Re: Surely it's time for a cull of these pinstriped chancers : Mon Jul 01, 2013 12:41 pm  

Strangely enough, I am in favour of paying MPs more.

However I would couple the increase to a few other changes to their contract of employment, such as:

1) Their job as MP should be their only form of remuneration. They should immediately resign all directorships and sell all shareholdings (not to family members), except those held in openly-recognisable pension funds.

2) Any fees received for TV/radio appearances or other media work should be donated to charity

3) They will receive a subsistence allowance to cover time spent away from home. This will be at a set rate and will cover any meals or accommodation. If they wish to spend more, they are welcome to pay the extra from their own pockets.

4) Travel expenses will be based on a 1.6l car at national average pump prices. If they decide to use an alternative form of transport, they can fund the difference themselves. Only those MPs living more than 200 miles from Westminster would be expensed to use air travel for commuting to and from home and that will be in the form of one return ticket (Economy class) per week.

5) Any MP found to have been fiddling his expenses to be summarily dismissed with forfeiture of all benefits.

There will be anomalies but not many and it shouldn't be difficult to work around them

Re: Surely it's time for a cull of these pinstriped chancers : Mon Jul 01, 2013 12:42 pm  

Andy Gilder wrote:

Mainly, to pee off bigoted racist xenophobes like you. I hope.

The point in issue is that if people come here of their own accord, without permission / invitation why should residents pay for their legal hearings? They should pay themselves or accept they must leave if they are not British.

Re: Surely it's time for a cull of these pinstriped chancers : Mon Jul 01, 2013 12:44 pm  

Does that include those who arrive claiming asylum? They are here without permission in the first instance.

Should they be denied access to legal representation and forced to conduct their own hearings in a foreign language?

Re: Surely it's time for a cull of these pinstriped chancers : Mon Jul 01, 2013 12:45 pm  

Andy Gilder wrote:

Another balanced article from the Wail.

Frankly I don't know why the government doesn't just go the whole hog and start deporting people without trial, tribunal or hearing.

I just hope those who are happy to bypass due process for them furriners don't find themselves needing the legal aid system at any point in the future. Once Failing Grayling has finished with it, there won't be much left and what there is won't be bothered in the slightest about right and wrong or winning and losing.

How long does Grayling seriously think he can circumvent the due process of law before Strasbourg get involved? Now then I really can see advocates bills racking up.

Re: Surely it's time for a cull of these pinstriped chancers : Mon Jul 01, 2013 12:56 pm  

cod'ead wrote:

How long does Grayling seriously think he can circumvent the due process of law before Strasbourg get involved? Now then I really can see advocates bills racking up.

That's the annoying thing.

HMG uses the likes of Abu Qatada as an example to run these scare stories about immigrants and legal aid costs, but if Theresa Domi-May-trix hadn't continually tried to break the law by shipping him out to a country with a reputation for extracting confessions by torture he wouldn't have had to go through so many appeals.

Re: Surely it's time for a cull of these pinstriped chancers : Mon Jul 01, 2013 1:12 pm  

Andy Gilder wrote:

Does that include those who arrive claiming asylum? They are here without permission in the first instance.

Should they be denied access to legal representation and forced to conduct their own hearings in a foreign language?

If they arrived in the UK after travelling overland through other "safe" countries, they should not be afforded legal assistance.

Re: Surely it's time for a cull of these pinstriped chancers : Mon Jul 01, 2013 1:54 pm  

cod'ead wrote:

Strangely enough, I am in favour of paying MPs more.

However I would couple the increase to a few other changes to their contract of employment, such as:

1) Their job as MP should be their only form of remuneration. They should immediately resign all directorships and sell all shareholdings (not to family members), except those held in openly-recognisable pension funds.

2) Any fees received for TV/radio appearances or other media work should be donated to charity

3) They will receive a subsistence allowance to cover time spent away from home. This will be at a set rate and will cover any meals or accommodation. If they wish to spend more, they are welcome to pay the extra from their own pockets.

4) Travel expenses will be based on a 1.6l car at national average pump prices. If they decide to use an alternative form of transport, they can fund the difference themselves. Only those MPs living more than 200 miles from Westminster would be expensed to use air travel for commuting to and from home and that will be in the form of one return ticket (Economy class) per week.

5) Any MP found to have been fiddling his expenses to be summarily dismissed with forfeiture of all benefits.

There will be anomalies but not many and it shouldn't be difficult to work around them

Sadly, I think the idea is to increase salaries and stay firmly aboard the expenses/corporate toadying gravy train.

Re: Surely it's time for a cull of these pinstriped chancers : Mon Jul 01, 2013 2:03 pm  

6) Put in at least 40 provable hours per week, either in the House of Commons, government offices, official meetings or surgeries in constituencies.... including during periods when Parliament is in recess.
Paid holidays to be in line with the National average.

Re: Surely it's time for a cull of these pinstriped chancers : Mon Jul 01, 2013 2:42 pm  

El Barbudo wrote:

Paid holidays to be in line with the National average.

And not to be taken on an oligarch's yacht.

Re: Surely it's time for a cull of these pinstriped chancers : Mon Jul 01, 2013 3:44 pm  

cod'ead wrote:

How long does Grayling seriously think he can circumvent the due process of law before Strasbourg get involved? Now then I really can see advocates bills racking up.

Which is what he wants, another chance to have a go at "The EU"