Andy Burnham claims £17,000 a year to cover rent for London flat despite owning a property in walking distance to Westminster.
It should be illegal.
If e had ten places, it wouldn't be enough for him to hide when the leadership tussle gets under way and the mud starts flying about how, when he was Health Minister, he tried to quietly strangle the Stafford hospital revelations.
Getting the attacks in early? The Tories must be scared.
I'm genuinely puzzled why you think the Tories would be scared of Burnham. Part of the Brown team, part of the Miliband team, the man who said that investing in the NHS was irresponsible, who vetoed 81 requests for a public inquiry into mid Staffs - and now, best of all, the man who the Unions want as leader.
Scared of him? The Tories would welcome him in a heartbeat.
It's that other one - the Blairite - that the Tories need to keep their eye on.
Actually, most Tories want Andy Burnham to be the new leader.
My own view is that Labour would be better off with a leader such as Kendall or Creagh because Cooper and Burnham are so involved and tainted by the Blair/Brown years. In fact, the Tory-loving Mail should be bigging up Burnham instead if they really want to help their beloved Conservative party.
Andy Burnham claims £17,000 a year to cover rent for London flat despite owning a property in walking distance to Westminster.
Out of all the MP's from all parties is he the only one who rents out a property he owns in London while claiming rent for a flat in London on expenses ?
Out of all the MP's from all parties is he the only one who rents out a property he owns in London while claiming rent for a flat in London on expenses ?
After looking it up I can answer that question myself it's 46 MPs
Our investigation found many of the MPs bought their London properties with the help of the taxpayer when the previous expenses system allowed them to claim back mortgage payments.
But when those claims were banned following the expenses scandal they switched to letting out their properties, in some cases for up to £3,000 a month. They then started claiming expenses for rent and hotels in the capital.
MPs are permitted to claim more than £20,000 a year in London rent, and £150 a night for hotels. The practice is allowed under rules set by expenses watchdog, the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (Ipsa), that oversees what MPs can claim. There is no suggestion of wrongdoing by any of the 46 MPs.
Our investigation raises questions about whether the new Ipsa expenses system allows taxpayers' money to be used appropriately, and whether MPs can still gain. The list of 46 MPs include 25 Conservatives, 14 Labour, and four from the Liberal Democrats.
Cameron claimed benefits for his disabled son, despite being a millionaire. If a system allows something, then people will use that system.
That's different as that is based on something that would be available to the general public is sadly necessary. Whereas this is about milking the system.
There was an attempt under the Freedom of Information Act to find out just how much Disability Living Allowance had been claimed by the Camerons but it was quashed on the grounds that it was private and personal information and thus exempt from the FOI (which inadvertently indicates that they were claiming this benefit although how much will always remain a mystery).
Thanks; quite interesting numbers at the end there really. I think the Conservatives only had about 28 MP's in London ( including the likes of IDS and Justine Greening, and now Boris of course who can start claiming too) and 25 took the opportunity to fleece the tax-payer. I think Labour had about 39 seats and the LD's 7or 8.
I think the point is that he should not be able to claim if he owns a property that close to Westminster. It is the procedure that is at fault.
Personally I would build a MPs residence where they could all stay and not have to claim a penny in expenses.
To avoid the usual cries of "security" through centralisation (because backbench MPs are obviously major targets), they could instead build up a substantial property portfolio. Buy 650 flats dotted around London (okay, maybe this should have happened 20 years ago), any MP who wants one gets one picked randomly and given to them for a term, if they want something else they can pay for it privately (no taxpayer funding) and any unused parliamentary flats are rented out to the public for 5 years
Thanks; quite interesting numbers at the end there really. I think the Conservatives only had about 28 MP's in London ( including the likes of IDS and Justine Greening, and now Boris of course who can start claiming too) and 25 took the opportunity to fleece the tax-payer. I think Labour had about 39 seats and the LD's 7or 8.
Seems like Burnham is small fry among those big Tory names yet the media chooses to focus on him, there must be a reason for that....
Comments
Actually, most Tories want Andy Burnham to be the new leader.
If e had ten places, it wouldn't be enough for him to hide when the leadership tussle gets under way and the mud starts flying about how, when he was Health Minister, he tried to quietly strangle the Stafford hospital revelations.
I'm genuinely puzzled why you think the Tories would be scared of Burnham. Part of the Brown team, part of the Miliband team, the man who said that investing in the NHS was irresponsible, who vetoed 81 requests for a public inquiry into mid Staffs - and now, best of all, the man who the Unions want as leader.
Scared of him? The Tories would welcome him in a heartbeat.
It's that other one - the Blairite - that the Tories need to keep their eye on.
Personally I would build a MPs residence where they could all stay and not have to claim a penny in expenses.
And him for exploiting it.
They shouldn't need somewhere to sleep, they do enough of it during debates.:D
There all exploiting it one way or another, does not matter which party as there all at it.
The tories would love him to be the new leader. Cameron would make mincemeat of him at PMQs.
I think we found some Tories exploiting it as well. I don't see Cameron rushing to fix the broken system.
My own view is that Labour would be better off with a leader such as Kendall or Creagh because Cooper and Burnham are so involved and tainted by the Blair/Brown years. In fact, the Tory-loving Mail should be bigging up Burnham instead if they really want to help their beloved Conservative party.
Cameron claimed benefits for his disabled son, despite being a millionaire. If a system allows something, then people will use that system.
Out of all the MP's from all parties is he the only one who rents out a property he owns in London while claiming rent for a flat in London on expenses ?
But it isn't.
After looking it up I can answer that question myself it's 46 MPs
http://www.channel4.com/news/mps-expenses-46-claim-in-london-despite-owning-a-property
Yep,another do as I say,don't do as I do toss pot
Can you provide details and a link?
That's different as that is based on something that would be available to the general public is sadly necessary. Whereas this is about milking the system.
There was an attempt under the Freedom of Information Act to find out just how much Disability Living Allowance had been claimed by the Camerons but it was quashed on the grounds that it was private and personal information and thus exempt from the FOI (which inadvertently indicates that they were claiming this benefit although how much will always remain a mystery).
I seriously doubt that tbh having seen Andy Burnham in many debates. He's pretty amble and effective in debates.
Thanks; quite interesting numbers at the end there really. I think the Conservatives only had about 28 MP's in London ( including the likes of IDS and Justine Greening, and now Boris of course who can start claiming too) and 25 took the opportunity to fleece the tax-payer. I think Labour had about 39 seats and the LD's 7or 8.
To avoid the usual cries of "security" through centralisation (because backbench MPs are obviously major targets), they could instead build up a substantial property portfolio. Buy 650 flats dotted around London (okay, maybe this should have happened 20 years ago), any MP who wants one gets one picked randomly and given to them for a term, if they want something else they can pay for it privately (no taxpayer funding) and any unused parliamentary flats are rented out to the public for 5 years
Seems like Burnham is small fry among those big Tory names yet the media chooses to focus on him, there must be a reason for that....
Proof?