How Big is the Trough?

Once again elected Members of the House Commons, (M.P.s) have been exposed in attempting to use their position as an M.P. to enhance their income. This time it is Sir Malcolm Rifkind, M.P. for Kensington and Chelsea and Jack Straw, M.P. for Blackburn.

These two paragons of virtue and morals were set up in a sting by Channel 4 and the Daily Telegraph were they both were gladly willing to help representatives of a Chinese company by helping to promote and lobby for their company. Of course this came at a price. Jack Straw was willing to settle for his standard fee of only £5,000 for a day whilst Sir Malcolm Rifkind came at a higher price of £5,000 to £8,000 for a HALF a DAYS work. This is on top of their M.P.s salary of £67,060 per year plus their very extensive expenses allowance. Sir Malcolm Rifkind also tried to appear impoverished as he stated; “I am self-employed so nobody pays me a salary. I have to earn my income.” What complete and utter nonsense. What he really meant was I am open to any offer you wish to make me. I am willing to sell myself and my privileged position to the highest bidder. http://www.parliament.uk/about/mps-and-lords/members/pay-mps/

Does a salary of over £67,000 a year not count as paid income? What arrogance from a man who is only too willing to use his position as senior M.P. Chair of the Intelligence and Security Committee, now ex- Chair, he resigned his position after he was exposed, and ex-cabinet minister to fatten his wallet. The irony is that he is ex-Chair of the now defunct Standards and Privileges committee which was set up in 1955 to oversee and recommend allowances and expenditure of M.P.s to regulate the behaviour of M.P.s to make recommendations to the House of complaints on any breach of Parliamentary Privilege. Or to see if any M.P. had been a bad boy or girl and if any punishment was necessary, such as a suspension from the House of Commons.

I can only imagine the glee and joy that the Members of Parliament felt in knowing that “Malky the Milker” was in charge.

As for Jack Straw I suppose his only recent claim to fame or infamy, apart from being an M.P. for Blackburn since 1979 serving as Foreign Secretary, (2001-2006), and Home Secretary, (1997-2001), is when as Home Secretary he refused to extradite General Pinochet to Spain to face charges of Crimes against Humanity when Pinochet was President of Chile. Jack Straw released Pinochet in March 2000 allowing him to go back to Chile as a free man. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indictment_and_arrest_of_Augusto_Pinochet   

What always amazes me is that when an M.P. is caught with his snout in trough they plead that they have done nothing wrong and have not broken any parliamentary rules or regulations. They are the people that wish to dictate to the people of the U.K. on how to behave, observe morals and principles and to obey the law. Jack Straw in the exposé was also not shy in mentioning that he will shortly become named as Lord therefore sitting as a Peer of the Realm in the House of Lords. I assume that sitting as a Peer in the House of Lords he could influence decisions and votes and he would have the openings to talk to top business people, Cabinet Ministers, Members of the European Parliament and the like. In fact Jack Straw boasted that he had influenced members of the European Parliament to give an advantageous outcome to clients he was being paid to represent and promote their business activities. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/investigations/11411007/Jack-Straw-and-Sir-Malcolm-Rifkind-in-latest-cash-for-access-scandal.html   

The two disgraced M.P.s fortunately have not only suffered great embarrassment but Sir Malcom Rifkind, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malcolm_Rifkind apart from resigning from the Intelligence and Security Committee has now decided not to stand for re-election at the coming General election on Thursday May the 7^th. Whilst Jack Straw http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Straw who had already decided to stand down as an M.P. will probably not now receive his cherished Peerage as a Lord sitting in the House of Lords.
The Parliamentary web site does not hang about; it immediately listed both M.P.s as Independents as soon as they had the party whip was withdrawn. Withdrawing the Party Whip means an M.P. is no longer part of that Parliamentary party. In this case Rifkind is no longer a Member of the Conservative Parliamentary party and it is the same for Jack Straw with the Labour party. Both are no longer funded by the relevant political parties.


M.P.s are always claiming that they work hard either in Parliament or in their constituencies but it is surprising how many of them, especially the Tory M.P.s, have time for a second job, or highly paid part-time directorships, to supplement their salaries and fat excessive expenses claims. 


How many are there still using their position to line their pockets and being paid a salary about three times above the national average?


McTaggart

The Chancellor's Easter Present

It will be announced soon that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne will be giving every person on state benefit a £15 Easter bonus. This includes people on a State Pensions. This will be paid before Easter Friday.
 
The Chancellor came to this decision after having a very enjoyable Mother’s Day and in consultation with his advisor's it is thought it will help stimulate the economy as people will hopefully spend this windfall to treat themselves especially on drink, cigarettes and a game of bingo.

Of course these little extras do not come without some form of payback. It has been decided that any household receiving a state benefit with children under 18 in England and Wales, 16 in Scotland, will have to share a room and have a Children Levy placed upon it.

An example of this is if a house has three bedrooms but only two children both under the age limit, (18/16), they will have to share a room and a levy of £10.00 a week will be imposed on the householder for the spare bedroom. This is very similar to the current so called “Bedroom Tax” on people who have an unused bedroom. This is to encourage people to have more children or move to a smaller house as family houses, 3 or 4 bedrooms are scarce.  

A spokesman for the Government stated that if a household is facing hardship they can always take in a lodger for the spare bedroom. “I am certain this will enhance the life of the family on a State Benefit”.  

The Tory leadership feels this will help increase their vote for the 2015 General election and please Middle England and the Home Counties, the Tory Party's strong voting base. 

This was sent on 1st April 2014.   All Fools Day

 

McTaggart 

Happy New Year from the Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne

I feel the Tory members of the cabinet must have had a very jolly Christmas playing with their new board game, “Cuts to the Benefits for the Sick and Vulnerable” This came to mind when the Chancellor of the Exchequer the Right Honourable, not my words, George Osborne announced cuts to the Benefit system of £25,000,000,000 (£25 billion). Actually, when all the figures are collated it is over £60 billion.  

To quote George Osborne, he said "We’ve got to make more cuts £17 billion this coming year, £20 billion next year and over £25 billion further across the two years after. That’s more than £60 billion in total." The Telegraph

 Mr. Osborne said that 2014 will be "the year of hard truths" and that "Britain faces a choice".  The Government is on course to borrow £111 billion this year, almost double the £60 billion it was forecast to borrow when Mr. Osborne took office in 2010.  The national debt will hit £1.2 trillion by April, and is due to carry on rising, hitting £1.5 trillion by 2018. It means the Treasury is spending £50 billion a year on debt interest to Britain’s lenders. The BBC

What irritates me is so far, although I may have missed it, no-one either when interviewing the Chancellor or reporting this very important news challenges these figures and by how he came to them. I can imagine George, his friends and colleagues playing this game after a very good lunch quaffing the after dinner Brandy and cigars as they pull out a card with a figure on it, say £17 billion and deciding where it should go in the cuts to the benefits. Just like picking up a card of “Chance” in Monopoly and laughing at the choice.

A friend of mine is a carer for his brother who has severe mental health problems. Every time the Tory led Government announces cut backs or decide to revise the benefit system he fears the worst for his brother and himself. I feel they, the government, have no conception of how many people, through no fault of their own or by their choice, are doing their best to live a life as best they can.  

Not happy to celebrate over the festivities with this he decides to come up with another great wheeze this one concerning people Under 25s. The Chancellor full of “bon homme” decides he wishes to remove housing benefit from the Under-25s.   It is estimated that this will only save about £50 million after the people such as parents, victims of domestic abuse and similar are taking into account.   

Department of Work and Pensions figures show that 351,678 people under the age of 25 claim housing benefit at a cost of £1.8bn. Of these 55.6% are parents, which mean the cuts would not apply to them. Osborne's plan would therefore produce savings of £827.4m in this area. But Whitehall sources suggested this figure could be reduced to as low as £50m once other groups among the under-25s, such as victims of domestic violence, are excluded from housing benefit cuts. "It is laughable that you can get anywhere near £12bn in cuts this way," one source said.

Fiona Weir, chief executive of Gingerbread, which represents single parents, said: “Almost half of under-25s supported by housing benefit are single parent families with young children, for whom moving in with mum and dad simply isn’t an option.”

Alison Worsley, deputy director of strategy at Barnardo’s, said: “Any proposal to remove housing benefits from all under-25s risks leaving some of this country’s most vulnerable people stranded. We must not forget that many disadvantaged young people starting out in the world simply do not have a family that they can turn to.”

Once again I can see why the Prime Minister, David Cameron, stated that the Tory Party “is no longer the nasty party but the caring party.”

McTaggart

N.B.   1, 000,000,0000, (1 billion) = one thousand million.

In the U.K. a billion, (1,000,000,0000,) used to be one million million and some people still use it today.