Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
21 January 2009
10:2813391#1
Brown has ordered Labour MP's to vote against the publication of detailed MP expenses (the John Lewis list).
DC has told Conservative MPs to vote in favour of publication and Charlie Elphicke has written in support of publication.
Where does Gwyn Prosser stand on this?
Will he defy Brown and vote for publication or will he fall into line?
Just what have those who are against publication got to hide?
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
21 January 2009
10:5813395#2
Below is a statement from
GWYN PROSSER MP
on the subject of MP's Expenses.
Its just in hot off the wire......
Gwyn says....
"I expected full details of all MP's expenses to be published by the parliamentary authorities last autumn and I was comfortable with this. When it failed to happen I was informed that publication had been delayed until January so last week's news that further votes were scheduled on the subject took most of us by surprise.
I understand that pressure to partly exempt MPs from the Freedom of Information Act came from the 1922 Committee of Conservative MPs and some members of the Parliamentary Labour Committee. At no time have I sought any exemptions, I can not see the justification for such exemptions and I will not be voting for any exemptions.
If the vote is lost then all details of all MP's expenses will be published. If the vote is carried I will still endeavour to publish my own expenses in as much detail as possible - but this will require the assistance of the House of Commons Administration Department."
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
21 January 2009
12:5513399#3
We will see. His name is not among a list of just 8 Labour MPs (including Frank Field) who have said they are defying Brown's 3 line whip.
Cameron has instructed all Conservative MPs to vote for publication.
GP is just being disingenious mentioning 1922 Committee.
We have seen him (GP) before saying one thing and voting for another.
Sid Pollitt
21 January 2009
13:3913401#4
The Prime Minister has just said in the HoC that they are having to do things in a different way and will be transparent over this, the problem came because the main oppostion party had initially agreed the way forward and had then withdrawn support. The main opposition party were probably playing games [again].
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
21 January 2009
13:4713402#5
Brown it seems has quickly backed down and Brown is telling some 'Brownies' again to try to save face and divert blame. He is claiming that the Whips had agreed an approach but the Tory whips office knew nothing about it!!!
A thought. Why was it that Brown decided he would have to use a 3 line whip on his MPs if a 'deal was agreed'? If there was a deal then a whip would not be necessary.
Alan Duncan, Shadow Leader of the House, made it clear the instruction to Conservative MPs to vote against was a reaction to the Labour 3 line whip.
Sid Pollitt
21 January 2009
17:3313410#6
I wonder if Tory MPs get their family members to fill in their expense forms. That'd make good economical sense because they'd then be able to pay them for the service like Conway did, and that Tory MEP too, is his name Ben Dover? I've just looked it up that's not his name that what they same to their constituents when they get elected.
Guest 667- Registered: 6 Apr 2008
- Posts: 919
21 January 2009
18:4913414#7
My little old point of view. If you have got nothing to hide, then what is the problem with every one knowing?
Simple.
I have to declare my expenses to the Charity Commission, so why should MP's not declare theirs when doing their expenses.
H
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
21 January 2009
18:5313415#8
Quite right Harry.
Now we have had the climb down maybe we will see exactly why some were so desperate to hide them.
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
21 January 2009
20:2613418#9
a u-turn is a u-turn what ever party you in.
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
22 January 2009
09:2113462#10
It was good to see Gwyns quote on this Expenses situation yesterday.
For those who may have missed it see post #2 above its all there.
Gwyn is clearly comfortable with exposure, he was expecting it last autumn and is clearly equally happy to expose all today!
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
22 January 2009
09:2713466#11
Just tory trying to play politics
Glad Gwyn been sensible and is sensible over this issue
Realy I find it difficult to justify the wages
but thats cross party, dont forget its not jus labour mp's that get all this dosh!!
Guest 671- Registered: 4 May 2008
- Posts: 2,095
22 January 2009
10:2413473#12
Honesty and integrity should come naturally to all persons in such influential positions; they should not have to be forced into openness.
Same goes for I.D cards, if you have nothing to hide, why be worried
"My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum"
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
22 January 2009
10:3413476#13
Gary c with you on this one
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
22 January 2009
12:4413487#14
the public should be payed 50 quid every time a politicl broadcast comes on telly or radio.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
22 January 2009
12:4413488#15
Gary - no disagreement here over MP expenses but I am completely in disagreement over the id cards.
Too many of our ancient liberties have been trampled on already we must not allow a situation where we might get imprisoned for not producing an id card on demand to some official. Make no mistake, that is where the id card policy will lead. We already have far too much intrusion in our lives by Government.
Guest 675- Registered: 30 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,610
22 January 2009
13:0813491#16
And here I go, agreeing with BarryW again (I'm scared).
The only ones that will benefit from ID cards are the governments coffers and the people cloning them for illegal use. The innocent, with 'nothing to hide', are the ones who will suffer from identity theft and heavy fines (already passed into the statute book) or worse from not following the labyrinthian regulations concerning them.
Politics, it seems to me, for years, or all too long, has been concerned with right or left instead of right or wrong.
Richard Armour
Guest 671- Registered: 4 May 2008
- Posts: 2,095
22 January 2009
16:0413506#17
Yes I do agree there could be negative issues with ID cards, I don't want to pay for it, is one, but I would pay for it, if it included driving licence and passport all in one document. Cloning, id theft etc is already here, introducing ID cards wont alter that and our phone calls and emails can be can already be monitored, which I cant say I am happy with but if bringing in ID cards saves one child from being exposed to a paedophile, one instance, amongst many other crimes it will help to prevent, then I don't care if ancient liberties get trampled on.
"My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum"
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
22 January 2009
22:1013553#18
sorry but the argument that just one child or life saved because of a new law, has been used by by authoritarian governments since the year dot.
surveillance has got out of control now.
anti terror laws are invoked willy nilly.
the latest thing is emails having to be kept by internet service providers for a length of time for future perusal by our betters.
can you imagine the army of snoopers that would have to be employed?
Guest 671- Registered: 4 May 2008
- Posts: 2,095
23 January 2009
13:4013598#19
Howard,
i am not against what you are saying, i agree with your concerns, what i am saying, personally,i am willing to put up with the negatives to achieve the positives that ID cards would achieve.
"My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum"
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
23 January 2009
20:2713658#20
i think that you may be in a minority gary.
the info that would be held would be much more than law agencies would need