340 MPs are using taxpayers' money to claim energy bills on expenses

Sunday 03 November 2013 UK
MPs feel the heat after claiming energy bills on expenses

The rising cost of energy is now a key political issue. But it has been revealed that MPs are claiming thousands of pounds in expenses for energy bills at their second homes - at a cost to taxpayers.
News

MPs are facing criticism for claiming £200,000 in taxpayers' money to cover their energy bills at a time when home heating costs are rising.

Some 340 MPs, including government ministers, have used parliamentary expenses to cover the cost of heating their second homes, the Sunday Mirror revealed.

Bills of over £1,000 were submitted by 41 MPs while 78 made claims for £500 in the 12 months up to March of this year, analysis found.

MPs have not broken any parliamentary rules but the revelation comes at a time of heightened tensions over spiralling costs of gas and electricity.

Conservative MP Nadhim Zahawi, founder of market research firm YouGov, claimed the most with a bill of £5,822.27 covering electricity and heating oil for his Warwickshire estate.

International Development Minister Alan Duncan claimed £2,750 for electricity bills and £1,250 in heating oil for his home in Rutland, Leicestershire and Universities Minister David Willetts, claimed £2,596.

Factcheck: Turning the heat up on PM's fuel poverty claims

Labour MP John Mann, who did not claim for his energy bills, said MPs who submitted the claims should start “wearing thicker jumpers”.

Speaking to the Sunday Mirror he said: "There will be people including pensioners who can't afford to heat their homes who will be furious to find out that MPs who can afford to pay them are putting in such high claims.

"Government ministers are attacking Ed Miliband for proposing to freeze prices but they don't have to worry about the cost because they can put the claims in."
Costs rise

Energy industry regulator Ofgem analysis this week showed that increases announced by four of the Big Six have averaged 9.1 per cent with wholesale prices rising by 1.7 per cent.

Dave Prentis, general secretary of Unison, said "It's disgraceful that well-paid MPs should claim expenses for heating costs at the same time that thousands of families are struggling to pay to turn the oven on to cook dinner for their families.

"These are the same hypocritical MPs who have failed to get a grip on soaring fuel and energy costs, rising food bills and pay freezes."

340 MPs are using taxpayers' money to claim energy bills on expenses

news.sky.com...

These politicians that are supposedly representing the common people and are so disconnected from ordinary folk its unreal. They talk a load of waffle and do as they please, half of them only turn up to the commons to collect their payment for doing so.

People need to stop playing along with this political charade, either by boycott or voting in an independent party. The BS we are being spoon fed in politics, taxation, propaganda, spying, needs to come to an end.

There is only 650 elected members, so more than half the house claim on what is probably their 2nd homes, while the poorest struggle to pay their bills.

It's bloody infuriating that they have the gall to belittle the people for being benefit scroungers when they are getting more benefits just to pay there heating bills that is even more costly than what an average person on benefits would get to help with living expenses in a year, the hypocrisy is staggering.

I also read another stat somewhere that since the MP's were caught fiddling their expenses the cost in claims has risen by 70%

reply to post by Horus12


Can't help but feel this is like bribery, "here have free energy on us, we'll just screw the public every winter with price increases. " Energy companies are vile and they answer to no-one except the pound sign.

The whole thing is a joke, and the joke is on ordinary people who have to buy their homes and run them on what they earn after the taxman has ripped in, Oh! and ordinary people have to buy their cars and fuel them, and their furniture, and their clothes, and their Garden gnomes. These career politicians piss me off, they live off of our backs the bunch of hypocrites, they are corrupt and stinky. Of course they do a few 'good' things like telling the BBC to knock a few bob off the TV licence in these hard times, fecking hikarious isn't it?

reply to post by Horus12


Traditionally, entitlement culture only existed amongst those that never had to work for a living. What they despise is the same sense of entitlement amongst the working classes. What they do not know is how they despise themselves, else they would have some pride or honour, pay for their own damn comforts and stop stealing from the public purse.

Unfortunately the whole thing isn't a joke, if only it was, that would be funny.

I've seen how the press have focused on benefit recipients and there scrounging ways. I've also noticed how the tide of opinion has been swaying towards the MSM.

The current administration use unfortunate language, which will come back to haunt some within. However, this is across parties and just demonstrates the hypocrisy of these people.

This is exactly what Russell Brand was talking about and to see how the Newspapers have reported against him since, appears to reveal they are afraid of his ideology. This to me suggests there might just be something in it, after all they are the mouthpiece of the Administration.

teapot
reply to post by Horus12

 

Traditionally, entitlement culture only existed amongst those that never had to work for a living. What they despise is the same sense of entitlement amongst the working classes. What they do not know is how they despise themselves, else they would have some pride or honour, pay for their own damn comforts and stop stealing from the public purse.

edit on 3/11/2013 by teapot because: edit

To love, you must first learn to love yourself. These full time plutocrats haven't even made the first step. Money needs to be taken out of politics, maybe a true democracy needs to be in order. The bureaucrats need to be paid the most commonly occuring wage of the people and then they can get a taste of the reality and keep interests where they should be, the collective quality of life.

reply to post by BlubberyConspiracy


I have been looking but have not as yet found anything that lists all the MP'S that claim domestic fuel costs. If I do find such a resource, I will check to see what list my MP is on and if he has made such claims, I think I shall write to him and demand that he desist.

What really takes the pee is that this money is for second homes! They're probably only using them during the summer months! Now add to that the fact that people are being made homeless because of the housing shortage!

They have a spare home!
They use OUR money to heat those homes!

Every single one of them should be made homeless as punishment.

VoidHawk
What really takes the pee is that this money is for second homes! They're probably only using them during the summer months! Now add to that the fact that people are being made homeless because of the housing shortage!

They have a spare home!
They use OUR money to heat those homes!

Every single one of them should be made homeless as punishment.

I would like to see the rest of the list of "entitlements" these politicians think they are owed. It's nothing new, I would imagine the same practice continues in most governments around the world.

Expenses like communication, transportation, health insurance, legal expenses, certain legal immunities, lots of paid vacations, you don't have to show up to work every day, and many more. In some positions and countries, "serving" in an elected position means a paycheck for the rest of your life for a few years of "work."

The politicians are the real enemies of their own nations. It's no wonder they're addicted to their government jobs and recruit family into the political mafia whenever possible.

Mmmm... for heating their "second homes", which they also gamed the system to acquire, at the expense of the taxpayer once again.
My place of work is 50 miles from where I live. I couldn't afford to move there and so it costs me between £2500 and £3000 a year in fuel, not to mention the additional wear and tear on the car. I don't get to claim any fuel expenses or get preferential rates on purchasing or leasing a "second home" closer to work, so why should the MP's? Don't forget too that many of these second homes have also been sold later, making the MP's who had them some very tidy profits indeed.

I remember seeing figures a few years ago showing how much our local MP was claiming in fuel expenses to travel to Westminster each year. Now, unless he drives a Ferrari or some other gas guzzling hypercar, I just couldn't fathom how it was so much. If my annual fuel bill is, for example £3000, and I travel a 100 mile round trip each working day, then how could his have been twice that amount when his trip into central London would be 20 miles or so. Even allowing for travel around his constituency area it was excessive!

When they go on about "benefit scroungers" on the news, they always present the very worst cases you could find, to give the impression that it is the norm, and so demonize ALL claimants. However, the government members, with their "claim for everything" attitude are the biggest scroungers of the lot, and expect these expenses as some sort of entitlement as they are, after all, so deserving!
There was a good Channel4 programme a few months ago that looked at the expenses issue, after all the scandal and "reforms" had been implemented. As expected, it was pretty much business as usual as far as gaming the system went.

I have been saying for years that all they need to do is buy / build an apartment complex next to or close to Westminster, so that when MP's need to travel into London they have a place to stay. No permanent room allocation, just a drop-in accommodation. If MP's want a second home, let them buy it and pay for it's heating and upkeep at their own expense, and not burden the taxpayer with the cost. Seems simple and fair, Doesn't it?

reply to post by Britguy


Quite - I have always argued that MP's should not have any expenses over and above what those in private employment would expect, say train fares or hotel fee's.

The second home thing is a thing of the past when MP's might live several day's travel from London and hotels were not widespread.

In this day an age, all MP's should either be put up in a 3/4 star hotel instead of having a "second home" or, a better long-term option would be to build an apartment block where MP's could stay in serviced apartments.

For people on £70k a year+, they really do take the piss.

You see that kind of thing with the rich people in the US as well. You would be surprised the kind of things you can get written off as business expenses when you have the money to hire some bigshot tax lawyer to make everything look kosher.

Anyone caught breaking the law should be prosecuted accordingly whether they are a citizen or a politician. If you're a politician and you have committed a federal crime like fraud, then you should be fired and sent to a federal prison or whatever they call federal prisons in countries with provinces. I'd suggest the guillotine as a good start. haha

I do think that when Cameron and that ghastly smug Chancellor Osborne smirk at the cameras whilst announcing cuts here, there and everywhere, to find out that they have left themselves and all politicians in a position of claiming heating bills, is unbelievable. I do hope that the Media will pick up on this as well as the tv and really take them to task. Its a pity the General Election is not coming up soon.

Just slightly aside to this, although linked, was a very interesting little fact that Caroline Flint let out on the tv the other day. As I understand it, apparently the Energy Companies that supply the UK have set up intermediary companies between themselves and the supplying companies which means that they get double dips at charging the consumer so pushing prices up. With the new middle company in existence we, the customers, bear the cost of the extra transaction, the profit of which goes into the pocket of the energy company one gets one's supply from. This piece of information was not picked up by the Interviewer but I wondered if anyone else had heard of this greedy little trick, because Caroline Flint obviously thought it was a sham.

You can get anywhere in the UK in a couple of hours, much less than a day, so there is no need for MP's to have free 2nd homes. If they don't want to commute they should get different job. The expenses they claim are no less than frivolous.

MP's are the only citizens who are allowed to claim taxpayer money without being means-tested first. Anyone else is means-tested, and if you have a well paid job and an unearned inherited fortune in the bank you can't claim a penny. You have to be destitute to get anything.

Hefty wages and frivolous perks should be taken away from MP's and out of politics altogether. If MP's were paid basic salaries and no perks then these positions will begin to be filled by the right sort of people, the type who want to do the job, unlike now where they're only in it for personal gain and profit.

Over-rewarding MP's positions only attracts the wrong sort of people to the jobs, the greedy corrupt type, and these types will always fill their own pockets before taking care of gov business. They can't help it. And this is why a politician's job should never be granted frivolous pay, perks and priviledges, these things distract from the job too much.

Pay them basic wages and that's it. Let's have some real people in these jobs whose ambition is to make life better, happier and fairer for the nation's people.

If they were paid just a basic pay, how many of today's politicians would be MP's? How many would have even considered being an MP if there were no wealth to be gained from it? None, I fear. An MP's job should be for people with two feet on the ground and not ten feet off it, with an 'inner calling' to create and maintain a 'fair for all' society. To get this type of person in the job we have to take away the lucrative financial perks and luxuries out of the picture altogether. The greedy types won't want the job if they can't get rich from it - it's the only way to get them out and keep them out.

reply to post by Horus12


Yeah, read this the other day and thought 'wow' 'talk about Liberties'... this is disgusting practice and should definately be investigated and withdrawn from 'Government Subsidies'.

We are and have always been taken for a ride here in Britain. We have been Manipulated, Bribed, Extorted for many years now by Companies using excuses to up their costs every year!

This System needs to stop. Its corrupt to the core!

smurfy
The whole thing is a joke, and the joke is on ordinary people who have to buy their homes and run them on what they earn after the taxman has ripped in, Oh! and ordinary people have to buy their cars and fuel them, and their furniture, and their clothes, and their Garden gnomes. These career politicians piss me off, they live off of our backs the bunch of hypocrites, they are corrupt and stinky. Of course they do a few 'good' things like telling the BBC to knock a few bob off the TV licence in these hard times, fecking hikarious isn't it?

True what you say but you can always stop paying the TV License Fee! Everyone can stop paying the TV License Fee from today. Just get on the Internet and watch your Favorite TV/Films on TV Catchup Sites!! No need to pay any extra Fees!!

Tell everyone you know... spread the word!

Another thing to consider is that many of these leeches also hold external director level positions (some multiple positions) in other organizations! That in itself is a recipe for corruption and conflicts of interest.

So, it's not like many of them are short of a few quid. It galls me every time I hear one of them say that they are worse paid than counterparts in the private sector. What they don't mention of course, is that in the private sector, they'd be having to account for every penny they claimed on expenses and would also be held accountable for every penny spent, not walking away from failed initiatives that have cost £Millions and keeping their jobs without any remorse at all.

There has always been the revolving door scenario of MP's leaving to take up lucrative lobbying positions and directorships, with organizations they have promoted whilst in office. This too, is probably worthy of some scrutiny, but I won't hold my breath waiting.

Bottom line is that we need a complete shake up and reorganization of government to stamp out this blatant robbery of the public purse, and all the corruption from the local council level right to the very top of the pile.