Advanced search

Thieving MPs' expenses totally censored

(37 Posts)
SomeGuy Thu 18-Jun-09 18:43:55

Has anyone looked?

The dirty thieving bastards have censored nearly everything. Apparently we aren't to know where our elected representatives live. And that includes knowing even the town, although one rather hopes it is somewhere in the constituency they supposedly represent. Or the shop they bought it from. Or even the brand of washing machine they selected.


Peachy Thu 18-Jun-09 18:49:07

Hmm, wellI don't think we should have their addresses, no. We ahve the right to keep ours private by ticking boxes on electoral role forms etc and I beleive that's important for all- especially as some of these people are high profile and high security risk.

I'mminded of my Mum giving direftions cheerfully to an Irish eprson in the height of the whole IRA thing for our local MPs home (he was irish Sec) and then panicking for days about it.

OTOH I do think we should know the town, and brand of items- I can live with Beko but SMEG would make me hmm

HolyGuacamole Thu 18-Jun-09 18:49:59

Bloody hell. It is annoying that all the documents are seperate PDF files too. Couldn't they have made them into clickable webpages or something less tedious to navigate?

<off to have a nosey>

SomeGuy Thu 18-Jun-09 20:41:58

Possibly they could remove the street and house number, but the actual censorship goes FAR beyond that, they remove the address of shops they've shopped in, the town that their gardeners come from, etc.

The vast majority are pathetic non-entities and have no security risk at all. If they don't want to give their addresses, no problem, find another career, not as an MP. It's not like it would be hard to find them out anyway.

clemette Thu 18-Jun-09 20:44:04

SomeGuy it might be as well (as less libellous) to acknowledge that the VAST majority of MPs have not cheated on their expenses...

SomeGuy Thu 18-Jun-09 20:47:53

Here's one: ogg_0708_ACA.pdf

Douglas Hogg. He has censored the fact that he is on Vodafone? Why?!?! Nobody cares.

SomeGuy Thu 18-Jun-09 20:49:08

You can't libel a group of people clemette.

SomeGuy Thu 18-Jun-09 20:52:29

Anyway, as a group they are totally and utterly self-serving, voting themselves bigger pensions, higher salaries exemption from FOI, including from the expenses provision. They act not for the people but for themselves.

The fact is that these censored expenses go out in their collective names in the name of disclosure shames them all. It is laughable.

clemette Thu 18-Jun-09 20:52:56

Fair enough. But it is still not very respectful to the hundreds of people who are not "dirty thieving bastards" is it?
I understand anger at those who have cheated, but they are not all the same...

edam Thu 18-Jun-09 20:53:18

Peachy, point is without addresses you can't see any second home skulduggery - no-one would have known Margaret Moran was claiming for a 'second home' in Southampton when her constituency is Luton!

Someone on the Beeb website suggested IF they are truly concerned about security they should use unique identifying numbers - so Peter Lilley's second home is no. 123456 and if he changes the building he calls his second home, it's called no. 789101112 so we can see clearly that he's moving the allowance around. Might be justifiable if he's genuinely moved house, but if Mr Bloggs MP changes the designation three or four times, it's less understandable.

Clemette, I really can't see MPs suing for libel atm. It would be suicidal! And I'm not sure 'the vast majority of MPs' are clean, tbh.

edam Thu 18-Jun-09 20:54:31

Actually you can libel a group of people, it's called libel by association. Big mistake to try to water down a story about a bent copper by referring to 'an officer at X station' as you are then libelling ALL officers at that station rather than criticising PC Bloggs.

clemette Thu 18-Jun-09 20:57:08

I suspect the new guidelines will tackle the second house issue and tht we will see something like that suggested on the BBC site in the next published figures. For now, I suppose we will have to trust the the Parliamentary Standards Committee will root out any second home skullduggery.

I just feel sorry for the many MPs who are scrupulously clean (including my own who always publishes his figures online for his constuents anyway). I think it is sad that they are seen as guilty by association.

FAQinglovely Thu 18-Jun-09 20:58:55

I really don't give a damn who supplied the goods, or which claims were rejected - I just had lots of fun going thrugh comparing the difference in amounts claimed for food/rent etc.

You know I think I've decided Anne Widdecombe is probably the best one for speaker - she doesn't even have a 2nd home - she stays in hotels - and doesn't even always claim for her dinners - often just her bed and breakfast! grin

Peachy Thu 18-Jun-09 22:57:33

Edam'scode system makes sense

I am as disappointed as anyone about the 'bad' MPs but therefore doubly impressed with those who didn't cheat the system: it was there for the taking and they resisted. I read an estimate of around 50 MPs- chastise the rest but celebrate those because forgetting them is wrong.

HerBeatitudeLittleBella Thu 18-Jun-09 23:00:22

God have just heard on Question Time that Tony Blair's expenses were shredded.

Now what's he hiding?

FAQinglovely Thu 18-Jun-09 23:50:52

HEcate = according to this - the fact that he was late paying his water grin

HecatesTwopenceworth Fri 19-Jun-09 07:45:27

?? me??

FAQinglovely Fri 19-Jun-09 11:41:57

yes you asked what he was hiding - and that link shows he was late paying his water bill.

Although his expenses having been shredded is actually old news - we were told about that about a year ago smile

MrsJamin Fri 19-Jun-09 12:51:56

Have you guys looked at the data on You can help to go through the documents registering them as interesting, or not, etc. There's so much blacked out stuff that you can't tell though about which homes they are talking about. One MP I was going through last night though was the MP for a town, and used builders from that town, etc, so you can kind of trace some things.

Peachy Fri 19-Jun-09 12:58:27

FAQ wasn't it BerBe rather than Hecate? ( did the same thing at a glance BTW LOL)

DC has paid back more funds, david Davis in the next constituency is in trouble also it seems..... will ahve to see what our MP has been up to but he's a horrid man anwyway regardless.

Peachy Fri 19-Jun-09 13:00:16

Oh quelle surprise, his documents aren't on there.

There is a hugely boak-worthy pic though. Yuck.

(Can you tell I don't like him? FWIW he refuses to take on any casework on help constituents calling himself a parliamentary MP hmm)

bleh Fri 19-Jun-09 13:10:37

I read somewhere that these documents were requested to be released a year ago (under the FOI Act), so they had the time to redact information. However, in the meantime the un-redacted expenses were leaked to the Telegraph. So these blacked out monstrosities are all that we would have seen, had the leak never happened

FAQinglovely Fri 19-Jun-09 13:12:24

blush - so it is - that's why Hecate was confused - sorry grin

PortAndLemon Fri 19-Jun-09 13:15:51

It's been suggested that partial postcodes are used, to identify (a) the home-flipping and (b) when a residence being claimed for is neither in the constituency nor in London.

My MP has a claim of £19 for "hire of handicraft". I am sure it's entirely above board but am very curious to know what it's for...

Peachy, can you find your MP here?

PortAndLemon Fri 19-Jun-09 13:23:39

(Oops, that was the original link, wasn't it? blush)

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now