Hypocritical MP's ............again!
13 October 2009, 08:45 AM
#1
Hypocritical MP's ............again!
So now some of them are whining that they don't think they should have to pay back any expenses because "the rules were changed retrospectively"?
Now correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the party who introduced retrospective legislation, not once, but TWICE, still in power? And what did MP's of THAT party have to say when it was done?
Did WE have the right to challenge it in court?
These fekkers are incredible, aren't they?
Now correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the party who introduced retrospective legislation, not once, but TWICE, still in power? And what did MP's of THAT party have to say when it was done?
Did WE have the right to challenge it in court?
These fekkers are incredible, aren't they?
13 October 2009, 09:24 AM
#2
Guest
Posts: n/a
.... and ... breeeaaattthhheeeeeee ................... There, that's better isn't it?
MPs: the ones that fight it will probably be the ones who aren't going to put themselves up for re-election! Saw Guido on the box and he reckons there's a rumour that Julie Kirkbride wants to put herself forward again. Troughing bint!
Dave
MPs: the ones that fight it will probably be the ones who aren't going to put themselves up for re-election! Saw Guido on the box and he reckons there's a rumour that Julie Kirkbride wants to put herself forward again. Troughing bint!
Dave
13 October 2009, 09:36 AM
#3
Guest
Posts: n/a
Oh, just to raise your bloof pressure even more, from Jacqui Smith : Crime Without Punishment - Guy Fawkes' blog
"... So despite being found to have wrongly claimed £116,000, to have mislead the investigation and broken the rules, her ‘honourable’ friends ruled she had to merely apologise. She was not ordered to repay a single penny ..."
Me- thinks she'd better not show much of her face around her own constituency after this!
Dave
"... So despite being found to have wrongly claimed £116,000, to have mislead the investigation and broken the rules, her ‘honourable’ friends ruled she had to merely apologise. She was not ordered to repay a single penny ..."
Me- thinks she'd better not show much of her face around her own constituency after this!
Dave
13 October 2009, 12:43 PM
#4
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I personally hope that they cannot get out of repaying the money that they effectivelt stole from the taxpayer however much they wriggle and that the ones who deserve it get taken to court.
Making the rules yourself and voting them in is many steps too far!
Les
Making the rules yourself and voting them in is many steps too far!
Les
13 October 2009, 01:33 PM
#6
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that MP's who have deliberately defrauded the tax payer should be punished and publicly humiliated.
I do however have some sympathy for those that claimed what they were supposed to cliam and are now being told to pay it back, that does seem unfair to me, but given the hysteria surrounding this issue I don't suppose anyone cares about fairness.
I do however have some sympathy for those that claimed what they were supposed to cliam and are now being told to pay it back, that does seem unfair to me, but given the hysteria surrounding this issue I don't suppose anyone cares about fairness.
13 October 2009, 02:06 PM
#7
Guest
Posts: n/a
It was Billy Liar who pushed through the rule change that meant that MPs could *flip* their main residence designation which meant they could avoid capital gains tax. And it's (Old) Labour that are now going on about *moneyed toffs* in the Tories who know little about running the country etc etc. Well, I for one would be happier for someone to run the country who had built their wealth outside of parliament rather than the kn*bs there now who have changed the rules to enrich themselves whilst IN parliament!
Can we vote to bring back public flogging with members of the public then allowed to rub salt into the weals ..??
Dave
Trending Topics
13 October 2009, 02:23 PM
#8
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that MP's who have deliberately defrauded the tax payer should be punished and publicly humiliated.
I do however have some sympathy for those that claimed what they were supposed to cliam and are now being told to pay it back, that does seem unfair to me, but given the hysteria surrounding this issue I don't suppose anyone cares about fairness.
I do however have some sympathy for those that claimed what they were supposed to cliam and are now being told to pay it back, that does seem unfair to me, but given the hysteria surrounding this issue I don't suppose anyone cares about fairness.
Why is this government allowed to break the law?
Maybe I will claim £116,000 extra next time I do my VAT return. If she can do it why can't I? Oh, thats right because HMRC will lock me up for fraud for at least 3 years.
13 October 2009, 02:34 PM
#9
I do too have sympathy for those who claimed within the rules. But MP's like Smith who have committed a criminal offence and have not been punished and even get to keep their gains are a disgrace.
Why is this government allowed to break the law?
Maybe I will claim £116,000 extra next time I do my VAT return. If she can do it why can't I? Oh, thats right because HMRC will lock me up for fraud for at least 3 years.
Why is this government allowed to break the law?
Maybe I will claim £116,000 extra next time I do my VAT return. If she can do it why can't I? Oh, thats right because HMRC will lock me up for fraud for at least 3 years.
As stated they're all whining now because its a retrospective thing and they don't like it.
Us motorists haven't had much of a say over the retrospective car tax debacle
They're all a shower of dirty rotten b@stards.
Last edited by urban; 13 October 2009 at 03:42 PM.
13 October 2009, 07:48 PM
#11
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
13 October 2009, 08:21 PM
#12
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Runway two seven right.
Posts: 6,652
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Retrospective car tax anyone?
Any politician that come knocking on my door will get verbal bashing and the door slammed in their faces.
As my friend likes to say " Scum sucking retards all of them "
Any politician that come knocking on my door will get verbal bashing and the door slammed in their faces.
As my friend likes to say " Scum sucking retards all of them "
14 October 2009, 03:57 PM
#14
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that MP's who have deliberately defrauded the tax payer should be punished and publicly humiliated.
I do however have some sympathy for those that claimed what they were supposed to cliam and are now being told to pay it back, that does seem unfair to me, but given the hysteria surrounding this issue I don't suppose anyone cares about fairness.
I do however have some sympathy for those that claimed what they were supposed to cliam and are now being told to pay it back, that does seem unfair to me, but given the hysteria surrounding this issue I don't suppose anyone cares about fairness.
However you try to justify it Martin, they were effectively trousering money that they were not entitled to however you dress it up!
Les
14 October 2009, 07:20 PM
#15
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do you honestly think that they did not know that even if they slavishly followed the rules, that they were morally wrong in claiming all that taxpayer's money especially when they were fiddling the items that they were claiming for?
However you try to justify it Martin, they were effectively trousering money that they were not entitled to however you dress it up!
Les
However you try to justify it Martin, they were effectively trousering money that they were not entitled to however you dress it up!
Les
Incidentally the report published this week does nothing to stop the most flagrant abuses, namely the 'flipping' of second homes.
So it's easy to all feel outraged by this, but should also apply some common sense too, so let's have justice not a witch hunt
14 October 2009, 09:19 PM
#16
Hmmmmmmmmm, Labour justice?
Now would that be the one where you are guilty until proven inocent?
Or the one where you are forced to incriminate yourself or receive a harsher punishment?
Or the one where you buy a car in good faith, have the tax rules changed under you and end up paying through the nose to run it?
Or the one where you claim £116,000, mislead the enquiry, lie and STILL don't have to pay back one penny?
HINT: one of the above refers to a Labour minister. The other three are for the rest of us. See if you can guess which one is the minister's justice?
Now would that be the one where you are guilty until proven inocent?
Or the one where you are forced to incriminate yourself or receive a harsher punishment?
Or the one where you buy a car in good faith, have the tax rules changed under you and end up paying through the nose to run it?
Or the one where you claim £116,000, mislead the enquiry, lie and STILL don't have to pay back one penny?
HINT: one of the above refers to a Labour minister. The other three are for the rest of us. See if you can guess which one is the minister's justice?
14 October 2009, 09:42 PM
#17
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmmmmmmmm, Labour justice?
Now would that be the one where you are guilty until proven inocent?
Or the one where you are forced to incriminate yourself or receive a harsher punishment?
Or the one where you buy a car in good faith, have the tax rules changed under you and end up paying through the nose to run it?
Or the one where you claim £116,000, mislead the enquiry, lie and STILL don't have to pay back one penny?
HINT: one of the above refers to a Labour minister. The other three are for the rest of us. See if you can guess which one is the minister's justice?
Now would that be the one where you are guilty until proven inocent?
Or the one where you are forced to incriminate yourself or receive a harsher punishment?
Or the one where you buy a car in good faith, have the tax rules changed under you and end up paying through the nose to run it?
Or the one where you claim £116,000, mislead the enquiry, lie and STILL don't have to pay back one penny?
HINT: one of the above refers to a Labour minister. The other three are for the rest of us. See if you can guess which one is the minister's justice?
14 October 2009, 10:38 PM
#18
Guest
Posts: n/a
Dave
15 October 2009, 03:53 AM
#19
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,911
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1st MP. "I think I'll cliam half-a-mil for new velvet wall paper in my garden crapper, because I can and I know I'll get away with it too."
2nd MP in reply. "Don't you think this is wrong, certainly dishonest, fraud even?"
1st MP in reply. "Oh yeah, but they will soon get over it and move on."
Last edited by Klaatu; 15 October 2009 at 04:28 AM.
15 October 2009, 11:08 AM
#21
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,911
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
15 October 2009, 11:40 AM
#22
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes Les I know thats the easy thing to say, and indeed there are many guilty of what you say, but there appear to be many that have been caught out somewhat unfairly by the hysterical desire for some kind of retribution.
Incidentally the report published this week does nothing to stop the most flagrant abuses, namely the 'flipping' of second homes.
So it's easy to all feel outraged by this, but should also apply some common sense too, so let's have justice not a witch hunt
Incidentally the report published this week does nothing to stop the most flagrant abuses, namely the 'flipping' of second homes.
So it's easy to all feel outraged by this, but should also apply some common sense too, so let's have justice not a witch hunt
The facts are that the MP's were caught out at last taking full advantage of those rules which were made up to give them the maximum chance of claiming vast sums that they were not entitled to by any standards.
Very few MP's claimed their expenses in an honest and fair manner, and those who did showed themselves to be honest and trustworthy.
The least intelligent person can see how those rules favoured their claims and all defended as best he could by the man responsible for administering those expenses, ie the man from the Gorbals who is now in the Lord's of course with that other man who was disgraced a few times for dishonesty!
Those who claimed such large sums knew that they were taking money that they were not entitled to by any moral standards and should give the cash back. Those who further fiddled extra of course, as you say by "flipping" should most certainly be prosecuted. How that woman can get away with it by apologising in the House and also keep the cash is beyond any kind of common sense!
They are all guilty Martin and should be treated as such. You and no one else can justify their behaviour.
Les
15 October 2009, 01:07 PM
#24
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,911
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't buy a Nike-On DSLR then...you can buy a car, or a condo (In a special place), for the cost of a D700 body alone. I know, I've done both.
16 October 2009, 10:44 AM
#26
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How many times do I have to say PUNISH THE GUILTY????
16 October 2009, 10:46 AM
#27
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
16 October 2009, 10:47 AM
#28
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apologists like this is why MP's are defrauding the taxpayer funded expense claims system.
1st MP. "I think I'll cliam half-a-mil for new velvet wall paper in my garden crapper, because I can and I know I'll get away with it too."
2nd MP in reply. "Don't you think this is wrong, certainly dishonest, fraud even?"
1st MP in reply. "Oh yeah, but they will soon get over it and move on."
1st MP. "I think I'll cliam half-a-mil for new velvet wall paper in my garden crapper, because I can and I know I'll get away with it too."
2nd MP in reply. "Don't you think this is wrong, certainly dishonest, fraud even?"
1st MP in reply. "Oh yeah, but they will soon get over it and move on."
16 October 2009, 10:49 AM
#29
Punishing the guilty, as you, yourself, just said.
Let's start with Jacqui Smith? Oh, no, she's already been punished, she had to apologise to parliament, the poor thing
Then she can keep the £116,000 she swindled out of the British taxpayer
I sometimes wonder if you are on the same planet as everyone else, Martin? Or do you just like an argument?
Let's start with Jacqui Smith? Oh, no, she's already been punished, she had to apologise to parliament, the poor thing
Then she can keep the £116,000 she swindled out of the British taxpayerI sometimes wonder if you are on the same planet as everyone else, Martin? Or do you just like an argument?
16 October 2009, 11:03 AM
#30
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Punishing the guilty, as you, yourself, just said.
Let's start with Jacqui Smith? Oh, no, she's already been punished, she had to apologise to parliament, the poor thing Then she can keep the £116,000 she swindled out of the British taxpayer
I sometimes wonder if you are on the same planet as everyone else, Martin? Or do you just like an argument?
Let's start with Jacqui Smith? Oh, no, she's already been punished, she had to apologise to parliament, the poor thing
Then she can keep the £116,000 she swindled out of the British taxpayerI sometimes wonder if you are on the same planet as everyone else, Martin? Or do you just like an argument?
I agree with you that Jacqui Smith shoud be facing criminal charges, and anyone else accused of serious fraud.
But what about the guy who claimed for a Kit Kat, should he be hounded out of office? - which is my point I guess; where is this going to end, and what will be left?