To have gone off Stephen Fry?

[Fairynufff]

Everyone I have spoken to is absolutely outraged at the whole MP's expenses debacle but (wealthy tv presenter) Stephen Fry thinks we're all being petty by claiming the issue is "unimportant" and a "tedious, bourgeois obsession"...

Compass-less politicians aside, Fry's national treasure status has always been a mystery to me.

The man is ubiquitous. Where next for the voice of Pocoyo and the Direct Line telephone? Standing in for Paxo on newsnight?

Why do people worship at the feet of television personalities?

I think what Stephen Fry said about the government (this one and previous ones) wasting a whole lot more taxpayers' money on needless wars was a very good point. I can't really be bothered about a few beds, garden paths or even moats (although that does take the p a tad) but I do mind that my money has been spent invading countries on the pretext of protecting their citizens' human rights, when really it was about protecting our desire for those countries' oil reserves. Also the gazillions of pounds spent on totally unnecessary defence projects.

Did anyone else hear Ann Widdecombe on the Today programme tonight saying that the MPs were all competing to have the hairiest hair shirt on this issue? Now there' a woman.

P.S. I'm with morningpaper on the Prezza issue...

I'd rather we didn't have needless wars and that MPs didn't take the piss with expenses. Most of use are more than capable at being annoyed at more than one issue at the same time.

Quiet

Oh I agree Crackfox, but where is the media coverage of the pointlessness of the wars and exposure of the real reasons behind them? Doesn't sell as many papers or whip up outrage in the populace in the same way. But it ought to.
I could spend all day being aggrieved about everything that is wrong and unfair in the world but MPs expenses come way down the list behind third world debt, global warming and human rights abuses.

I don't fiddle my expenses. Never have.

I like Stephen Fry but he';s wrong on this one. the reason why it';s a big deal is not the amounts they're claiming; it's the fact that they are the ones who are going to be making the big decisions about what cuts have to happen to what budgets, and it's going to be painful for lots of people for all sorts of reasons, and they have lost their moral authority to do it. One of them, a woman responsible for 'reforming' housing benefit (ie. cutting the bill) claimed for plastering over artex in her flat becasue she claimed it was more than just a matter of taste, it was a 'necessity'. If we are supposed to just expect that our elected representatives will line their own pockets at any opportunity, what the hell hope is there for anything? Why SHOULD we expect them to make honourable decisions about whether to go to war when they can't make an honourable decision about paying the capital gains tax when it's due? Of course they've been doing it all along, and personally I think the company directorships and other income streams are even more suspect than this expenses gravy train and shouldn't be allowed, but I think it's a good thing it's seen the light of day and they can publish their expenses from now on.

Having said all that, it's interesting that they've made so many people believe that someone claimed to clean his moat out, when he apparently didn't claim for it at all. People don't read the small print, do they. Fling a bit of mud and some of it will stick.

I've been peed off for years about Ann Keen and her husband living about 10 miles out of central London and both claiming for having 2nd homes. And so have lots of other people. Until the Telegraph press storm no one took any notice.

I am absolutely with morningpaper on this one. I think john prescott is ok too. I also find stephen fry a bit trying (absolutely agree with the stupid person's clever person by doriswhatever)but possibly agree with him on this occasion.

Also the Great British Public have got on high horse v badly. Some bloke on the news said 'Right, I voted Labour last time, now I am going to vote BNP' erm, sounds like he's really got the finger on the pulse of the political parties....from Labour to BNP in 24 hrs or whatever.

I am absolutely with morningpaper on this one. I think john prescott is ok too. I also find stephen fry a bit trying (absolutely agree with the stupid person's clever person by doriswhatever)but possibly agree with him on this occasion.

Also the Great British Public have got on high horse v badly. Some bloke on the news said 'Right, I voted Labour last time, now I am going to vote BNP' erm, sounds like he's really got the finger on the pulse of the political parties....from Labour to BNP in 24 hrs or whatever.

"everyone fiddles their business expenses a little" not in our company they don;t. We have a hard as nails bitch finance director whowouldfire you as soon as look at you if you tried to fiddle anything other than a violin.

(I'm the FD by the way )

I am totally bored by the whole fiasco - but frankly I do think that Stephen Fry is a twat to refer to it as a 'bourgeois obsession'...Why on earth Newsnight sought an opinion from him is unclear...he has gone down in my estimation since he sold out to the utterly tedious QI...where he plays up to the role of know-it-all non-entity rather well.
He'll probably appear on the next celeb BB.

But the furore is not so much about the expenses but the fact that we had to prise this information out of them. Labour introduced the Freedom of Information Act but then tried to say that it didn't apply to MPs and their expenses. Now we now why they were so reluctant to publish.

This thread has shocked me to the core.

Finding out morningpapers feelings for John Prescott has been like discovering a much respected teacher wears stockings under his brown cords

Eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuwwwwwwwwwwww....oh Lordy...how gross, Is Morningpapers okay?

I love Stephen Fry, and I quite agree with him.
What I don't understand is why anyone should ask him for an opinion on this, or why his opinion would matter to anybody, and make them judge him differently?

And total and utter boak at anyone eyein up Prescott in that manner!

To be honest I can't get myself worked up about the MPs fiddling with their expenses. The regulations surrounding expense claims have been pretty loose, so I am not surpised that MPs claimed on them. They weren't breaking any law. This ridiculous hand-wringing and handing back of the money is yet another level that this non-story has descended to. Yes, it is a crap system and it needs to be overhauled but I think 2 weeks of the media obsessing on this bloody topic is enough.

To be honest, and in the grand scheme of things, MPs are not actually paid huge amounts, and are subject to enormous amounts of scrutiny, imo. The salary compares unfavourably compared to that of a senior civil servant or GP for instance.

(I am NOT an MP, by the way).

To be honest I am far, far more pissed off with the endless pissing away of our money on useless, ill thought out projects such as the NHS database (still jinxed by problems), ridiculous high end military procurement (I have worked closely with the Defence Procurement Agency, you should see the hundreds of millions they spend inefficiently per year and many millions on purposeless Management Consultants. That never makes the news. This annoys me far far more than Hazel Blears dodging 13 grand on Capital Gains Tax.

"I couldnt bear him when he wrote 'Moab is my washpot' I thought it the most pretentious title ever (but thats probably because _I havent a clue what it means)"- says it all......

a good smoke screen for other things , eg spending approx £25m to move road around stonehenge , and build new visitor centre
and tragic events in sri lanka which made front page of guardian, but not on news headlines that i saw
this is deemed more important, sadly

...and what's happened to the Swine flu 'pandemic'??? Everyone's forgotten about that too, thank goodness.

hmm, I think I can see the allure of Prescott, but only if I squish my eyes up really tight

He was quite the dish in his youth

I still feel disappointed when people in power are revealed as honour-less, corrupt,grasping fat cats. Which is ridiculous really because it happens over and over again.
I would object strongly to these people being paid large salaries. Politicians should not be in it for the salary and there is no parallel to politics in business to align wages to. If someone is torn between business and politics because of the salary then they should definitely not go into politics.

I agree with the suggestion made by several people on PM last night that there should be a hostel type building for politicians to stay in when in London.

A hostel? So if you're a working mother with say three kids and a job in London and happen to be married to an MP with a constituency in say Yokshire, you live in a "hostel" during the week?

£60,000 is a ridiculously low salary for an MP, particualrly to run two properties on. The average NHS Dentist earns over £100k and primary school heads in London can get more than £80k.

No of course not. The hostel idea is for those politicians whose constituency is outside of London and who come to London to attend parliament.

Stephen Fry has spectacularly missed the point - it's nothing to do with our petty obsessions or the fact that most people probably do fiddle their expenses.

If i'm trying to blag my expenses then i might claim for a few drinks that, strictly speaking, were pleasure not business. I don't claim for having my tennis court re surfaced or the front of my house painted.

The MPs themselves made the rules and the rules stink. they all have their noses in the trough while telling the rest of us 'we're all in this together'

never been that mad about him...he's not as funny as he thinks he is, but re; politicians fiddling expenses....nothing new im sure.