So are Labour on their way out?

[Stuart*]

The one thing I do recall them proposing was freezing the license fee for one year. This from the same party that calls cutting VAT by 2.5% pointless (although it's looking like it helped things, apparently - tsk @ me not remembering where I read that).

Perhaps you are remembering their proposal to freeze Council Tax for two years, as reported here? I don't remember them having any particular pledge about the licence fee, although they may well have announced one.

It's rather difficult for the Conservatives to announce precice policies for an election which may be up to a year away; they have no idea what the economic situation will be at that time. The government equally can't be drawn on their exact plans on most issues more than six months into the future for the same reason.

However, Cameron should be clearer on the general direction he intends to steer a Conservative government. I think people would be more willing to trust him if he at least did that much in the period before he has to produce a detailed manifesto.

[Pete]

I don't remember them having any particular pledge about the licence fee, although they may well have announced one.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7946080.stm
Monday, 16 March 2009

[marksi]

It'll be interesting to see if the release of all MPs miscellaneous expenses has more of an effect on one party than others.

A reminder of some of Home Secretary Jackie Smith's:

88p for a bath plug, a few sacks of coal worth £82.40, a footstool for £120.80, four scatter cushions at £18 a throw, a “large extending table” – ideal for writing out expenses forms – for £460, and a kitchen sink for £550. She has described the claims as “fair and reasonable”.

[Gavin Scott]

It'll be interesting to see if the release of all MPs miscellaneous expenses has more of an effect on one party than others.

A reminder of some of Home Secretary Jackie Smith's:

88p for a bath plug, a few sacks of coal worth £82.40, a footstool for £120.80, four scatter cushions at £18 a throw, a “large extending table” – ideal for writing out expenses forms – for £460, and a kitchen sink for £550. She has described the claims as “fair and reasonable”.

Yes - "fair and reasonable" if you don't consider using your own, hefty salary for sundry household items like sink plugs and scatter cushions.

I find the whole thing a disgusting gravy train - but then, and being careful what I say here, I am more than aware of some people who consider birthday gifts for their children (and their mobile bills) to be a legitimate expense for the business.

Its no wonder the ones in the highest pay-band stay so rich when they hardly have to use their salary for things the rest of us pay for.

[Stuart*]

There was a very interesting 'Dispatches' programme on C4 last night which explored the issue of MPs' expenses among other things. It was quite balanced, from a party political point of view. It explored how many have breached the 'rules' they are so fond of quoting.

What incenses me most about the expenses scandal is MPs' continued claim of 'innocence' after being caught with their hands so firmly in the taxpayers' till. Exploiting a system which was so obviously open to abuse is bad enough, especially when they write the rules themselves, but trying to convince everyone that it was ever acceptable is insulting the intelligence of the electorate.

[marksi]

What they are saying is that they're doing nothing wrong... and indeed they're not. Not according to their own rules. But it is morally reprehensible. While you could argue that MPs who live outside London may need accommodation closer to Parliament, and that they therefore need, say, a fridge in that accommodation, I really don't think that scatter cushions and footstools should be on the list of necessities to function in a "second home".

Until recently they needed no receipts for items claimed under £250!

In addition, many MPs use their allowance to pay off the mortgage of the property in which they live. When they cease to be MPs, they then have a nicely paid off home in the capital which they can sell, having paid nothing for it themselves.

Then we get on to the subject of paying their families as staff...

But having said all this, it may have no effect on the election as on this matter I suspect the public consider politicians all as bad as each other.

[Gavin Scott]

But having said all this, it may have no effect on the election as on this matter I suspect the public consider politicians all as bad as each other.

I would go along with that, except to say that those who beat the drum the loudest on the subject, such as Cameron, make me more inclined to avoid voting for them - as there's little doubt he'll be doing EXACTLY the same as all the other MPs; but thinks he can garner my support by pointing the finger at others?

I hardly think so.

[Stuart*]

But having said all this, it may have no effect on the election as on this matter I suspect the public consider politicians all as bad as each other.

From the 2007/08 Summary of Allowances it seems that most MPs are claiming similar amounts.

It will be July before we find out whether £20K on 'Housing Costs' are actually mortgage payments or simply patio heaters and plasma TVs. 'Staff Costs' could similarly be either genuine or just income for family members.

[Gavin Scott]

Well well well.

Brown has stepped in with a clear and decisive proposal to scrap the second home allowance, and introduce a flat rate on expenses - much less generous than before.

It will be interesting to hear Cameron's reaction to this - anything less than his full support will reveal his true colours on the matter.

[Stuart*]

Brown has stepped in with a clear and decisive proposal to scrap the second home allowance, and introduce a flat rate on expenses - much less generous than before.

I don’t see much that is particularly ‘clear’ in his proposal from the brief statement so far. No figure has been released for this ‘attendance allowance’; the Senior Salaries Review Board has been asked to come up with one, but some reports indicate that they will be unable to do so before a vote by MPs (if it were to take place next week).

A ‘flat rate payment’ may reduce the income for some, but also reward those who have incurred no additional costs whatsoever. It also removes the requirement to submit those embarrassing 'home improvement' receipts which have been the catalyst for public discontent.

Surely a salary is intended as remuneration for attending work. I doubt you would get a favourable response from your employer, Gavin, if you tried asking for an additional payment for simply turning up.

However, there are some positive aspects in the proposal as revealed so far:
Outside work – there will be better monitoring of the time spent, money earned and from whom.
MPs’ Staff – become directly employed by Parliament with proper contracts and pay.
Temporary – this is only an interim measure until the independent study is completed.

It will be interesting to hear Cameron's reaction to this - anything less than his full support will reveal his true colours on the matter.

MPs pay and expenses are normally an all-party issue, not one for the government alone. I suspect that Cameron and Clegg may be rather annoyed that Brown reneged on his promise on 1st April to discuss the issues with them and has instead decided to make a unilateral statement.

Apparently Harriet Harman is to make a statement in the Commons later today which may flesh out the proposals. I think it’s premature to suggest that either party leader should or should not give their full support until more details have been revealed. It will be interesting to see how this story develops.

[Sput]

I think it'll be 'very' interesting to see how this thread progresses with the new 'facts'.