State of UK Politics

[Adrock]

The problem, Brats, is that we are the regulators. In recent decades the electorate has become further disillusioned with the political systems in this country. Without the public taking an interest years of status quo loom ahead. Whether it be Labour or Conservative administered.

The idea of our democracy is that you hold the person you vote for accountable for all of their decisions they are making on your behalf. Ideally that'd mean they would never stray from their promises and would vote exactly how the majority of their electorate felt. Sadly that doesn't happen, especially with the public not caring. Scrutiny of MP's is probably at an all time high, but only because the media is looking for sensationalist material. When it comes to the important, boring, facts they are usually ignored in favour of the newest smear/sleaze story.

Being an MP, for the majority it seems, is about power and wealth nowadays.

[Ady]

The way I see it the whole "smash the system" thing is a bit of an illusion. In this day and age the country is locked down so tight that the only thing that's likely to get smashed is your skull by a policeman with a riot baton.

To that I always say, there are more of us than there are of them...

[Big Seany]

Some MP down here claimed a hundred-odd quid on his expenses for a trouser press. Got to hand it to the bloke for having the grapefruits to be so cheeky.

[abigsmurf]

If it was dodgy, it shouldn't have been ok'ed. It's the same with all expense accounts, if stuff gets ok'ed without issue, people will use them as much as possible

[egparadigm]

The only thing I want to say on the matter is that the issue needs to be viewed with a little proportion. Changing the designation of your second home, avoiding capital gains tax, refurbishing in order to increase the profit on your sale is of a different order of magnitude to claiming for cat food totalling £4.50.

Although, of course, the smaller claims for things unrelated to your role as an MP is also not right, it is just a symptom of a system that has become increasingly relaxed. Not only was it an error to ask for the reimbursement of cat food, but it was also an error to approve the claim.

The one other thing some people don't seem to understand is that, thanks to the efforts of MPs like Norman Baker, this information was about to be published through the freedom of information act. All that the Telegraph has achieved is a march on its rivals. The newspaper claims that it was going to be censored, but I've yet to see any proof of this.

We also have a relatively uncorrupt system of government when compared to other first-world democracies. And I speak as someone with serious issues with the state and the way we are governed. I think it's bankrupt, but – for the most part – honestly so.

[Concrete donkey]

I'm I being cynical or was anyone seriously suprised by the idea of politicans abusing things like expenses. Sure we have the facts and figures now but wasn't it just assumed that these kind of things go on anyway? The only thing I'm suprised at is once the series of articles got going why hadn't individual MPs tried to beat the newspapers to the punch by coming clean before their turn in print. And yes, the scale is a little bigger than I would have imagined.

[gunrock]

In some ways it's a shame that there's all this scrutiny of MP's expenses, as I was going to tell my daughter when she asks for career advice, that she should become an MP!

Not sure if anyone else has mentioned in this thread, but I love the way that MP's get to vote on public sector pay and release statements about how the private sector should show restraint in wage increases to keep inflation down, but when they vote on their own wage increases, the answer is usually "Yes please, 2.33% for 2009, that'll do nicely, sir!". In fact it's the only thing that seems to unify the parties...

Why are they voting on their own pay anyway? Shouldn't there be a referendum?

[gunrock]

I'm I being cynical or was anyone seriously suprised by the idea of politicans abusing things like expenses. Sure we have the facts and figures now but wasn't it just assumed that these kind of things go on anyway? The only thing I'm suprised at is once the series of articles got going why hadn't individual MPs tried to beat the newspapers to the punch by coming clean before their turn in print. And yes, the scale is a little bigger than I would have imagined.

What made me sick is the way they colluded to keep it secret, by attempting to exempt themselves from the Freedom of Information high-court order, then voted 172 to 146 to keep the existing "gravy-train" expenses system.

BBC link

Shysters, the lot of them. :grr:

[abigsmurf]

In some ways it's a shame that there's all this scrutiny of MP's expenses, as I was going to tell my daughter when she asks for career advice, that she should become an MP!

Not sure if anyone else has mentioned in this thread, but I love the way that MP's get to vote on public sector pay and release statements about how the private sector should show restraint in wage increases to keep inflation down, but when they vote on their own wage increases, the answer is usually "Yes please, 2.33% for 2009, that'll do nicely, sir!". In fact it's the only thing that seems to unify the parties...

Why are they voting on their own pay anyway? Shouldn't there be a referendum?

2.33% pay increase is/was below inflation so is effectively a pay cut.

You cannot have a referendum on this as they would never, ever get a pay rise. As I said before, you don't want a system where only rich people can be an MP unless they get money from other questionable means.

MPs are elected because you cannot function through constant referendums. You take that route and whilst you may be able to pass the "puppies for orphans" motions, stuff like "increasing the food budget for prisoners" would never get passed and you'd end up with malnourished prisoners getting ill and costing the NHS a fortune.

The one other thing some people don't seem to understand is that, thanks to the efforts of MPs like Norman Baker, this information was about to be published through the freedom of information act. All that the Telegraph has achieved is a march on its rivals. The newspaper claims that it was going to be censored, but I've yet to see any proof of this.

It would have been published and all the information would have come out at once. We wouldn't have this slow trickle that's preventing the government from doing anything for weeks on end.

[EJG1980]

Watched Question Time last night, Ming Campbell (without quite realising the implication of what he was saying I think) summed it up really.

He will be paying back an expenses claim from 2006 which he said "Should clearly not have been claimed and it was obviously wrong to do so" and Dimbleby asked him why, if it was so obviously wrong, didn't he notice in 2006 that it was obviously wrong? "Well public opinion was different in 2006" replied Ming...

In other words, the fact that what he'd done was wrong didn't matter to him until the public caught wind of it. I think that's pretty much the position of most MPs on just about everything.

I agree with someone on QT who said that they'd like to see a list of all the MPs who haven't milked the system and have claimed reasonable and justifiable expenses. Might be good to get a bit of proportion and balance to a story for a change.

[abigsmurf]

Proportion and balance is of no interest to tabloids. They will pick on anything and everything and take things out of context.

One of the 'scandalous' expenses I read about for example, was "£120! Just to change some light bulbs!". When you looked at the detail, there were 26 bulbs that had to be changed, not exactly a quick job, something that would take a couple of hours and, assuming they're energy saving bulbs which they probably were, would cost at least £50 in parts along.

[Spatial]

Watched Question Time last night, Ming Campbell (without quite realising the implication of what he was saying I think) summed it up really.

He will be paying back an expenses claim from 2006 which he said "Should clearly not have been claimed and it was obviously wrong to do so" and Dimbleby asked him why, if it was so obviously wrong, didn't he notice in 2006 that it was obviously wrong? "Well public opinion was different in 2006" replied Ming...

That's about right - they're not really sorry for what they've done, they're sorry that they got caught.

[abigsmurf]

They thought it was fine to claim these things, the people handling the expenses claims thought it was fine, the rules said it was fine. It's just three years later, people have now decided it isn't fine and that we should retro-actively apply this view to what they did then.

[gunrock]

2.33% pay increase is/was below inflation so is effectively a pay cut.

You cannot have a referendum on this as they would never, ever get a pay rise. As I said before, you don't want a system where only rich people can be an MP unless they get money from other questionable means.

It's still a rise. MP's are paid well. As of April 2008 the pay for an UK MP is £63291. Pretty good by the national average pay standards (median 2008 is £24908, source: National Statistics Online). This is excluding pension and expenses. It also excludes pay of £14039 for those who are chairmen of various committees. In fact, in the ten years since 1998, their pay has increased by £18225. Pretty good, IMO and certainly not a wage that would put people off being an MP or having to resort to "questionable means" of raising money. Other than abusing their expenses system, I suppose...

All this info was gleaned from here.
UK parliament download
National statistics online, average pay

MPs are elected because you cannot function through constant referendums. You take that route and whilst you may be able to pass the "puppies for orphans" motions, stuff like "increasing the food budget for prisoners" would never get passed and you'd end up with malnourished prisoners getting ill and costing the NHS a fortune.

I'm not suggesting a referendum for every issue. I just think that it's folly to ask people to vote on their own pay for obvious reasons.

['Press Start']

The whole system is rotten to the core. Guy Fawlkes had the right idea - blow it up and start again.

Careful what you say. I know you do not believe in the new world order but if particular authorities mis-understood what you are inciting you could be arrest under the terrorism act.

I know you are really saying is we need change but you see how we even have to watch what we say because we could be 'perceived' as a threat. You are having thought crimes brats!

If you think it disgraceful what low level (yes in the grand sceme of things they are low level) MPs are doing controlling your tax money, then imagine what the people with the real power are doing in the shadows. If your money is perceived as their money then what of your lives?

People are calling for a total govement re-structure because they have lost all faith in the current system, World leaders are calling for a new world order, the two go hand in hand along with a world finanical crisis.

This scandel should get more people thinking deeper about is govenment still for the people, or is govenment now a vechical for world control, a desire that has been with us since we stood upright (or were placed here, whatever your view)



Ady nailed it, there are more of us then them. Down side is most of us have no idea what is going on and do not want to rock the boat of our comfortable lives.

Sometimes the lie is more comfortable to live with then the truth.