Immoral Behaviour
I don't have a vote in the Scottish Labour leadership election, but if I did I would at least consider supporting Jim Murphy.
Because I think he is a talented and serious politician, who is probably the most able of the three candidates to have thrown their hats into the ring, the others being Sarah Boyack and Neil Findlay.
Because I think he is a talented and serious politician, who is probably the most able of the three candidates to have thrown their hats into the ring, the others being Sarah Boyack and Neil Findlay.
And if I had a vote I would vote for the most able person, having weighed up what they have to say; I wouldn't vote for someone because they are left or right wing or because they are identified as a 'Blairite' of 'Brownite' as the trade unions do, for example.
But one thing that continues to trouble me is about the Westminster Parliament is its attitude over MPs' and their expenses which has effectively allowed many MPs to enrich themselves from the public purse.
Now the MPs concerned were claiming mortgage interest payments on houses in London which were being 'bought' with public money and which have increased hugely in value leaving these MPs with an enormous capital asset that they have done nothing whatsoever to earn.
So why do they think it's OK to hold on to such a big financial windfall, especially when this has been purchased with public funds?
The system has now changed in Westminster although it's still indefensible if you ask me because while MPs can claim legitimate rental expenses these days, some now rent out properties they were buying (or had bought) under the old Westminster regime.
In other words why should a Westminster MP be allowed to claim accommodation expenses when they already own a property in London, and one which public money has paid for in the first place?
If you ask me that's completely immoral behaviour and reflects badly on Westminster and the MPs in question and while I don't know the details of Jim Murphy's housing arrangements in London, the 2012 article below from The Mail newspaper suggests that he has questions to answer.
Good Socialist Values (13 June 2013)
I laughed at this recent article in Private Eye which made a very serious point about the use of public money for personal gain - as well as lampooning the behaviour of Westminster MPs.
For me, the great irony is the fact that 'good socialist' MPs seem to see nothing morally wrong with their behaviour - because to some extent you expect this kind of attitude from Tory MPs or some of them at least.
So when MPs from the 'People's Party' which espouses the common good, of course - think nothing of enriching themselves from the public purse - then to me it seems perfectly reasonable to that something's wrong with the values of the Westminster Parliament.
Such a shame that none of the Westminster parties feel strongly enough to show some leadership on this issue which is right under their noses - yet they feel able to pontificate all day long about standards of behaviour eslewhere - for example within the press and media.
HP SAUCE
Last week the Daily Telegraph revealed more boot-filling by MPs who speculated on the London property market. Treasury minister David Gauke, who clearly hasn't suffered from a double-dip housing recession, made a £67,000 profit on his south London flat thanks to the kindness of taxpayers, but has only been asked to repay £27,762.
Will the lucre-grabbing legislators be sanctioned? This is one for the standards and privileges committee, aka the double standards committee, so don't hold your breath.
Its chairman, Kevin Barron, made a profit of almost £500,000 on the sale of his taxpayer-funded flat; and the vice chairman, Sir Paul Beresford, used public money to pay a mortgage and most of the running costs at his lucrative dental practice in Putney, which is located in his house. Neither has reimbursed the taxpayer for the gains made from the pre-2010 mortgage payment scheme.
Perhaps Barrons' committee will now ask former parliamentary standards commissioner john Lyon whyhe never investigated the most blatant examples of MPs exploiting taxpayers' generosity.
Perhaps it will look into the "petty cash" scandal, whereby MPs such as chancellor George Osborne, former deputy speaker Alan Haselhurst and, er, Kevin Barron claims 3250 a month without having to show any receipts.
Perahaps it will also explain why, despite forcing Labour MP Denis McShane out of the Commons for the dodgy way he secured a £12,000 reimbursement for his work as Tony Blair's envoy in Europe, Barron's committee was so much more lenient with David Laws MP, who diverted £50,000 of taxpayers' money to his live-in partner as "rent" but is now back in the cabinet in his ministerial car and attending cabinet.
Perhaps it will. But, then again, probably not.
For me, the great irony is the fact that 'good socialist' MPs seem to see nothing morally wrong with their behaviour - because to some extent you expect this kind of attitude from Tory MPs or some of them at least.
So when MPs from the 'People's Party' which espouses the common good, of course - think nothing of enriching themselves from the public purse - then to me it seems perfectly reasonable to that something's wrong with the values of the Westminster Parliament.
Such a shame that none of the Westminster parties feel strongly enough to show some leadership on this issue which is right under their noses - yet they feel able to pontificate all day long about standards of behaviour eslewhere - for example within the press and media.
HP SAUCE
Last week the Daily Telegraph revealed more boot-filling by MPs who speculated on the London property market. Treasury minister David Gauke, who clearly hasn't suffered from a double-dip housing recession, made a £67,000 profit on his south London flat thanks to the kindness of taxpayers, but has only been asked to repay £27,762.
Will the lucre-grabbing legislators be sanctioned? This is one for the standards and privileges committee, aka the double standards committee, so don't hold your breath.
Its chairman, Kevin Barron, made a profit of almost £500,000 on the sale of his taxpayer-funded flat; and the vice chairman, Sir Paul Beresford, used public money to pay a mortgage and most of the running costs at his lucrative dental practice in Putney, which is located in his house. Neither has reimbursed the taxpayer for the gains made from the pre-2010 mortgage payment scheme.
Perhaps Barrons' committee will now ask former parliamentary standards commissioner john Lyon whyhe never investigated the most blatant examples of MPs exploiting taxpayers' generosity.
Perhaps it will look into the "petty cash" scandal, whereby MPs such as chancellor George Osborne, former deputy speaker Alan Haselhurst and, er, Kevin Barron claims 3250 a month without having to show any receipts.
Perahaps it will also explain why, despite forcing Labour MP Denis McShane out of the Commons for the dodgy way he secured a £12,000 reimbursement for his work as Tony Blair's envoy in Europe, Barron's committee was so much more lenient with David Laws MP, who diverted £50,000 of taxpayers' money to his live-in partner as "rent" but is now back in the cabinet in his ministerial car and attending cabinet.
Perhaps it will. But, then again, probably not.
Public Money (1 December 2012)
The latest edition of Private Eye has another timely piece about Westminster MPs and what I would describe as a rather cavalier approach - towards spending public money.
Only this time an 'honourable' Labour member is in its sights.
"HP Sauce"
"Kevin Barron MP, chairman of the standards and privileges committee, said Denis McShane's illegitimate expenses claim was "the gravest case" he had ever come across.
What a sheltered life Barron must lead! Although his committee found it impossible to say how much McShane had claimed "outside the rules", they thought it "may have been in the order of £7,500".
The rules that he broke were thise stating that an MP can claim no more than three European trips a yea, with business-class travel and four-star hotels. McShane made more than three trips a year after 2005, in his capacity as Tony Blair's unpaid Euro-envoy, but he travelled on EasyJet and stayed with friends to keep the costs down to the same sort of level as would cover the officially sanctioned trips.
In total, his Euro-expenses between 2005 and 2008 came to about £12,000. That is what Kevin Barron describes as "the gravest case that has come before this committee".
Can this be the same Kevin Barron who sold his taxpayer-funded flat at a £500,000 profit after the 2009 expenses scandal, and thene xploited a loophile in the rules (following the ban on MPs claiming mortgage interest) by renting a flat from fellow MP John Trickett so he could carry on claiming the hous9ng allowance? "
Now there's a thing - an eye-watering profit of £500,000 all paid for by the public purse
And I wouldn't be in the least surprised if some of these Labour members who have benefited in this way - continue to regard themselves as good socialists.
I hope one of the newspapers publishes a list of all MPs who have made a small fortune from the London property market - on the back of their housing allowances.
Mail Online - 19 October 2012
New MPs expenses scandal: 27 are letting their London homes while claiming up to £20,000 of public money to rent elsewhere
- Defence secretary Liam Fox, shadow ministers Andy Burnham, Jim Murphy and Chris Bryant using legal loophole
- Rules changes from original expenses scandal in 2009 allows MPs to claim up to £20,000 per year to rent a London pad
- Some who already own one have been letting that out to cover mortgage and then use public cash to stay elsewhere
MPs were embroiled in yet another expenses row today after it emerged that 27 are letting out their London homes at the same time as claiming taxpayers' money to rent elsewhere in the city.
Former defence secretary Liam Fox, shadow ministers Andy Burnham, Jim Murphy and Chris Bryant, and Communities Minister Don Foster are among those listed as raking in income from properties while receiving up to £20,000 a year in expenses.
They have been using a loophole that was opened when expenses rules were changed after the 2009 scandal, because so many were fiddling the system.
Claims: (top left to bottom right) Liam Fox, Andy Burnham Jim Murphy and Chris Bryant have all been letting out their homes while using taxpayers' money to rent elsewhere in London, research has found
Although the practice does not break any rules, it will fuel concerns that politicians are still able to profit from Commons allowances.
The Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority’s (Ipsa) blanket ban on MPs claiming mortgage interest came into effect this summer.
They are now only permitted to receive up to £20,000 expenses for renting.
The move was intended to head off criticism after the scandal three years ago showed politicians had been using public money to build up property portfolios.
However, it also appears to have created an incentive for many to vacate homes they own.
Research by the Daily Telegraph identified Tory MPs David Amess and Peter Luff, and Liberal Democrat ex-defence minister Nick Harvey among those letting out properties in the capital while also claiming expenses for renting.
The names could only be deduced because Ipsa last night released partial postcodes of taxpayer-funded second homes - which could then be cross-referenced with the parliamentary register of interests.
The disclosure followed linked concerns that MPs are able to exploit a “loophole” in the rules to rent properties to colleagues, who then claim the costs on expenses.
Speaker of the House of Commons, John Bercow, is attempting to stop the release of MPs' landlords
It is understood that four MPs are currently renting from four other MPs - although there are no cases of home “swaps”.
Linda Riordan, the Labour MP for Halifax, lets her London flat to fellow Labour MP Iain McKenzie for £18,720 a year..
Mr McKenzie said: 'If I had known beforehand that the flat was owned by an MP then I probably wouldn’t have taken it.
'You’ve got to apply the test of how it looks to the man in the street, regardless of whether it’s above board or not.'
Yesterday, Commons Speaker John Bercow was accused of trying to suppress details of the matter after warning Ipsa that revealing the identities of politicians’ landlords would be a 'security risk'.
The watchdog had been due to disclose the material in response to another Freedom of Information (FOI) request.
However, the process has now been put on hold in the wake of Mr Bercow’s intervention.
In a letter to Ipsa, Mr Bercow insisted there was a 'very real danger' that MPs’ residential addresses could be discovered as a result of the planned publication.
Responding to the Speaker’s letter last night, Sir Ian Kennedy, chairman of Ipsa, insisted the authority 'would not, under any circumstances, release the full address' of an MP.
But he added: 'The policy also makes clear that we would release, on request, the names of landlords and other suppliers of goods and services where this was in support of a claim made under the scheme for business costs and expenses.'
Property: The socialist MP for Halifax Linda Riordan, left and the £400,000 London flat, right, which she rents to fellow Labour MP Iain McKenzie for £1,560 a month
Sir Ian said all affected MPs had been contacted, asking if they had concerns about the release of their landlord’s details.
WHAT IS THE LOOPHOLE MPS ARE NOW USING?
When details of the expenses scandal broke in 2009 it came out that dozens of MPs 'flipped' their second home allowance from one property to another to use taxpayers' money to cover their mortgage payments and pay for improvements before making a hefty profit if they sold them.
The Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority phased out these payments in the aftermath of the revelations, with the transitional period for these ending this summer, following concerns that politicians were able to build up valuable property empires using the public purse.
Now they can only claim for rent, up to £20,000 per year, but this loophole appears to allow them to continue building up a portfolio of homes.
Some feel it is better for them financially to rent out their own home to cover their mortgage and use the new allowance to rent another property.
However, only a third - 110 - replied. Some 60 have indicated they have no problems with the disclosure, and 50 expressed reservations.
'We are therefore delaying our response to the FOI request and will be writing to those MPs concerned to give them a further two weeks to respond,' he said.
Tory Sarah Wollaston said she had grave concerns about revealing MPs’ addresses, having had her London flat and constituency home broken into.
The Totnes MP said she agreed with the need for transparency, but was worried about a tiny minority of people, including activists, using the information maliciously.
Dr Wollaston said: 'I am very happy for everyone to know that I have no connection with my landlord in my London address - I have never met them and I don’t think they even live in this country.
'But if they (Ipsa) publish politicians’ home addresses then you are exposing them (MPs) to very difficult situations.'
Matthew Sinclair, chief executive of the TaxPayers’ Alliance, said: “If MPs are again found to have exploited the expenses system, it will be another stain on the reputation of Parliament.
'It was the cry that ‘it’s all within the rules’ combined with attempts to suppress the publication of claims that made the MPs’ expenses crisis three years ago so toxic. Whilst the rules may not technically prevent MPs from renting properties to one another, it is certainly against the spirit of those rules.
'The public’s faith was left in tatters in 2009 and the latest allegations could endanger much of the work that has been done since then to restore public confidence in our politicians.
'It is vital that there is total transparency in all matters relating to MPs’ taxpayer-funded expenses and allowances."
