To think that having one too many homes is actually a luxury ...

[garlicbaguette]

... when these homes we paid for with taxpayer's money and claimant keeps profits from the sale of one? Tory benefits rant :)

David Gauke

I can keep these coming all day if you like, Tories.

Taxpayers' dammit. I went to a good Tory school, as well

Entitled fucking spongers.

You know the way that these people often pronounce, "house", as, "hice"?

That's because they have more than one. Like "mouse" and "mice".

Cunts

Excellent! Consider it nicked

Classic comment Audrina.

@ hice

Audrina!

at Audrina

at David Gauke

not sure why this is a tory rant, as there were a load of labour MP's caught cheating expenses. seeem to remember some of them went to prison.

Dreamingofsun, a lot of them are bent and I'd like to see them all kicked out of their jobs, frankly. Tories, however, are making a living - off the taxpayer - by mouthing off against the poor, who they claim are ripping off taxpayers.

Plus, of course, some of us may be tired of 'benefit envy' threads on here, which are always peppered with Tories repeating the accusations made by scamming Tory politicians :)

David Gauke is the Treasury minister who made headlines saying it's ?morally wrong? to pay tradesmen cash-in-hand. The hypocrisy is rather impressive, don't you think?

David Cameron admitted he pays cash-in-hand. Which possibly explains why he's so sure everyone else cheats the system when they can

Francis Maude in 2009
Francis Maude yesterday

"Francis Maude has claimed almost £20,000 in expenses for his second home ? despite David Cameron?s promise he would stop taking taxpayers? cash to subsidise it.

"He has since claimed for council tax, electricity and gas bills, ground rent, buildings insurance, an internet connection, a TV licence and renting a television set, as well as service charges. His service charge claim alone is almost £5,000 a year.

"Under the new system, all these items are classed as 'associated expenditure', which standards watchdogs say should be limited to £2,600 a year."

Can you imagine if this were a story about a "benefits family" getting £17,400 a year more than they were entitled to?

It's not just Tory bastards, or Labour bastards, or Lib Dem bastards...

They're all a bunch of bent bastards. Doesn't matter who's in power, they'll find a way to scam as much money as possible from the tax payer.

I don't think that saying that all politicians are corrupt is accurate or helpful - it just normalises the behaviour of a corrupt minority, and encourages them to think that there's no point in behaving otherwise. Surely we should be pointing out that other MPs are not behaving in the same way and that this is therefore not normal or acceptable behaviour, whatever your job.

Absolutely, Grendel. You and I, however, are in the minority who try to make the equivalent point on 'benefit envy' threads.

I don't recall any previous administration displaying such hypocritical arrogance as to base their ideology on demonisation of lower-class scroungers while scrounging quite spectacularly themselves.

... sorry, meant to add that negative generalisation is precisely what our government depends on for support. If they can dish it out, they should be able to take it.

From today's Telegraph: Stephen Dorrell.

"A senior Conservative MP investigating Britain?s social care system secretly arranged for the owners of a chain of nursing homes to buy his London flat ? which he now rents back at taxpayers? expense."

He kept a £70,000 profit from his taxpayer-funded flat by selling it to close friends. He now rents it back from them at £1,400 a month - paid by taxpayers.

This is the man who is tasked with seeing that taxpayers' money is wisely spent in health and social care.

I don't understand the indignation about expecting the tax-payer to fund an MP's accommodation. Anyone who works away from home on a regular basis will tell you that companies either put them up in hotels short-term or get them a long term lease on a property. Either way the cost is not expected to be financed by the employee. MPs could previously claim for the mortgage on a second property and that's been stopped. Now they can claim for rent on a property instead. Of course some will sell the flat and either rent it back or rent a different one. What's the alternative?

If what you're saying is that MPs shouldn't get any living expenses at all, by all means say that. But understand that the only people who would then be able to afford to be MPs would be those who were independently wealthy.... and I don't think that's what we want at all.

When I had a job where I used to travel a lot, my employer paid for me to stay in a travel lodge or a premier inn. I had a £10 evening meal allowance too! I don't see why these useless, lying thieves can't do the same.

I agree, it is appalling.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/london-mayor-election/mayor-of-london/9136015/How-Ken-Livingstone-funnelled-238000-through-tax-avoidance-scheme.html

Jim Devine, scumbag.

www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/mar/31/jim-devine-sentenced-expenses-fruad

Margaret Moran, suddenly poorly. www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/nov/13/labour-mp-margaret-moran-expenses

I'm surprised you think its just Tory scumbags who are screwing over the tax payer. There are a lot of scumbags about.

He's no better than the scroungers who live off tax payers money and have a 'career' of laziness and never working and having kids continually. No matter what party he does or doesn't belong to. It's deceptive.

No, Cogito, the problem is that they scammed it. Dorrell used public money to buy a house. He sold it at a large profit, which he did not return to the taxpayer. He now rents it - at our expense - for a purportedly inflated rent. The implication is that he gets a kick-back from his landlords: the friends to whom he sold it.

He broke two explicit rules. One was that MPs who claimed their mortgage payments on expenses should return a proportionate amount of any profits when the property was sold. The other is that rents should be wholly and necessarily incurred. He basically sold his property in order to pocket the difference, which he knew was against the rules. He also failed to declare that his buyers are his landlords, and that they are close personal friends. For additional icing, he tried to claim large amounts for refurbishments, landscaping, etc prior to the sale but was refused.

The big scandal has been as follows (in short):- MPs have been using public funds to buy property, which they then rent out to other MPs. Taxpayers pay the second MP's rent. Taxpayers also pay the first MP's rent after he has moved out ... and the mortgage on his own property. So we pay twice for the first home and once on the second. If that one is also owned by an MP, it's also double-funded.

Nobody's claimed that MPs from other parties don't also scam. I've said I'd like to see the lot of 'em fired. But the Tories are the ones making a big deal of benefit fraud and cash-in-hand tradesmen. So they're the ones in the "glass house", throwing stones.

Ok I got you, you mean like when labour mps move heaven and earth to get their children into selective or private schools that will suit their precious offspring but the rest of us can lump it?
It is hypocrisy and I hate it.

It is hypocrisy, euphemism, with stunning arrogance and avarice. All their fulminations about a sense of entitlement are starting to look a lot like projection

They even get a 45% subsidy on their meals! It's costing taxpayers £6m a year to keep well-paid MPs in lovely restaurant meals, averaging about six quid per waiter-served dinner. That £6 would make a very big difference to a lone parent's food budget, yet the Tories spend it discussing how to take even more away from her. (And, yes, the Labs swap tips on getting their DC into private schools while promoting common values to the plebs.)

They should lead by fucking example ... Grrr.