Roger Gambba-Jones

MPs set up their own expenses system and appoint those who police it.  They also review it for themselves and approve changes, so is it any wonder it's been created to serve them royaly, whilst screwing the taxpayer in a way that can only be described as institutionalised state sanctioned fraud????????

Now I know that most of those interviewed so far have been crying foul - 'it's within the rules' - 'everybody else does it, so why shouldn't I' etc, etc, but lets not forget that many of these greedy bottom feeders come from legal background and know how to interpret the law both good and bad. 

In the case of expenses claims, they clearly had the discretion to recognise a flawed system that was open to abuse and either exploit it or, recognise that it was open to ruthless exploitation by unscrupulous self serve people, demonstrate that this was not them and act with an appropriate level of self control. 

Unfortunately, it's human nature to take advantage of opportunities when they present themselves and this expenses fiasco has very amply demonstrated just how very, very human our MPs are!  If fact if they were any more human they'd be in goal!!

However even if most of this abuse is currently within their self created and blatantly corrupt set of rules, there is one activity that goes well beyond taking advantage of a flawed system to the point of defrauding it and that is property hopping. 

I fail to see how anybody in the MPs' expenses office could possibly have considered that, having had the taxpayer pay out tens of thousands of pounds to improve one property, that was supposed to have been the MP's home whilst serving his or her constituents in Parliament, they were then allowed to flog it, move on and start all over again on a new property and again at our expense !!!!!!!!!    

How has any MP been able to justify the need to move from one property to another, to another?  Surly the purpose of the property is to have somewhere to live whilst working in London not to create a home worthy of family living in all respects. 

The phrase about not living to work springs to mind here.  You know the one about work life balance and all that touchy feely stuff, ‘work to live, not live to work'.  Well in the case of MP's second homes, that's exactly what they are for, living to work and not working to live!!!!

Please, please, please somebody out there make the proper complaint through the proper channels and drag these greedy pigs away from the trough and in to the courts.  How can any of us look an MP in the face and believe a single word he or she says?  I wonder how any constituency associations will be holding emergency meetings over the next few weeks and calling their duly elected member to account? - quiet a few I hope!    

Birmingham City Council are planning to spend a small fortune on lighting up Spaghetti Junction as some sort of 'bright' (pun fully intended) idea to make it a feature of the city, whilst most other councils are talking about switching off street lights to save both money and the planet.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1172898/Out-world-Birminghams-ambitious-plans-light-Spaghetti-Junction--seen-space.html

Apparently somebody on the city council thought somebody else (aliens perhaps?) might actually want to see this motoring monstrosity from space - speaking of space, what planet are these people on?  Just because you Google it, doesn't mean you actually want to visit the blessed thing!  

Can local authorities and therefore elected members be made to look anymore stupid in the eyes of the public?  Whilst the right hand is switching the lights on, the left hand is reaching for the off switch!  No doubt some 'bright spark' on Birmingham City Council has bought a load of low energy light bulbs so that it has a minimum carbon footprint!

Whilst taking a swipe at Birmingham la la land, did you see the report about the city council spending tax payers money on sending officials on a jolly to promote Birmingham as a centre of haute cuisine? - no doubt with spaghetti being the house speciality! - Laugh, I nearly phoned for a takeaway!!!!!

On the 9th April the Prime Minister and Home Secretary met with Chief Constables at Downing Street to mark a "new era" of neighbourhood-based policing, established in response to the public's call for a service that is visible, accountable and responds to their needs.

Standard government spin and BS to claiming that they've had this great idea called neighbourhood policing.  Isn't that another name for the bobby on the beat that became so unfashionable in the late 70s and whose disapperance has given our town centres and housing estates over the to drunks and yobs?

Well whatever you call it these days, it's a good idea, just like it was when it was scrapped.  The trouble is, there's not enough of the main ingredient to make it work properly - coppers on the beat! 

Just today (Thurs) the local newspaper contains a story of yet more loutish behaviour in Long Sutton leading to yet more mindless and pointless damage to a public park.  The police were called and pitched up an hour later by which time surprise, surprise, the yobs had bolted for cover!  The police's explanation?  ‘We were dealing with A prisoner, yes just ONE prisioner apparently!  Makes you feel very safe in your beds at night doesn't it!

Another story tells of local business people and members of the public in Spalding town centre, all wanting no drinking areas established, to get rid of the scourge of drunks monopolizing the seating area in the Market Place and scaring off the rest of the public.  The obvious question is, what's the point of a no go zone if nobody's there to enforce it?   Remember it only takes one villain to clear our streets of cops!

I have been the holder of a somewhat modest Norwich Union insurance policy for many years now.  I therefore feel reasonably justified in my increasing level of irritation with the TV ad campaign NU is running about changing their name.

Norwich Union have been banging on about being AKA (police jargon for Also Known As) AVIVA for some time now and I've little doubt that us ordinary folk were beginning to get the message. 

However, in keeping with the impatience that seems to infect everybody and every organisation these days (including government) Norwich Union has decided to spend millions of £s, employing the likes of Ringo Starr, Alice Cooper and Dame Edna to tell us what a difference a name makes.  I have to wonder what the shareholders think?

This seems to be typical corporate spin doctoring.  Take a ‘domestic' name and change to something more international and in this case completely meaningless.

So once again, something that you could associate with being British has been sanitised and Europeanised to remove it's Britishness.  I wonder how many of our European cousins would even consider killing off one of their own well known national name like this?

It's a shame Norwich Union didn't consider investing these advertising millions instead.  They could of then paid me more than the annual five-pence ha'penny bonus they are currently paying me on my insurance policy!      

As of today, it seems that all of our emails and internet traffic will now be stored by our ISPs for 12 months.  Yet again, this is claimed to be an EU directive designed to fight terrorism and crime.   I was only following orders,  is no doubt the excuse our political leaders will use for this further erosion of our civil liberties and acceptance of the surveillance society.

Since 2007, whenever you've made a phone call the number and duration have been logged and stored for a year by your phone company. If it was from a mobile then your location was recorded, along with your direction of travel.

The enthusiasm with which our leaders grasp every opportunity presented to them to pry and spy on us, seems to be bringing us closer and closer to the nightmare painted by George Orwell in his definitive novel 1984.

I wonder how the French and even the Germans (who is claimed love order, regulation and above uniforms) are responding to this further step towards a police state?