Read this in the Telegraph, and we can see

In response to this newspaper’s disclosures about the routine abuse by MPs of their second home allowance, the House of Commons authorities last night asked the police to investigate – not the wrong-doing of Members of Parliament, but how the information exposing it was leaked. If evidence were needed that parliament simply fails to understand the deep anger felt in the country about the tawdry goings on at the Palace of Westminster, then this, surely, is it.

Now on to some of the claims themselves

Barbara Follett, the Minister for Tourism, claimed more than £25,000 in expenses for security patrols at her central London home, because she said she did not feel safe there. Not only is Mrs Follett married to a multi-millionaire author and, therefore, not short of money, but nobody forced her to live in a townhouse in Soho.

Next

Phil Hope, the minister in charge of community care. He claimed more than £37,000 in just four years to re-equip a flat that was arguably too small to contain all the items purchased. He also charged the taxpayer £120 for a barbecue – even though Commons rules say that MPs can only claim for the cost of maintaining a garden.

Next

Keith Vaz, the chairman of the Commons home affairs select committee, who lives in a £1.15 million house 12 miles from Parliament, but also claims for a second home in Westminster. Mr Vaz moved his designated second home to a property in his Leicester constituency for one year only, claiming £20,000 during that time, before once again making his Westminster flat his second home. Will he resign? 

Next

Phil Woolas, the Immigration Minister, trying to stop Gurkhas settling in the UK. He has claimed for nappies and women’s clothes, even though the rules state clearly that personal items such as toiletries will not be reimbursed, nor items bought for anyone else

I’m sure that members of all parties will be exposed as milking the system, but just because technically the rules have not been broken does not make the system morally acceptable.

Quite simply, anyone who has de-frauded the public, must resign with immediate effect, it’s the only way the reputation of politicians in the UK can be saved.

If you tried to do what our MPs have done in any other career, you’d be sacked, quite rightly and probably arrested for fraud. Do you think that’ll happen here?  I seriously doubt it, after all our MPs make the laws!

Guido has a great explanation of the phrases we’ll hear over the next few days. I’ve republished here

“It has since been corrected” - I knew it was going to come out and it was such a blatant fiddle that I realised I had to repay the fraudulently claimed money before it came out.

“The Fees Office approved the payment“ - the Fees Office always take the word of “honourable” members.  They always make the payment without question.

“It was a clerical error” - it was a small fiddle.

“Lessons have been learned“ - we have got away with it, but we won’t do it again.

“We have to have two homes to do our job properly” - why stay in a hotel when we can build a property portfolio at the public’s expense.

“Claims were made in good faith” - we have always got away with it in the past.

“It was within the rules” - MPs make the rules to suit themselves. MPs are  lawmakers, judge and jury.  It is a joke at our expense.  They really are almost all at it. 

Gordon replied that YouTube was a very important communication medium and that he will continue to use it even if the other parties do not?

Maybe he wasn’t aware of:

• http://www.youtube.com/user/webcameronuk
• http://www.youtube.com/user/LibDem
• http://www.youtube.com/user/greenpartyew
• http://www.youtube.com/user/ukipwebmaster

to list just a few

ursulaerrington: #G20. Feeling on trading floor is that they understand why people are angry. Dont mind protests as long as it doesn’t get violent.

Umm do they live in a different world to the rest of us?  How about blowing all your money have having to be bailed out to the tune of trillions of pounds by the taxpayer?

Absolute genius

Why not give money to homeowners to pay off their mortgages, instead of giving money to the banks? The banks get the money anyways, two birds with one stone, everybody wins. Please educate me as to why this is a bad idea.

He added: “You may think VAT is unimportant but at the end of every week a typical family has more than £5 extra in their pocket. That may not matter to the Tories. But that’s £275 a year, more money for everyone in the community, not just for the few that you support.”

Now let’s work this out shall we.

£5 x 52 weeks = £260

No wonder our finances are in a mess if he can’t do basic multiplication.  OK let’s give him the benefit of the doubt that he rounded the figures to make a nice soundbite.  To get £275 a year the calculation must be

£5.29 x 52 weeks = £275.08

OK why not say over £260?

But that works out^* that every person must spend approximately £11,000 a year on VATable goods per year, that’s a staggering £212 a week.  Seriously, are we to believe that everyone spends £212 a week on VATable goods?  Actually looking back at Gordon’s quote, he actually says MORE than £5 a week!

Are these the so called ‘Green Shoots’ that were mentioned the other day? That we’re all being given huge payrises so that we can spend £11,000 a year on VATable products?

* the linked calculator is for 13 months not 12 so calculations have taken into account spending over 12 months not 13

Please, please, please can we stop. It’s not a down turn it’s a ressession or we can just say we are bankrupt or even better ‘we’re all f***ed’