheating. It is the same with MPs, that is why we need an outside group BUT they must not be part of the "great & good" because they are part of the same community.
When we pay their mortgage repayments, when we buy their furniture, they end up owning it. That is why renting is a more satisfactory option, their is no financial gain for the MP.
It is not as complicated as they wish to pretend and flipping is clearly fraudulent if there is no change in circumstances. Charles Clarke changed when he became a minister, the point being that he now felt that he was spending more time in London. That is probably genuine. It is also plausible that if an MP has children and when they leave home they might well change their main place of residence. However the number of times that that will occur will be rare.
Again the issue with Ian Gibson, he probably felt he owned the flat so letting his daughter stay there was no problem. If you had a flat in London most parents would not feel they had done anything wrong by letting family members use it at no cost. The converse would be true, if you charged them that would seem very unkind as a parent.
Clearly legitimate & reasonable expenses should be allowed but funding the purchase of property is not reasonable.
Another important point is that what is reasonable for a "second" home. No one needs a house with a moat or a duck island for their "second" home. In my view that is also fraudulent. But is all part of a culture of greed and mutual support. Most communities stick together, doctors don't like reporting on other doctors, lawyers are reluctant to admit that their colleagues are cheating. It is the same with MPs, that is why we need an outside group BUT they must not be part of the "great & good" because they are part of the same community.
Labels: MP's Expenses
posted by Unknown at
1:07 AM
1 Comments:
It seems interesting that very little has been discussed about the standard of living people 'deserve', many of the MPs who claimed lots 'so they could walk to work and have a room for their children when they came to London in the holidays' will have voted against a minimum wage for cleaners etc, who don't have that 'right'/'entitlement'. The whole thing could be raising fundamental questions about 'living wage' for the poorest and whether 'relative poverty' is something we should prioritise in the UK - to me the MPs clearly see relative poverty as a key area and should be campaigning on it!
By
Unknown, at 1:41 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home