April 9, 2020 at 3:00 pm #174935
Been thanked: 5196 times
For our hard working MPs!
On the “clapping” thread Fansy wrote: –
“Now is not the time to discuss pay rise for nurses’, says health secretary Matt Hancock….
MP’s got a 3.1% pay rise starting from April 1st.”
Well they’re now getting an extra £10k to enable them to work from home!
Helluva price for unlimited broadband.April 9, 2020 at 3:22 pm #174939April 9, 2020 at 3:37 pm #174941
Before we get too outraged we should bear in mind that this is £10,000 of expenses, not a wage increase, and this applies to their staff too. So it’s not them pocketing more money for themselves, but being able to spend more money for them and their caseworkers to be able to work.
Let’s see if there are any abuses before we get too angry. However, I grant that it does stick in the craw when hospitals can’t afford PPE, but that doesn’t mean other vital work should be neglected. Caseworkers and MPs need to be able to deal with constituency needs; these are important during such times. Dealing with petitions cost nearly £10,000, so their work isn’t necessarily cheap.April 9, 2020 at 4:20 pm #174956
Been thanked: 2680 times
Wonder if Matt Hancock will suggest the footballers should pay the MP’s the extra £10,000, you know in the interest of balance. What do you reckon Alcy?April 9, 2020 at 4:21 pm #174957April 11, 2020 at 9:42 am #175072
One MP has told them where to shove itApril 11, 2020 at 10:52 am #175075
Are you referring to the supposed selfless act by Saint Jeremy, as shown below?
If so, and if this is true, then I have some concerns. In order for Corbyn to have done this he would have needed to file an expenses claim for that amount (remember, this isn’t money being given to the MPs, but money being made available for claiming. This would require filing a claim on the network system, as it would be when making a claim in any other job) to go to the NHS. This is unlikely to be seen as a legitimate use of expenses and could well be seen as expenses fraud.
Moreover, the whole reasoning for the expenses claim increase is to aid MPs and their staffers to sufficiently work from home, where their roles as politicians are vital, and increased workloads in unfamiliar working environments where they may not have everything and may need to make more claims. With regards to the outrage over this, one staffer recently asked if those upset would rather them go to their offices each day to work and risk spreading coronavirus?
If Corbyn has spent all of his increased expenses, which are supposed to aid him and his staffers, on something it is not intended for he has potentially deprived his own caseworkers from money required to carry out their roles efficiently and sufficiently. If they needed something to help out their constituents they may not be able to access it now through the system, meaning they may need to dive into their own pockets for the money, because Corbyn didn’t see it fit that they need this. I would argue that this isn’t such a good thing. It’s not like Corbyn’s strapped for cash. He could have made a charitable donation to the same effect, instead of abusing a system designed to help out MPs and staffers in a time where they may need it.
However, I am not going to get too angry with Corbyn over this, because the story is nothing but fake news. The original account of this came from one Preston based councillor, who has since deleted the tweet, and there is absolutely nothing to give supporting evidence that he has actually done this. I don’t think Corbyn would have been daft enough to file an expenses claim, which is fraudulent. It didn’t happen.April 11, 2020 at 11:59 am #175080
Been thanked: 2680 times
So You could have saved all that typing then BRI, basically.April 11, 2020 at 12:32 pm #175086
I could have stated that it was fake news and left it at that, yes, but given that this bit of fake news was designed to signal Corbyn’s moral high standing and cast shade on others for using a perfectly legitimate expenses mechanism, I felt the need to deconstruct the supposed virtue of the meme.
People have been using the £10000 expenses claims as an unfair baton to whip MPs with (metaphorically speaking), so it needs to be combated when people use the instance of alleged principled action by one MP to signal his greatness against everyone else’s shadiness. As such, I felt the need to point out that one ‘great’ MP turning the money down wouldn’t be an act of kindness in reality, if this meme was true. I was criticising the nature of Corbyn in the meme to demonstrate how wrong the meme was.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.