Last Post (for a while) on Mps Expense Claims.

In the post dated 4 Feb which I headed "Fiddling the Expenses" which I have now changed to "Fiddling the Expenses?" I mentioned that some of the amounts were almost unbelievable. Then I mentioned three of those amounts, one being our very own local MP, Mr Adrian Sanders. I pointed out that he had been asked to pay back a little over £690. In the context of the post it could possibly have looked like I was suggesting that there could have been wrong doing on the part of Mr Sanders, though that wasn't my intention. He hadn't switched his second home to get the government to pay his personal mortgage or claimed £500 for a laptop computer bag. He had merely claimed for rent on his flat in London, which he is entitled to. Then 4 years ago Parliament had been dissolved. This period of 21 days after Parliament has been dissolved MPs can not apparently claim rent for London flats but no one told the MPs and until Sir Thomas Legg mentioned it a couple of months ago Mr Sanders had no idea he had inadvertently over claimed. So the overpayment was to do with mistakes made by the admin department that are supposed to control MPs expense claims. Which was in fact the purpose of the post. In all this sorry mess no one appears to be commenting on that department's shortcomings. The changes in the rules that have been brought in plus the slowness of the admin department are in fact making many MPs look like guilty men and women when they aren't. As Mr Sanders says in a comment on a recent post an independent audit of expenses should be carried out every year.

Mr Sanders, as soon as he was informed of the fact that he had received too much repaid the total amount immediately.

PS
So far, while living in Torbay I have voted for the same person in two general elections. I do not expect to change this habit in the next general election.

Fiddling the Expences, More Thoughts

So out of 337 MPs only 3 are to face charges regarding the matter. What about the couple who claimed expenses for both the houses they were living in, what about the man who claimed for a duck house or the nearby MP who spent loads of your money and mine doing up his garden?

It was bad enough the MPs had been found(allegedly) to have their fingers in the till but the farce the enquiry has turned into is only making the matter worse. For instance of the MPs who appealed against having to pay back money over 60% have been successful. I bet those who didn't claim are kicking themselves now. And the changing of some of the rules so that MPs who had claimed expenses according to the rules suddenly found the goal posts had been moved and not only that, the new rules had been backdated. So if the football rule makers decide that the goal posts should be wider and the rules backdated to 1950 then all the players the hit the post with a shot in the last 60 years can claim a goal. That would make a mess of the record books.

And finally as someone has commented here, the cost of this has been more than will be recovered which make this farce a fairly expensive one.

OK I know I said finally but one more comment. The 3 MPs who are trying to use Parliamentary Privilege to get out of going to court should remember this privilege  only covers them for what they say in the House. So be brave lads and stand up in the House of Commons and say out loud, "I did fiddle my expenses." Then you can not end up in court as freedom of speech is sacred and what you say cannot be used against you. Good luck to you.

Fiddling the Expences?

Many years ago I had a job in the retail trade that involved travelling to different outlets each day.

I was told that as well as my wages I would receive so much a mile petrol allowance. I can't remember the exact amount now so lets say it was 20p a mile. I didn't have a car but rode a small motorbike and 20p a mile represented a fairly large profit compared to a car owner. I pointed this out to the boss as I didn't want him coming back to me months later and saying I owed the company a huge amount of petrol money because my bike was using less petrol than a car. He told me that there was one worker who cycled everywhere and he still got the petrol allowance. It was built into the pay structure. After I had been working for a few weeks I was told by a fellow worker to always add a few miles a day onto my claim. There were about 12 people doing a similar job to me, travelling and claiming petrol money and the company didn't check the exact mileage travelled.

Now I felt I was already getting far more petrol money than I was actually spending and didn't feel the need to fiddle the claim to get more. But, and it was a small but; a moral dilemma. Should I be a whistle blower and tell the boss some of his workers were fiddling the accounts. I didn't due to the fact I didn't want to be that unpopular with my fellow workers, the amount really wasn't that big, not likely to break the company bank and if the boss was too lazy to check the mileage then that was his problem.

The reason I tell this story is because today a report has been released concerning the MP expenses. Just over half the honourable members have to pay back some of the expenses they have claimed. Some of these claims or so outrageous as to be almost unbelievable. To mention but 3,Barbara Follett (Lab) Stevenage £42,458, was the largest amount to be repaid, the smallest amount was for £104.48 while our very own local MP Adrian Sanders has paid back £691.

The average amount the 300 or so MPs have to pay back comes to over £3500 so Adrian could hardly be said to be on a gravy train. [In fact the money he had to pay back dated from 4 years ago and it wasn't his fault he had incorrectly claimed it. See comment below]. Now there have been many comments about the MPs who have made exaggerated claims but very few if any have asked the question I asked myself, briefly, when I heard that some of my fellow workers were fiddling. Did any of those MPs who haven't got to repay anything and were therefore not fiddling the taxpayer stand up in Parliament and Blow the Whistle? If not, why not? And the other question that seems to be ignored is why wasn't there tighter controls on all these expenses by the department responsible for actually paying them. Those people, civil servants I assume, did they just say as they rubber stamped the claim forms, "Oh, it's taxpayers money. Why should we care?" If they did why are they still in a job?

Redevelopment of Princess Gardens and The Pavilion

I received an email from the local residents association containing the agenda set out below. The pier in front of Princess Gardens is falling down and the only way it can be repaired is if the whole area is redeveloped using mostly private money. Princess Gardens is an open space in a town that is short of open spaces and needs to be preserved. So if you live in Torquay and give a damn then give some though to attending the meeting on Monday 22 Feb.

Agenda for the Tormohun Community Partnership
February 22nd 2010
7.00 pm – 9.00 pm
ENGLISH RIVERIA CENTRE
Rosetor Room courtesy of Barry Cole
The Future of Princess Gardens and the Pavilion

1. Apologies & Housekeeping 2 mins

History of Princess Gardens
- Dr Michael Rhodes, Ian Williams and Tony Garratt 15 mins

Condition of Princess Gardens and the Pavilion

By Gordon Ross and Dave Stewart 15 mins

Options Appraisal and importance to our economy
By Steve Parrock (TDA) 15 mins

Discussion with the developer 25 mins


Questions and Answers 45 mins

If you can't make it then see this site for a report, full or otherwise on 23 Feb.

Note; Tormohun is the name of part of Torquay. It is only used in local government circles.

The Government Have Come Up With The Cash

It has been announced that Torbay will receive and extra £580,000 towards the cost of Concessionary Bus Passes. This is not enough to cover the expected £800,000 shortfall that the Bay would have been facing had this extra grant not been paid. I will feel slightly less embarrassed now when I get on a number 12 bus in Fleet Street and go down to the Harbour.

This does raise the question of previous years when the council had to subsidise the scheme by over half a million pounds each year. Not what Gordon Brown promised (no winners, no losers) when he set the scheme up but then he is a politician.

Here is a short quote from the Herald Express.

The £600,000 grant goes a long way to alleviating the burden on Bay taxpayers, but mayor Nick Bye said there will still be funds to be found. He added: "Torbay Council has lobbied very hard and very effectively because, of all the councils, we are aware we seem to have experienced the greatest shortfall.
"This does not quite plug the gap and does nothing for this financial year, or last year. It does make life quite a bit easier for the budget in 2010/11.
"We support the scheme and think it's really good and improving the quality of life of older people and disabled people in the Bay."