What we can expect for a year or two

[CliveH]

1footinthegrave - 2012-04-18 7:50 AM

francisgraham - 2012-04-17 11:44 PM

1footinthegrave - 2012-04-17 11:35 PM"I am not sure it is quite as bad as all that - the economies are in a mess mainly because of political interference"What, all of them, long overdue for some new politics and politicians in that case. Anyway there ain't much the average bloke can do about it, but it's nice to know we're all in it together !

You still don't get it do you? The continuing improvement in your standard of living over the last fifty years, the fact that longevity is increasing so much that children borne today will live to be 100, is down to two things, those interfering politicians and the capitalist economy that they promote and encourage.

Yes, there are blips on the way, there always have been and there always will be. But who can deny the massive improvements in every aspect of our lives?  Well, you can presumably, but your utter and dreary pessimism is based on nothing but prejudice and certainly not on any real facts.

You obviously inhabit a different universe to many folk, it is widely acknowledged that people are becoming more and more disconnected from the whole political system, and career politicians who for the most part have never done a single days real work in their lives. I agree there have been some improvements,but I can remember a time when you could drive down the M1 all the way into London without a stop, everyone had a dentist, youngsters could get a job, housing was just about affordable on one wage, carrots tasted like carrots, teachers lasted a bit longer that 3 years, university students didn't work as shelf fillers,you had an outside chance of buying OR renting a house, "real facts", there are plenty of them out there, but you carry on mate in your Rose tinted spectacle world, but trust me, things are a real struggle for many people though given your view obviously not you, you like me have probably lived through the best of it, you wouldn't want to be starting out now !People obviously have short memories, or are completely stupid, but I can't get my expenses paid for Duck ponds, porn channels, nor be a dead beat like Kinnock and go on to get a very well rewarded EU job. Yes three cheers for them all.

Don't forget Mandelson!Twice he had to resign in disgrace - and on one of those occaisions -if it were one of us mere mortals his actions would have resulted in a criminal conviction for fraud - and he gets rewarded with a post in the EU (now there's a surprise :-S ) and then is welcomed back to No 10 by the deeply flawed Gordon Brown.Yes career politicians do exist, and yes - we need to get rid of them.

[Guest pelmetman]

francisgraham - 2012-04-17 11:44 PM

the fact that longevity is increasing so much that children borne today will live to be 100, is down to two things, those interfering politicians

 

Obesity and the post code lottery should help balance things out ;-)...........................and the healthy ones can look forward to working until they're 80 :D

[francisgraham]

1footinthegrave - 2012-04-18 7:50 AM

francisgraham - 2012-04-17 11:44 PM

1footinthegrave - 2012-04-17 11:35 PM"I am not sure it is quite as bad as all that - the economies are in a mess mainly because of political interference"What, all of them, long overdue for some new politics and politicians in that case. Anyway there ain't much the average bloke can do about it, but it's nice to know we're all in it together !

You still don't get it do you? The continuing improvement in your standard of living over the last fifty years, the fact that longevity is increasing so much that children borne today will live to be 100, is down to two things, those interfering politicians and the capitalist economy that they promote and encourage.

Yes, there are blips on the way, there always have been and there always will be. But who can deny the massive improvements in every aspect of our lives?  Well, you can presumably, but your utter and dreary pessimism is based on nothing but prejudice and certainly not on any real facts.

You obviously inhabit a different universe to many folk, it is widely acknowledged that people are becoming more and more disconnected from the whole political system, and career politicians who for the most part have never done a single days real work in their lives. I agree there have been some improvements,but I can remember a time when you could drive down the M1 all the way into London without a stop, everyone had a dentist, youngsters could get a job, housing was just about affordable on one wage, carrots tasted like carrots, teachers lasted a bit longer that 3 years, university students didn't work as shelf fillers,you had an outside chance of buying OR renting a house, "real facts", there are plenty of them out there, but you carry on mate in your Rose tinted spectacle world, but trust me, things are a real struggle for many people though given your view obviously not you, you like me have probably lived through the best of it, you wouldn't want to be starting out now !People obviously have short memories, or are completely stupid, but I can't get my expenses paid for Duck ponds, porn channels, nor be a dead beat like Kinnock and go on to get a very well rewarded EU job. Yes three cheers for

 them all.

Wow, you could drive all the way to London without a stop! Could that be because very few people could afford a car? 

Who are these MPs who've never done a single day's work in their lives. Can we have some names please? 

Your problem is that you base the ethics and morals of the entire Houses of Parliament on the actions of a few. It's about as sensible as deciding that all motorhomers are filthy animals because they dump there waste in streams or the sea.

And carrots tasted like carrots eh? Wow, you've really got your finger on the political pulse haven't you?

Your problem is that it's you that live in a fantasy world. A world many years ago where no one was ever unemployed, where summers were twice as long and it never rained. You forget the smog and the filth and the poor diets and the sub-standard housing. You forget unscrupulous employers who could sack you on a whim. Yes, they were lovely times!

You whinge about how people can't rent or buy houses. Are you being serious? Home ownership has never been higher! My parents couldn't afford to buy a house, but someone doing the job that my father did would definitely own their own home today.

I will admit though that we never had university students struggling to find good jobs. Perhaps it was because hardly anyone went to university? When I went only about 5% of the very brightest went to a university. Now it seems like half of the population go to some ex-polytechnic to get a degree in knitting. 

The university students struggling to get good jobs aren't the ones with good degrees. Some industries are crying out for qualified graduates.

And as for people being disconnected from the political classes I agree. But it's those with a lynch mob mentality who can't see beyond their tabloid headlines and are unable to work out that just because a small number of MPs bent the rules, that they are not necessarily all like that.

You said recently that you hate the political classes with every fibre of your being. First of all, I'm not sure what the political class is? If an ex-army officer, or an ex-miner stands for parliament, do they then somehow become part of a different class?

You may as well talk about the medical classes, or the teaching classes. MPs do a job. They have all had other jobs before becoming MPs. What is special about being an MP that you must have worked as a welder, or a bus driver before you can be a proper MP?

Anyway, I look forward to your list of all the MPs who have never done a day's work in their life. I'm sure that you wouldn't trot out a statement like that without any substantiation.

Hating politicians with 'every fibre of your being' just sums up your intemperate and unreasonable views. Do you hate MPs more than paedophiles or mass murderers for instance? It looks to me as though you might. That is very worrying!

[Guest pelmetman]

francisgraham - 2012-04-18 9:27 AM

But it's those with a lynch mob mentality who can't see beyond their tabloid headlines and are unable to work out that just because a small number of MPs bent the rules, that they are not necessarily all like that.

 

As you say Francis ;-)............................just a small number *-)

 

From Channel 4

 

We contacted each MP to ask the following three questions:

 

1) Have you agreed to pay any amounts back? If so, how much and what for?

2) Have you agreed in the past week to stop claiming for certain items or services for that formerly submitted as a refundable expense? If so, how much and what for?

3) If the answer to the above two questions is no, do you envisage having to pay back any expenses in the future?

Their responses have been published below, in order of those that have agreed to pay back their claims at the top, followed by those we are awaiting responses from, and finally we list those who have not yet agreed to payback any money.

 

Phil Hope

 

Spent more than £10,000 in one year refurbishing a small London flat, among other expenses.

 

Paid back: £41,709

 

Margaret Moran

 

Switched address of her second home, allowing her to claim £22,500 to fix a dry rot problem.

 

Paid back: £22,500

 

Elliot Morley

 

Claimed parliamentary expenses of more than £16,000 for a mortgage which had already been paid off.

 

Paid back: £16,000

 

Hazel Blears

 

Did not pay capital gains tax on a property she sold despite having told the Commons authorities it was her second home.

 

Paid back: £13,332

 

David Chaytor

 

Spent nearly £13,000 for a flat in London after it was paid off in 2004.

 

Paid back: £13,000

 

Michael Gove

 

Spent thousands on his London home before "flipping" his Commons allowance to another address.

 

Paid back: £7,000

 

Ronnie Campbell

 

Claimed a total of £87,729 for furniture for his London flat.

 

Paid back: £6,200

 

Hilary Armstrong

 

Claimed £3,100 towards repointing walls and gables.

 

Paid back: £5,500

 

"On looking at my expenses a couple of weeks ago, I decided that I was uncomfortable about having claimed £150 per month for 3 years (and £100 for 1 month) and so decided to pay back the £5,500 for that. I was therefore not asked to repay anything, not even questioned about this by the Telegraph! It was a personal decision.

 

"On your second question, I have not been asked to repay anything else, and am confident that everything I have claimed is for the repair and maintenance of the property and not the enhancement of it."

 

Alan Duncan

 

Spent thousands from his allowance on gardening, including repairs to his lawnmower.

 

Paid back: £4,704.86

 

Mark Lazarowicz

 

Claimed more than £5,000 of his expenses claims for legal and professional fees.

 

Paid back: £2,675

 

Andrew Lansley

 

Spent more than £4,000 of taxpayers’ money renovating his country home months before he sold it.

 

Paid back: £2,600

 

Douglas Hogg

 

Included with his expenses claims the cost of having the moat cleared, piano tuned and stable lights fixed at his country manor house.

 

Paid back: £2,200 for moat cleaning costs.

 

More than £2,000 worth of furniture delivered to his London home when he was claiming his Commons allowance on a second home in Oxfordshire.

 

Oliver Letwin

 

Repaired a pipe beneath his tennis court using taxpayers' money.

 

Paid back: £2,000

 

Sir Menzies Campbell

 

Hired a top interior designer to refurbish his small flat in central London at taxpayers’ expense.

 

Paid back: £1,490.66

 

Julia Goldsworthy

 

Spent thousands of pounds on expensive furniture just days before the deadline for using up parliamentary allowances.

 

Paid back: £1,005

 

David Cameron

 

Claimed £680 for the removal of wisteria.

 

Paid back: £680

 

Kenneth Clarke

 

Avoided paying the full rate of council tax on either of his two homes by effectively claiming that neither is his main residence.

 

Paid back: £600

 

George Osborne

 

Claimed money for a chauffeur-driven car.

 

Paid back: £400

 

Stewart Jackson

 

Claimed more than £66,000 for his family home, including hundreds of pounds on refurbishing his swimming pool.

Paid back: £304.10

 

Alistair Burt

 

a) Alistair volunteered to pay back total amount of sundries (snacks and drinks) from hotel bills over fifteen months in 2004/05 (£229.24) although they were perfectly fair within subsistence reimbursement, he recognises the climate has changed

 

b) Doesn’t apply as Alistair has rented furnished flats since 2005 and regularly only claims rent, council tax and utilities

 

James Arbuthnot

 

Claimed from the public finances for cleaning his swimming pool at a country residence.

 

He has agreed to repay the money related to the swimming pool costs.

 

Chris Huhne

 

Regularly submitted receipts for bus tickets and groceries.

 

Paid back: £119 for trouser press

 

David Willetts

 

Claimed for changing light bulbs.

 

Paid back: £115 plus VAT

 

Michael Ancram

 

Put the cost of having his swimming pool boiler serviced on his parliamentary allowances.

 

"I have paid back the bill for £99.85 for the servicing of the swimming pool boiler which was submitted in error. I have submitted my ACA claims for scrutiny and have made it clear if any others are deemed inappropriate I will repay them. I HAVE PUBLICLY ANNOUNCED THAT I WILL MAKE NOT FURTHER CLAIMS OF ANY SORT AGIASNT THIS NOW DISCREDITED ALLOWANCE."

 

Nick Clegg

 

Claimed the maximum allowed under his parliamentary second home allowance

 

Paid back: £82 phone bill

 

Lembit Opik

 

Claimed £40 for a court summons for failing to pay council tax.

 

Paid back: £40

 

Andrew George

 

Used parliamentary expenses for a London flat used by his student daughter. He also claimed hundreds of pounds for hotel stays with his wife.

 

He has said he will repay £20 for a hotel breakfast

 

Cheryl Gillan

 

Bought dog food using her allowance.

 

Paid back: £4.47

 

Greg Barker

 

Made a £320,000 profit selling a flat the taxpayer had helped pay for.

 

Agreed to pay back undisclosed amount.

 

Jack Straw

 

Only paid half the amount of council tax that he claimed on his parliamentary allowances over four years.

 

"As he made clear last week he has already repaid some amounts claimed in error. Jack no longer makes claims under the Additional Costs Allowance."

 

Clare Short

 

Paid £8,000 too much after claiming for her full mortgage payments despite only being entitled to the interest.

 

"I paid back in 2006 and don’t owe anything."

 

Francis Maude

 

Claimed almost £35,000 in two years for mortgage interest payments on a London flat when he owned a house just a few hundred yards away.

 

Agreed to stop claiming

 

Chris Grayling

 

Claimed for a London flat even though his constituency home is only 17 miles from the House of Commons.

 

Agreed to stop claiming for London home.

 

Theresa Villiers

 

Claimed almost £16,000 in stamp duty and professional fees on expenses when she bought a London flat, even though she already had a house in the capital.

 

Agreed to stop claiming for home later this year.

 

Diana Johnson

 

Ms Johnson, a Labour whip, spent £1,000 of taxpayers' money on hiring an architect for a decorating project at her second home.

 

"I paid back money in March 09 for some plans to replace rotten windows. I had paid for the repair work myself in any event."

 

Austin Mitchell

 

Claimed for security shutters, ginger crinkle biscuits and the cost of reupholstering his sofa.

 

"I'm considering paying back the 87p for the Branston Pickle, I am giving that some serious thought. But there’s such a big queue outside the Fees Office they might not be able to consider it until next week. I have eaten the pickle though."

 

Derek Wyatt

 

Billed 75p for scotch eggs.

 

"I have agreed to change my diet and reduce my intake of pork pies and scotch eggs."

 

Gordon Brown

 

House swap let the PM claim thousands.

 

Awaiting response

 

Alistair Darling

 

Stamp duty was paid by the public.

 

Awaiting response

 

David Miliband

 

Spending was even queried by his gardener.

 

Awaiting response

 

Shaun Woodward

 

Received £100,000 to help pay mortgage.

 

Awaiting response

 

Douglas Alexander

 

Spent more than £30,000 doing up his constituency home.

 

Awaiting response

 

Margaret Beckett

 

Made a £600 claim for hanging baskets and pot plants.

 

Awaiting response

 

Andy Burnham

 

Had an eight-month battle with the fees office after making a single expenses claim for more than £16,500.

 

Awaiting response

 

Kevin Brennan

 

Had a £450 television delivered to his family home in Cardiff even though he reclaimed the money back on his London second home allowance.

 

Awaiting response

 

Iain Wright and Tom Watson

 

Spent £100,000 of taxpayers' money on the London flat they once shared.

 

Awaiting response

 

Barbara Follett

 

Used £25,000 of taxpayers' money to pay for private security patrols at her home.

 

Awaiting response

 

Andrew MacKay and Julie Kirkbride

 

Claimed more than £1,000 a month to cover mortgage interest payments on their joint flat near Westminster, which he designated his "second home" despite owning no property in his Bracknell constituency.

 

At the same time, Ms Kirkbride used her own second homes allowance to claim more than £900 a month towards the loan on their family home in Bromsgrove.

 

Awaiting response

 

James Cappison

 

Claimed more than £100,000 in expenses including thousands for gardening and redecoration.

 

Awaiting response

 

Phil Woolas

 

Submitted receipts including comics, nappies and women's clothing as part of his claims for food.

 

Awaiting response

 

Ben Bradshaw

 

Used his allowance to pay the mortgage interest on a flat he owned jointly with his boyfriend.

 

Awaiting response

 

Keith Vaz

 

Claimed £75,500 for a second flat near Parliament even though he already lived just 12 miles from Westminster.

 

Awaiting response

 

Ed Balls and Yvette Cooper

 

Changed the designation of their second home three times in two years.

 

Awaiting response

 

Peter and Iris Robinson

 

The couple, who are both Democratic Unionist Party MPs, are said to have both claimed expenses based on the same £1,223 bill when they submitted claims in 2007.

 

Awaiting response

 

Shahid Malik

 

Claimed £66,000 on his second property while paying less than £100 a week for his main house.

 

Awaiting response

 

Alan and Ann Keen

 

Claimed almost £40,000 a year on a central London flat although their family home was less than 10 miles away.

 

Awaiting response

 

Michael Martin

 

Used taxpayers' money to pay for chauffeur-driven cars to his local job centre and Celtic's football ground.

 

Awaiting response

 

Helen Jones

 

Claimed a total of £87,647 on her London flat between 2004 and 2008, most of which was taken up by mortgage interest repayments.

 

Awaiting response

 

Helen Goodman

 

Claimed £519.31 for a week's stay in a holiday cottage in her constituency over a bank holiday, it was claimed.

 

Awaiting response

 

Stephen Byers

 

Claimed more than £125,000 for repairs and maintenance at a London flat owned outright by his partner.

 

Awaiting response

 

John Reid

 

Used his allowance to pay for slotted spoons, an ironing board and a glittery loo seat.

 

Awaiting response

 

John Prescott

 

Claimed for two toilet seats in two years.

 

Awaiting response

 

Bob Marshall-Andrews

 

Claimed £118,000 for expenses at his second home, including stereo equipment, extensive redecoration and a pair of Kenyan carpets.

 

Awaiting response

 

Fabian Hamilton

 

Declared his mother’s London house as his main residence while over-charging the taxpayer by thousands of pounds for a mortgage on his family home in Leeds.

 

Awaiting response

 

Harry Cohen

 

Claimed thousands of pounds for redecorating his second home before selling it and charging taxpayers £12,000 in stamp duty and fees on a new property.

 

Awaiting response

 

Nick Herbert

 

Charged taxpayers more than £10,000 for stamp duty and fees when he and his partner bought a home together in his constituency.

 

Awaiting response

 

David Heathcoat-Amory

 

Gardener used hundreds of sacks of horse manure and the MP submitted the receipts to Parliament.

 

Awaiting response

 

Sir Gerald Kaufman

 

Charged £1,851 for a rug he imported from a New York antiques centre and tried to claim £8,865 for a television.

 

Awaiting response

 

Chris Bryant

 

Changed second home twice in two years to claim £20,000.

 

Awaiting response

 

Anthony Steen

 

Claimed £87,000 on country mansion with 500 trees.

 

Awaiting response

 

Tam Dalyell

 

Tried to claim £18,000 for bookcases two months before he retired as an MP.

 

Awaiting response

 

Geoffrey Clifton-Brown

 

He "flipped" his second home designation from London to his Gloucestershire home, before buying a £2,750,000 house.

 

Awaiting response

 

Nadine Dorries

 

Bill for a lost £2,190 deposit on a rented flat.

 

Awaiting response

 

Crispin Blunt

 

Asked to stop claiming Commons allowance on his home because his children live there.

 

Awaiting response

 

Richard Younger-Ross

 

Asked to stop claiming Commons allowance on his home because his children live there.

 

Awaiting response

 

Julian Lewis

 

Attempted to claim £6,000 in expenses for a wooden floor at his second home.

 

Awaiting response

 

Fraser Kemp

 

Repeat purchases of household items over the space of several weeks.

 

Awaiting response

 

Mike Hall

 

Claimed thousands of pounds in expenses for the cost of cleaners, cleaning products and laundry bills for his London home.

 

Awaiting response

 

Liz Blackman

 

Engaged in last-minute shopping sprees before the end of each financial year, in an apparent attempt to make sure she claimed as close to maximum expenses as possible.

 

Awaiting response

 

Greg Knight

 

Claimed £2,600 in expenses for repair work on the driveway at his designated second home.

 

Awaiting response

 

David Ruffley

 

Claimed for new furniture and fittings after “flipping” his second home from London to a new flat in his constituency.

 

Awaiting response

 

Maria Eagle

 

Claimed thousands of pounds on refurbishing a bathroom at one of her flats just months before switching her designated second home to a property with a higher mortgage

 

Awaiting response

 

Joan Ryan

 

Spent thousands of pounds on repairs and decorations at her constituency home before switching her designated second home to a London property.

 

Awaiting response

 

Ben Chapman

 

Over-claimed for interest on the mortgage of his London house by about £15,000 with the approval of the fees office, reports claim.

 

Awaiting response

 

George Mudie

 

Claimed almost £17,000 for furniture and renovations, including a dining room set he had delivered to his constituency home before claiming it on expenses for his designated second home in London.

 

Awaiting response

 

Ruth Kelly

 

Claimed more than £31,000 to redecorate and furnish her designated second home in the past five years

 

Awaiting response

 

Robert Syms

 

Claimed more than £2,000 worth of furniture on expenses for his designated second home in London, but had it all delivered to his parents’ address in Wiltshire

 

Awaiting response

 

Madeleine Moon

 

Switched the address of her second home, allowing her to claim £22,500 to fix a dry rot problem. Plus £4,000 in legal fees.

 

Awaiting response

 

Sir Michael Spicer

 

Claimed for work on his helipad and received thousands of pounds for gardening bills.

 

Awaiting response

 

Sir Alan Haselhurst

 

Charged the taxpayer almost £12,000 for gardening bills at his farmhouse in Essex, his expenses claims show.

 

Awaiting response

 

Ian Davidson

 

Paid a family friend £5,500 to renovate his London flat and took him on two shooting trips, reports claimed. The MP for Glasgow South West also had reclining furniture worth £1,459 delivered to his constituency home.

 

Awaiting response

 

Claire Ward

 

Claimed up to £1,150 in petty cash over eight months on her second home allowance, of which £850 was paid out by the Fees Office. Also switched her second home to a flat a few minutes walk from her old property and more than doubled her mortgage interest payments.

 

Awaiting response

 

Ian Austin

 

The Dudley North MP split the stamp duty on the purchase of a flat in Waterloo in March 2006 into two claims - £6,770 and £1,344.

 

Awaiting response

 

Stephen McCabe

 

Mr McCabe over-claimed on his mortgage by £4,059, it was claimed. The money was deducted from the Birmingham Hall Green MP's subsequent second home expense claims.

 

Awaiting response

 

Dawn Butler

 

The government whip claimed thousands of pounds on renovating her second home in north London even though her main home is just 15 miles away in east London, it was reported.

 

"An independent review body has been established to look at all MPs allowances and I will comply with the findings of that body.

 

"For the record, I did not claim for a Jacuzzi as alleged by the Telegraph, this appeared on a list of works carried out to my bathroom however I specifically did not claim for that item or receive any payment and the records show this.

 

"I stopped claiming Additional Cost Allowance (ACA), sometimes referred to as 'second home allowance' in 2008. As stated above I will comply with any findings of the independent review body."

 

Patrick McLoughlin

 

Conservative Chief Whip was said to have claimed £3,000 for the fitting of new windows at his second home - a detached country house in Derbyshire.

 

Awaiting response

 

Nick Brown

 

The Government Chief Whip submitted £18,800 in unreceipted claims for food over a period of four years, it was reported.

 

Awaiting response

 

Tommy McAvoy

 

The Deputy Chief Whip and Labour MP for Rutherglen and Hamilton West spent £86,565 in second home expenses on his Westminster flat between 2004 and 2008.

 

Awaiting response

 

John Gummer

 

Gardening, including the removal of moles from his lawn, cost the taxpayer £9,000

 

Awaiting response

 

Stephen Crabb

 

Claimed his “main home” was a room in another MP’s flat, after buying a new house for his family at taxpayers’ expense

 

Awaiting response

 

Alan Reid

 

Claimed more than £1,500 on his parliamentary expenses for staying in hotels and bed-and-breakfasts near his home

 

Awaiting response

 

John Austin

 

The Labour MP claimed more than £10,000 for the redecoration of his London flat - which was just 11 miles from his main home - before selling for a profit, it was reported. Mr Austin, MP for Erith and Thamesmead, made £30,000 when he sold the flat in Southwark, south London, in 2006, according to the newspaper.

 

"The answer to a and b is "no" but I believe all my claims have been inaccordance with both the rules and guidance AND the spirit of those rules.

 

"I have argued for more than ten years that allowances and remunertaion of MPs should be done by an independent body and that MPs should not vote on parliamentary allowances.

 

"In that respect, I welcome the PM's announcement. I am willing to submit all my claims and expenditure to the independent body that is being set up or other interim review body that the Labour Party may establish."

 

Lord Mandelson

 

Faced questions over the timing of his house claim which came after he had announced he would step down

 

"The claims submitted by Peter Mandelson were for essential maintenance. All were reasonable and fully consistent with Parliamentary rules."

 

Caroline Flint

 

Claimed £14,000 for fees for new flat

 

“All my claims have been agreed with the fees office and I am confident they were all within the rules but we now all accept that the rules are wrong. So I am going through my claims with a fine tooth comb and I if I find that I have claimed for anything that in hindsight appears to be unjustifiable, or fails the test of appearing to be beyond reproach, then I will pay the money back. In addition, as the Prime Minister has said, all receipts will be independently scrutinised and in the future claims for fittings, furniture and household goods will not be allowed. “

 

Vera Baird

 

Claimed the cost of Christmas tree decorations

 

“Vera Baird MP does not participate in surveys of this kind.”

 

Ian Lucas

 

The assistant Labour whip claimed around £1,000 a month in mortgage interest payments on a London flat - and sold it for a £45,000 profit, billing taxpayers for £6,000 in sale fees.

 

Mr Lucas has asked me to respond – in short, the answers to your questions are (1) No; (2); No and (3) No.

 

Barry Gardiner

 

Bought a flat in Pimlico for £246,500 in 2003 and spent more than £11,000 renovating it – and claiming mortgage interest – before selling it for £445,000 in 2007.

 

"In response to your three questions:

No

No

No

Yours sincerely

Barry Gardiner

Member of Parliament for Brent North"

 

David Maclean

 

Spent thousands of pounds of taxpayers’ money renovating a farmhouse before selling it for £750,000.

 

a) No.

b) No, because I stopped voluntarily in July last year. I did not claim a penny in furniture, fittings and white goods since 31st March 2008. I saved almost £30,000 last year.

c) No, but this will be up to David Cameroon’s Scrutiny Committee. Because of the Telegraph's misreporting of my position I am preparing detailed files for that team and will abide by their decision.

 

Sir Nicholas and Ann Winterton

 

Claimed more than £80,000 for a London flat owned by a trust controlled by their children.

 

Ann Winterton: "I have used the allowance legitimately and do not envisage having to pay any back."

 

Sir Nicholas: "No, no and no."

 

James Gray

 

The MP for North Wiltshire claimed £2,000 for future decorations to his second home on the day his lease on the property ended. Also claimed £5,000 to cover the cost of moving into a property nearby with his new partner.

Thank you for your email. (a) No, (b) NO © No.

 

John Redwood

 

Admitted being paid twice after submitting an identical £3,000 decorating bill on his second home allowance

 

"The answer is No to all three"

 

Paul Murphy

 

Had a new plumbing system installed at taxpayers’ expense because the water in the old one was “too hot”.

“In response to your email, the Committee on Members' Allowances has been asked to make urgent proposals to reassess all claims made. Mr Murphy will, of course, abide by any proposals that they make.”

 

Geoff Hoon

 

Claimed taxpayer-funded expenses for at least two properties

 

Spokesman said answer to all the questions was 'no'. Wanted to make clear he wasn't liable for capital gains tax on house.

 

Phil Willis

 

The Lib-Dem MP spent around £15,000 of taxpayers' money on mortgage interest payments and refurbishing a flat in which his daughter now lives, according to reports.

 

The answer to all three questions is ‘no’ from Phil.

 

David Clelland

 

Claimed for the cost of “buying out” his partner’s £45,000 stake in his London flat

 

a) no

b) no

c) don't know, it will be a matter for the scrutiny committee, but not expecting anything

 

Kitty Ussher

 

Asked the Commons authorities to fund extensive refurbishment of her Victorian family home.

 

"Kitty has always made clear that the public needs to have confidence in the democratic process. She fully supports the Committee on Standards in Public Life's review into creating a better system for MPs expenses that the Prime Minister has asked for and believes it is right that MPs expenses' claims should be published.

 

"All her claims were in line with the relevant House of Commons rules and guidance and have been approved by the Fees Office."

 

David Davis

 

Spent more than £10,000 of taxpayers’ money on home improvements in four years, including a new £5,700 portico at his home in Yorkshire.

 

“David’s expenses will be considered by the Review Panel announced by David Cameron on Tuesday.

 

“In addition, the whole party has agreed to no longer claim for furniture, other household goods and daily subsistence allowance.”

 

John Maples

 

Declared a private members’ club as his main home to the parliamentary authorities

 

"I have said that I believe that I have done nothing wrong, but also that I have asked the Scrutiny Panel set up by David Cameron to look into my claim. If they decide that, despite the Fees Office approval, I should not have claimed ACA for that period, then I will refund it."

 

Nick Harvey

 

Had to be reminded twice by parliamentary officials to submit receipts with his expenses claims.

 

"The answer is no to all three."

 

Alex Salmond & Angus Robertson

 

Claimed £400 per month for food when the Commons was not even sitting. Robertson successfully appealed to the fees office when they turned down his claim for a £400 home cinema system

 

"We welcome the establishment of an independent group to scrutinise all MPs expenses over the past four years, and if that group find anything untoward with specific claims, even if it was within the rules, it will be paid back.

 

"In the meantime, SNP MPs are responding to the Westminster mess by proactively publishing our expenses for 2008-09 – the year after the Daily Telegraph have information for – and thereafter publishing on a quarterly basis, exactly like the Scottish Parliament system."

 

I wonder if channel 4 ever did get a response from all those that hadn't replied................I'd of thought they'd of been more than eager to clear their names? ;-)

[Guest 1footinthegrave]

I'll save francisgraham the trouble of responding, "they were acting within the rules". Although not a shred of moral fibre amongst them even if they were, how they must collectively laugh at us the bottom feeders, especially with the likes of francisgraham to defend them.

 

;-) ;-)

[francisgraham]

1footinthegrave - 2012-04-18 10:58 AMI'll save francisgraham the trouble of responding, "they were acting within the rules". Although not a shred of moral fibre amongst them even if they were, how they must collectively laugh at us the bottom feeders, especially with the likes of francisgraham to defend them. ;-) ;-)

Congratulations, you're finally understanding. They were acting within the then rules. There was a culture where new MPs were actually encouraged to claim expenses 'within the rules'. "Listen old chap, the pay as we know isn't too good, but the expenses are very generous".

Then of course the DT highlighted the situation and, all of a sudden, MPs were told that the claim that was considered perfectly acceptable last year, no longer is.

How many MPs actually acted illegally? You can count them on the figures of your hands and that's from over 1400 (including the Lords).

One thing that you can guarantee, is that if it had been the general public or members of the motorhoming community who seem obsessed with saving or not spending money, it would have been a lot higher!

But once more, you show your incredibly rabid bias, when you talk about people who simply used the system in the way that they believed it was intended to be used, as not having 'a shred of moral fibre'. Good man, have you any idea what you sound like?

Yes, some took the mick, yes, a very small number actually broke the law, and went to prison and ruined their lives.

But on this list we have Cheryl Gillan who submitted a receipt for allowable expenses but it turned out that she hadn't removed £4.47 for a tin of dog food. Horrible woman, totally lacking in moral fibre!

What was wrong was the system and it's now been changed. But do you really believe that you and the other members of this forum would have behaved any differently when given the same nod and a wink?

I remember the old cowboy films where someone was thought guilty, and a lynch mob of brainless and unthinking rednecks form a gang to string him up, based on nothing more than their own prejudices. People whose hatred of almost everything colours their actions and makes them behave irrationally and without examining the situation clearly and fairly.

This forum could provide a few superb lynch mobs!

Anyway, when are you going to produce that list of MPs who have never done a day's work in their life? Or is that just another bit of your lynch mob unsubstantiated bile against a group of people for whom you seem to have developed a most unhealthy dislike.

What about the over 300 MPs who, despite the culture, didn't claim one penny too much? Are they too lacking in moral fibre, or do you conveniently forget them? But of course, I forget, they're members of the 'political class' now, so are lower than a paedophile.

I think that what some did was wrong but, unlike you, I haven't jumped up and formed a lynch mob. I know some MPs and your description of them could not be further from the truth. Why must you blanket everyone with the same vile epithets? Every MP is a thief, no MPs have ever done a day's work, they're only in it for what they can get.

Don't you realise how such statements simply show you to be a simplistic hate-monger who hasn't really given the subject any thought that's deeper than the gut reactions that you continually spew?

I mean, Britain is crap because our motorways are crowded and you can no longer drive to London without a traffic jam occasionally. The mind boggles!

Don't forget that list by the way.

 

[francisgraham]

I find myself continually puzzled by the theory, regularly promulgated on this forum, that being a 'career' politician, is somehow A Bad Thing.

If I have an operation, I want a career surgeon, if I need financial advice I'd prefer a career financial advisor.

Now being an MP is very demanding and needs special skills, learned over years. They burrow away in the background on committees, where they write legislation, most of which is designed to make us more safe, more healthy and better off.

They have to help constituents with often complex problems and have to know how to obtain the best for them.

Why is it then that, unlike a surgeon or a financial advisor, it is wrong for them to acquire these skills over some years and to allow experience to make them even more effective in their jobs?

Are we really suggesting that, every four years, we parachute in a whole new bunch who have absolutely idea how the Commons works, have absolutely no idea of the legislative process and even less idea on how to best serve their constituents?

Ah, but you all say, they've no experience of ordinary people. Really?You should look at the mix and backgrounds of MPs before making such ludicrous statements. What does Dennis Skinner know about the problems of the middle classes? What does George Osborne know of the problems of poor families?

Do you really think that, before someone can understand another's situation, that they must have experienced it themselves? I've never been starving, but I can understand what being starving must be like. I've never had to live on the dole, but I can understand what it must be like. 

So, what is wrong with having 'career politicians' bearing in mind that, before they became MPs, they actually had, and still have, careers that cover almost every aspect of life? 

[Guest pelmetman]

Steady on Francis 8-).....................or you'll have me feeling sorry for our politicians (lol) (lol)

 

That's the mistake our local tea leaves make;-)...................they don't write the rules to make their thieving legal *-)

[Guest 1footinthegrave]

Take just one at random, Ed Miliband....................................plenty of life experience here

 

After a brief career in television journalism, Miliband became a speechwriter and researcher for Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury Harriet Harman in 1993, blah blah blah

 

Sure he'd know what it's like to live on the dole, like most of them, talk about head in the sand mentality.

 

I'm sure your view is set in stone,but I think we would benefit with remembering a saying I once read.

 

"Just expressing the view you want to get into politics should be the very thing to disbar you ever doing so"

 

And trust me when you say" I've never had to live on the dole, but I can understand what it must be like" NO YOU CAN'T, any more than I can understand what being posted to that s**t hole Afghanistan as a young soldier must be like, by these brain dead morons, perhaps if one of their sons came back in a body bag they might just get it, no chance of that though, they'll all be at uni studying politics no doubt..

[pepe63xnotuse]

francisgraham - 2012-04-18 12:00 PM

 

...Do you really think that, before someone can understand another's situation, that they must have experienced it themselves?....

 

To some degree Yes,FG....

...there is no way on this earth that anyone will convince me that the likes of Osbourne/Camerons etc,will know what's it's like to have lost their job and awake each morning feeling sick in the pits of their guts... and dreading the postman calling,in case THIS is the morning that he brings that final reminder...!

 

Mind you,I have no idea what it would be like to be the heir to a multimillion pound family fortune either...so I supose we could say it's "swings and roundabouts" eh!?

 

Oops! sorry,I've just realised that I've pretty much just echoed your sentiments 1foot'... ;-)

[francisgraham]

1footinthegrave - 2012-04-18 12:18 PMTake just one at random, Ed Miliband....................................plenty of life experience hereAfter a brief career in television journalism, Miliband became a speechwriter and researcher for Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury Harriet Harman in 1993, blah blah blahSure he'd know what it's like to live on the dole, like most of them, talk about head in the sand mentality.I'm sure your view is set in stone,but I think we would benefit with remembering a saying I once read."Just expressing the view you want to get into politics should be the very thing to disbar you ever doing so"And trust me when you say" I've never had to live on the dole, but I can understand what it must be like" NO YOU CAN'T, any more than I can understand what being posted to that s**t hole Afghanistan as a young soldier must be like, by these brain dead morons, perhaps if one of their sons came back in a body bag they might just get it, no chance of that though, they'll all be at uni studying politics no doubt..

Now I understand, so the only people who can make a decision on whether or not this country should go to war are those with sons in the army. The only people who can vote on measures dealing with poverty, are those who have lived in poverty. Very intelligent!

Do you have any idea how you come across on here?

MPs who have never done a day's work in their lives. I'm still waiting for the list by the way.

Brain dead morons (that's rich!).

Your hatred is so embedded that you seem incapable of reasoned debate on this subject.

And well done, you've found Ed Milliband who, being a 'brain dead moron' got a Bachelor's from Oxford in PPE and went on to a Masters in Economics from the LSE. After a short career in journalism he became, as you say, a speech writer for Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury and the Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer.

In 2002 he took a one-year sabbatical to lecture at the Centre for European Studies at Harvard University, one of the finest in the U.S.

Millibrand was, by the way, the son of Polish Jewish immigrants who survived the Holocaust and came to this country, a country famed for its tolerance and its welcome to the oppressed, a policy that you appear to deplore. If people of your opinion had been in power then they'd have perished in the gas chambers and we would have allowed Hitler to trample all over Europe rather than go to war.

But once more, I am puzzled as to how you would consider Ed Millibrand's background as unsuitable to be a politician? I would have have thought that he was ideal material?

But of course, he can't possible be a good MP, because he hasn't had to starve, or ever been on the dole. Actually, he appears to have worked very hard, so I don't suppose he'll be on the list of MPs who've never done a day's work in their life that I know you're currently working on to prove your allegation! I won't hold my breath!

Now to sum up. Yes, some MPs behaved disgracefully, a small number broke the law, but not all. Your views which tar them all as thieves, as 'brain dead morons' as people who've never done a day's work in their lives, simply make you look very bitter and rather silly!

Just for once try to remember how your life has changed. Here you are, a normal working man possibly, and you have a motorhome in which you can travel the world if you want to! But no, every morning you wake up hating your country, our government and everything else it would seem.

Just for once be grateful that you live in a western democracy and not Cuba or Sierra Leone, where life expectancy is about forty years (Sierra Leone that is, not Cuba).

In truth, even your user name, 1footinthegrave, gives away your pessimistic outlook on life. It suggests: I'm on my way out, not long to live. Why not try changing it to 'I'm still alive and enjoying life to the full!'

Every day I give thanks for my life and for the freedom that I enjoy, the standard of living that I have and, most of all, for the fact that I am likely to live 20 years longer than my grandparents did.

For God's sake man, cheer up and stop this incessant bleating and whinging!

[RogerC]

Looking through this thread I feel that something I have been unhappy with for a long time might just go a little way to explaining the ongoing 'spat' about 'career politicians'.

 

Many moons ago politicians were (in the main) upstanding members of their community hence they had a grasp of the trials, tribulations and concerns of their electorate.  Unfortunately the trend of 'parachuting in'  individuals of party choice to 'safe seats' has badly distorted the balance in Westminster away from those 'local' candidates to parachuted in 'career politicians'.  Instead of having members with intimate knowledge of their constituency and having the political nous we now have 'party hacks' who it must be assumed will toe the party line even if it goes against the interests of those that elected them.  Ergo the feeling grows amongst the general public that 'career politicians' have no idea of the issues facing them.  This engenders a feeling of disaffection with politics and therefore the feeling that politicians are purely 'self/party interested' will continue to grow.

 

[francisgraham]

pepe63 - 2012-04-18 1:02 PM

francisgraham - 2012-04-18 12:00 PM...Do you really think that, before someone can understand another's situation, that they must have experienced it themselves?....

To some degree Yes,FG.......there is no way on this earth that anyone will convince me that the likes of Osbourne/Camerons etc,will know what's it's like to have lost their job and awake each morning feeling sick in the pits of their guts... and dreading the postman calling,in case THIS is the morning that he brings that final reminder...! Mind you,I have no idea what it would be like to be the heir to a multimillion pound family fortune either...so I supose we could say it's "swings and roundabouts" eh!?Oops! sorry,I've just realised that I've pretty much just echoed your sentiments 1foot'... ;-)

Yes, but they're a small number from the total. In the same vein, can you imagine what it must be like to wake up wondering if you'll still be alive later in the day, as you're starving. Possibly not, but does it mean that you can't understand what starving people need to to save them?

But what's your answer? No one can be an MP if he's successful and wealthy? But what about those who are not pensioners? Should we only allow MPs who are pensioners to vote on measure concerning OAPs?

Should MPs from the working classes not be allowed to vote on measures concerning high earners and successful companies?

I've never been out of work, but the fact that I haven't doesn't mean that I can't understand what it must be like. I've never had acid thrown in my face, but I can imagine the horror!

All this talk of millionaires who can't relate to ordinary people is so much hokum. Laws are promulgated by MPs from all walks of life, advised by experts and civil servants and yes, they don't always get it right but, if they're all so detached from reality, how do you explain all the improvements in the lives of ordinary people owing to laws that they have passed?

There's a mystery!

[francisgraham]

RogerC - 2012-04-18 1:19 PMLooking through this thread I feel that something I have been unhappy with for a long time might just go a little way to explaining the ongoing 'spat' about 'career politicians'.

 

Many moons ago politicians were (in the main) upstanding members of their community hence they had a grasp of the trials, tribulations and concerns of their electorate.  

I'm sorry, but that's rose-tinted wishful thinking. Winston Churchill was the MP for Oldham. On the other side of the house, Clement Atlee was MP for Stepney, one of the poorest boroughs in London. He was raised the son of a solicitor in leafy Purley.

Yes, there were many people who were local selected but not always.

Both these men by the way had distinguished war careers before entering parliament.

But what does it matter? Constituencies deserve the best person for the job, not someone who's selected just because he grew up locally. And as for toeing the party line, well of course they should.

If they have been elected using the weight of the party and agreeing to its manifesto, then it isn't unreasonable that they are expected to support the party. If they later find themselves opposed to their own party's policies then they should do the honourable thing and resign and stand as an independent.

But all this bleating about our terrible MPs still doesn't explain why, over the last half a century, they have constantly delivered a better, healthier and wealthier life for the all of us. Even those on the dole live a better life than their grandparents!

[RogerC]

francisgraham - 2012-04-18 1:24 PM

pepe63 - 2012-04-18 1:02 PM

francisgraham - 2012-04-18 12:00 PM...Do you really think that, before someone can understand another's situation, that they must have experienced it themselves?....

To some degree Yes,FG.......there is no way on this earth that anyone will convince me that the likes of Osbourne/Camerons etc,will know what's it's like to have lost their job and awake each morning feeling sick in the pits of their guts... and dreading the postman calling,in case THIS is the morning that he brings that final reminder...! Mind you,I have no idea what it would be like to be the heir to a multimillion pound family fortune either...so I supose we could say it's "swings and roundabouts" eh!?Oops! sorry,I've just realised that I've pretty much just echoed your sentiments 1foot'... ;-)

Yes, but they're a small number from the total. In the same vein, can you imagine what it must be like to wake up wondering if you'll still be alive later in the day, as you're starving. Possibly not, but does it mean that you can't understand what starving people need to to save them?

 

Yes it does.....a bad analogy I'm afraid.  Having seen first hand the effects of famine in Ethiopia you do not the faintest idea of what someone who is starving to death needs to aid recovery and to possibly survive.

 

[RogerC]

francisgraham - 2012-04-18 1:38 PM

RogerC - 2012-04-18 1:19 PMLooking through this thread I feel that something I have been unhappy with for a long time might just go a little way to explaining the ongoing 'spat' about 'career politicians'.

 

Many moons ago politicians were (in the main) upstanding members of their community hence they had a grasp of the trials, tribulations and concerns of their electorate.  

I'm sorry, but that's rose-tinted wishful thinking. Winston Churchill was the MP for Oldham. On the other side of the house, Clement Atlee was MP for Stepney, one of the poorest boroughs in London. He was raised the son of a solicitor in leafy Purley.

Yes, there were many people who were local selected but not always.

Both these men by the way had distinguished war careers before entering parliament.

But what does it matter? Constituencies deserve the best person for the job, not someone who's selected just because he grew up locally. And as for toeing the party line, well of course they should.

If they have been elected using the weight of the party and agreeing to its manifesto, then it isn't unreasonable that they are expected to support the party. If they later find themselves opposed to their own party's policies then they should do the honourable thing and resign and stand as an independent.

But all this bleating about our terrible MPs still doesn't explain why, over the last half a century, they have constantly delivered a better, healthier and wealthier life for the all of us. Even those on the dole live a better life than their grandparents!

 

I am fully aware of the histories of the two 'Honorable' members you mention.......both of them could be called 'Statesmen' unlike the recent and current crop of 'opportunists'.

 

By the time Churchill entered politics he had travelled the world and seen war, destruction, famine and deprivation.

 

He was educated at Harrow and the Royal Military College at Sandhurst, and was sent to India with a http://www.winstonchurchill.org/images/learn/6a00d83451586c69e20111690044a1970c-800wi.jpgcavalry commission in 1895. He won early fame as a war correspondent, covering the Cuban revolt against Spain (1895), and British campaigns in the Northwest Frontier of India (1897), the Sudan (1898) and South Africa during the Boer War (1899). Churchill had authored five books by the age of 26. His daring escape from a Boer prison camp in 1899 made him a national hero and ushered him into the House of Commons, where his career spanned 60 years.

 

I think you will agree that  by the time he entered politics Churchill had packed more 'life experiences' into those few years than any of the current pack of 'career politicians'.

 

In all honesty I can not come close to comparing the 'statesman like' conduct to the photo opportunist power hungry politicians we have today.

 

Cameron, in response to the furore over the 'pasty tax' goes public claiming he eats pasties regularly and bought one from an outlet on Leeds station......when it had been shut for a number of years prior to the date he claimed.

 

Opportunism has no place in politics....integrity and honesty will regain public confidence...not cheap photo opportunities.

 

In addition 'parachuting in' the 'favoured' will do nothing to regain public approval.....I for one would never vote for such a candidate because it would give tacit approval to the practice which I abhor.

 

As for advances in living standards I agree politicians had something to do with it but in the main it was industry and technology that brought these things into being.....not politicians.

 

 

[francisgraham]

As for advances in living standards I agree politicians had something to do with it but in the main it was industry and technology that brought these things into being.....not politicians.

 

Ah, but it is the political framework within which industry is allowed to flourish that is the root of its success. South and North Korea are two examples.

And of course industry did not voluntarily stop discharging its filth into our rivers and atmosphere. Industry did not voluntarily give workers protection against unfair dismissal and longer holidays and sick pay. Industry did not voluntarily make its workplaces safer with good working conditions.  That was those awful politicians who forced it on them. And of course parliament has done many of these things against the wishes of big business, which many here would say have MPs in their pockets!

I really do not believe that every politician is a paragon of virtue. Many behaved badly and those that broke the law suffered as a result.

What I object to is the lynch mob mentality that brands them all as thieves, as 'brain dead morons' and as opportunists who are just in it for themselves, or as people who have never done an honest day's work in their lives!

Many of them are less well off by being an MP and, in my experience, the vast majority are in politics because they feel strongly about whatever issues colour their political views.

Regrettably, there are one or two on this forum whose views are just risible and actually laughable, so extreme and so silly as to render any sensible debate pointless. (And I'm not including you in this list.)

[Guest pelmetman]

francisgraham - 2012-04-18 2:32 PM

>What I object to is the lynch mob mentality that brands them all as thieves, as 'brain dead morons' and as opportunists who are just in it for themselves, or as people who have never done an honest day's work in their lives!

 

There goes your gang of three political parties future problem Francis..................as due to demographics it will soon be the 50 + lynch mob that will have their say on who rules, as the young aren't interested unless of course they plan to be a career politician ;-)................and based on their recent performance I expect the gang of 3 to get less and less share of the vote.................which I expect will make little difference overall as we are run by Brussels anyway *-).......................mind you it'll give someone else the chance to stick their snouts in the taxpayers trough for a while ;-)

[francisgraham]

RogerC - 2012-04-18 1:55 PM

Possibly not, but does it mean that you can't understand what starving people need to to save them?

Yes it does.....a bad analogy I'm afraid.  Having seen first hand the effects of famine in Ethiopia you do not the faintest idea of what someone who is starving to death needs to aid recovery and to possibly survive.

That's a pretty fallacious argument I'm afraid. To rehash, I said: I've never been starving but it doesn't mean that I can't understand what starving people need to save them.

You told me that it's a poor analogy because I've probably never seen starving people and have no idea what they need.

But I do know what they would need. They would first of all need relief and, if it was in my power, I would first engage the experts who would know exactly what is required. I presume that it would be the major relief agencies but again, I would take advice from those who know.

My job as a politician isn't to know everything about everything. My job is to know whom to employ and whose expertise to use. 

You may as well say that, as I'm not a highways engineer, I shouldn't be allowed to make a decision on whether or not we build a new motorway. My job would be to assess the expert opinion and make the final decision.

It really is hokum to suggest that, if someone hasn't been starving themselves, or seen it first hand, that they are not qualified to make informed decisions about how to help. Perhaps if you've never had an operation, you cannot make decisions that affect the NHS?

[Guest pelmetman]

francisgraham - 2012-04-18 3:27 PM

My job as a politician isn't to know everything about everything. My job is to know whom to employ and whose expertise to use. .

 

You mean you'd get clever people into run the banks like this lot :D

 

The International Monetary Fund (IMF (Berlin: MXG1.BE - news) ) has raised the prospect of a second credit crunch worldwide as European banks slash their balance sheets in the face of the euro crisis.

The Washington-based organisation said it expected the world's biggest banks to slash their size by $2.6 trillion (£1.6 trillion) by the end of next year.

That represents a 7% squeeze in the size of their combined balance sheets.

It will mean businesses in Britain and throughout Europe (Chicago Options: ^REURUSD - news) are likely to face even more trouble borrowing from banks.

The IMF said it expected a quarter of this balance-sheet crunch to come in the form of lower bank lending, with the rest involving selling off assets and securities.

It said the squeeze was already well underway, with banks having reduced their balance sheets by $580bn in the final quarter of last year.

The IMF also said "there is a risk that a large-scale reduction in assets by European banks could lead to a credit crunch" of the kind seen in the early stages of the credit crisis in 2008/09.

In this scenario, it said, banks could shed $3.8 trillion, or 10%, of their total assets and world economic growth would be 1.4% lower than it forecast in its World Economic Outlook report earlier this week.

The warning will cause concern in the UK, where small and medium sized businesses are still struggling to raise cash, which in turn has caused many to lay off staff.

The IMF said that although euro area nations such as Spain and Italy would be most affected by the squeeze, Britain would suffer a near 1% fall in bank credit even on the basis of its conservative forecast.

It said: "Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are likely to be most affected.

"Even where credit is maintained, corporate borrowers could face elevated borrowing costs."

The warning came in the Global Financial Stability Report, published at the IMF's Spring summit in Washington DC.

IMF financial stability chief Jose Vinals said: "So far current policies have prevented a generalized 'credit crunch', but we still anticipate a considerable squeeze on credit which will impede growth."

He said that the European Central Bank's emergency LTRO lending scheme had helped soothe euro financial markets, but said it was too early to assume the crisis had been averted.

[Guest 1footinthegrave]

francisgraham - 2012-04-18 2:32 PM

As for advances in living standards I agree politicians had something to do with it but in the main it was industry and technology that brought these things into being.....not politicians.

 

Ah, but it is the political framework within which industry is allowed to flourish that is the root of its success. South and North Korea are two examples.

And of course industry did not voluntarily stop discharging its filth into our rivers and atmosphere. Industry did not voluntarily give workers protection against unfair dismissal and longer holidays and sick pay. Industry did not voluntarily make its workplaces safer with good working conditions.  That was those awful politicians who forced it on them. And of course parliament has done many of these things against the wishes of big business, which many here would say have MPs in their pockets!

I really do not believe that every politician is a paragon of virtue. Many behaved badly and those that broke the law suffered as a result.

What I object to is the lynch mob mentality that brands them all as thieves, as 'brain dead morons' and as opportunists who are just in it for themselves, or as people who have never done an honest day's work in their lives!

Many of them are less well off by being an MP and, in my experience, the vast majority are in politics because they feel strongly about whatever issues colour their political views.

Regrettably, there are one or two on this forum whose views are just risible and actually laughable, so extreme and so silly as to render any sensible debate pointless. (And I'm not including you in this list.)

I'm quite happy that by implication you include me, to be fair you illustrate perfectly the puffed up self important pompous attitude of so many politicians ( perhaps your are one, you seem to have the perfect disposition ), who are grand masters of never giving a straight answer to a straight question. Your idea of "debate" is to agree with you and your view point, or verbally beat up those like me that don't. Anyway must pop out and get a hot Pasty before they go up again, there that'll have you laughing again ;-)

[francisgraham]

1footinthegrave - 2012-04-18 3:36 PMI'm quite happy that by implication you include me, to be fair you illustrate perfectly the puffed up self important pompous attitude of so many politicians ( perhaps your are one, you seem to have the perfect disposition ), who are grand masters of never giving a straight answer to a straight question. Your idea of "debate" is to agree with you and your view point, or verbally beat up those like me that don't. Anyway must pop out and get a hot Pasty before they go up again, there that'll have you laughing again ;-)

Biggest laugh today actually! I debate, you just spout slogans about 'brain dead politicians' who've never done a day's work in their lives!

As for verbally beat up, what does that mean? That I highlight the vapidity of your arguments and the chip that you have on each shoulder?

When are you going to give me the list of those MPs who have never, to quote you, done a day's work in their lives?

The truth is you won't give any evidence to back up your wild allegations, because there isn't any. You actually reduce any sensible debate on this subject to the level of playground name-calling but with a very nasty edge to it.

And now that you have been shown for what you are, you resort to a personal attack on me for verbally beating you up. For God's sake man, grow up and defend your wild statements or stop making them.

I really do not think that I've come across anyone so brimming with such an irrational and uninformed hatred, although there's one or two come close!

[RogerC]

francisgraham - 2012-04-18 3:27 PM

RogerC - 2012-04-18 1:55 PM

Possibly not, but does it mean that you can't understand what starving people need to to save them?

Yes it does.....a bad analogy I'm afraid.  Having seen first hand the effects of famine in Ethiopia you do not the faintest idea of what someone who is starving to death needs to aid recovery and to possibly survive.

That's a pretty fallacious argument I'm afraid. To rehash, I said: I've never been starving but it doesn't mean that I can't understand what starving people need to save them.

You told me that it's a poor analogy because I've probably never seen starving people and have no idea what they need.

But I do know what they would need. They would first of all need relief and, if it was in my power, I would first engage the experts who would know exactly what is required. I presume that it would be the major relief agencies but again, I would take advice from those who know.

My job as a politician isn't to know everything about everything. My job is to know whom to employ and whose expertise to use. 

You may as well say that, as I'm not a highways engineer, I shouldn't be allowed to make a decision on whether or not we build a new motorway. My job would be to assess the expert opinion and make the final decision.

It really is hokum to suggest that, if someone hasn't been starving themselves, or seen it first hand, that they are not qualified to make informed decisions about how to help. Perhaps if you've never had an operation, you cannot make decisions that affect the NHS?

 

The above in red......But I do know what they would need just reinforces my comments...you do not know what they need.  Your comment regarding bringing in 'experts' merely reinforces the argument that knowledge of the topic is not necessary in the modern world.  This obfuscation of the intent of the words is indicative of modern 'politic speak'.  You said 'But I do know what they would need' by which you actually mean 'I have no idea of what is required personally but  I will ask someone who does'.  Unfortunately there are too many people in politics with this mentality who, whilst being the 'big man' rely on the expertise of others to 'gild their lily'.  In my walk of life these people were regarded as wastrels......living on the efforts and knowledge of others industry and intellect.

 

If you had said 'the experts would know what is needed' that would be a different matter but to claim, as you did that you know what is needed is obviously untrue.  Fortunately, unless you are in a position of 'power' your obfuscation is irrelevant.  However when those in 'office' use this tactic to reinforce their own standing and the 'pollsters count' it is disingenuous, misleading and morally reprehensible.  Honesty and morality amongst our political elite is what is needed not politic speak, double speak and platitudes.

 

[Guest 1footinthegrave]

francisgraham - 2012-04-18 3:50 PM

1footinthegrave - 2012-04-18 3:36 PMI'm quite happy that by implication you include me, to be fair you illustrate perfectly the puffed up self important pompous attitude of so many politicians ( perhaps your are one, you seem to have the perfect disposition ), who are grand masters of never giving a straight answer to a straight question. Your idea of "debate" is to agree with you and your view point, or verbally beat up those like me that don't. Anyway must pop out and get a hot Pasty before they go up again, there that'll have you laughing again ;-)

Biggest laugh today actually! I debate, you just spout slogans I really do not think that I've come across anyone so brimming with such an irrational and uninformed hatred, although there's one or two come close!

How odd that most political parties spout slogans, "we're all in it together comes to mind" or "the big society" or"we'll get Britain working", the very thing you accuse me of. As for not coming across someone brimming with irrational and uninformed hatred, you know nothing about me, other than my dislike of Politics, and to stoop to your level of insult, you obviously don't glance in a mirror very often.And how I agree with the previous commentHonesty and morality amongst our political elite is what is needed not politic speak, double speak and platitudes, I wouldn't hold your breath that we will get that anytime soon though ;-)

[francisgraham]

RogerC - 2012-04-18 3:55 PM  

 

The above in red......But I do know what they would need just reinforces my comments...you do not know what they need.  Your comment regarding bringing in 'experts' merely reinforces the argument that knowledge of the topic is not necessary in the modern world.  This obfuscation of the intent of the words is indicative of modern 'politic speak'.  You said 'But I do know what they would need' by which you actually mean 'I have no idea of what is required personally but  I will ask someone who does'.  Unfortunately there are too many people in politics with this mentality who, whilst being the 'big man' rely on the expertise of others to 'gild their lily'.  In my walk of life these people were regarded as wastrels......living on the efforts and knowledge of others industry and intellect.

 

If you had said 'the experts would know what is needed' that would be a different matter but to claim, as you did that you know what is needed is obviously untrue.  Fortunately, unless you are in a position of 'power' your obfuscation is irrelevant.  However when those in 'office' use this tactic to reinforce their own standing and the 'pollsters count' it is disingenuous, misleading and morally reprehensible.  Honesty and morality amongst our political elite is what is needed not politic speak, double speak and platitudes.

You choose to see into my statement that which you wish to see. Are you really suggesting that I would claim to know how to deal with starving people personally? People whose metabolism is awry after weeks of hunger?

If I were a politician I would know how to help starving people and that would be by enlisting the aid of the relevant agencies.

If I came across a building that was on fire I would know how to deal with it! I'd call the fire brigade. 

But are you really suggesting that politicians who rely on expert advice are somehow deficient? If you are I find that a most extraordinary statement. Do you really expect them to be experts in all things in this ever more complex world that we live in?

I would have thought that asking people with specialised knowledge to enable you to better make a decision is exactly what our politicians should do. I would worry more about those who think themselves smart enough not to need advice from others.

I'm sorry that you have chosen to infer that I meant that I personally would know how to help starving people. I clearly would not and I would not have thought it necessary to spell it out in words of one syllable. But I would know how to ensure that they got that help.