BN66 - Time to fight back (Chapter 3)

[elpinar]

cashing in CTDs

With the interest rate on these being so low - does anyone know if you cash them in do you still get the benefit for the time you held them - or does all your interest get added again?

would be intersted to try and find out iof those of us wiht CTDs are alos the ones who have no recieved CNs yet (like me) or if thats just coincidence

Also - savigs wise - halifax international - its down to 4% now (was 5) but basically - you can save up to 2k a month and you get the rate for the next year fixed at what the rate was when your first payment arrived .

http://www.halifax-international.com...ular-saver.asp

[SantaClaus]

I am on the case. Watch this space.

Well done DR! Look forward to signing.

[Emigre]

I am on the case. Watch this space.

Don't forget to include words like "fair", "proportionate", "in the public interest", "intent of parliament", always been our view, a reference to the ECHR test etc

Go for it!

[smalldog]

dya know, the whole home secretary thing sickens me. If I were to lose and say had to try and stump up £100k, that could be the £100k towards paying for her F***ing living costs for her second home! what a brilliant use of someones money who has just been bankrupted over a tax bill....

[anxious1]

Expenses petition

You know, thats not a bad idea! Its would not have to be for a long period, as it would be the No10 answer to the petition that is needed.

It would get a lot of support from everyone I suspect - this is an area everyone is not happy with, especially as its a waste of tax payers money........ just image how much money they could get back if the repayment was retrospective!!!!!


I would love to hear the grounds when the petition is finished, they give not to do it!

You might want to be a bit careful there, we're all asking our MPs for help here aren't we? Having a pop at their expenses is a pretty blunt weapon!

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Petition rejected

Reason given:

Outside the remit or powers of the Prime Minister and Government

Further information: This is a matter for direct communication with Parliament.


We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to..
Change the rules retrospectively to claw back MPs expenses

[BDetails[/B]
In last year’s budget, the Government changed the law retrospectively to claw back tax people had avoided paying by exploiting a loophole in the law. They argued that people may have followed the “letter of the law” but not the “spirit of the law”. Ordinary taxpayers are now facing retrospective tax demands, and are also expected to pay interest on the money for commercial restitution.

However, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

The same principle should be applied to MPs expenses. Where an MP has followed the “letter of the rules”, but not the “spirit of the rules”, they should be made to repay their expenses, and charged interest. Dubious expense claims for so-called “second homes” should be first to come under the spotlight.

[BolshieBastard]

Emailed BN66 letter to Ben Wallace, MP for Lancaster & Fylde. Email acknowledgement says a reply will be sent asap!

[SantaClaus]

Reason given:

Outside the remit or powers of the Prime Minister and Government

Further information: This is a matter for direct communication with Parliament.


We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to..
Change the rules retrospectively to claw back MPs expenses

[BDetails[/B]
In last year’s budget, the Government changed the law retrospectively to claw back tax people had avoided paying by exploiting a loophole in the law. They argued that people may have followed the “letter of the law” but not the “spirit of the law”. Ordinary taxpayers are now facing retrospective tax demands, and are also expected to pay interest on the money for commercial restitution.

However, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

The same principle should be applied to MPs expenses. Where an MP has followed the “letter of the rules”, but not the “spirit of the rules”, they should be made to repay their expenses, and charged interest. Dubious expense claims for so-called “second homes” should be first to come under the spotlight.

Thats a pity it was rejected. Maybe we could reword to call for an enquiry into claiming back expenses retrospectively.

[Emigre]

Thats a pity it was rejected. Maybe we could reword to call for an enquiry into claiming back expenses retrospectively.

All 3 main parties have called for it and now the Cycloptic Scottish Idiot has announced a review of MPs expenses, and salaries, but not before approving an increase in pension contributions to their final salary scheme from 26% to 28%. Shades of Fred? This is called pocket-lining before they get fired.

DR - you should persevere with the wording. The issue they have in the original words may be the reference to others facing retrospection. I suggest using the same words they have to justify the hit on us - fair, proportionate, public interest, spirit of the law, deliberate intent etc etc. Run for a month, and when their refusal arrives it will provide ammunition for our cause. The wording will need to be tight to avoid the retort that they are reviewing it.

These guys are slimy self serving, f**k the electorate b*st*rds. They deserve no sympthy from anyone. They are failures and in any other role in society would have been relieved of any responsibility a long time ago. The fact that they are able to line their pockets ahead of their departure is offensive.

If you want to serve in public office you should not only BE above reproach you should be SEEN to be above reproach. These guys fail on every count of integrity. Wow! Sir Alan would have a field day.

[smalldog]

if anyone hasnt read animal farm yet I stringly urge you to read it, Orwell was spot on. These guys are already standing on two legs and drinking whisky..there are some scary similarities between the book and whats going on right now.