More Bloody Tories Expenses

[life on mars]

Do they need anymore in life :

https://order-order.com/2023/02/14/the-shadow-cabinet-expense-files-yvette-cooper/

Since Labour are giving it both barrels on their new Damian McBride-inspired campaign for efficient spending, Guido’s looked through the archives to see how the Shadow Cabinet handled taxpayers’ money when they were in government. A worthwhile effort given they seem to have no issue resurrecting the political career of Douglas Alexander, despite his notorious expense fiddling…

First up, the Shadow Home Secretary Yvette Cooper. At the time of the expense scandal in 2009, Cooper was the DWP Secretary. Her husband, professional dancer Ed Balls, was the Children’s Secretary. Together, the pair were investigated for flipping the designation of their second home three times within the space of just two years. In total, they claimed £24,400 on their second-home allowance, more than the £23,000 allotted to individual MPs…

While the standards commissioner ultimately ruled the claims were above board because they had paid (ouch) capital gains following their move, the pair were later forced to repay £1,363 each for a mortgage overpayment. Nonetheless, the taxpayer still footed the £2,000 bill for removal men to haul the couple’s furniture around London – and, according to the Telegraph, “submitted regular claims for food, usually totalling up to £600 a month”. The maximum food allowance for a single MP was £400. Not to mention the £225 Cooper spent on a digital camera, and £1,200 on 30,000 calendars. At the time, Cooper and Balls were both on salaries of £141,866 a year…

[JamesWales]

Re: More Bloody Tories Expenses

It's almost as if one party isn't inherently better or morally superior to another. Who would have thought it?!

[Tito Fuente]

Re: More Bloody Tories Expenses

What's this telling us exactly?

Yvette Cooper and Ed Balls didn't individually claim the maximum amount that they were entitled to as MPs.

The narrative has been twisted to show that, as a *pair* of MPs, their claims totalled more than the maximum amount of entitlement for a *single* MP.

Are there any arguments that it says something else that has led to James and Life on Mars thinking that this is some sort of 'gotcha' piece?

On this topic, most of the expenses MPs are entitled to are disgusting and shouldn't be required.

Travel costs (for work) and subsidised housing within a short travelling distance to Westminster are the only two expenses that they should be able to receive (in my humble opinion).

[JamesWales]

Re: More Bloody Tories Expenses

What's this telling us exactly?

Yvette Cooper and Ed Balls didn't individually claim the maximum amount that they were entitled to as MPs.

The narrative has been twisted to show that, as a *pair* of MPs, their claims totalled more than the maximum amount of entitlement for a *single* MP.

Are there any arguments that it says something else that has led to James and Life on Mars thinking that this is some sort of 'gotcha' piece?

On this topic, most of the expenses MPs are entitled to are disgusting and shouldn't be required.

Travel costs (for work) and subsidised housing within a short travelling distance to Westminster are the only two expenses that they should be able to receive (in my humble opinion).

I don't think it's a gotcha piece.

[Tito Fuente]

Re: More Bloody Tories Expenses

I don't think it's a gotcha piece.

And yet, commenting on the piece: "It's almost as if one party isn't inherently better or morally superior to another. Who would have thought it?!"

[Dorcus]

Re: More Bloody Tories Expenses

And yet, commenting on the piece: "It's almost as if one party isn't inherently better or morally superior to another. Who would have thought it?!"

It's Guido Fawkes whataboutery. When they resort to this we know they're scared.

[the other bob wilson]

Re: More Bloody Tories Expenses

It's Guido Fawkes whataboutery. When they resort to this we know they're scared.

Yep, the Tories, and their lackeys on here, have got nothing left except to sling mud and fight culture wars - that clown Lee Anderson admitted as much last week.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/lee-anderson-tories-election-trans-b2282185.html

[Claude Blue]

Re: More Bloody Tories Expenses

It's Guido Fawkes whataboutery. When they resort to this we know they're scared.

Guido is just a right wing anti Labour scurrilous online rag, not to be taken seriously.

Run by a scumbag called Paul Staines, a multiple convicted drink driver.

[cyril evans awaydays]

Re: More Bloody Tories Expenses

This was a response to a rather half-arsed Labour foray on promiscuous use of Government Procurement cards and people like Greg Hands staying in £700 a night hotels when attending foreign meetings.

I think the sins here were pretty minor given we are dealing with a series of the same government that has long since raised the capacity to shock bar to stellar heights. As far as I can see no one on here raised an eyebrow when Labour made their play.

Didn't stop Whatabboutery International making a weekend play for attention though!

[JamesWales]

Re: More Bloody Tories Expenses

What's this telling us exactly?

Yvette Cooper and Ed Balls didn't individually claim the maximum amount that they were entitled to as MPs.

The narrative has been twisted to show that, as a *pair* of MPs, their claims totalled more than the maximum amount of entitlement for a *single* MP.

Are there any arguments that it says something else that has led to James and Life on Mars thinking that this is some sort of 'gotcha' piece?

On this topic, most of the expenses MPs are entitled to are disgusting and shouldn't be required.

Travel costs (for work) and subsidised housing within a short travelling distance to Westminster are the only two expenses that they should be able to receive (in my humble opinion).

This was a response to a rather half-arsed Labour foray on promiscuous use of Government Procurement cards and people like Greg Hands staying in £700 a night hotels when attending foreign meetings.

I think the sins here were pretty minor given we are dealing with a series of the same government that has long since raised the capacity to shock bar to stellar heights. As far as I can see no one on here raised an eyebrow when Labour made their play.

Didn't stop Whatabboutery International making a weekend play for attention though!

A former Labour MP was jailed a week or two ago for fraud, fiddling expenses. Someone posts another story here and the immediate responses are whataboutery.

Whens your birthday? I may buy you a mirror.

[JamesWales]

Re: More Bloody Tories Expenses

What's this telling us exactly?

Yvette Cooper and Ed Balls didn't individually claim the maximum amount that they were entitled to as MPs.

The narrative has been twisted to show that, as a *pair* of MPs, their claims totalled more than the maximum amount of entitlement for a *single* MP.

Are there any arguments that it says something else that has led to James and Life on Mars thinking that this is some sort of 'gotcha' piece?

On this topic, most of the expenses MPs are entitled to are disgusting and shouldn't be required.

Travel costs (for work) and subsidised housing within a short travelling distance to Westminster are the only two expenses that they should be able to receive (in my humble opinion).

Guido is just a right wing anti Labour scurrilous online rag, not to be taken seriously.

Run by a scumbag called Paul Staines, a multiple convicted drink driver.

Excellent distraction tactics!

Guido Fawkes skewers Tory MPs all the time. It's not a bad thing to read as part of a balanced media diet and it will always provide links and sources. Editorially it has a clear slant, but that isn't in favour of any particular party.

If Labour are presenting themselves as holiar than though on some things, then why shouldn't they be exposed?

They may be the next govt of the UK. What's wrong with the media presenting these stories?

What's good for the goose, is good for the gander, no?

[cyril evans awaydays]

Re: More Bloody Tories Expenses

A former Labour MP was jailed a week or two ago for fraud, fiddling expenses. Someone posts another story here and the immediate responses are whataboutery.

Whens your birthday? I may buy you a mirror.

I would have thought the merits or otherwise of Labour's campaign on the use of public money would have been an appropriate topic to raise or trash. As I said I think at best it is throwing another small log on the bonfire of misuse of public funds most starkly characterised by the VIP Covid Procurement lane.

But the reaction of a fourth rate wind-up artist was to post a bit of Guido whataboutery from 14 years ago as a bit of whataboutery.

When's your birthday. I may buy some sand for you to bury your head in.

[Tito Fuente]

Re: More Bloody Tories Expenses

Excellent distraction tactics!

Guido Fawkes skewers Tory MPs all the time. It's not a bad thing to read as part of a balanced media diet and it will always provide links and sources. Editorially it has a clear slant, but that isn't in favour of any particular party.

If Labour are presenting themselves as holiar than though on some things, then why shouldn't they be exposed?

They may be the next govt of the UK. What's wrong with the media presenting these stories?

What's good for the goose, is good for the gander, no?

What has this specific piece exposed that warranted your initial response?

[pipster]

Re: More Bloody Tories Expenses

Parliament like the Senedd and house of Haggis in Scotland - it's like a club - where people go to feather their nests (albeit on the edge of legality and sometimes illegality) - If you ever watched the channel 4 doc on how the journalists involved broke the story - it's well worth a watch. Plenty more goes on down the Bay - it's just never scrutinised that much - other than at a welsh govt level (like the airport money or the farm that Drakeford and Co decided to buy)

[life on mars]

Re: More Bloody Tories Expenses

Guido is just a right wing anti Labour scurrilous online rag, not to be taken seriously.

Run by a scumbag called Paul Staines, a multiple convicted drink driver.

So it's a lie, thanks for heads up let's hope the rag gets sued and for this untruth ..

Given Rachel Reeves will be handling the public purse if Labour win the next election, you’d hope she’s at least responsible enough with her own finances to manage her MPs expenses card. Not so much…

In 2015, Reeves was one of nineteen MPs to have her official credit card suspended by IPSA after racking up £4,033.63 in invalid expense spending – the third-highest sum of all nineteen listed. According to the Guardian, she cleared her outstanding debts soon afterwards. Guido has contacted Reeves’ office for an explanation. Radio silence so far…