Mistake? MISTAKE!?
Discussion
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8049096.stm
[i]"A former minister has admitted he claimed £16,000 from Commons expenses for a mortgage which had been paid off.
Labour MP Elliot Morley told the BBC he had paid some back and called it a "mistake" which he felt terrible about." [/i]
How the f
k can he call that a mistake (the headline originally read as "error" in fact, but seems to have been edited since) you lying, thieving scum!?
Decca Records rejecting The Beatles for a recording contract was a mistake.
Telling Einstein's parents that their son might be retarded was a mistake.
THIS, my toss-ing friend, is theft from the tax payer plain and simple!!
I earn more than an average MP does and I have absolutely no problems spotting when an extra £800 lands in my account (let alone if it were to happen for 18. EIGH-fkING-TEEN consecutive months!).
there is just no way, one could genuinely forget to stop claiming £800 a month on a mortgage that has ended 1 and a halfing years ago! WHY was the taxpayer paying his mortgage for him is another question.
I didn't really care about it when MPs tried to get extra things done for their homes "within reason" if the legislation allowed for it, as someone said,- it was largely down one's moral standards, but this is just fraud! I see no justification for it!
[i]"A former minister has admitted he claimed £16,000 from Commons expenses for a mortgage which had been paid off.
Labour MP Elliot Morley told the BBC he had paid some back and called it a "mistake" which he felt terrible about." [/i]
How the f
k can he call that a mistake (the headline originally read as "error" in fact, but seems to have been edited since) you lying, thieving scum!?Decca Records rejecting The Beatles for a recording contract was a mistake.
Telling Einstein's parents that their son might be retarded was a mistake.
THIS, my toss-
ing friend, is theft from the tax payer plain and simple!!I earn more than an average MP does and I have absolutely no problems spotting when an extra £800 lands in my account (let alone if it were to happen for 18. EIGH-f
kING-TEEN consecutive months!).there is just no way, one could genuinely forget to stop claiming £800 a month on a mortgage that has ended 1 and a half
ing years ago! WHY was the taxpayer paying his mortgage for him is another question.I didn't really care about it when MPs tried to get extra things done for their homes "within reason" if the legislation allowed for it, as someone said,- it was largely down one's moral standards, but this is just fraud! I see no justification for it!
The list goes on and on.
Lots of people screw their employers for expenses. I was out at the match on Monday night with a mate, and he got receipts for all the drinks. He will put that thru as expenses, claiming to be entertaining a client.
Fair enough. The difference is that MP's are employed by the tax payer. And I dont think we are all too happy about it.
Lots of people screw their employers for expenses. I was out at the match on Monday night with a mate, and he got receipts for all the drinks. He will put that thru as expenses, claiming to be entertaining a client.
Fair enough. The difference is that MP's are employed by the tax payer. And I dont think we are all too happy about it.
ben_reza said:
The list goes on and on.
Lots of people screw their employers for expenses. I was out at the match on Monday night with a mate, and he got receipts for all the drinks. He will put that thru as expenses, claiming to be entertaining a client.
Fair enough. The difference is that MP's are employed by the tax payer. And I dont think we are all too happy about it.
and lets face it you'd have been pretty fLots of people screw their employers for expenses. I was out at the match on Monday night with a mate, and he got receipts for all the drinks. He will put that thru as expenses, claiming to be entertaining a client.
Fair enough. The difference is that MP's are employed by the tax payer. And I dont think we are all too happy about it.
king wrecked if he needed to claim 16k...ben_reza said:
The list goes on and on.
Lots of people screw their employers for expenses. I was out at the match on Monday night with a mate, and he got receipts for all the drinks. He will put that thru as expenses, claiming to be entertaining a client.
Fair enough. The difference is that MP's are employed by the tax payer. And I dont think we are all too happy about it.
Agree. As I said I am not too bothered about them taking advantage of a system that is there. For instance media was making it sound that getting a swimming pool done was out of order but at the same time getting the garden trimmed isn't. Personally I fail to see a difference.Lots of people screw their employers for expenses. I was out at the match on Monday night with a mate, and he got receipts for all the drinks. He will put that thru as expenses, claiming to be entertaining a client.
Fair enough. The difference is that MP's are employed by the tax payer. And I dont think we are all too happy about it.
But as you say: chances are, your mate is EARNING money for the company and is paying for himself.
isee said:
ben_reza said:
The list goes on and on.
Lots of people screw their employers for expenses. I was out at the match on Monday night with a mate, and he got receipts for all the drinks. He will put that thru as expenses, claiming to be entertaining a client.
Fair enough. The difference is that MP's are employed by the tax payer. And I dont think we are all too happy about it.
Agree. As I said I am not too bothered about them taking advantage of a system that is there. For instance media was making it sound that getting a swimming pool done was out of order but at the same time getting the garden trimmed isn't. Personally I fail to see a difference.Lots of people screw their employers for expenses. I was out at the match on Monday night with a mate, and he got receipts for all the drinks. He will put that thru as expenses, claiming to be entertaining a client.
Fair enough. The difference is that MP's are employed by the tax payer. And I dont think we are all too happy about it.
But as you say: chances are, your mate is EARNING money for the company and is paying for himself.
Has the nation lost its moral direction completely now?
It really does look like it has.
Time for a massive re-think on what we are doing as a country and where we are going.
Edited by Eric Mc on Thursday 14th May 09:49
ben_reza said:
The list goes on and on.
Lots of people screw their employers for expenses. I was out at the match on Monday night with a mate, and he got receipts for all the drinks. He will put that thru as expenses, claiming to be entertaining a client.
Fair enough. The difference is that MP's are employed by the tax payer. And I dont think we are all too happy about it.
Why is that fair enough? Surely he is stealing from his employer?Lots of people screw their employers for expenses. I was out at the match on Monday night with a mate, and he got receipts for all the drinks. He will put that thru as expenses, claiming to be entertaining a client.
Fair enough. The difference is that MP's are employed by the tax payer. And I dont think we are all too happy about it.
Its a bit like benefits, you can't really blame the people if the system allows them to claim so much money for sitting on their arses. It's the system that's at fault, the people are jsut taking full advantage of it.
Change the system so people don't take the piss, problem solved.
I wonder how many people who are complaining about the MPs' 'scandal' claimed back years of overdraft charges from their bank? It's more or less the same thing, you're taking advantage of a 'system' to make money. The bank customers would have been well aware of the charges when they took out the account, even if they thought they were excessive, but they'll still complain and claim the money back.
Change the system so people don't take the piss, problem solved.
I wonder how many people who are complaining about the MPs' 'scandal' claimed back years of overdraft charges from their bank? It's more or less the same thing, you're taking advantage of a 'system' to make money. The bank customers would have been well aware of the charges when they took out the account, even if they thought they were excessive, but they'll still complain and claim the money back.
herewego said:
ben_reza said:
The list goes on and on.
Lots of people screw their employers for expenses. I was out at the match on Monday night with a mate, and he got receipts for all the drinks. He will put that thru as expenses, claiming to be entertaining a client.
Fair enough. The difference is that MP's are employed by the tax payer. And I dont think we are all too happy about it.
Why is that fair enough? Surely he is stealing from his employer?Lots of people screw their employers for expenses. I was out at the match on Monday night with a mate, and he got receipts for all the drinks. He will put that thru as expenses, claiming to be entertaining a client.
Fair enough. The difference is that MP's are employed by the tax payer. And I dont think we are all too happy about it.
ben_reza said:
Lots of people screw their employers for expenses. I was out at the match on Monday night with a mate, and he got receipts for all the drinks. He will put that thru as expenses, claiming to be entertaining a client.
I've *never* understood that. Why on earth would you risk a well paid position for a round of drinks?Is he insane?
shakotan said:
Its a bit like benefits, you can't really blame the people if the system allows them to claim so much money for sitting on their arses. It's the system that's at fault, the people are jsut taking full advantage of it.
Change the system so people don't take the piss, problem solved.
I wonder how many people who are complaining about the MPs' 'scandal' claimed back years of overdraft charges from their bank? It's more or less the same thing, you're taking advantage of a 'system' to make money. The bank customers would have been well aware of the charges when they took out the account, even if they thought they were excessive, but they'll still complain and claim the money back.
Yes! exactly taking advantage of a system that is there. If i think i can get my swimming pool cleaned I'll do it too. But in this case the guy was claiming an expense that did not exist! He had money coming in and nothing coming out. No work, no expenditure, no purchases. Nothing. that's fraud!Change the system so people don't take the piss, problem solved.
I wonder how many people who are complaining about the MPs' 'scandal' claimed back years of overdraft charges from their bank? It's more or less the same thing, you're taking advantage of a 'system' to make money. The bank customers would have been well aware of the charges when they took out the account, even if they thought they were excessive, but they'll still complain and claim the money back.
shakotan said:
Its a bit like benefits, you can't really blame the people if the system allows them to claim so much money for sitting on their arses. It's the system that's at fault, the people are jsut taking full advantage of it.
There is a difference. A lot of MPs have been 'bending' the truth in order to qualify and claim for some of the expenses they have been receiving. If they had been entirely truthful, the system wouldn't have allowed them to claim some of the expenses they have received.That, in my eyes, is fraud, and I'm disappointed that it seems that none of them are going to be charged with such.
Mr E said:
ben_reza said:
Lots of people screw their employers for expenses. I was out at the match on Monday night with a mate, and he got receipts for all the drinks. He will put that thru as expenses, claiming to be entertaining a client.
I've *never* understood that. Why on earth would you risk a well paid position for a round of drinks?Is he insane?
'Don't go to prison for a Pound'
Exactly as you say - why risk dismissal from a £x thousand pound job for a couple of pints of beer?
Did you read the rest of the article, it gets worse.
The Article said:
In further allegations, The Telegraph reports that Mr Morley rented out a London flat designated as his main residence to another Labour MP, Ian Cawsey, who named the property as his second home, allowing him to claim £1,000 a month in rent, which he paid to Mr Morley.
In November 2007, the newspaper claims, Mr Morley "flipped" his designated second home from his Shorpe property to his London home and for four months the two men claimed expenses on the same property - Mr Morley claimed the mortgage interest and Mr Cawley claimed the rent he was paying to Mr Morley.
Both should be banged up..In November 2007, the newspaper claims, Mr Morley "flipped" his designated second home from his S
horpe property to his London home and for four months the two men claimed expenses on the same property - Mr Morley claimed the mortgage interest and Mr Cawley claimed the rent he was paying to Mr Morley. Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff