|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jan 2, 2019 12:10:09 GMT
The "expenses scandal" was one of the biggest storms in a teacup in recent years. Most of the MPs pilloried were doing no more than following the rules they had been told to follow. A small number were found to be acting illegally. Meanwhile there is constant evidence of people in positions of power in the private sector abusing the system for personal gain. Presumably these are the people so much more able than MPs that Middle englander identifies. Libor, insider dealing, the Shell fiddling of reserves for bonuses, the vast golden goodbyes given to failures. At best we have a culture of legal tax avoidance which is morally dubious. All these things including bribes existed in politics and private enterprise long before the EU, and blaming the EU fir them is just bizarre. But presumably you will join me in criticising Farage for exploiting the EU expenses and pension system as assiduously as anyone else, and at our expense as taxpayers. It was no such thing. It was a quite disgraceful episode where very many MPs showed themselves in their inner basic true colours of craven liars and two-faced manipulators of truth, a system of rules and common decency. All too keen to grandstand on failing to publicly vote to pay themselves a proper and appropriate salary by repeatedly putting back the decision or voting it down or reducing it or any other device to publicly show their asceticism as regards the mere unnecessary feature of cash. But in private and with the open connivence of Speaker, PM, Ministers and HOC officials they flagrantly bilked and milked a system for every penny they could rob from it knowingly bulking up their salary by other means that was illicit and snide and often petty as well as glaringly dubious. And then using every possible means to suppress the truth with open threats to those legitimately trying to expose their evil ways. And middleenglander is right to compare and contrast with those serving the EU, for it was outright envy of the naked pilfering that MEPs get up to that fired the desire to bilk the HOC system, for they saw their brothers over the water deriving so much more largesse. It was not caused by or facilitated by the EU of course, merely that the evidence of the riches available stung those MPs at home into grasping subversive envy. Make no mistake over this. It was serious and not enough of them got sent down or chucked out. I was sickened and changed forever by their behaviour and will never get over it. It changed my relationship to all of them forever. Because it proved what most of us had always suspected, that they were all mouth in the pretence of denying themselves a reasonable income, and no trousers when it came to illicit mass pocketing of undeserved hidden pseudo expenses. It epitomised everything about modern politicians in that it is all crafted worthless words, being on message, not taking any decisions for fear of failure or displeasing someone, keeping the seat and doing the square root of bugger all most of the time. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Jan 2, 2019 14:41:06 GMT
The "expenses scandal" was one of the biggest storms in a teacup in recent years. Most of the MPs pilloried were doing no more than following the rules they had been told to follow. A small number were found to be acting illegally. Meanwhile there is constant evidence of people in positions of power in the private sector abusing the system for personal gain. Presumably these are the people so much more able than MPs that Middle englander identifies. Libor, insider dealing, the Shell fiddling of reserves for bonuses, the vast golden goodbyes given to failures. At best we have a culture of legal tax avoidance which is morally dubious. All these things including bribes existed in politics and private enterprise long before the EU, and blaming the EU fir them is just bizarre. But presumably you will join me in criticising Farage for exploiting the EU expenses and pension system as assiduously as anyone else, and at our expense as taxpayers. It was no such thing. It was a quite disgraceful episode where very many MPs showed themselves in their inner basic true colours of craven liars and two-faced manipulators of truth, a system of rules and common decency. All too keen to grandstand on failing to publicly vote to pay themselves a proper and appropriate salary by repeatedly putting back the decision or voting it down or reducing it or any other device to publicly show their asceticism as regards the mere unnecessary feature of cash. But in private and with the open connivence of Speaker, PM, Ministers and HOC officials they flagrantly bilked and milked a system for every penny they could rob from it knowingly bulking up their salary by other means that was illicit and snide and often petty as well as glaringly dubious. And then using every possible means to suppress the truth with open threats to those legitimately trying to expose their evil ways. And middleenglander is right to compare and contrast with those serving the EU, for it was outright envy of the naked pilfering that MEPs get up to that fired the desire to bilk the HOC system, for they saw their brothers over the water deriving so much more largesse. It was not caused by or facilitated by the EU of course, merely that the evidence of the riches available stung those MPs at home into grasping subversive envy. Make no mistake over this. It was serious and not enough of them got sent down or chucked out. I was sickened and changed forever by their behaviour and will never get over it. It changed my relationship to all of them forever. Because it proved what most of us had always suspected, that they were all mouth in the pretence of denying themselves a reasonable income, and no trousers when it came to illicit mass pocketing of undeserved hidden pseudo expenses. It epitomised everything about modern politicians in that it is all crafted worthless words, being on message, not taking any decisions for fear of failure or displeasing someone, keeping the seat and doing the square root of bugger all most of the time. Don't you think all that could apply even more to most people working in the city, who pretend they are doing some great work for the capitalist system while actually just gambling with other people's money? At no risk to themselves because they have hedged their bets with guaranteed pay-offs. They are doing illicit pocketing on a scale that MPs and MEPs can only dream of |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jan 2, 2019 14:53:57 GMT
For andrew111 Well, as worded by me, it is site specific to politicians surely? So the direct answer is no. Have there been many examples of overpayment and excesses in the private sector? Yes. I too deplore those of course. But those excesses are separate and not in the same right and not directly funded from public funds by those responsible for the very nature of the public funds. I do rather deplore rebuttal of this nature altogether. The case is that the MPs did wrong. What other people did or have done is not of any relevance at all. It really isn't, any more than in a court of law. I can't defend my single solitary murder by citing Himmler and trying to maintain that in comparison I am hardly worthy of arrest. Some of the practices you cite are not illegal and others are really just practices you don't like. They have nothing at all to do with MPs and I am disappointed that you choose to defend behaviour that was rank gross and quite indefensible. |
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Jan 2, 2019 15:15:44 GMT
For andrew111 Well, as worded by me, it is site specific to politicians surely? So the direct answer is no. Have there been many examples of overpayment and excesses in the private sector? Yes. I too deplore those of course. But those excesses are separate and not in the same right and not directly funded from public funds by those responsible for the very nature of the public funds. I do rather deplore rebuttal of this nature altogether. The case is that the MPs did wrong. What other people did or have done is not of any relevance at all. It@andrew111 really isn't, any more than in a court of law. I can't defend my single solitary murder by citing Himmler and trying to maintain that in comparison I am hardly worthy of arrest. Some of the practices you cite are not illegal and others are really just practices you don't like. They have nothing at all to do with MPs and I am disappointed that you choose to defend behaviour that was rank gross and quite indefensible. I think I am closer to andrew111 than to you on this one. Nobody should excuse the deplorable behaviour of some MPs but some of the rest of it was pretty trivial in nature and it was all piled in to one great steaming heap to promote the idea that "they're all at it "when this was a gross oversimplification. In terms of copying other behaviour outside our own parliament, then I suspect copying practices in the private sector was probably far more important than any aping of MEP's, and so highly relevant to the case in question, and trying to drag in Himmler into the argument is just silly. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jan 2, 2019 15:36:57 GMT
For andrew111 Well, as worded by me, it is site specific to politicians surely? So the direct answer is no. Have there been many examples of overpayment and excesses in the private sector? Yes. I too deplore those of course. But those excesses are separate and not in the same right and not directly funded from public funds by those responsible for the very nature of the public funds. I do rather deplore rebuttal of this nature altogether. The case is that the MPs did wrong. What other people did or have done is not of any relevance at all. It@andrew111 really isn't, any more than in a court of law. I can't defend my single solitary murder by citing Himmler and trying to maintain that in comparison I am hardly worthy of arrest. Some of the practices you cite are not illegal and others are really just practices you don't like. They have nothing at all to do with MPs and I am disappointed that you choose to defend behaviour that was rank gross and quite indefensible. I think I am closer to andrew111 than to you on this one. Nobody should excuse the deplorable behaviour of some MPs but some of the rest of it was pretty trivial in nature and it was all piled in to one great steaming heap to promote the idea that "they're all at it "when this was a gross oversimplification. In terms of copying other behaviour outside our own parliament, then I suspect copying practices in the private sector was probably far more important than any aping of MEP's, and so highly relevant to the case in question, and trying to drag in Himmler into the argument is just silly. But yellowperil for people of my persuasion our MPs should not be aping the bad practices anywhere. They should be vigilant bastions of probity and good practice as public service demands. And seeking to stamp out the bad practices elsewhere. They were guilty as charged and the majority were at it. But a small minority were not involved at all and they rather tend to prove that decency and honourable behaviour were quite possible but just ignored by the many because they were uncaring a quite venal. The mention of Europe and MEPs is incidental and not accusatory. This was not an EU problem. It is just that some of us think that the comparison in the heads of many MPs engendered envy and a desire to copy bad conduct. The mention of Himmler was solely in the context of trying to explode the defence of non-relevant material, that if one was accused of a routine seemingly domestic murder, that citing a Himmler or indeed a Stalin or a Robespierre is not relevant to one's own crime. Those MPs are to be judged on what they did under the circumstances in which they were placed. The did wrong in a serial and quite cynical manner. |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jan 2, 2019 15:59:28 GMT
There is extreme danger in expecting MPs to exercise superhuman levels of probity and good practice (even if there was a general agreement about what appropriate standards of behaviour were). There is surely a level on which it is an advantage to have a Parliament full of human beings aware of their fallibility.
|
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Jan 2, 2019 16:50:16 GMT
I think I am closer to andrew111 than to you on this one. Nobody should excuse the deplorable behaviour of some MPs but some of the rest of it was pretty trivial in nature and it was all piled in to one great steaming heap to promote the idea that "they're all at it "when this was a gross oversimplification. In terms of copying other behaviour outside our own parliament, then I suspect copying practices in the private sector was probably far more important than any aping of MEP's, and so highly relevant to the case in question, and trying to drag in Himmler into the argument is just silly. But yellowperil for people of my persuasion our MPs should not be aping the bad practices anywhere. They should be vigilant bastions of probity and good practice as public service demands. And seeking to stamp out the bad practices elsewhere. They were guilty as charged and the majority were at it. But a small minority were not involved at all and they rather tend to prove that decency and honourable behaviour were quite possible but just ignored by the many because they were uncaring a quite venal. The mention of Europe and MEPs is incidental and not accusatory. This was not an EU problem. It is just that some of us think that the comparison in the heads of many MPs engendered envy and a desire to copy bad conduct. The mention of Himmler was solely in the context of trying to explode the defence of non-relevant material, that if one was accused of a routine seemingly domestic murder, that citing a Himmler or indeed a Stalin or a Robespierre is not relevant to one's own crime. Those MPs are to be judged on what they did under the circumstances in which they were placed. The did wrong in a serial and quite cynical manner. (1)first three sentences: agree 100%. (2)" the majority were at it" is only true if you accept the lumping together of gross misdemeanours with pretty trivial going along with accepted practice. The latter is deplorable, but if you lump it together with serious crimes it only diminishes the latter. (3) glad to you see you row back somewhat from the point about the European Parliament. In turn I accept that there is a lot of corrupt practice in the EP which needs to be stamped on- some practices have always been more openly abusive in Europe than in the UK. It was interesting to see how quite a few UKIP MEPs became so hung up about misuse of expenses that it seems they became among the worst practitioners. I am not sure you have totally accepted the point that the comparison with malpractice within private sector industry "in the heads of many MPs" was more of a factor than comparison with MEPs. (4) I understood your point about Himmler et al. I accept that the defence that "there are others doing worse"as such is no defence at all. Just think it was an odd, and rather loaded, example to take. |
|
|
|
Post by middleenglander on Jan 2, 2019 17:37:06 GMT
(3) glad to you see you row back somewhat from the point about the European Parliament. In turn I accept that there is a lot of corrupt practice in the EP which needs to be stamped on- some practices have always been more openly abusive in Europe than in the UK. It was interesting to see how quite a few UKIP MEPs became so hung up about misuse of expenses that it seems they became among the worst practitioners. I am not sure you have totally accepted the point that the comparison with malpractice within private sector industry "in the heads of many MPs" was more of a factor than comparison with MEPs. All the 5 or 6 MPs to receive some form of custodial sentence were Labour; two Conservative Peers were also convicted. I believe that few if any of the Labour MPs had any aspiration to work within the private sector and thereby benefit personally from what they saw as malpractice. They did however see what their MEP colleagues were getting for doing the perceived lesser work. One can debate whether the EU Parliament is / was or is / was not corrupt itself; I recall it refuses to release detailed expenses claims which in any case do not require receipts for significant expenditure. However, I consider the perverse effect this has on MPs is / was itself corrupting. I furthermore reiterate my considered view that the EU as an institution and a system of Government is not only corrupt but corrupting. |
|
|
|
Post by matureleft on Jan 2, 2019 18:18:38 GMT
My, this has wandered a long way from the topic! There are some interesting points in here but really there should be another thread?
|
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jan 2, 2019 18:39:59 GMT
But yellowperil for people of my persuasion our MPs should not be aping the bad practices anywhere. They should be vigilant bastions of probity and good practice as public service demands. And seeking to stamp out the bad practices elsewhere. They were guilty as charged and the majority were at it. But a small minority were not involved at all and they rather tend to prove that decency and honourable behaviour were quite possible but just ignored by the many because they were uncaring a quite venal. The mention of Europe and MEPs is incidental and not accusatory. This was not an EU problem. It is just that some of us think that the comparison in the heads of many MPs engendered envy and a desire to copy bad conduct. The mention of Himmler was solely in the context of trying to explode the defence of non-relevant material, that if one was accused of a routine seemingly domestic murder, that citing a Himmler or indeed a Stalin or a Robespierre is not relevant to one's own crime. Those MPs are to be judged on what they did under the circumstances in which they were placed. The did wrong in a serial and quite cynical manner. (1)first three sentences: agree 100%. (2)" the majority were at it" is only true if you accept the lumping together of gross misdemeanours with pretty trivial going along with accepted practice. The latter is deplorable, but if you lump it together with serious crimes it only diminishes the latter. (3) glad to you see you row back somewhat from the point about the European Parliament. In turn I accept that there is a lot of corrupt practice in the EP which needs to be stamped on- some practices have always been more openly abusive in Europe than in the UK. It was interesting to see how quite a few UKIP MEPs became so hung up about misuse of expenses that it seems they became among the worst practitioners. I am not sure you have totally accepted the point that the comparison with malpractice within private sector industry "in the heads of many MPs" was more of a factor than comparison with MEPs. (4) I understood your point about Himmler et al. I accept that the defence that "there are others doing worse"as such is no defence at all. Just think it was an odd, and rather loaded, example to take. Well we are getting closer all the time. I didn't row back at all on the EU or the EP, because I never accused either of anything at all. You and another respondent just casually assumed I had because I am avowedly anti-EU. All I did was to agree with middleenglander that our MPs were in part influenced by envy over the benefits accruing to MEPs. It was as simple as that and no more. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jan 2, 2019 18:53:12 GMT
There is extreme danger in expecting MPs to exercise superhuman levels of probity and good practice (even if there was a general agreement about what appropriate standards of behaviour were). There is surely a level on which it is an advantage to have a Parliament full of human beings aware of their fallibility. It is far from a request for superhuman probity to merely expect there not to be flagrant abuse of expenses. Now come off it. The tide went out and most of your chaps were found on the beach not wearing bathers! Most of ours were too, but you are the moral high ground champions and shown up yet again to be cynical humbugs of the first rank. Stop wriggling. You were done bang to rights and should be thoroughly ashamed of yourselves. And no, I don't want fallible cheats and bilkers, but I am uncaring about loose talk, off colour jokes, use of recently banned words and extra-marital affairs as none of those affect work or are a charge on the public purse. |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jan 2, 2019 21:33:14 GMT
There is extreme danger in expecting MPs to exercise superhuman levels of probity and good practice (even if there was a general agreement about what appropriate standards of behaviour were). There is surely a level on which it is an advantage to have a Parliament full of human beings aware of their fallibility. It is far from a request for superhuman probity to merely expect there not to be flagrant abuse of expenses. Now come off it. The tide went out and most of your chaps were found on the beach not wearing bathers! Most of ours were too, but you are the moral high ground champions and shown up yet again to be cynical humbugs of the first rank. Stop wriggling. You were done bang to rights and should be thoroughly ashamed of yourselves. And no, I don't want fallible cheats and bilkers, but I am uncaring about loose talk, off colour jokes, use of recently banned words and extra-marital affairs as none of those affect work or are a charge on the public purse. Oh do shut up you silly old fool. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jan 2, 2019 22:13:42 GMT
It is far from a request for superhuman probity to merely expect there not to be flagrant abuse of expenses. Now come off it. The tide went out and most of your chaps were found on the beach not wearing bathers! Most of ours were too, but you are the moral high ground champions and shown up yet again to be cynical humbugs of the first rank. Stop wriggling. You were done bang to rights and should be thoroughly ashamed of yourselves. And no, I don't want fallible cheats and bilkers, but I am uncaring about loose talk, off colour jokes, use of recently banned words and extra-marital affairs as none of those affect work or are a charge on the public purse. Oh do shut up you silly old fool. Getting down to a nerve am I David? Surely a better kinder politics should not stoop to rudeness and blatant ageism? What has my age to do with the argument? That is just cheap slur of the sort that comes a bit too easily to you. |
|
|
|
Post by Delighted Of Tunbridge Wells on Jan 3, 2019 0:27:43 GMT
It is far from a request for superhuman probity to merely expect there not to be flagrant abuse of expenses. Now come off it. The tide went out and most of your chaps were found on the beach not wearing bathers! Most of ours were too, but you are the moral high ground champions and shown up yet again to be cynical humbugs of the first rank. Stop wriggling. You were done bang to rights and should be thoroughly ashamed of yourselves. And no, I don't want fallible cheats and bilkers, but I am uncaring about loose talk, off colour jokes, use of recently banned words and extra-marital affairs as none of those affect work or are a charge on the public purse. Oh do shut up you silly old fool. Don't rise to the bait David. You are a decent person and these are just silly insults. Carlton,I respect you when you are reasoned in your comments,but when you start throwing silly insults and generalisations about our MP's, it just drags the conversation to a conversation of a lower standard and that is not what this forum is for. And,by the way, if any of our side start throwing around silly generalisations or insults, tag me and I'll be the first to condemn them. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jan 3, 2019 0:48:27 GMT
Oh do shut up you silly old fool. Don't rise to the bait David. You are a decent person and these are just silly insults. Carlton,I respect you when you are reasoned in your comments,but when you start throwing silly insults and generalisations about our MP's, it just drags the conversation to a conversation of a lower standard and that is not what this forum is for. And,by the way, if any of our side start throwing around silly generalisations or insults, tag me and I'll be the first to condemn them. But I haven't insulted any MPs and I have not made it personal at any time. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2019 1:07:20 GMT
Oh do shut up you silly old fool. Don't rise to the bait David. You are a decent person and these are just silly insults. Carlton,I respect you when you are reasoned in your comments,but when you start throwing silly insults and generalisations about our MP's, it just drags the conversation to a conversation of a lower standard and that is not what this forum is for. And,by the way, if any of our side start throwing around silly generalisations or insults, tag me and I'll be the first to condemn them. Hang on, so David makes a borderline trollish direct personal attack, but it is Carlton who is lowering the standard of the conversation and making “silly insults”? Either I need new glasses or something is amiss here. |
|
|
|
Post by Delighted Of Tunbridge Wells on Jan 3, 2019 3:15:29 GMT
Don't rise to the bait David. You are a decent person and these are just silly insults. Carlton,I respect you when you are reasoned in your comments,but when you start throwing silly insults and generalisations about our MP's, it just drags the conversation to a conversation of a lower standard and that is not what this forum is for. And,by the way, if any of our side start throwing around silly generalisations or insults, tag me and I'll be the first to condemn them. But I haven't insulted any MPs and I have not made it personal at any time. "Most of your chaps were found on the beach not wearing bathers" Both inaccurate (only 5 Labour MP's were prosecuted) and offensive baiting. You may have not made it personal but it is still offensive. |
|
|
|
Post by Delighted Of Tunbridge Wells on Jan 3, 2019 3:22:17 GMT
Don't rise to the bait David. You are a decent person and these are just silly insults. Carlton,I respect you when you are reasoned in your comments,but when you start throwing silly insults and generalisations about our MP's, it just drags the conversation to a conversation of a lower standard and that is not what this forum is for. And,by the way, if any of our side start throwing around silly generalisations or insults, tag me and I'll be the first to condemn them. Hang on, so David makes a borderline trollish direct personal attack, but it is Carlton who is lowering the standard of the conversation and making “silly insults”? Either I need new glasses or something is amiss here. You must need new glasses because Carlton chose to insult Labour MP's with the sentence "The tide went out and most of your chaps were found out on the beach not wearing bathers" and this obviously angered David. He then made the personal attack after Carlton lowered the standard of the conversation.Here's a screenshot for proof: |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jan 3, 2019 9:09:07 GMT
But I haven't insulted any MPs and I have not made it personal at any time. "Most of your chaps were found on the beach not wearing bathers" Both inaccurate (only 5 Labour MP's were prosecuted) and offensive baiting. You may have not made it personal but it is still offensive. Come on URF it is a mere jocular phrase and I applied it to our side as well. It is in no way 'offensive'. They, the many, were all caught out. It was a mass observation of cheating and bilking a system. That is the 'offence', what they did, not me saying so. This defence is all very silly. They did wrong on a mass scale. |
|
|
|
Post by Adam in Stroud on Jan 3, 2019 9:53:58 GMT
"Most of your chaps were found on the beach not wearing bathers" Both inaccurate (only 5 Labour MP's were prosecuted) and offensive baiting. You may have not made it personal but it is still offensive. Come on URF it is a mere jocular phrase and I applied it to our side as well. It is in no way 'offensive'. They, the many, were all caught out. It was a mass observation of cheating and bilking a system. That is the 'offence', what they did, not me saying so. This defence is all very silly. They did wrong on a mass scale. I must say that if the new mod team take the view that the phrase used is offensive it is going to be very hard to make any criticism of any party. It's possible to object to the accusation, or better yet refute it, without being offended that it is made. It's actually helpful to have these accusations sometimes - Carlton referring to some of my party's MPs as twerps is helpful to remind me of how they might be perceived by people not sharing my core beliefs. I think it'd be daft to think the general public don't agree with Carlton on this specific accusation, applied to every single party. Then we can move on to whether that is fair and what if anything should be done. |
|
