MP Expensive Claims

HOORAY!!!:yho::yho::yho:

Jacqui Smith is resigning as Home Secretary. Apparently she's not standing down as an MP though and will stand again as MP for Redditch. Lets all wish her well. She'll need it!! :lollol:Her majority last time around was slim - this time she'll be lucky if she doesn't get booted into next century. Still, she got a decent house and some porn out of her job

 

I would love to see a group of average Joe's, be allowed into government to fight for laws and rules which the average citizen would find acceptable. As long as we leave it up to these numpties in parliament, they will get away with all sorts.

 

I did hear an interesting suggestion, that it should be a Civic Duty, in much the same way that Jury Service is. ie every 5 years, 650 odd 'invitations' go out to 'randomly' selected Joe Averages to become MPs.

They could make sure that 50% were male and 50% female with a proportion of ethnic minorities, age groups etc. in line with the population distribution. I guess it would need 'a professional' to lead, perhaps that's where the rest of us would vote.

Apply the same system of expenses that apply to Jury Service, give them fixed salaries (perhaps based on current earnings, with appropriate regard to those who might be currently unemployed), a travel allowance or even pay their existing Mortgages / Rent during their term of office.

If not implementable in real life, it would make a great TV series!!!

 

Going back a few hundred years, that's what the house of commons was set up for. My history knowledge is a bit vague, but I think there was some sort of mass complaint that the peasants were not represented, and only the lords were. The house of commons was supposed to be the peasants wing parliament, hence the name 'House of Commons' as opposed to House of Lords. I wonder how many actual common folk get their say in there these days.

 

On a purely technical basis, anyone can stand for an election as an MP. In reality, sponsorship by a major political party is a far more promising likelihood. At least we're not as bad as the USA where election to Congress can potentially cost millions.

I see Scotland Yard say there is little likelihood of any MPs being prosecuted for expense claims or fraud. This could be potentially dodgy - hoe many tax evaders will be able to claim in court that they were just doing what their MP did?

 

The only real problem with your suggestion Doogle is that power corrupts. It wouldn't matter who was in parliament they would inevitably be corrupted.

 

Yup, you're right and it has been demonstrated again, today, with Mr Brown's re-shuffle and the appointment of Peter Hain to Welsh Secretary.

Remember 2008 ?

Quote from the BBC at the time:

Peter Hain has quit the cabinet saying he wanted to "clear his name" after his Labour deputy leadership campaign donations were referred to the police.

The Electoral Commission passed the work and pensions and Wales secretary's late declaration of donations to police after a "thorough review" of the case. In a statement Mr Hain said he felt he had "no alternative" but to resign. Earlier, speaking outside the Department for Work and Pensions, Mr Hain said: "I severely and seriously regret the mistake in declaring the donations late." Mr Hain, who has said suggestions that he tried to hide anything are "absurd", earlier wrote to Prime Minister Gordon Brown: "I made a mistake but it was an innocent mistake."

Haven't we heard recently of MPs regretting "unfortunate / innocent mistakes" relating to money ? (eg I forgot I'd paid the Mortgage off').

Mr Brown's strategy seems to be Get rid of one or two and when the dust settles re-appoint them (the General Public wont notice / care)

Problem is, the dust hasn't setled.

 

Saw this and thought I'd just had to share with you.....

 

We could write pages and pages about the faults of Gordon Brown, but it is far quicker to just summarise that he is an idiot.

He reminds me of my childhood days. There was always one kid who would be persistently naughty then promise to be good, thinking his promise of being good would make up for all the times they were naughty and that everyone would forget about their past record, and thinking that they can be naughty again whenever they feel like it as long as they say 'it was by accident' and promise to be good again afterwards.

The trouble is, with kids you can forgive that because their minds are not fully developed, but Gordon Brown is 58, so what's his excuse?

 

Anyone see Peter Mandelson on The Andrew Marr Show this morning? For some reason, that little toad sends shivers down my spine...and he's now effectively the deputy PM. Great!