Lest we forget

Copied from Mirror.co.uk
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2009/05/29/expenses-row-three-mps-to-stand-down-but-taxpayers-will-foot-1-2m-bill-115875-21397425/

Expenses row: Three MPs to stand down... but taxpayers will foot £1.2m bill

By Bob Roberts and Jason Beattie29/05/2009

Three more MPs were forced to quit yesterday over the expenses scandal - but they will still rake in £100,000 each in taxpayers' cash in "golden goodbyes".

The three included brazen Tory Julie Kirkbride who finally bowed to public fury over her lavish claims.

It brings the number of MPs standing down to 12 - yet because they refuse to go now, they will still be taking our money until Gordon Brown goes to the country.

Incredibly, the cost to the taxpayer of parachute payments and winding-up schemes for the 12 could run to £1.2million. And that does not include their £64,766 pay... or expenses.

There was anger yesterday that not one has agreed to quit immediately.

One furious constituent in Ms Kirkbride's Bromsgrove seat said: "She should go right now. We have already shelled out more than enough on her."

Last night it was also revealed that record numbers of MPs have applied for peerages after the next election.

At least 52 Labour members - a seventh of those elected in 2005 - are said to have approached Downing Street to request a seat in the House of Lords.

Ms Kirkbride, 48, finally announced her decision to quit at 1.10pm yesterday following revelations that she spent £50,000 on a home extension. This came on top of her "double-dipping" with husband Andrew MacKay.

Just a minute earlier, Labour's Margaret Moran, 54, quit following the news she claimed £22,500 for dry rot at her partner's home in Southampton - 100 miles away from her constituency.

Conservative Christopher Fraser, who claimed more than £1,800 in expenses to mark out the boundary of his house, also announced he was stepping down.

And the Mirror can reveal Labour MP Elliot Morley will tell his constituency party this weekend he has had enough and will go at the next general election.

If the MPs stepped down now they would not be eligible for the parachute payment under Commons rules.

But by hanging on until the election, due within a year, Ms Moran gets a payoff of £93,125 when she goes. This includes a parachute payment of £50,517 and a "winding up" allowance of £42,608.

Ms Kirkbride will walk away with at least £74,000.

Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg said it showed the need to reform the constitution to give people the right to sack their MP. He said: "If MPs feel they have done badly enough to stand down then people should have the right to sack them and not wait until the election."

In Ms Moran's Luton South constituency, pensioner Gilbert Green, 67, said: "She's not standing in Luton, especially now. She should stand down straight away. She can't show her face."

Joshua Clarke, 27, added: "Standing down is not enough. She needs to pay the money back at least, and maybe do community service."

Ms Moran blamed stress and health problems for her decision. She said: "The anger in the media and among the public over the issue of Parliamentary expenses has had a bruising effect upon my friends, my family and my health."

Ms Kirkbride's news followed days of insisting she would not go. Tory leader David Cameron had previously backed her but after a phone chat with him yesterday, she said: "I must take into account the effects on my family. I understand people's anger about MPs' expenses, but I have been subject to a barrage of distorted stories which I have sought to rebut. This pressure on my party workers and me has to end."

Piling the pressure on the MP was housewife and mum of four Louise Marnell, 43, who was so angry at Ms Kirkbride she launched a Julie To Go campaign and petition in Bromsgrove, West Mids. Four thousand signatures later, Louise said: "All you need to know is that I'm a normal housewife and my husband is a builder. I've never been involved in politics or anything like that. I'm too busy doing the things that mums do, trying to make ends meet."

A senior Labour source said he expected the resignations, which include Commons Speaker Michael Martin, to be only the start. The party expected Mr Morley, who claimed for a mortgage he had already paid off, to go. Others would follow when Labour's "star chamber" finished its probe. Officials from the Parliamentary Fees Office have spoken for the first time about how the scandal developed.

Speaking anonymously to the BBC, one source said there was a "tea room chain" at Westminster. When one MP remortgaged to get a higher claim the honourable member would tell pals and soon there would be "a gold rush" of others claiming the same thing.

Meanwhile Esther Rantzen, who had announced she would stand against Ms Moran, said she may still fight the seat if local people wanted her to.

And Barack Obama's former brotherin-law Ian Manners, 56, announced he will try to stand as a Tory candidate after disgraced Andrew MacKay steps down in Bracknell, Berks. Mr Manners said: "This is not a gimmick. I would do better than most of the current crop."

TOLL OF MPs FELLED IN EXPENSES SCANDAL
Douglas Hogg, Conservative
Claimed £2,115 to have his moat cleared. Also claimed for piano tuning and £671 for mole catcher.

Sir Peter Viggers, Conservative
Filed a £30,000 claim for a gardening bill including a duck island for his pond.

Anthony Steen, Conservative
Spent £87,729 in four years on upkeep of his "very large" mansion people are "jealous of".

Andrew Mackay, Conservative
Julie Kirkbride's husband. Claimed second home expenses but had no first home in his constituency.

Sir Nicholas Winterton Conservative
Husband of Ann. Together claimed £120,000 to rent a flat from a family trust.

Ann Winterton, Conservative
Wife of Nicholas. Together claimed £120,000 to rent a flat from a family trust.

Michael Martin, Speaker
To quit after MPs attacked him for trying to keep expenses secret. Claimed £1,400 for chauffeur.

Ben Chapman, Labour
Will step down after overclaimed £15,000 mortgage interest payments by mistake.

Ian McCartney, Labour
Leaving due to bad health. Has repaid almost £15,000 expenses including champagne flutes.

The scalps which were claimed
By Bob Roberts

The scalps which were claimed yesterday show how deep the expenses scandal is cutting.

Previously, those who had gone had been Westminster's old guard. The fusty, old-fashioned Tory squires Sir Peter Viggers, Anthony Steen and Douglas Hogg announced they were quitting when few of them would have been expected to carry on for long anyway.

From Labour, Elliot Morley is facing possible deselection and David Chaytor has been suspended. Even if they stay in Westminster they will be in the shady obscurity of the backbenches. But Julie Kirkbride and Margaret Moran are not the semi-retired wing of either the Conservative or Labour parties.

They are both modern women who came to Parliament in 1997 after having successful careers outside.

Kirkbride, 48, was a feisty daughter of a truck driver who became a Daily Telegraph political journalist and then an MP.

She could have expected a ministerial post in a David Cameron government.

Margaret Moran, 54, a former Catholic schoolgirl, had been the leader of Lewisham Council in London before becoming an MP. As a leading campaigner against domestic violence and child abuse, few would have thought her career was finished until three weeks ago.

But their falls shows no one is safe as the axe in the expenses scandal keeps swinging and public anger shows no sign of easing.

The question now is: who is next?

And the MPs are trembling in the tearooms - because no one knows the answer.

Rain forests, global warming blah blah

Those that know me may be surprised to know that I am a great proponent of global warming, and looking for ways of saving the human race (the planet will be fine, it will just get rid of the human race, and start again).

The thing that we do is burn fossil fuels and dump CO2 by the millions of tons into the atmosphere. Then expect it to be soaked up by trees around the world. One of the biggest places being the Amazon rain forest.

For years we have been harping on about the Brazilians destroying their natural habitat, and the earths lungs (for those stupids out there, at a very basic level trees suck up CO2, and release O2). CO2 of course isn't the only greenhouse gas, and the complete picture is a bit more complicated than that.

But, I was listening to Costing the Earth today on Radio 4, where some Brazilian / Amazonian politicians / landowners were talking, and they were getting a bit sick of being told by the rest of the world not to tear down their rainforest, where they could make an income from it by doing so. Effectively they want to be paid for having the trees providing a service to the planet. Totally understandable.

The US has effectively deforested for the sake of urban expansion, and farming, and now expects Brazil not to do so.

So, a solution. There should be (another) tax on all fuel usage, to go, not to governments, but to a big global pot of money. There would be outcry, prices of other goods and services would go up as a result (perhaps there may even be less fuel usage as a result), but we all have to pay for using the Earth.

From there, all land owners who have trees should be paid for having trees, and maintaining and keeping trees instead of cutting them down. Whether this be countries / governments or individuals.

Hideously complicated and expensive I know, and 3rd world countries will suffer from land grabbers (previously worthless land will become an income source, and therefore attractive to politicians and other lowlifes), but a start nevertheless.

Many believe that we have already passed the tipping point, so maybe Hazel Blears was right - grab as mush as you can while you can.

£1645 for a duck island.

£1645 for a duck island!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

On expenses. Amongst total expense claim of £30 odd 000.

Sir Peter Viggers. Why are you still knighted. Where are Inland revenue. Why have you not been clapped in irons.

This is not just amoral, and wrong, its got to be illegal.

The inland revenue need to look at each and every MP over the last 7 years, look at all the expense claims, and get back taxes, with interest and fines. Just like everyone else.

School holidays

Just heard some utter twit on breakfast tv this morning (tuned in a bit late, so didn't get his credentials or name), but either a teacher or head, along with the opposite view parent, talking about taking children out of school for holidays.

Parents stance - its much cheaper to do so, it affects child school progress very little, it's good for family time, and it's educational (cross cultural learning, and language development). Personally I utterly agree with this, we have taken our children out of school for holidays, and it has mad absolutely no impact on their school progression whatsoever.

Twit's - oops teacher's - stance, and this statement really stood out - poor child performance has been unequivocally linked to poor attendance. Of this I have absolutely no doubt, but you have to link holidays to poor attendance, and of that there is no evidence - ie do parents who take their children away on holidays also allow thir children to poorly attend. Perhaps, but poor attendance is more likely to be a chronic, repeated poor attendance throughout the year, rather than just a 2 week or so period one off.

Other anti in term holidays arguments - its disruptive to teaching - well that was about it really.

The snob also commented that he had sympathy with parents who took children on educational trips as opposed to the Marbella - hmmm - wonder what Marbellan residents have to say about that.

The problem - holiday providers (hotels, tour operators etc) all inflate their prices for school holidays, sometimes double or more compared to term time, so it is very tempting for parents to go, with or without permission.

The solution - change the shool term system, so there is no holiday price bias. Instead of fixed terms, have teaching all year round, and allow children to have an amount of time off over the year, whenever they want. They would have to make themselves available at certain times to attend for instance exams.

Downside for teachers - they would only get 5 weeks or so holiday a year, just like the rest of us, instead of the 13 weeks or so they get now (fully paid of course), together with all the training days held during what would normally be classed a teaching day, forcing the parents to take time off work in order to look after the offspring (what goes on in a training day anyway?)

Now perhaps we see the real reason for teachers reluctance to allow out of term holidays - it would just be the thin end of the wedge, the slippery slope to have to work all year, instead of the ridiculous holidays they have now.

Don't get me wrong, I have far more respect for teachers than I do for politicians, and most of them do a fine job of teaching, often under difficult circumstances, but the holidays, and the insistance on keeping them is just out dated.

The speaker

So the speakers done the honourable thing and stepped down. Or according to Hilary Ben, has put everyone else and the rest of the House of Scheisters, I mean Commons first before himself.

Or was it that the effusive apology and attempt to cling on to his position just wasn't enough to stop the back stabbing trough snorting power mongers demanding that he go, and take the blame for what they have been doing for years?

Getting someone to resign doesn't excuse the years of fingers deep in the pie of 'rules allowed' expenses claims, just because they were unable to keep it hidden from the great unwashed. Or is that the real reason he had to go - because he couldn't obfuscate the freedom of information flow, and keep it hidden from us?

Whatever the case, some MPs are now worried that if public opinion could get the speaker's head to roll, then which one of them is next?

Expenses - again!

Its been a while since my last post, but it's really looking like fun in London at the moment.

"The House of Commons authorities have asked police in London to investigate the leaking of details of MPs' expenses."

"A spokesman for the House claimed that there were "reasonable grounds to believe a criminal offence may have been committed". "

I'll bloody say.

£6000 for a cleaner for Gordy and his brother

Jack Straw claiming back full council tax for 4 years, when he was only paying 50% for a second home. And claiming for work done on his own constituency home under the second home allowance rules to repair dilapidated fixings (which one was the 'second' home then?)

Hazel Blears switching second home allowance 3 times to 3 different properties in the space of one year.

The list goes on.

When interviewed, the universal reply is that they've done nothing wrong, as it was all within the rules. Who made the rules?

No wonder the country's sick to the eye teeth of this lot. And they sit there and wonder what's going on.