Expensive Claims (1 Viewer)

[Rabbie]

I think Guy Fawkes had the right idea....


KABOOM......



Bye Bye Politics...

So there are no politicians in Local Government

 

[Simon_MT]

The difference now is Guy Fawkes would be heralded as a hero!

Simon

 

[oumahexi]

I just received the following, at the end one of the options it gives is to abstain from voiting in the forthcoming election. The last I heard, if you didn't vote then your vote was automatically given to the ruling party, has that changed? My person thought, it should be illegal not to vote!

Can you imagine working for a company that has a little more than 600 employees and has the following statistics?

29 have been accused of spouse abuse

7 have been arrested for fraud

19 have been accused of writing bad cheques

117 have directly or indirectly bankrupted at least 2 businesses

3 have done time for assault

71 cannot get a credit card due to bad credit

4 have been arrested on drug-related charges

8 have been arrested for shoplifting

21 are currently defendants in lawsuits

84 have been arrested for drink driving in the last year

Which organization is this?
It's the 635 members of the House of Commons, the same group that cranks out hundreds of new laws each year designed to keep the rest of us in line
AND THE LATEST
We don’t as yet know how many are on the take with their expenses. If it’s not fraud then they are incompetent and shouldn’t be in the job anyway.
Their excuse if you saw last night’s cringe worthy Question Time on the BBC is that the rules are too vague & complex – but it’s the same people who made up the rules.
Let’s face it if they are the ones making the laws, are in charge of the country’s finances and on our behalf debate and legislate for complex issues & they can’t work out their own expense claims properly and fairly. How can they ever pretend to understand and control the wider economy, resolve the recession and handle our finances with any level of competence. Can we trust them in any manner whatsoever.
THE SOLUTION
If you are of the same opinion and want decent competent and trustworthy politicians working on our behalf regardless of whether you are tory, socialist or whatever then at the forthcoming elections and at the next general election if your candidate has been exposed as incompetent or a cheat then either vote for another candidate or abstain. We must show all political parties that the man & woman in the street demands that we the public are listened to respected and our hard earned taxes are used wisely and that they act on our behalf & best interest not their own!
If you agree with the statement above send this on to everyone you know & vote for a candidate who does not lie, cheat or defraud us and has the common sense & intelligence to act in your best interest at these elections – then we may get better fairer and more competent government in this country.

 

[namliam]

In Holland if you dont vote you dont vote... No vote is counted anywhere...
Some people regard that as voting for the largest party because you might vote for a smaller one... thus by not voting for the smaller one you are (relatively) making the largest bigger.

Dont know if that is what you mean... but there you go

 

[Alc]

29 have been accused of spouse abuse
7 have been arrested for fraud
19 have been accused of writing bad cheques
117 have directly or indirectly bankrupted at least 2 businesses
3 have done time for assault
71 cannot get a credit card due to bad credit
4 have been arrested on drug-related charges
8 have been arrested for shoplifting
21 are currently defendants in lawsuits
84 have been arrested for drink driving in the last year

Are each of these mutually exclusive (i.e. 21 are currently defendants and an entirely different 8 have been arrested for shoplifting) or does it cover a much smaller group who have committed two or more of these 'sins'?

Not that either is good by any means, but having 82% who are guilty of no offences does look better than only 43%.

 

[oumahexi]

In Holland if you dont vote you dont vote... No vote is counted anywhere...
Some people regard that as voting for the largest party because you might vote for a smaller one... thus by not voting for the smaller one you are (relatively) making the largest bigger.

Dont know if that is what you mean... but there you go

Hmm, could be what was meant when I was told about this, I was, after all, a teenager, and it was my father that told me, chances are I'd only have been half listening

 

[Pauldohert]

I just received the following, at the end one of the options it gives is to abstain from voiting in the forthcoming election. The last I heard, if you didn't vote then your vote was automatically given to the ruling party, has that changed? My person thought, it should be illegal not to vote!

Can you imagine working for a company that has a little more than 600 employees and has the following statistics?

29 have been accused of spouse abuse

7 have been arrested for fraud

19 have been accused of writing bad cheques

117 have directly or indirectly bankrupted at least 2 businesses

3 have done time for assault

71 cannot get a credit card due to bad credit

4 have been arrested on drug-related charges

8 have been arrested for shoplifting

21 are currently defendants in lawsuits

84 have been arrested for drink driving in the last year

Which organization is this?
It's the 635 members of the House of Commons, the same group that cranks out hundreds of new laws each year designed to keep the rest of us in line
AND THE LATEST
We don’t as yet know how many are on the take with their expenses. If it’s not fraud then they are incompetent and shouldn’t be in the job anyway.
Their excuse if you saw last night’s cringe worthy Question Time on the BBC is that the rules are too vague & complex – but it’s the same people who made up the rules.
Let’s face it if they are the ones making the laws, are in charge of the country’s finances and on our behalf debate and legislate for complex issues & they can’t work out their own expense claims properly and fairly. How can they ever pretend to understand and control the wider economy, resolve the recession and handle our finances with any level of competence. Can we trust them in any manner whatsoever.
THE SOLUTION
If you are of the same opinion and want decent competent and trustworthy politicians working on our behalf regardless of whether you are tory, socialist or whatever then at the forthcoming elections and at the next general election if your candidate has been exposed as incompetent or a cheat then either vote for another candidate or abstain. We must show all political parties that the man & woman in the street demands that we the public are listened to respected and our hard earned taxes are used wisely and that they act on our behalf & best interest not their own!
If you agree with the statement above send this on to everyone you know & vote for a candidate who does not lie, cheat or defraud us and has the common sense & intelligence to act in your best interest at these elections – then we may get better fairer and more competent government in this country.

These aren't real are they - I beleive all - except the credit card and DD.

 

[oumahexi]

No idea Paul, I wouldn't be surprised, but you know what the grapevine/ bandwagon is like. My main query was what happens if you don't vote, the rest I thought was just amusing.

 

[Pauldohert]

On further examination


http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2006/mar/20/mpsincorruptionshocker

 

[Alc]

These aren't real are they - I beleive all - except the credit card and DD.

Just found it.
Nope, not true.

http://www.rogerdarlington.me.uk/nighthawk/2007/03/the_rise_and_rise_of_the_urban.html

 

[Alc]

No idea Paul, I wouldn't be surprised, but you know what the grapevine/ bandwagon is like. My main query was what happens if you don't vote, the rest I thought was just amusing.

Got too focussed on the rest of it, so missed that question.
What would you suggest the penalty for not voting should be? I doubt it would even be an enforceable law, given the numbers who don't bother.

Personally, I voted once - back in the early '90's I think - not since.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

In the USA, we have our share of corrupt politicians, but in a different direction. I am sad that he was from our area, but glad that former Senator William Jefferson is going on trial for 16 counts of abuse of office by taking bribes related to official functions of a senator. The functions were indirect, but reasonably relevant to something a senator might influence given committee memberships and the way it works here. His trial was delayed by appeals all the way up through the U. S. Supreme Court, who refused to remove any of the indictments that were based on the raid on his personal residence. He was claiming a violation of the "separation of powers" clause in our US constitution, but nobody was buying in on that one. He lost every appeal uniformly. Now, at least, his indiscretions will become a matter of public record once the trial is over.

But to be honest, when I first saw this thread, I didn't understand it. Two days ago, I found an article in the back section of our local news rag that explained it as a form of expense-account corruption. Then it started to make more sense.

As to "might as well not vote..." - a few years ago in a state election, I ran into the worst of all possible choices. Despite having voted for other guys in the various primary elections, I was faced with the choices of David Duke, a known racist and American Nazi party supporter, or Edwin Edwards, a known crook and embezzler who was incredibly adept at side-stepping every attack. I was so disgusted that I didn't want to vote, until someone pointed out that if I didn't vote, I didn't care. The truth was, I really DID care. So I changed my thinking from "who do I want to vote for the most" to "who do I want to vote AGAINST the most." Then voted for the crook as opposed to the bigot.

Later, BOTH of them were arrested on federal charges and spent time in the slammer. Duke got expelled recently from a European country because he is a holocaust denier on top of all of his other crap.

 

[Len Boorman]

A few observations
Power corrupts
Absolute power corrupts absolutely
Lead a pig to the trough and it will eat.
Trust the Tories to have upper class expenses. Moat cleaning etc
Socialists have the more mundane expenses
Mistakes occur everywhere
When was last time you did not notice an extra £800 or so in your account when you got your bank statement.
Rules are guidelines really
Guidelines are just examples really
Examples are not a complete list of options
I apologise... like Fred Goodwin except he wasa lot smarter and had it all tied up legally before his cover was blown.

Len

 

[scott-atkinson]

Except Fred Goodwin can only ever hang out with his other super rich bank buddies, as if he ever meets a normal person they will spit in his face..

 

[Rabbie]

Got too focussed on the rest of it, so missed that question.
What would you suggest the penalty for not voting should be? I doubt it would even be an enforceable law, given the numbers who don't bother.

Personally, I voted once - back in the early '90's I think - not since.

Don't vote for politicians - It only encourages them.

Doesn't matter who you vote for - the goverment always gets in

 

[oumahexi]

Don't vote for politicians - It only encourages them.

Doesn't matter who you vote for - the goverment always gets in

There are a lot of people out there want Joanna Lumley in Parliament! Also, Esther Ransen is putting herself forward so I hear! We could take a leaf of the American book

 

[Rich]

Esther Ransen is putting herself forward

God help us

 

[Fifty2One]

When I have to chose between completely wrong people then I will spoil the ballot. A purposely spoiled vote is not a wasted vote, it makes a statement if there are more spoiled then there are for each candidate.

I have voted in every election which I am entitled to participate in as a voter, it is my democratic right and a right that is hard earned with the blood of many people in the past, present and most likely future. There are so many countries which are ruled by dictatorships and iron fists that I can hardly believe some people would not vote.

Perhaps to apease you non-voters the next government will end the apathy by passing a law to abolish voting if the turnout at the polls is less then 50%...

 

[Alc]

When I have to chose between completely wrong people then I will spoil the ballot. A purposely spoiled vote is not a wasted vote, it makes a statement if there are more spoiled then there are for each candidate.

I have voted in every election which I am entitled to participate in as a voter, it is my democratic right and a right that is hard earned with the blood of many people in the past, present and most likely future. There are so many countries which are ruled by dictatorships and iron fists that I can hardly believe some people would not vote.

Perhaps to apease you non-voters the next government will end the apathy by passing a law to abolish voting if the turnout at the polls is less then 50%...

I don't need 'appeasing', thanks. As you pointed out, voting is a right, It's not mandatory. If everyone who feels that none of the candidates is worth voting for were forced to vote for one of them anyway, where is the democracy you mentioned?

Spoiling the ballot papers may be very satisying to you on a personal level but do you honestly imagine any of the people involved care?

 

[Pauldohert]

Vote BNP - the ultimate spoiling of a ballot paper, they may care about that.