MPs' expenses claims rise by a quarter in a year - The Telegraph

This is an oldish article - 6 days ago but haven.t been able to access Mac for a while.

Amazing that nothing seems to have changed does it? One article I read was that one MP presented his Electricity Invoice twice, it was a photocopy of the original, he said it was a mistake when they refused to pay the amount!

By Holly Watt, Whitehall Editor7:26PM BST 06 Sep 2012




The bill went up by a quarter to nearly £90 million last year.
Politicians spent the money on second homes, staff, travel and office costs - including dozens of iPads.
The figure is now only slightly lower than in the run-up to the scandal that rocked Westminster in 2009 after it was exposed by the Daily Telegraph.
The Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (Ipsa) insisted that the rate of claims had remained "stable".
The total outlay for 2010-11 had been £71 million, and IPSA pointed out this was lower because of the impact of the general election.
RELATED ARTICLES
Cameron in ageism row over Spelman sacking 06 Sep 2012
Boris attacks Justine Greening's move from Transport 04 Sep 2012
The reshuffled Cabinet 04 Sep 2012
Bizarre MPs' expense claims 11 Dec 2009
In 2008-09, before the expenses crises, MPs claimed £95.6million, while immediately after the scandal, the claims fell to £90.7 million.
Only seven claims of the 35,315 submitted by MPs were not paid by IPSA, of which six were made by the former Environment Secretary Chris Huhne. The claims – for car mileage – totalled only £4.95 together.
Tim Loughton – who was sacked from his Education Minister role in the reshuffle on Tuesday – had an electricity bill of £262 rejected on the grounds that it was a "duplicate claim".
Mr Loughton's position in government was taken by the Liberal Democrat David Laws, who had to resign in May 2010 after the Telegraph disclosed he had been paying rent to his partner, which is against the rules.
Chairman Sir Ian Kennedy said "like for like" the rate of claims had been about the same last year, and 99% were within the rules.
"If we want a good service from our MPs, we have to fund them," he said. "And if you don't think you get a good service from your MP, the answer is not to withhold funding - it is to use your vote."
Altogether, the 650 MPs were handed £89.4 million in 2011-12.
Some 50 iPads were purchased, along with a variety of Apple accessories.
The top three claimants were Liberal Democrats – Greg Mulholland, Stephen Gilbert and Alistair Carmichael. Mr Mulholland, who received £188,783.38 in staffing salary and expenses, said his costs were higher than usual because of staff suffering health problems. As the MP for Orkney and Shetlands, Mr Carmichael's travel expenses are unusually high.
MPs spent £6,401,099 on accommodation costs.
The former Prime Minister Gordon Brown received £127,197 in expenses and staffing costs. Mr Brown claimed £13,458 in travelling costs, despite speaking in Parliament only three times since the 2010 election.
The Prime Minister David Cameron claimed £5,617, most of which covered office costs.
The Chancellor George Osborne received £9,715.04, which was mainly spent on travelling to and from his constituency in Tatton.
Dozens of MPs have continued to claim the cost of their mortgage interest, a system which is due to be phased out. In total, they claimed £353,646 to cover the cost of their mortgage interest.
The Defence Secretary Philip Hammond claimed £7,500 in mortgage costs last year, although he represents the constituency of Weybridge and Runnymede, which takes just over half an hour to reach by train from London.
MPs claimed a further £836,742 to cover rent of properties either in London or their constituencies.

Angelique wrote:This is an oldish article - 6 days ago but haven.t been able to access Mac for a while.

Amazing that nothing seems to have changed does it? One article I read was that one MP presented his Electricity Invoice twice, it was a photocopy of the original, he said it was a mistake when they refused to pay the amount!

By Holly Watt, Whitehall Editor7:26PM BST 06 Sep 2012




The bill went up by a quarter to nearly £90 million last year.
Politicians spent the money on second homes, staff, travel and office costs - including dozens of iPads.
The figure is now only slightly lower than in the run-up to the scandal that rocked Westminster in 2009 after it was exposed by the Daily Telegraph.
The Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (Ipsa) insisted that the rate of claims had remained "stable".
The total outlay for 2010-11 had been £71 million, and IPSA pointed out this was lower because of the impact of the general election.
RELATED ARTICLES
Cameron in ageism row over Spelman sacking 06 Sep 2012
Boris attacks Justine Greening's move from Transport 04 Sep 2012
The reshuffled Cabinet 04 Sep 2012
Bizarre MPs' expense claims 11 Dec 2009
In 2008-09, before the expenses crises, MPs claimed £95.6million, while immediately after the scandal, the claims fell to £90.7 million.
Only seven claims of the 35,315 submitted by MPs were not paid by IPSA, of which six were made by the former Environment Secretary Chris Huhne. The claims – for car mileage – totalled only £4.95 together.
Tim Loughton – who was sacked from his Education Minister role in the reshuffle on Tuesday – had an electricity bill of £262 rejected on the grounds that it was a "duplicate claim".
Mr Loughton's position in government was taken by the Liberal Democrat David Laws, who had to resign in May 2010 after the Telegraph disclosed he had been paying rent to his partner, which is against the rules.
Chairman Sir Ian Kennedy said "like for like" the rate of claims had been about the same last year, and 99% were within the rules.
"If we want a good service from our MPs, we have to fund them," he said. "And if you don't think you get a good service from your MP, the answer is not to withhold funding - it is to use your vote."
Altogether, the 650 MPs were handed £89.4 million in 2011-12.
Some 50 iPads were purchased, along with a variety of Apple accessories.
The top three claimants were Liberal Democrats – Greg Mulholland, Stephen Gilbert and Alistair Carmichael. Mr Mulholland, who received £188,783.38 in staffing salary and expenses, said his costs were higher than usual because of staff suffering health problems. As the MP for Orkney and Shetlands, Mr Carmichael's travel expenses are unusually high.
MPs spent £6,401,099 on accommodation costs.
The former Prime Minister Gordon Brown received £127,197 in expenses and staffing costs. Mr Brown claimed £13,458 in travelling costs, despite speaking in Parliament only three times since the 2010 election.
The Prime Minister David Cameron claimed £5,617, most of which covered office costs.
The Chancellor George Osborne received £9,715.04, which was mainly spent on travelling to and from his constituency in Tatton.
Dozens of MPs have continued to claim the cost of their mortgage interest, a system which is due to be phased out. In total, they claimed £353,646 to cover the cost of their mortgage interest.
The Defence Secretary Philip Hammond claimed £7,500 in mortgage costs last year, although he represents the constituency of Weybridge and Runnymede, which takes just over half an hour to reach by train from London.
MPs claimed a further £836,742 to cover rent of properties either in London or their constituencies.

That Cabinet Room must reek of Corruption....

I like the way their all rubbing their hands together like all the freebies are being dished out.Didn't take long for them to get their snouts back in the trough.

For some strange reason this collection of lying overpaid scrofulous thieves consider themselves as the elite...
God help us plebs.

When the scandal of expenses first broke, hurried moves were supposed to have been made to stop it happening again. The next thing we heard was MP's complaining now that They were waiting too long for their claims to be settled. Given their salaries, and other perks, I can't really see many of them having to go to the job centre and claim hardship allowance for having to live on the streets until they get their expense money.

All that has really happened of course is they have dreamt up a whole new, and much more imaginative ways of stealing, because that is what it amounts to. One such is the renting of a house in or near London, a house owned by another MP. That way everybody wins. The landlord gets his/her mortgage paid for (they don't pay any interest anyway like us voting fodder) and the sub-letter claims the rent from the tax payer. One thing is guaranteed they will not lose. They will see to that. When caught with their fingers in the sweetie jar it is always a genuine mistake. I suppose admitting to ripping off the taxpayer would be a little OTT even for such practiced liars.

Malena Stool, you  refer to them as lying, overpaid, scrofulous thieves. That is almost praising them. They used to enter parliament to serve their country now they enter parliament to help themselves to whatever they can until the electorate rumble them. Then as like as not they will be sent to the other place as they call it and cop for £300 for each attendance sometimes staying for as long as 5 minutes depending on how many other lucrative deals they have going. In between claiming  hardship allowance at the job centres that is.

katertaif wrote:When the scandal of expenses first broke, hurried moves were supposed to have been made to stop it happening again. The next thing we heard was MP's complaining now that They were waiting too long for their claims to be settled. Given their salaries, and other perks, I can't really see many of them having to go to the job centre and claim  hardship allowance for having to live on the streets until they get their expense money.

All that has really happened of course is they have dreamt up a whole new, and much more imaginative ways of stealing, because that is what it amounts to. One such is the renting of a house in or near London, a house owned by another MP. That way everybody wins. The landlord gets his/her mortgage paid for (they don't pay any interest anyway like us voting fodder) and the sub-letter claims the rent from the tax payer. One thing is guaranteed they will not lose. They will see to that. When caught with their fingers in the sweetie jar it is always a genuine mistake. I suppose admitting to ripping off the taxpayer would be a little OTT even for such practiced liars.

Malena Stool, you  refer to them as lying, overpaid, scrofulous thieves. That is almost praising them. They used to enter parliament to serve their country now they enter parliament to help themselves to whatever they can until the electorate rumble them. Then as like as not they will be sent to the other place as they call it and cop for £300 for each attendance sometimes staying for as long as 5 minutes depending on how many other lucrative deals they have going. In between claiming  hardship allowance at the job centres that is.

Good morning katertaif,
Yes you are right, I'm afraid I was a tad exuberant in my assessment of their moral (or amoral) qualities. Leperous toads might be better, without resorting to the language our elected representatives themselves, are quite likely more more at home with.

Sadly long gone are the days when politicians of all parties entered Parliament to represent their constituents and follow the party mandate they had campaigned with. Sadly also, long gone are the days when most politicians whatever their political beliefs were real men, men who had served their country in one or another of our armed services and understood the needs and aspirations of the people they represented. The new breed of public representatives are no more than spivs, shirking real work or responsibility, work which would probably kill them. Instead they opt for the easy life of professional speculation and profiteering and if it involves little risk as befitting a 'Honourable Member'... so much the better.

As for the other place... They should close it down or rename it The House of Doss, so many are seen to be enjoying a good £300 pit stop when the tv cameras are allowed in. I wonder if there are any statistics as to how many occupants of this place have been discovered inert, expired and running at room temperature after they've shut up shop for the day. As an afterthought, can they still claim their daily attendance allowance if they are pronounced DoA?

Hi Malena Stool

This is one issue on which I am more sorry than I can say to be right. In the not too distant past, we had a parliamentary system we could be proud of. It was known as the Mother of parliaments. MP's were sometimes wrong even often wrong, but they were wrong for the right reasons. They entered politics to serve their constituents and their country.

We saw on TV, or read about the antics of other governing bodies in other countries. and ours was free of the corruption and sleaze which bedevilled them. Not so now. parliament is rocked by scandal after scandal mostly to do with money and their greed. They no longer enter politics to serve their constituents and their country. They enter to serve themselves. The country they have sacrificed. on the altar of their own greed and ineptness. On the altar of a corrupt EU that the accountants refuse to balance the books of year on year. On the altar of multiculturism.

Their main concern now is the most creative and original way of claiming expenses they can find. You only have to look at their behaviour during PMQ's. Behaviour that would shame a toddler and cause an older child to be excluded from School. It certainly is not the behaviour we have a right to expect from the people supposed to be running the country

katertaif wrote:Hi Malena Stool

This is one issue on which I am more sorry than I can say to be right. In the not too distant past, we had a parliamentary system we could be proud of. It was known as the Mother of parliaments. MP's were sometimes wrong even often wrong, but they were wrong for the right reasons. They entered politics to serve their constituents and their country.

We saw on TV, or read about the antics of other governing bodies in other countries. and ours was free of the corruption and sleaze which bedevilled them. Not so now. parliament is rocked by scandal after scandal mostly to do with money and their greed. They no longer enter politics to serve their constituents and their country. They enter to serve themselves. The country they have sacrificed. on the altar of their own greed and ineptness. On the altar of a corrupt EU that the accountants refuse to balance the books of year on year. On the altar of multiculturism.

Their main concern now is the most creative and original way of claiming expenses they can find. You only have to look at their behaviour during PMQ's. Behaviour that would shame a toddler and cause an older child to be excluded from School. It certainly is not the behaviour we have a right to expect from the people supposed to be running the country

Good afternoon katertaif.
Were we to perform our daily tasks in the same casual, off handed, unprofessional manner as our, 'Honourable' representatives we would likely be searching for other employment. I can only assume that behind these deviant, overpaid pathetic clowns there is a real system of government staffed by normal, honest professionals, otherwise there is no hope for us.

They ignore the mandates which see them elected and bow to the demands of Europe and immigrants at the expense of the electorate who forget the broken promises, sky high inflation and stalled economy at each General Election. Perhaps it's the electorate's fault, but all party members are of the same mind... Self gratification trumps all.

They have created a third world country out of the UK. Our taxes are astronomical for the services we receive, our roads are crumbling, they have sold our public utilities, (illegally in my opinion), they allow unchecked immigration that reintroduces diseases long since eradicated in the UK, they give public money to other richer countries yet restict our income, while giving themselves an 11% rise.

I think I'll nip off for my own medication... a little early perhaps, but the sun is way over the yardarm......  

Self gratification is what they do best.

Even when they loose or resign their seats they get a nice juicy parachute payment of £65000 conveniently described as a 'resettlement grant'.

Most will 'employ' their wives,lovers,daughters as their secretaries/researchers.

Pro rata i believe we have more
MP's/representatives per capita than any other country in the World.

Grossly overstaffed and underworked and the longest holidays of any other occupation.

Hi Lioned.

You ain't just whistling Dixie there. I think you are quite correct in that never have so few been governed by so many The English Parliament, The, "other place" the Scottish Parliament, The Irish and Welsh assemblies. MEP's and that is before we start on the regional assemblies and the local councils. What are they all for? 80% of our laws are enacted in Brussels anyway so what do they all do, apart from feed greedily on the taxpayer, promote immigration and tell lies?

I can't find any fault with the long holidays they have though. Myself I would suggest 52 weeks a year holiday for the majority of them. They're a pretty useless crew of malcontents at the best of times. I wonder what happened to the pledge Cameron made to cut down the number of MP's. Possibly he did not find favour with my suggestion of cutting them by about 650.

Just another broken electioneering promise but then what else is new?

I like that idea ! However,assuming there might be some honest decent people out there it is my considered view that we should have a parliament made up of around 100 elected members.
That would be based on,i think,about 92 counties in the UK some of which being geographically or demographically larger could be split in two.
I am happy with a second chamber of great wise men/women who would be elected by a panel of even greater wise men/women.Again about 100 should be enough,of which they would be split into Industrial/commercial interests.
I would pay them well and give them expenses and holidays and a clocking in machine so they cant cheat.

So even if we pay them double the current rate the bill would be about a quarter of what it is now !

Get out of Europe and ditch the freeloaders and Kinnocks entire family and we would once again be the greatest nation in the World.

Then i would re - nationalise everything that Thatcher sold off and then i would re open all the mines so the Welsh can do what they do best.

Lioned wrote:I like that idea ! However,assuming there might be some honest decent people out there it is my considered view that we should have a parliament made up of around 100 elected members.
That would be based on,i think,about 92 counties in the UK some of which being geographically or demographically larger could be split in two.
I am happy with a second chamber of great wise men/women who would be elected by a panel of even greater wise men/women.Again about 100 should be enough,of which they would be split into Industrial/commercial interests.
I would pay them well and give them expenses and holidays and a clocking in machine so they cant cheat.

So even if we pay them double the current rate the bill would be about a quarter of what it is now !

Get out of Europe and ditch the freeloaders and Kinnocks entire family and we would on e again be the greatest nation in the World.

Then i would re - nationalise everything that Thatcher sold off and then i would re open all the mines so the Welsh can do what they do best.

The Welsh..... Dig very deep holes and then sing in them.....

(No offence intended to any Welsh members).

ms

The Welsh are very good at singing and digging deep holes and also looking after sheep.More recently they have got pretty good at running call centres.

I knew a girl from Wales who was a cracking bird but thats another story.

They are also good at rugby.

Good evening Lioned.

I can't find any fault in your arithmetic. About 100 in each chamber sounds about right. As long as the "other place" is not made up of party hacks sports personalities and other people who get made lords and ladies on nuisance value.

I can't agree with a blanket reopening of the mines however. pits do work out, and whereas Scargill did tell us repeatedly that Britain has some of the greatest reserves of deep mine coal, he forgot to mention two very salient points. The deeper you go the more dangerous it gets. I worked as an underground electrician on a gold mine for some years so I have some idea of what deep mining entails.

He also forgot to mention that those reserves are so contaminated by sulphur as to be unusable.

What we do need is to bring back apprenticeships, and to stop playing at training. To bring out and properly fund some meaningful courses that will lead to a skilled motivated workforce, we can then stop depending on transient immigrant labour doing what we are told Brits are no longer able or willing to do. If they refuse to take part then think about cutting their unemployment benefit. They will get motivated so quickly it'll be eye watering.