Forum Topic

"How can you say that Mary Macleod does not say anything or express her views?" I just did - because its true!I have indeed met Mary and a very nice lady she is too. I have also copied her in on about 180 emails concerning local issues but she has remained silent. I agree I received a brochure about her last summer. I would however be very concerned about a PPC who is ignored by the local press. Not a good start is it? Not surprisingly she didn't join concerned residents at a meeting with Thames Water's External Affairs and Environmental Director today. Its a great pity as the press were there in full force so she missed yet again a good opportunity to engage with the community and a (free photo-shoot). Delivering 250,000 leaflets is futile if you don't actually find out what is going on in the community and then blame the press for not taking any notice of you. Perhaps she could engage with the community one to one instead of blogging?Anyway - my point was, and still is, that the 'takers' in the Labour Cabinet have not been condemned by Cameron because when the can of worms is opened, his lot will no doubt be found just as guilty for 'legally' exploiting their expenses. Even at local Council level the Thompson/Reid escapade to Cannes leaves one with little doubt that they are all in it to have a good time at taxpayers' expense. Thus my suggestion that its time for a total change. Again I challenge anyone to state that Vince Cable has ever exploited his expenses. Thus my suggestion: Dakers for MP, Cable for PM.  Total change is required to get this country out of the muck inflicted upon us by both the Tory and Labour governments. Mr Dakers has always stated on his website that he would not claim unnecessary expenses even if he is perfectly entitled to them. The difference between him and the other lot is that we believe him because his bosses won't tolerate the behaviour we have had to accept from other MP's with full approval and support of their leaders.

Steve Taylor ● 6265d

According to the Daily Mail:"Health Minister Ann Keen has been confirmed as Britain's most costly MP. Her expenses claim totalled a whopping £167,306 in the last financial year - the highest excluding transport costs, which disproportionately affect some English and Welsh and all Scottish MPs. "Her husband Alan, who represents a neighbouring seat, claimed a total of £146,408, bringing the couple's overall cost to the taxpayer to £313,714 in the last financial year - excluding travel costs. "The couple, nicknamed 'Mr and Mrs Expenses', claimed the extraordinary costs despite living just a 30-minute drive from Westminster. "The claims came on top of their annual salary, which was worth £61,820 to each at the time, and a gold-plated final salary pension scheme. "The MPs represent adjoining constituencies in West London, nine miles from the House of Commons, and live in their constituency home in Brentford. "In all, the Keens, who are officially 'outer London MPs', received a total of £38,193 in second-home allowance alone, to cover the cost of running the cost of an apartment on the South Bank, a short walk from the House of Commons. "The property's value has risen from an estimated £500,000 in 2002 to around £750,000 today - meaning the pair are estimated to have built up a £250,000 property nestegg courtesy of the taxpayer."There is no suggestion that Mrs Keen, 60, and her 71-year-old husband broke the rules. However, critics claim they live so near to the Commons that they should be able to claim only the inner London supplement of £2,700. Last year it emerged that Mrs Keen had insured her husband's life for £430,000 and put the premium on expenses. That is despite the fact that both members are covered thanks to their parliamentary pensions. "Mrs Keen also became the first MP to face action for breaching the 'duty of care' to a constituent. She was ordered to pay £15,000 in damagesto 84-year- old war veteran John Taylor for failing to represent him in his battle to clear his name after a miscarriage of justice, although the case has yet to be resolved. "The other expenses she claimed include £104,508 in office costs, £10,000 in communication costs, £19,142 in staff cover and other costs and £5,497 in stationery. In addition to his second-home claim of £19,855, Mr Keen's overall bill also included £13,449 in office running costs, £97,101 in staffing costs and £9,786 in communication costs and £3,549 in stationery costs.A spokesman for Mrs Keen refused to comment on her expenses. "

David Giles ● 6266d

None of this is really news to those of us who live locally and read the local papers and participate in local websites but the Keen's luxury flat was featured on Newsnight last night and the Keens got yet another dishnourable mention in the Evening Standard.For those of you who didn't read yesterday's Daily Telegraph the headline read: "Husband and wife MPs build up £250,000 nest egg on taxpayer" and the story continued:"A husband and his fellow MP wife have built up a £250,000 property nest egg courtesy of the taxpayer after they were both allowed to claim a controversial second homes allowance to pay the mortgage on a luxury flat. "Ann Keen, a junior health minister, and her husband Alan have claimed at least £175,000 in publicly-funded expenses to pay for a Thames-side flat which they say they need. "This is despite the fact the Labour MPs shared London constituency home is just 30 minutes away. "Mrs Keen, 60, is MP for Brentford and Isleworth. Mr Keen, 71, represents neighbouring Feltham and Heston."It comes after it emerged that another minister, Tony McNulty, had claimed the Additional Costs Allowance, which is currently £24,000 per year, to pay the mortgage on a house where his parents live. "The fact that the Keens stand to gain such a huge windfall after claiming so much money in "his 'n' hers" expenses intensified the clamour for reform yesterday. "Mrs Keen, 60, who is MP for Brentford and Isleworth in West London, and Mr Keen, 71, who represents neighbouring Feltham and Heston, live in a terraced house in Brentford. "It is just nine miles by road from parliament, in a journey which takes 30 minutes by car or 55 minutes by bus and Tube. "Their house is far enough from parliament to enable them to qualify for the second homes allowance. "There is nothing in parliamentary rules to stop married MPs from both claiming the maximum allowance for a second home, even if they live in it together. "The loophole has enabled the Keens to buy a far more expensive flat than they could otherwise have afforded. "Seven years ago they bought a flat behind the Royal Festival Hall in a complex which has its own swimming pool, hot tub, gym, concierge service and spectacular views of the Thames. "Between 2002 and 2007 - the latest year for which figures are available - Mrs Keen claimed £87,325 from the ACA, while her husband claimed £87,803. "In a letter to the Commons Fees Office explaining their reasons for the claim, the couple said that they had tried staying in a hotel but: "Despite some advantages of hotel accommodation, overall we found it unsatisfactory and have borrowed... to purchase a flat within walking distance of Westminster." "Mrs Keen's total expenses and allowance claim for 2007 came to £135,599, on top of her ministerial salary of £94,228, while her husband, who is paid the standard MP's wage of £63,291, claimed £135,009, mainly covering staffing and office costs. "Despite his claim that he needs to be within walking distance of parliament, Mr Keen has spoken in just five debates in the past year. "The Keens were unavailable for comment. "Mary Macleod, the Conservative Prospective Parliamentary Candidate, has promised that she will not claim the Additional Costs Allowance if she is elected MP for Brentford and Isleworth at the next general election.Related ArticlesJacqui Smith's husband 'sorry' for adult film claims Health minister Ann Keen paid her husband's life insurance on expensesFour ministers facing questions over second homesMPs vote to keep 'John Lewis' expenses and let the taxpayer fund their

David Giles ● 6267d

I used to work for Alan Keen some years ago when he had his own business, to cut a very long story short I took him to an Industrial Tribunal for unfair dismissal, I was also a member of the GMB union which sponsors him, the union was 'warned off' representing me. Thanks to Hounslow Law Centre I had good representation, Ann as company secretary agreed with my rep. in accordance with ACAS procedure, a sum for compensation and then reneged the next day so we went to an I.T. The tribunal found in my favour and called it the most 'heinous case' of unfair dismissal they'd seen. By this time the company was in dire straits and went kaput, so my only option was to get in the queue and become a creditor, needless to say I got zilch. Apart from everything else he messed up my N.I. by deducting too much, and also fouled up my tax leaving me owing the Inland Revenue even though I was PAYE! Plus I got no money or payment in lieu of notice. To be honest I realised I was probably on a hiding to nothing as I was aware of the financial situation, however in the light of all the dosh they are now trousering I reckon with interest from 1993 there's a moral case to cough up. I am not holding my breath, which is just as well. And I always took the view they would need me long before I ever needed them, it was at least a moral victory. A lot of water has since passed under a lot of bridges and I reckon that a lot of chickens are now coming home to roost. The final straw was that the Sunday Times reported this and Alan Keen threatened to sue them, they of course contacted me and the BCI Times whose reporter had been there and taken notes to ask if we would give evidence, the action was dropped subsequently when the Sunday Times started to flex its legal muscles. It's all a long time ago now, but it makes you think doesn't it?

Vanessa Smith ● 6267d