Sunday, July 12, 2009

Second Home Allowances for MPs.

Interesting article in today's Mail on Sunday by Brendan Carlin. Headline reads 'Furious MPs vow: We will quit over new expenses blitz.' He reports that some MPs are 'seething with anger' that the head of the Parliamentary Fees Office has demanded confirmation in writing of the following before second home allowances will be paid;

a) The terms of the mortgage agreement.
b)That the payments are for interest only.
c)That the amount claimed is accurate.

What surprises me is that any payment can have been made in the past without these conditions being met. Not only is it right and proper that payments should end if these conditions are not met, but they should never have been made in the first place. I've always argued, without much support from anyone, that there is no difference between helping a politician meet the costs of providing secondary accommodation in London (or Cardiff) via reimbursing rent or mortgage interest. My argument collapses if the above basic conditions are not being enforced. The MoS report suggests that some MPs are contemplating resigning and forcing by-elections over the issue. I did just check it was not the April 1st edition. Sometimes I read stuff that is so preposterous that its just not believable.


Anonymous said...

It seems pretty clear that the British public (who after all should be taken into account) want no truck with even the appearance of personal enrichment 'going on'.

The public believes too many MPs have abused the second home allowance system for the system to survive. If some MPs don't like it, there are plenty of Brits who would love their job and would love to replace them at the polls. So go on yer 'Furious MPs", "quit over new expenses blitz".

If u guys think you should still get second home allowance without submitting basic paperwork - then by all means quit.

And what is wrong with an MP writing 'That the amount claimed is accurate'.

People claiming benefits have to sign that the informatino they give is accurate.

Why should MPs be above mere mortals? It is tax payers money that they are claiming after all.

Glyn Davies said...

Anon - I agree with most of your comment - and even though I see nothing wrong, in priciple, with ownership of a second home as opposed to rental, I accept that abuse of the system may well have made its continuance no longer acceptable.

Anonymous said...

well lets them quit ,there's no shortage of candidates.
Let them see if they can get the same perks in another job.
If they are there just for cash,are they what we want anyway

Alison said...

Did you see the lorry that won first prize in Llanidloes carnival yesterday? Clue: MPs were involved.

Glyn Davies said...

VM - This story is so outrageous that I wonder if its true. I agree that if any politicians are in it for personal financial gain, we are all better off without them.

Alison - No but I can guess.

Anonymous said...

Do tell us what was on the lorry!