The absolute worse thing about this is that Farage once again gets good mileage out of it with irritatingly accurate soundbites
In every political party, every company and perhaps most families, you get somebody that does things they ought not to do, and the question is how do you deal with it? I think throughout this whole Maria Miller saga, what we've seen is a Prime Minister, who clearly is totally disconnected with how the voters in Britain feel about MPs' expenses.Let's not forget that taxpayers' money helped this woman to make a profit of £1m, it's a truly astonishing situation. To try and pretend that frankly she didn't really know where she lived simply isn't good enough, and I think had Cameron sacked her a week ago, people would have said 'right, Dave's taken control, he's showed us the kind of administration and the kind of regime that he wants in parliament'. The fact that it has been left her, a week on, to resign I think reflects very badly indeed.
[img] 
[/img]
extra hard to stomach as he brags about the £2million hes claimed form the euro parliament, which he rarely bothers to turn up to
hypocrisy is obviously lost on a lot of (ukip)voters
the main point is that she didn't "start using her parents home". Her parents were invited to live with her in a house she and her husband jointly owned from 1996 - even before she was selected as the candidate for her constituency.
The analysis of the the designation of the homes starts on page 12 of the report, and rather unhelpfully for those seeking to score party political points cites the precedent set by Ed Balls and Yvette Cooper which was confirmed by the Commissioner at the time - so what we basically have is application of a new "standard" to historic events in which an MP checked with the commissioner at the time to confirm what should be done / not done and then followed the advice.
I wonder how comfortable we'd all be if we paid all of our due taxes only for HMRC to retrospectively decide that we should have paid a different rate and the media then reported that we had "dodged" tax - which is basically what this comes down to. I rather suspect we'd make the same defence as Ms Miller i.e. if you check the rules and ask for advice, then follow the advice, it's quite unfair to then be taken to pieces in public because the standards and application of the standard changes further down the line.
Would you though?
You know...
.....rather unhelpfully for those seeking to score party political points
An interesting feature about the Maria Miller scandal is that reaction hasn't been drawn along party political lines. Across the political spectrum politicians have described both her behaviour and her apology as wholly unacceptable and have called for her resignation. Even Norman Tebbit had said that she should resign.
[quote=kimbers ]extra hard to stomach as he brags about the £2million hes claimed form the euro parliament, which he rarely bothers to turn up to
hypocrisy is obviously lost on a lot of (ukip)voters
He has also suggested each UKIP MEP donates 50k to UKIP - that quite impressive when their wages are 95 K Euros!!
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/mar/16/ukip-donations-meps-european-elections
But dont worry they are not like other parties riding the gravy train of expenses etc
What Miller did was not above board. Despite your claim. At least that's how the overwhelming majority of the population sees it.
HMRC decide these sorts of things though.
Not you or "the overwhelming majority of the population"
You can elect any property you own as your PPR regardless of how much time you spend there.
Them's the rules.
....rather unhelpfully for those seeking to score party political points
This whole thing has been driven by the press! The silence from the labour benches has been deafening!
Which, along with half the commission who watered down the report being labour, suggests that they're keeping schtum because those in glass houses……
Mind you, that hasn't stopped Nige
I wonder how comfortable we'd all be if we paid all of our due taxes only for HMRC to retrospectively decide that we should have paid a different rate and the media then reported that we had "dodged" tax - which is basically what this comes down to. I rather suspect we'd make the same defence as Ms Miller i.e. if you check the rules and ask for advice, then follow the advice, it's quite unfair to then be taken to pieces in public because the standards and application of the standard changes further down the line.
I think if I'd made a million and a half quid profit on a taxpayer funded house it would probably make up for it.
Neal the expenses exist to do that pay her expenses
They do not exist to enable her to flip her homes for personal gain but to make sure she is not out of pocket. Did she personally gain from this?
There is a balance between MP's rules for expenses, HMRC rules for homes and Morally what is right
She failed to get the right balance....even the MP's agree with that.
I have to say her attitude was appalling in refusing to explain why she doubled the mortgage before the switch - it was clearly IMHO for personal gain-
in a house she and her husband jointly owned from 1996
yes with a £215k mortgage, came to parliament in 2005 & was claiming back interest payments on a mortgage of some £525k - so basically she was borrowing an extra £310k * at the tax payers expense & the committee of MP's thought this was fine whereas the original investigation thought not
* if the £310k borrowing was to make her house suitable for a working MP then fine, but sounds like it might be for making large enough to house parents & then selling at a good profit!
HMRC decide these sorts of things though.
Whether they do or not doesn't make something above board. Maria Miller's behaviour was not above board. That is precisely why she has resigned.
You might reject and be dismissive of opinion of "the overwhelming majority of the population" but it's nice to know that in this case at least it has counted for something.
Whether they do or not doesn't make something above board. Maria Miller's behaviour was not above board. That is precisely why she has resigned.
You might reject and be dismissive of opinion of "the overwhelming majority of the population" but it's nice to know that in this case at least it has counted for something.
She resigned because of capital gains tax ??
Are you sure about that.
Or was it actually nothing to do with it at all.
OK I'm getting a little bored now. You said that everything Maria Miller had done was above board, most people disagree with that, indeed the overwhelming majority of people disagree with that. Let's leave it there shall we.
HMRC decide these sorts of things though.
HMRC also do sweetheart deals with big companies like Vodafone to let them off paying billions in tax. Not everything HMRC lets people get away with is 'above board'. And shouldn't we expect some level of responsible behaviour from MPs? You seem to think not.
She resigned because of capital gains tax ??
Are you sure about that.
Or was it actually nothing to do with it at all.
Oh dear - your straw man arguments are really getting rather pathetic.
There's an election next month and it's Dave's Question Time today. No-one from her party is likely to stand up and support her. She had to go.
The regulation threat to the D Tel reporter probably finished her with the dead tree press. Who've had her on their front pages for about a week. None of the governments good news stories stood a chance. She had to go.
She drew attention to MPs' expenses once again. She had to go.
firstly - i thought this thread was either the retirement of David Miller or worse, the untimely death of Windy Miller.
secondly - what would the Ukrainians do? Dig out your body armour and FF and teach the bitch a real world lesson. The pathetic ambivalence of the electorate in general is the cause and not a symptom.
You said that [b]everything [/b]Maria Miller had done was above board
No I didn't.
Have another read.
I was replying to a post specifically about her capital gains tax on her PPR.
Oh dear - your straw man arguments are really getting rather pathetic.
Not as bad as your reading skills apparently.
How exactly is it a "straw man"
I was talking about her capital gains tax situation.
Nothing else.
I quoted the post I was replying to, just to keep it clear.
If you can find me posting on this thread about anything other than capital gains tax related to her house, then please let me know.
Would you though?You know...
Shag Nigel Farage?
Nope.
nealglover, are you related to her?
I think the point he's making is that, strictly legal and 'above board', or not, if you or I had done something like this - in fact anyone else other than an MP - do you think you'd still be in a job, while sat debating the finer points of the semantics.
Somehow I doubt it. And thats the real point. Its the double standards. As so magnificently illustrated by the scourge of benefit fraudsters IDS, who looked ever so comfortable defending her, then being asked what the difference was between that and someone falsely claiming housing benefit, who he roundly condemns
If you can find me posting on this thread about anything other than capital gains tax related to her house, then please let me know.
Firstly - why choose to focus on a small part of the wider issue and defend Maria Miller on that, while ignoring the wider context of her appalling general behaviour?
Secondly, the issue about avoiding capital gains tax is part of the irresponsible behaviour which has meant she has had to resign.
It's a a straw man because ernie never claimed she resigned solely because of capital gains tax. Pretty obvious really - and a very poor/weird line of argument.
nealglover, are you related to her?
No.
Did she break any rules at all with her capital gains tax ?
I think the point he's making is that, strictly legal and 'above board', or not, if you or I had done something like this - in fact anyone else other than an MP - do you think you'd still be in a job, while sat debating the finer points of the semantics.
Quite. An independent commissioner found that she broke the rules, to the tune of more than £40k. I'm pretty sure that if I did the same, I'd be given my marching orders.
Did she break any rules at all with her capital gains tax ?
Why on earth would you think this is anywhere near the most important issue here? Or is it just that you want to 'win'? You're looking pretty daft here TBH.
Quite. An independent commissioner found that she broke the rules, to the tune of more than £40k. I'm pretty sure that if I did the same, I'd be given my marching orders.
… and I'm pretty sure, having been given our marching orders, we'd also have one or two questions to answer from the police
Did she break any rules at all with her capital gains tax ?
You said it was all "above board". Above board means straightforward, open, and honest.
Maria Miller's behaviour with regards to flipping homes has not been open and honest.
And her behaviour to the independent inquiry was not straightforward, open, and honest. Which is precisely why the inquiry dragged on for such a long time. She failed to co-operate fully with the inquiry.
Why on earth would you think this is anywhere near the most important issue here?
Where did I say I thought it was ?
Am I only allowed to comment on "the most important issue"
Or is ok with you, if I reply to a subject that someone else brought up ?
Or is it just that you want to 'win'? You're looking pretty daft here TBH.
Why ?
Because I replied to something that someone else brought up. ?
You will need to explain.
What hasnt been mentioned here, is that when caught out by the Daily Telegraph, she then got her lackies to threaten the Paper with extra regulations, at the press regulations committee, of which she chaired/sat upon.
That, to me, means corruption, which is far worse than trying to fiddle her expenses.
You will need to explain.
I already did, read my post before last. If you don't get it that's not my problem.
Am I only allowed to comment on "the most important issue"
No, but your dogged determination to defend someone to the hilt on a minor technicality while ignoring the wider context entirely is pretty weird.
defend someone to the hilt
Stop making things up.
I defended her CGT situation. nothing else whatsoever.
It's hardly "dogged determination"
Someone brought it up. I commented on it.
Since then all I have done is defend my comment.
If people with their pitchfork blinkers on can't cope with the fact that not [b] everything[/b] she did was wrong, that's not my fault.
Again, I didn't bring it up, I just replied to the person that did.
Its a fair cop guv. The raping and murdering was me, but theres no way I was involved in any shoplifting. Shoplifters are scum!!! 😆
[url= http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/apr/08/maria-millar-mps-lip-service-good-conduct-standards-committe ]The Real Point[/url]
written before her resignation
There was a time when she called for a recall system, whereby constituencies could bring errant MPs back to face criticism and possible replacement...
... does she still support that?
Its a fair cop guv. The raping and murdering was me, but theres no way I was involved in any shoplifting. Shoplifters are scum!!!
I get your point , but it was important enough to be reported in the papers, and important enough for people to mention on here.
First drugs, now this. I thought he'd been rehabilitated and accepted back into the peloton.
[img] 
[/img]
Really kimbers, I sincerely doubt Mr Cameron would be quaffing champagne from a wine glass. 🙄
Disappointed the odious woman has been allowed to resign, she should have been sacked.
Cameron approves of your quip sbob.
[img] 
[/img]
Which presumably makes the doubling of the House of Common's Champagne consumption since the Tories came back to government absolutely fine.
Although quite what the Bullingdon Boys have been celebrating I'm not sure.......shafting everyone and getting away with it ?
Which presumably makes the doubling of the House of Common's Champagne consumption since the Tories came back to government absolutely fine.
We don't have a Tory government, we have a coalition goverment between the Conservative party and the Liberal Democrats, incase it escaped your attention.
Maybe if violent drunkards like Labour's Eric Joyce drank a little less, the bill could be reduced.
I sincerely hope you don't interpret this post as suggesting that spending that much public money on champers is absolutely fine.
Everyone, the house of commons champagne budget has gone up - let's rise up against the greedy shampoo-swilling overlords..
“The increasing trend is to sell more receptions than dinner events which attract a higher number of guests and is the reason for increased consumption and sales in alcohol. To accommodate this increase in demand, banqueting has increased its order of champagne stocks." (house of commons food and beverage buyer)
Of course we have a Tory government. The LibDems are quite inconsequential and are simply aiding and abetting.
And I could be wrong but I doubt Eric Joyce got drunk on Champagne.
He also got expelled from the Labour Party as getting drunk and having fights with Tories in the House of Commons isn't Labour Party policy.
In contrast I assume David Cameron fully supports the doubling of Champagne consumption in the House of Commons since he became Prime Minister. Or have you got some proof that this has all happened against his express wishes ?
Prehaps a good day to remember that a guy who stole a £3.50 bottle of water during the riots went to jail for 6 months... 😕
He also got expelled from the Labour Party as getting drunk and having fights with Tories in the House of Commons isn't Labour Party policy.
Shame i reckon Ed balls would take most of the cabinet out on his own
I think Eric Joyce should be congratulated for punching Tory's. He's only doing what an awful lot of us would do given half the chance.
Lets be honest, given the 'Permanent Austerity' they've imposed on the nation, I'd imagine a bar full of the guffawing, champagne-swilling, chinless hoorays would have that effect on most right-minded people
Ignoring your initial fallacy,
I doubt Eric Joyce got drunk on Champagne.
this just exposes your prejudice, which was why I was careful to include all three major parties in my post.
They are all self serving shits, but some people will only look to pick up on certain negative traits of an MP if they are from a particular party.
I would be interested to know why you think you are aware of the record breaking expense claiming MP's drinking habits though, but for the record, he was drinking wine.
Red, so probably ok in your manifesto. 😉
