MP's Expenses

[JJ7]

I see Falkirk MP Eric Joyce claims the top spot once again. A member of another forum I go on has had an interesting arguement over email today with Mr Joyce, his local MP. Just shows how out of touch these idiots can be.

 

Constituent

I am utterly disgusted by the expenses you have incurred whilst "serving" the constituency of which I am a member, in the last year. The only consolation I have is that I didn't personally vote for you (as I think you are a dreadful politician notwithstanding your troughlike capacity to hoover up taxpayers money).

 

Why exactly do you top the list for expenses for the entire Parliament, given that you "represent" a constituency in the Central belt of Scotland?

 

What extenuating circumstances can you possibly point to which justifies this ludicrous waste of money people like myself contribute to the coffers of the national exchequer.

 

How dare you claim such exhorbitant expenses? It is particularly galling in the current belt-tightening climate withing the UK that Members of Parliament are raiding the larder for all that they can trouser - you of course being at the front of the queue elbowing others out of the way to grab and grasp the goodies.

 

I can only hope my fellow constituents decide you are no longer worthy of election should you choose to stand for office within Falkirk again, and I would be most keen to hear your excuses for this list-topping performance.

 

Eric Joyce

"Thanks for this. My allowances are made up of staff pay, office

accommodation and travel/accomm in London. Someone, by definition, will

always be top of the list. Which bit would you prefer I didn't do?

Should I pay my staff less, rent cheaper accommodation (it's hardly over

the top at present) or make myself available in the constituency less?

Do let me know."

 

Constituent

Eric,

 

Thanks for your prompt reply. With respect, your point concerning "someone has to be top" is a ridiculous one, but perhaps I should try another tack. Other MPs clearly have exactly the same issues as you regarding staff, accomodation and travel to deal with, yet they manage to do so whilst spending significantly less.

 

And your ancillary point of "which would I prefer you didn't do?" is even more preposterous. As above, other MPs manage to carry out these aspects of their role without spending anything like as much - unless of course you are suggesting they are shortchanging their constituents by underperforming on any of these measures or being MP of a Falkirk constituency has particular challenges that others do not have to face?

 

As regards the individual points, some more clarification is required.

 

Staff Pay - How many staff members do you have? How much of your total expenses does staff remuneration make up? How does your staff costs benchmark you against other Mmbers of Parliament? i.e. are your staff costs high, medium or low against other MPs? Are any of your staff family members and, whether they are or not, how transparent was the recruitment process by which you came by them? A

 

Office Accomodation - Again, what is the breakdown of office accomodation costs between the constituency and Parliament? I am aware you have an office in Falkirk, in the town centre. How often is it used and for what? Could you move to smaller accomodation? Obviously, Falkirk is hardly in the top strata of UK town centre rental income I expect. How much does this office actually cost you a month? How does this compare with your compatriots? How often are you in the contituency?

 

Travel - this is of particular interest. £34,000 in total!! Scrolling down the list of MPs alphabetically, I see few, if any, in your "class" of claim. I notice your air fares for the period of April 07 to March 08 were £21,459. Many other MPs claimed no air fares, and travelled by train, or presumably other means. Why exactly were your travel fees so great compared to others? How often did you travel home? I notice your family made 28 journeys at the taxpayers expense also. Why so often, and for what purposes?

 

Eric Joyce

Why is my point about someone having to be top preposterous? Every year, the media and people like you will write to the person (in the latter case if it happens to be their local MP) who is top of this list. That's just the way it is. My office in Falkirk is used every day - it's where my staff are. I handle over 1000 constituency cases every year. You do maths if you like. I'm there

Fri/Sat most Suns (actually in the office) and often Monday mornings. My staff are there every day. Most of the stuff you've asked me for is publicly available - you just need to go to the effort of finding the info at www.parliament.uk rather than being outraged at the Daily Express headline. I don't have any family members on my payroll and I don't own property in London.

My allowances are made up of pay for my staff, renting an office (it's competitive), travelling to London and paying rent (not a mortgage) in London. I have hundreds of live cases with constituetns and I'm paid at the level of a Deputy Head or Third Tier council officer. I've no idea why you feel I deserve the bile you're throwing at me. But do come and see me if you feel I can help you in any way in future.

 

Best wishes

 

Eric

 

Constituent

The point about "someone having to be top" is preposterous because I said in my second email, let's look not at your position in the list, but in the size of your claim if you prefer, and its amount relative to your colleagues'. Why have you claimed vastly more than other MPs who have to deal with the same issues you do? That's the point Eric!

 

I also do not read the Daily Express. I have no idea why you believe that to be the only publication which has questioned your expenses. You are most certainly out of touch with the views of your constituents (several of whom I have spoken to today who share my outrage) if you wish to dismiss any criticism/critique of your claims as some sort of media-led outrage. If you knew your constituency (and I've lived here much longer than you have) you'd realise people are very sensitive at the moment about finances and what the national exchequer is being spent upon.

 

I note you have completely ignored the specific questions I asked you regarding travel. One of the most disingenuous replies I could have imagined receiving, even from a Member of Parliament. Why do MPs from much further afield, with far more significant travel issues within their own constituency (i.e. Danny Gordon, Lib Dem, Inverness) spend vastly less than you do.

 

I haven't questioned your remuneration package. I work in the private sector and couldn't care less what you earn as a basic salary and what you do with it - that's the figure deemed appropriate for that role and how you use your salary is entirely up to you. I would have no issues in fact were this amount to be increased significantly, as long as MPs were thereafter forced to choose only this vocation, and not subsidise income with other sources. However it is quite clear that (and I have never indicated you are alone here) there is a culture within Westminster of claiming for anything, and all things, which the frankly ludicrous "rules" permit as expenses. We need to rip these up and start again. Perhaps trips between the constituency and Westminster should be curtailed, or restricted to certain types and classes of travel (you also failed to answer whether you always travel using the cheapest tickets available (as a private sector employee, I always do)). Similarly what star hotels do you stay at, if you claim accomodation during any trips for constituency of Parliamentary business?

 

I have no doubt a large part of the expenses will be common to all Members of Parliament - i.e. postage costs, staff costs etc. What is clear however is that you have a significantly higher supplementary total that other Members of Parliament. It is this point I wish to seek clarification on - as I said in paragraph one, and repeat here, what specific constituency issues do you have representing Falkirk, which necessitates far more expenses than other MPs.

 

Regards,

 

Eric Joyce

If you look at the structure of you letter, you begin by saying that my position

on the list is not relevant then conclude by telling me that that's the key

variable. In between, it's just a hate-filled rant. Do get in touch in you

need my services, but I think this correspondence (you'll give me no credit for

being prompt, and for most constituents that can be life affecting) has reached

it's limit of intelligent exploitation.

 

Best wishes

 

eric

 

 

Unbelievable! And we pay these cunts

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Does anyone have any idea what it is reasonable for an MP to claim in expenses? How much money does a person need to represent his constituents fully?

 

As far as I can see there should be travel expenses and a fixed amount to pay for a set number of staff (each on pre-defined salaries). The biggest expense is obviously that Westminster is in central london and so accommodation will be hugely expensive.

 

It's a difficult question, although expenses for those MPs living furthest from Westminster would naturally be highest.

[Adam]

I thought they got paid so they could afford to buy things, or do they just get paid for another reason ?

[Mowen]

I thought they got paid so they could afford to buy things, or do they just get paid for another reason ?

 

Your pay packet shouldn't be spent on being able to do your job though, hence travel expenses for work being claimed. That isn't me saying that all claims are reasonable btw.

[Dave]

There should be some rigid rules on what is payable, including limits.

[Slim]

<object width="480" height="295"><param name="movie" value="

name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="

type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="295"></embed></object>

[Guest Geordiecunny]

£21k a year on travel is ridiculous! It's outrageous! Getting to your job is your problem, same as the rest of us.

[Guest Sniffer]

Shows how low the country has sunk when the home secretary is expensing the family porn. And she's still in a job.

[JJ7]

Whats he doing getting planes down to London all the time anyway? He spends £21500 on airfares, £7200 on mileage and £3100 on trains. It works out at £404 a week on airfares. Ridiculous! Not to mention, the £1300 travel claimed for his wife , £3000 for his family and £1400 for his employees. Its taking the piss that like.

 

Heres another reply to someone else on the same forum.

 

Thanks for this Jonathan. I assume you've gone no further than yourDaily Express or some such so it's hard for me to answer what iscomplete nonsense, and quite offensive at that. I pay my staff, run anoffice and fly up and down to London. I rent a room in London. I ownnothing in London and I employ no family members. I happen to be top ofthe list because someone has to be. In my case, largely because I amallowed to be accompanied by my children on some journeys and it's niceto have contact with them then. Most MPs don't have young children.Perhaps you think that's unreasonable, that's your call. As for therest of the nonsense - should I pay people less, not have a local office(where I process over 1000 cases every year), spend less weekdays inFalkirk or less time in London? These things are costs, they're not expenses. I have no idea why somepeople are so gullible as to believe that instead of staff or an officeor flights or a rented room I get cash in my pocket. But if you want tolive you live by the banner of a newspaper headline, that't yourjudgement too. Do let me help if you need me in my role as your MP in future. I findthat the people who write this offensive stuff have never to have neededmy help. Don't let that stop you in future, though. Best eric

 

If he wants his children with him, shouldnt he be paying for that himself. He will see them 3 days a week anyway if he's in Falkirk as much as he says he is. Why should the taxpayer pay for this? The man types like a schoolkid. The fact that he can't see whats wrong with what he's doing says it all about the culture at Westminister. He's trying to justify it. Its unbelievable!

 

 

[Adam]

Shows how low the country has sunk, when the media talk about £10 claimed to watch a porn movie as the main headline. I was suprised they didnt show you how to get it for free, would be in line with all of their other recession busting ideas.

[Guest Sniffer]

I think you are missing the point.

[Dave]

Shows how low the country has sunk when the home secretary is expensing the family porn. And she's still in a job.

 

Tbh the fact some of it was filth (not that it's 'real' filth on UK television anyway) is irrelevant IMO. It's a disgrace that she was trying to claim for PPV television, whatever it actually was. The porn bit just made it better for the tabloids.

[Guest Heneage]

Shows how low the country has sunk when the home secretary is expensing the family porn. And she's still in a job.

 

Tbh the fact some of it was filth (not that it's 'real' filth on UK television anyway) is irrelevant IMO. It's a disgrace that she was trying to claim for PPV television, whatever it actually was. The porn bit just made it better for the tabloids.

This.

 

The fact that those in the Government already get a more healthy salary, and expenses are just another temptation. While there are those I imagine for whom their expenses card is used as it was intended, I bet there are still more than enough of those who will go unpunished or those who continue to make purchases that are not needed.

[cp40]

Shows how low the country has sunk when the home secretary is expensing the family porn. And she's still in a job.

 

Tbh the fact some of it was filth (not that it's 'real' filth on UK television anyway) is irrelevant IMO. It's a disgrace that she was trying to claim for PPV television, whatever it actually was. The porn bit just made it better for the tabloids.

 

 

What pisses me off, there seems to be a mentality amongst our mps, that aside from thier good salaries, ALL of thier living costs should some how be covered by expenses. What the fuck is thier salary for.

[GG]

A guy in my year's dad is an MP. They are minted. Wanker.

[Northerngimp]

Every thing will be tried for from a politician and their family.  It will all be bunged in and he or she will say "i'll claim on it, dont worry".  What has caught theese cunts out is someone has leaked the info.

 

If one shitbag is doing it then a hell of a lot more will.

 

 

Time to lash down more rules, tighten it up and put travel restrictions in.

 

I'm all for having flexable MPs but not when they are taking the piss.  Especially in the current climate or when you see someone on the news who cant get the drugs they need to fight cancer and you have politicians saying there aint enough money in the pot while their partner cracks out a few sly wanks on the tax payer.

 

Fuck off politicians you make me sick.

 

[BlueStar]

Shows how low the country has sunk when the home secretary is expensing the family porn. And she's still in a job.

 

Tbh the fact some of it was filth (not that it's 'real' filth on UK television anyway) is irrelevant IMO. It's a disgrace that she was trying to claim for PPV television, whatever it actually was. The porn bit just made it better for the tabloids.

 

The fact she (supposedly accidently) claimed for about £15 worth of PPV is a non-story taking up a stupid amount of headline space considering she's claiming that she lives in a room in her sisters house and the hosue that she lives in with her husband and children is her "second home" so she can claim a second home allowance on it.

[Dave]

Shows how low the country has sunk when the home secretary is expensing the family porn. And she's still in a job.

 

Tbh the fact some of it was filth (not that it's 'real' filth on UK television anyway) is irrelevant IMO. It's a disgrace that she was trying to claim for PPV television, whatever it actually was. The porn bit just made it better for the tabloids.

 

The fact she (supposedly accidently) claimed for about £15 worth of PPV is a non-story taking up a stupid amount of headline space considering she's claiming that she lives in a room in her sisters house and the hosue that she lives in with her husband and children is her "second home" so she can claim a second home allowance on it.

 

Quite.

[Thespence]

The biggest problem I have with this whole "TAXPAYER PAYS FOR PORN" is at the same time of paying for the satellite porn there was also a internet connection getting paid as well, who the f*** pays for TV porn when they have the net, schoolboy error or her fella likes jacking off to soft porn such as  Red Shoe diaries. Poor Dicky Timmy he must be new to this internet.

[Dave]

[Pilko]

[Northerngimp]

Yep, he has never heard of redtube of Xhamster.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

£21k a year on travel is ridiculous! It's outrageous! Getting to your job is your problem, same as the rest of us.

 

Not as simple as that though, their job requires work in the constituency, which might be in northern Scotland, and work in London for parliament. Usually if a person has to travel for work then the employer covers the cost.

 

I've been all over the country for work, and I haven't paid for it myself.

[madras]

Shows how low the country has sunk when the home secretary is expensing the family porn. And she's still in a job.

shows how low the country has sunk when we go mental over stuff like this but don't care when people like lord rothermere and rupert murdoch take millions out the country by having their companies registered in bermuda etc.

 

money made in this country should be taxed in this country and lets start with the big numbers.

[ikri]

Shows how low the country has sunk when the home secretary is expensing the family porn. And she's still in a job.

 

Tbh the fact some of it was filth (not that it's 'real' filth on UK television anyway) is irrelevant IMO. It's a disgrace that she was trying to claim for PPV television, whatever it actually was. The porn bit just made it better for the tabloids.

 

The hypocrisy of Jacqui Smith's war on porn vs her claiming expenses for PPV porn is what amazes me.

 

I just hope that the films her husband purchased involved bdsm so the police can try out their new poorly thought out & poorly worded porn laws by raiding her home and examining all their computers for anything dodgy.

 

If MPs think that it's all OK to intercept all internet and phone traffic then they should prove it, by letting us see every email they send or receive, let us hear recordings of their phone calls and I want to see the web traffic logs to see what sites they like to visit.

 

Nothing to hide, nothing to fear, etc.