johnsix wrote:
> Barbara Follett who has a combined wealth of ?14Mn with her
> novelist husband, Claimed ?60.00 from the taxpayer for an
> automated watering system for house plants in one of her five
> homes.
> She also claimed ?1.600 for window cleaning.
> I suppose she thinks we should be grateful she is
> redistributing OUR wealth as opposed to her own.
A bit in the same way Green Dave feels about US paying for his mortgage you mean?
The solution to all this is to scrap the expenses for everyone apart from what 'we' can claim for as expenses and put and end to the jealousy once and for all because if you're honest that's all it really boils down to.
The problem with that is that very few would want to do the job and pay for the two properties they would need just so they could work, even if rented, etc.
To overcome that take the average expenses claimed add a few grand (for those accommodations not to the standard of others) and make it part of the pay.
When Johnny noisy cunt journalist then asks what have you spent your wages on they can say fuck off noisy cunt just like I and the rest of you would.
Most people have absolutely no fucking idea about what the job involves, the hours or the costs, an MP's office is now almost run as a small business.
Claiming for luxuries (like plants, sky etc) shouldn't be allowed but everything should be looked at as things needed to get the job done.
Do small business claim for window cleaners - Yes
Becket ....snout in trough
Re: Becket ....snout in trough
randyandy - you're beginning to sound like the late Wazza, constantly making excuses for New Labour.
They're a bunch of greedy, corrupt, hypocritical fuckers - simple as that. And no amount of yes-butting on your part will alter that fact.
True, some of "the others" aren't much better, but New Labour were elected largely on an anti-sleaze ticket, yet over the past decade or more have proven to be every bit as cynical and self-serving as John Major's Tories ever were.
- Eric
They're a bunch of greedy, corrupt, hypocritical fuckers - simple as that. And no amount of yes-butting on your part will alter that fact.
True, some of "the others" aren't much better, but New Labour were elected largely on an anti-sleaze ticket, yet over the past decade or more have proven to be every bit as cynical and self-serving as John Major's Tories ever were.
- Eric
-
Stewie_McGriffin
- Posts: 90
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: Becket ....snout in trough
Er sorry to piss on your chips but Green Dave only charged his mortgage interest (not the capital) and one phone bill to his expense account. Which as far as I'm aware MPs were entitled to do anyway based on the second home allowance that they have.
Compared to Bliar's ?10,000 kitchen and Gordon's ?000's on refurbs it isn't really that bad...is it.
As for the window cleaning you're quite right small businesses do claim for that cost. However, I'd like to see the house that costs ?94 to clean each week. I only pay ?3.
Compared to Bliar's ?10,000 kitchen and Gordon's ?000's on refurbs it isn't really that bad...is it.
As for the window cleaning you're quite right small businesses do claim for that cost. However, I'd like to see the house that costs ?94 to clean each week. I only pay ?3.
I'd love to stay and chat but you're a total bitch.
Re: Becket ....snout in trough
Flat_Eric wrote:
> randyandy - you're beginning to sound like the late Wazza,
> constantly making excuses for New Labour.
When some cunt tries to make a point that is fucking irrelevant then I point it out.
Sound like Wazza god I hope not.
> They're a bunch of greedy, corrupt, hypocritical fuckers -
> simple as that. And no amount of yes-butting on your part will
> alter that fact.
And the Tories are and the LiB Dems are ....
Lets be honest its a popular punt to make a look at me chaps posts to agree, look favourable and jump on the latest band wagon but if its to be done do it with fact or at least on a point thats correct.
Nobody gave a fuck (very few anyway) about expenses until some cunt decided this will make a good story.
For some reason it is only a good story if its Labour but if its some thieving Tory twat claiming for someone working for them when they aren't etc.. its news for a few seconds and barely mentioned by the perpetual daily ranters.
>
> True, some of "the others" aren't much better, but New Labour
> were elected largely on an anti-sleaze ticket, yet over the
> past decade or more have proven to be every bit as cynical and
> self-serving as John Major's Tories ever were.
Claiming expenses has fuck all to do with sleaze.
> randyandy - you're beginning to sound like the late Wazza,
> constantly making excuses for New Labour.
When some cunt tries to make a point that is fucking irrelevant then I point it out.
Sound like Wazza god I hope not.
> They're a bunch of greedy, corrupt, hypocritical fuckers -
> simple as that. And no amount of yes-butting on your part will
> alter that fact.
And the Tories are and the LiB Dems are ....
Lets be honest its a popular punt to make a look at me chaps posts to agree, look favourable and jump on the latest band wagon but if its to be done do it with fact or at least on a point thats correct.
Nobody gave a fuck (very few anyway) about expenses until some cunt decided this will make a good story.
For some reason it is only a good story if its Labour but if its some thieving Tory twat claiming for someone working for them when they aren't etc.. its news for a few seconds and barely mentioned by the perpetual daily ranters.
>
> True, some of "the others" aren't much better, but New Labour
> were elected largely on an anti-sleaze ticket, yet over the
> past decade or more have proven to be every bit as cynical and
> self-serving as John Major's Tories ever were.
Claiming expenses has fuck all to do with sleaze.
Re: Becket ....snout in trough
Stewie_McGriffin wrote:
> Er sorry to piss on your chips but Green Dave only charged his
> mortgage interest (not the capital) and one phone bill to his
> expense account. Which as far as I'm aware MPs were entitled to
> do anyway based on the second home allowance that they have.
>
> Compared to Bliar's ?10,000 kitchen and Gordon's ?000's on
> refurbs it isn't really that bad...is it.
Thats exactly what I said Green Dave hasn't done owt wrong and neither have the other MP's. It's allowed in the current system.
If its allowed why fucking rant about one and not the other?
Beckett quite rightly got fucked off when she wanted to claim for her plants.
>
> As for the window cleaning you're quite right small businesses
> do claim for that cost. However, I'd like to see the house that
> costs ?94 to clean each week. I only pay ?3.
It's only ?3.50 here so it baffles me as well but someone obviously does for the claim to be made.
> Er sorry to piss on your chips but Green Dave only charged his
> mortgage interest (not the capital) and one phone bill to his
> expense account. Which as far as I'm aware MPs were entitled to
> do anyway based on the second home allowance that they have.
>
> Compared to Bliar's ?10,000 kitchen and Gordon's ?000's on
> refurbs it isn't really that bad...is it.
Thats exactly what I said Green Dave hasn't done owt wrong and neither have the other MP's. It's allowed in the current system.
If its allowed why fucking rant about one and not the other?
Beckett quite rightly got fucked off when she wanted to claim for her plants.
>
> As for the window cleaning you're quite right small businesses
> do claim for that cost. However, I'd like to see the house that
> costs ?94 to clean each week. I only pay ?3.
It's only ?3.50 here so it baffles me as well but someone obviously does for the claim to be made.
-
Officer Dibble
- Posts: 2372
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: Becket ....snout in trough
"Thats exactly what I said Green Dave hasn't done owt wrong and neither have the other MP's. It's allowed in the current system. ?If its allowed why fucking rant about one and not the other?"
You're not listening, randy (or maybe you don't want to hear). As I've explained previously - The reason people keep pulling the socialists up about this is that they make themselves out to be morally superior to the rest of us. They look down their smug, sniffy, noses at us and sneer at our personal wants, ambitions and aspirations - deriding us as selfish while pretending they are above all that. This is really annoying - particularly when we see that they are just as hungry for power, wealth, glory and trinkets as the rest of us.
IT?S THE UTTER HYPOCRISY of these holier than thou luvvies that both rankles and infuriates.
We don't bat an eyelid when anyone else files his or her inflated expenses because that's just normal. It's what most normal people do (or have done at some point), be they cleaners or fat cats.
Do you understand where we are coming from now?
Officer Dibble
You're not listening, randy (or maybe you don't want to hear). As I've explained previously - The reason people keep pulling the socialists up about this is that they make themselves out to be morally superior to the rest of us. They look down their smug, sniffy, noses at us and sneer at our personal wants, ambitions and aspirations - deriding us as selfish while pretending they are above all that. This is really annoying - particularly when we see that they are just as hungry for power, wealth, glory and trinkets as the rest of us.
IT?S THE UTTER HYPOCRISY of these holier than thou luvvies that both rankles and infuriates.
We don't bat an eyelid when anyone else files his or her inflated expenses because that's just normal. It's what most normal people do (or have done at some point), be they cleaners or fat cats.
Do you understand where we are coming from now?
Officer Dibble
Re: Barbara Follett
Why have two houses? Lets put them in a secure residential block during the week, God knows there are enough buildings belonging to HMG going spare.
Being an MP entails a fucking site less now than it used to. You may not of noticed but they have voted to abdicate 90% of their responsibility to a Welsh assembly, A Scottish Parliament and where most of our laws are now made,
Brussels.
If any one in business had decided to hand the responsibility that goes with their position to a third party would they still expect to be paid the full rate for the job?
The buggers are part timers, Nodding through vast quantities of legislation behind closed doors without any debate in the house.
Wage rise! A cut and a cull is in order, If they don't like the rate of pay then they can do what the rest of us have to do, Change jobs.
Being an MP entails a fucking site less now than it used to. You may not of noticed but they have voted to abdicate 90% of their responsibility to a Welsh assembly, A Scottish Parliament and where most of our laws are now made,
Brussels.
If any one in business had decided to hand the responsibility that goes with their position to a third party would they still expect to be paid the full rate for the job?
The buggers are part timers, Nodding through vast quantities of legislation behind closed doors without any debate in the house.
Wage rise! A cut and a cull is in order, If they don't like the rate of pay then they can do what the rest of us have to do, Change jobs.
Re: Becket ....snout in trough
randyandy wrote:
>>>
ERIC REPLIES:
Like I said andy (if you care to read my post properly), I also said (quoting myself here): "True, some of "the others" aren't much better ..."
randyandy wrote:
>>
ERIC REPLIES:
Cheap shot old chap - but it doesn't wash I'm afraid. Are you saying that all of the many intelligent, free-spirited good folk who frequent these hallowed forums and regularly call the government to account don't have minds and opinions of their own?
Is that what you're claiming? If so, you disappoint me because from what I've read of your input so far (and despite disagreeing with your politics) you come across as a reasonably intelligent bloke who's above that sort of thing - although as a card-carrying Labour Party apparatchik, you can perhaps be forgiven for feeling obliged to employ both fair means and foul to loyally stick up for the 'Brooney Bunch' in the face of all adversity.
Mind you, I'm sure you wouldn't be saying such things to people hear-hearing one of your pro-Labour / anti-Tory threads !wink!.
randyandy wrote:
>>>
ERIC REPLIES:
MPs' perks and expenses have been the subject of controversy for many years. This is just the latest flare-up.
randyandy wrote:
>>
ERIC REPLIES:
Really? I seem to recall much outrage being expressed here a couple of months back about that Tory MP who'd employed his son as an assistant on 40 grand a year and yet the lad didn't do a stroke of work.
You may be right that more is said about Labour - but they're the party in power and so have more to answer for. They were (and I repeat) elected on anti-sleaze ticket, yet since coming to power have time and again done all the "sleazy" things that the Tories did and more.
randyandy wrote:
>>
ERIC REPLIES:
Claiming iffy expenses does though (examples of which have been given so I won't repeat them here). It's all part of the bigger picture of self-serving, hypocritical tossers running the show - and people have now finally had enough (as evidenced in Crewe & Nantwich, the recent locals and the London mayorals).
- Eric
>>>
ERIC REPLIES:
Like I said andy (if you care to read my post properly), I also said (quoting myself here): "True, some of "the others" aren't much better ..."
randyandy wrote:
>>
ERIC REPLIES:
Cheap shot old chap - but it doesn't wash I'm afraid. Are you saying that all of the many intelligent, free-spirited good folk who frequent these hallowed forums and regularly call the government to account don't have minds and opinions of their own?
Is that what you're claiming? If so, you disappoint me because from what I've read of your input so far (and despite disagreeing with your politics) you come across as a reasonably intelligent bloke who's above that sort of thing - although as a card-carrying Labour Party apparatchik, you can perhaps be forgiven for feeling obliged to employ both fair means and foul to loyally stick up for the 'Brooney Bunch' in the face of all adversity.
Mind you, I'm sure you wouldn't be saying such things to people hear-hearing one of your pro-Labour / anti-Tory threads !wink!.
randyandy wrote:
>>>
ERIC REPLIES:
MPs' perks and expenses have been the subject of controversy for many years. This is just the latest flare-up.
randyandy wrote:
>>
ERIC REPLIES:
Really? I seem to recall much outrage being expressed here a couple of months back about that Tory MP who'd employed his son as an assistant on 40 grand a year and yet the lad didn't do a stroke of work.
You may be right that more is said about Labour - but they're the party in power and so have more to answer for. They were (and I repeat) elected on anti-sleaze ticket, yet since coming to power have time and again done all the "sleazy" things that the Tories did and more.
randyandy wrote:
>>
ERIC REPLIES:
Claiming iffy expenses does though (examples of which have been given so I won't repeat them here). It's all part of the bigger picture of self-serving, hypocritical tossers running the show - and people have now finally had enough (as evidenced in Crewe & Nantwich, the recent locals and the London mayorals).
- Eric
Re: Becket ....snout in trough
Officer Dibble wrote:
> "Thats exactly what I said Green Dave hasn't done owt wrong and
> neither have the other MP's. It's allowed in the current
> system. ?If its allowed why fucking rant about one and not the
> other?"
>
> You're not listening, randy (or maybe you don't want to hear).
I am listening but as usual disagreeing with every point:
> As I've explained previously - The reason people keep pulling
> the socialists up about this is that they make themselves out
> to be morally superior to the rest of us.
No they dont.
They look down their smug, sniffy, noses at us and sneer at our personal wants, ambitions and aspirations - deriding us as selfish while
> pretending they are above all that.
No they don't.
This is really annoying - particularly when we see that they are just as hungry for power, wealth, glory and trinkets as the rest of us.
>
> IT?S THE UTTER HYPOCRISY of these holier than thou luvvies that
> both rankles and infuriates.
It's not hypocrisy they are claiming what they are entitled to claim under the current system just like everyone else is.
It would be hypocrisy if they said they would stop the claims.
>
> We don't bat an eyelid when anyone else files his or her
> inflated expenses because that's just normal. It's what most
> normal people do (or have done at some point), be they cleaners
> or fat cats.
>
> Do you understand where we are coming from now?
>
Yes, you're making your typical rant.
Totally changing the subject did you watch London Mayor's Questions this afternoon?
Your good mate Boris was on (obviously) and was even made to look a complete tool by the obnoxious BNP.
Speaking of Boris I've noticed yet another knife crime happened in London today.
> "Thats exactly what I said Green Dave hasn't done owt wrong and
> neither have the other MP's. It's allowed in the current
> system. ?If its allowed why fucking rant about one and not the
> other?"
>
> You're not listening, randy (or maybe you don't want to hear).
I am listening but as usual disagreeing with every point:
> As I've explained previously - The reason people keep pulling
> the socialists up about this is that they make themselves out
> to be morally superior to the rest of us.
No they dont.
They look down their smug, sniffy, noses at us and sneer at our personal wants, ambitions and aspirations - deriding us as selfish while
> pretending they are above all that.
No they don't.
This is really annoying - particularly when we see that they are just as hungry for power, wealth, glory and trinkets as the rest of us.
>
> IT?S THE UTTER HYPOCRISY of these holier than thou luvvies that
> both rankles and infuriates.
It's not hypocrisy they are claiming what they are entitled to claim under the current system just like everyone else is.
It would be hypocrisy if they said they would stop the claims.
>
> We don't bat an eyelid when anyone else files his or her
> inflated expenses because that's just normal. It's what most
> normal people do (or have done at some point), be they cleaners
> or fat cats.
>
> Do you understand where we are coming from now?
>
Yes, you're making your typical rant.
Totally changing the subject did you watch London Mayor's Questions this afternoon?
Your good mate Boris was on (obviously) and was even made to look a complete tool by the obnoxious BNP.
Speaking of Boris I've noticed yet another knife crime happened in London today.