Disgusted - Tory fingers in the national pot AGAIN!

I knew before I clicked the link I was going to end up spitting tin tack - can you hear them clinking against the screen; grrrrr.

It makes me so angry; the hypocrisy of it all. 'We are all in it together' but it's us at the bottom with them, as usual, standing on our backs to keep their own heads above the midden heap that they've created.

I heard a comment not long ago that the reason MPs fight so hard to get re-elected is because they can't bear the thought of living in the kind of society that they have created.

Can't you all march on Westminster or something?

I can"t as I will be away !

I like your penultimate paragraph , very apt.

So which is it...£2,000 a day or £2,500 a week?

It may be immaterial as it's way too much, but it doesn't lend much credence to an article if it's contradictory, or am I missing something??

Quite, Aka!

And even though David Miliband only used it for official functions etc when he was Foreign Secretary, it still cost taxpayers £1154 a week, apparently...

This is a ridiculous and inflammatory article!

So David Milliband only used it for official functions and didn't live in it and it is now costing £116, 000 per annum more to be used as both a home and an official residence.

Presumably David Milliband had to live somewhere in London, possibly a second home which the taxpayer funded and which he now owns. Does anyone know?

And inflation could easily take care of £116, 000 pa.

We either provide official residences or we do not.

Jacqui Smith refused to live in her official residence when she was Home Secretary and used her sister's spare room. Did she entertain foreign dignitaries there too? She certainly made a packet by bending the rules. and John Prescott certainly enjoyed the perks of official residences etc.
Looks as if Hague and his wife are doing everything according to the correct rules

I am not sure what the problem is here, much ado about nothing if you ask me..

Sorry, my post should have read £1154 per day when Miliband was Foreign Secretary.

Then the rules need to be changed - I thought these were times of austerity or have I got that wrong?

They are amoral people if they think that that is acceptable. Strange how they can find the money when they want to.

rosequartz, I agree with your post.

It certainly isn't just 'Tory fingers' in the National pot!

If someone rises through their political party to become Foreign Secretary and there's an official residence that goes with the job....What's the problem?

I would say that the problem is that this government initially talked about us "all being in it together" (although they're, not surprisingly, not saying it very often now). What sort of "austerity" are the elite, including the political elite, being subjected to?

HollyDaze If it's a march you want, The People's Assembly is organising one on Saturday 21 June 1 p.m. from BBC HQ Portland Place. The People's Assembly is an umbrella organisation containing diverse groups, such as UK Uncut and Save Our NHS, who want to see, amongst other things, an end to the privatisation of public services and zero hours contracts, a banking system that is not a cash cow for the super rich but which serves the country as a whole, and an end to the austerity policy that targets those who are least able to withstand austerity measures or defend themselves against them.

Eloethan - thank you for letting me know. Although I can't vote in your elections, I shall give serious consideration about attending that march (I won't tell if you don't). It irks me that they say empty words about the bankers bonuses but are quite happy to take whatever they can themselves. No wonder the public purse is a tad on the empty side.

You're welcome, Holly. It's important that as many people as possible attend this march to show that this government's policy of targetting the poor to make up for the excesses of the rich is not admired by all. I meet so many people who bemoan what is happening yet, perhaps because they are disenchanted with the whole political process or perhaps because they feel their actions will make no difference, are nervous about publicly voicing their opposition.

Maybe it should be publicised more Eloethan, (is there mention of it on Facebook/Twitter/etc?).

I'm sure that those in power would be much more nervous if people turned up en masse; I wish more people in the UK showed that Dunkirk spirit and didn't feel so disempowered. Or a nationwide one day strike (both of my parents were union reps - I wonder if that's hereditary!).

I'm feeling all Citizen Smith now!

The People's Assembly is on Facebook and Twitter. The national media aren't interested in covering such movements. We went on the NHS demo in Manchester last year, which was officially estimated to have attracted around 50,000 people. It got about 20 seconds' coverage on TV.

Twenty seconds coverage! And some say that the media isn't controlled.

On a positive note, that was a good turn-out and being a thorn in someone's side can be just as effective, in the long-term, as bigger pains can be in the short-term. For all those trying to effect change, I wish you all well and congratulate your spirit for fighting the odds; very commendable.

I need to make it clear that my comments also include any politician (whatever colour), bankers etc. etc. etc. the 'man in the street is being taken for a massive ride to nowhere.
I'd love to go to a demo but just at the moment do not have the money to travel that far at short notice.
I too wish that ordinary folk felt they could get up and demonstrate on a far more frequent basis.

I feel very strongly that 'our' government should be looking after the small people. I reckon the others are more than capable of looking after themselves and have certainly done so to date.

When I saw the OP I thought this thread would be about Gove's seizure of £8m (I think) from the fund designed to help local authorities create extra school places where schools are over-subscribed. He has taken it to cover the overspend on free schools. The government spokesperson explained that the free schools also provide places. Yes, but not necessarily where there is overcrowding. This really is scandalous. I love the idea of Jacquie Smith entertaining foreign dignitaries in her sister's spare room. The security people could camp in the garden, I suppose, and they could all have a takeaway.

I might be being a little obtuse but how many foreign dignatories need to be 'entertained'? How many, on an annual basis, turn up to be 'entertained'? What do they turn up for? Who pays for it all?

(We don't get that many so I'm baffled as to why it appears so often.)

The title OP is a partisan statement, so there is no point in claiming now that you meant ALL politicians, bankers etc, ayse!

The Hagues live in a 3 bedroomed flat in the official London residence, not the whole house, and they have redecorated it at their own expense, which they could have charged to the taxpayer.
David Milliband preferred not to live there when he was Foreign Secretary as he had a young family, so the taxpayer had the additional expense of guarding his own London home as well as maintaining the official London residence.

Before anyone picks me up on this, I do realise Jacqui Smith was Home Secretary and therefore may not have been meeting with foreign officials and dignitaries, more Home officials and dignitaries? Where?

I am not taking political sides, just trying to point out some facts. If people want to suggest ways of saving the taxpayer some money on MPs' expenses how about doing away with the huge country residences for ministers of state?

If any one who objects to this were to be offered a job with a rather nice 3 bedroomed flat in a prime location offered as part of the job would they turn it down on the grounds that it is funded by the taxpayer? I thought not. Oh, one or two if you on principle? Really?

The editor of the Daily Mirror should be ashamed at allowing such a sloppy piece of journalism to be published. It is incorrect factually, stastically and politically.

Lilygran, in the back garden in a very expensive marquee, then they could all stay in yurts and perhaps watch movies (!) on a big screen eating their takeaway!

rosequartz and when I said, This is scandalous, I meant Gove. It doesn't seem to matter how many times one Gransnetter refers another to some informative Wikipedia site explaining how officers of the Crown and the Crown itself are financed and who all these venerable piles of masonry belong to, the scandal about the cost of public office keeps on keeping on. As for me, I'd like to know why we are financing a lot of unelected officials in Brussels and Strasbourg to duplicate what we are financing in Westminster. I'm not suggesting they are in any sense corrupt, just that they are superfluous!

Why won't they sign off the EU accounts? And why do we keep letting them getting away with it? I can't bring myself to vote for Nigel but something needs to be done.

If we sold off these large grace and favour mansions it would be a temporary and shortlived addition to the nation's coffers; where would the money go to? Quite honestly I think as a nation we would be the poorer. I would rather they used the grace and favour homes available than we feather and pay for their own personal nests which many of them have been scrambling to do.

At least if they are kicked out of office or lose their job for some reason, the grace and favour home is available for the next incumbent. I have no objection at all to it as a system.
Not sure about the large country houses for their weekend jaunts, though.

Well, I'll just put the link in again, Lilygran. Then I will go to investigate the other thing about Gove upsetting everyone (again)!

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grace_and_favour

Gove www.theguardian.com/education/2014/may/11/michael-gove-warned-to-control-free-schools-spending Much, much more than the £8m I thought it was!