We're looking for a Mumsnetter to represent us at a 'News Comment Special' about MPs' expenses

Artichokes, Heather Roberts seems to have Andrew Walker down as one of the villains of the saga - somebody who believes in MPs' absolute right to play the system, and who worked hard to prevent the public finding out. Is this who you're talking about when you talk about 'he man who has done most to stop the no receipts culture and to try to make MPs aware that this culture cannot continue'? Cos that's not how his quotes in the HR article make him sound.

Would be interested to see the debate if you can find the link!

This G2 article speaks of the journo who worked to expose the situation, lenin.

Ah, right artichokes. That is extremelt interesting, and makes perfect sense. So all of this 'I was following the advice gave to me by the fees office...' is disingenuous to say the least (now we have egregious and disingenuous on the one thread. Do we get points for theat).

In that case, poor junior staff, hung out to dry. And I hope this committee of MPs is held to account.

This new story about continuing to claim mortgage interest when not entitled makes it even clearer that the Commons' Fees Office is massivley at fault in the permissions and advice it gave MPs. It was very actively colluding in the abuse of the system.

And I suppose that the Speaker bears ultimate responsibility for the conduct of that office?

I think that MPs still haven't caught on about how deep the electorate feels about this. I get rather sanguine but others don't, and rightly so.

Tony Benn was on breakfast tv and radio last week trying to explain how the sense of "trust" has been broken, and henceforth ANY elected member in our democracy will be viewed with suspicion. As he says, it is the task of the Constituency Parties to chose to not re-select anyone who has behaved in a less than glorious manner.

Trouble is, they all might have to go, and then who would make the laws, apart from me?

See now this makes me feel angry and insulted. All I want is a bit of a holiday for my children and this....er....person gets this.

Apologies for Yahoo news link - hardly top notch reporting but it does the job fro this post.

uk.news.yahoo.com/21/20090517/tuk-mp-faces-loan-interest-claim-probe-6323e80.html

I met someone who was working as a researcher for one of the MPs. Oxbridge grad: being paid £8k per year. Her parents were paying her rent and a lot of her bills, and her salary had been set by the MP. It's appalling that they would even think that that's an acceptable salary, while lining their own pockets and whinging about £65K.

CMOT: as far as I can make out, MPs have exempted themselves from HMRC control. Convenient, eh?

Yes, bleh, I agree. Calling a salary of £65k plus allowances 'inadequate' is just shocking. If there was a bit less luxury on offer, maybe some of the egregious tossers who just want to wallow in other people's money would bugger off to industry and leave politics alone.

Ooh ooh ooh ... can I make a point please?

One of the arguments that has come up again and again is that MP's are not paid that much, in comparison to members of the upper middle class (not normally phrased that way, normally it's a lame "equivalent position" "they'd earn more in the City" kind of way, but the Economist used UMC). However, isn't that fundamentally wrong, that they are expecting to BE upper middle class? One of the most fundamental flaws of our current political system is that MPs view it as a career, not a vocation. If they TRULY wanted to represent the people, and do the best by their constituents, they would not be that bothered about their social status and keeping up with the upper classes, while screwing the system for all it's worth. Anyway: 90% of the population in the UK earns under £40K, whereas MPs earn around £65K, before also getting second home allowance, £400 a month for food and numerous expenses paid for.

I'd love to know how these allowances fit in with the Inland Revenues rules about 'not paying an enhancement by way of expenses' - for instance, I now have to detail the exact start and end of each car journey I make as they are targeting expenses in the SE and questioning whether car claims are over paid - and making companies pay the extra tax. We also cannot claim for a chocolate bar as a meal (even though this may be your only meal on a low cost flight) as confectionary cannot be claimed for.

Somehow, this just doesn't tie up to me

Would I look fetching with a giant pretzel wedged in my oesophagus, that's the Q.

Oh go on. I think you would look very fetching in a stetson.

PDubya

The nomination process is still wide open AFAIK.

Have come late to this thread.

But am loving the renaming to PDubya!

I think MPs whose constituencies mean that they have to have a second home near Parliament should be provided with accommodation. But that is all they should be provided with.

Why not just a monthly allowance, the same for them all, with a separate travel allowance that takes into account how far they have to travel/specific fares for their destinations?

Or failing that, we should build halls of residence for them all.

I quite like the idea of making them sleep in dormitories, actually ...

Are you going then Policywonk??

and robes - Kaufman is an oily twat.

Oi!!