Alan Duncan apology

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

You get the government you deserve. To quote Ben Franklin:

"...there is no form of Government but what may be a blessing to the people if well administered, and believe farther that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in Despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic Government, being incapable of any other"

What kind of people will be MPs when we treat them like we do, and how will we feel then?

Oh dear oh dear. I suspect this view is held by a lot more than Alan Duncan, it's just that he was silly enough to voice it; that in itself speaks volumes about his judgement.

I really do want to be able to vote "Conservative" at the next election but at the same time I really do worry about how many of their candidates (including sitting MPs) have any empathy with, and understanding of, the wider electorate. Having said that the same worry has to apply to candidates from other parties as well.

Mr Duncan; if you read this (failing that I'm sure someone from Central Office will pass it on) please try to remember that a great many people (in fact by my calculation the overwhelming majority) have to live on a LOT less than your basic salary and do NOT have the luxury of supplementing it with "expenses".

Perhaps spending some of your protracted holiday (I refuse to call it anything else) with some of your constituents and actually *listening* to them might give you an insight into life as it really is, not as you imagine it to be.

The only thing that puts me of from becoming an MP is the biased state
of the media and of coarse the amount of moeny you need to stand

I have just gone to my copy of the Complete Expenses file and had a look at Alan Duncan's expenses claim.

As Nelson would say, 'Ha Ha'.

Or better still Think before you speak. More hair shirt, Mr Duncan, please!

Oh dear - I've been referred to the moderators for saying that the expenses saga will continue to rumble until we have a general election.

I also pointed out that Gordon Brown was odious and unprincipalled and there is no way he would act in the best interests of the country and give us the general election we need to clean up British politics - because he is selfish and only has his own interests at heart..

While Alan Duncan has, once again, put his foot in his mouth in an unprofessional and predictable way (who says that to a campaigner who dug up your lawn? Really!) he does have a point about the office losing respect and appeal, perhaps to an unfair extent. While many of the expenses claims were, of course, ridiculous and excessive, with a number approaching the fraudulent, some of them weren’t. Many MPs did use their second home allowances properly, but were not permitted to defend themselves from the storm of faux-outrage from the Fleet Street ‘broad brush’ approach to journalism. Some more balance in consideration of MPs pay might be good. One of the reasons for the lax enforcement from the fees office stems from the fact that governments sought to use expenses increases in the place of pay rises. While I’m not defending expenses excesses, we should remember that paying MPs was an important step in the democratisation of politics, and we shouldn’t step back down the road to politics being something you can only afford with the backing of an interest group or an inheritance.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

If he wants to know what it is like to live on rations then why does he not live in my house for a week, in fact he won't even last that, his comments are very foolish but the truth of it is the majority of MP's seam to have the same veiw. It's not the rules that were the problem it was the attitude towards them. If they want to overhaul the expenses then they should start by changing the culture and attidude and force the wrong doers out now because they don't think they have done wrong and they are the ones who are blocking the change.

"It's embarrassing for Mr Duncan that his view has come out this way, but it is something many in Westminster worry about."

-----

What are they worried about? That their views might actually be made public and the public that vote for them might actually hear the truth for a change?

I personally think that if Mr Duncan feels he is not paid enough and that he is treated unfairly that he should have his salary, pension, etc. stripped and be forced to work as an MP for the wage that I receive for the position I hold, I work 48hrs over 4 days per week in shifts of 12hrs per day, I travel 16 miles using public transport which takes 4+hrs each day an I end up with 6-7hrs between shifts for a rest, I spend 1/3 of my earnings on said public transport and I only earn £15k pa.

Perhaps if Mr Duncan had to lead that sort of life he would not think so badly of his circumstances.

MPs are currently coming across as those that are from the classes which have a history of being self serving and only interested in how rich they can get. Why else would they have made expenses claims such as they did?

If they wish to act in that manner they would do far better to seek jobs in the private sector where their attitudes are more prevelant than in service for the country as members of parliament.

Unfortunately a general election will not solve this issue. We need a wholesale culture change amongst those who wish to lead this country.

PS. I bet this doesn't get published, every time I mention my salary or details of my employment the moderators on HYS seem to think my comment is breaking house rules...

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

The expenses issue is very important and will rumble on for a very long time. It is a great pity that it will impinge strongly on the next election which will be a very important one regardless as to moats, duck-houses and the flipping of second home allowances.

I will be voting against my sitting MP at the next election as I consider him to be corrupt. He is a very pleasant chap who I enjoy whinding up but in my view he conspired to defraud the Inland Revenue. He is not fit to be my representative as he committed the same fraud as Lester Piggott and that poor man was crucified.

If MPs consider themselves underpaid then I suggest they go and get a better job. Unemployment has increased to 2.44 million and the government is GBP 175 billion in the red. I think they will find the job market a bit tight at the moment; but then if they had worked a bit harder at representing the people rather than vested interests this would not be the case, would it?

Wow, Mr Duncan clearly didn't read the script. Doesn't he know that the 3 main parties are having a hairy shirt contest.

In some ways this is just a distraction, but it is a bit worrying that MPs are complaining that they can't abuse expenses anymore.

Such comments are neither clever nor witty and if the Tories want to win the election then Alan Duncan would do well to shut up. Although I am a Conservative voter I absolutely abhor arrogance from any MP. At the moment most of this obnoxiousness exists amongst the nouveau riche of New Labour but there are still one or two in the Tory camp who despite all that's happened recently really don't seem to have any idea of what life is really like for the majority of people living in Britain.

Living on rations?

does he mean budgeting for his own food bill from his wages rather than claiming on expenses.

Because Mr Duncan should be aware thats how the vast majority, including his constituents have lived their entire lives.

He can claim it was meant humourously, but personally i see it as further evidence of the disconnect between politicians and those they represent.

oh come on has everyone lost their sense of humour? by saying "MPs have to "live on rations" it is pretty obvious he was joking...And Laura was doing so well..or does this piece bear the heavy hand of NR?

Poor lamb!

jonathan @ 10

you see David (mortimax) Cameron as the man to "clean up" politics, do you?

why's that?

The vast majority of MP's are so well removed from the electorate they are meant to serve that Alan Duncans comments are ony voicing what I suspect many of them believe. As most of them are lawyers, presumably if they don't like the MP's pay and conditions they can leave and go back to being a leech on society. I personally would ban anyone from the legal profession from government unless as an advisor and let people with real world experience take over. There's nothing as pedantic, devious and infuriating to deal with as a lawyer, hence the government we've got.

Well of course he's apologised. He's telling the public what they want to hear regardless of whether it's the truth. He showed his true colours when filmed in secret and now like any good politician he's trying to cover it up and pretend that it was all one big joke as if he knew it was happening.

If having his job and salary is equivalent to living on rations, someone please provide me witha suitable word to describe my own circumstances?

He should just admit the truth because the public are fed up with lies, deceits and cover-ups. I'm sure MPs are upset, especially some of the more honest and decent MPs who didn't abuse their expenses to the same level as many MPs but they should understand the view of the outraged public masses. The fact that they can't grasp the views of the general public and spend all their time complaining about how they've been unfairly treated and targetted only demonstrates how little they understand the public and how they live in their own little worlds away from the reality the erst of us have to exist in. This is just an added way of saying "Why are the public so upset when we merely followed the rules?". The rules were wrong, the attitudes were wrong, the culture was wrong and yet it is these people who were part of the wrong who are claiming that their only objective is to serve the people and that they've done nothing wrong and will do their utmost to reform the system. Yet those who were more careful in their use of expenses & allowances who have been trying to reform the system having been blocked time and again are again in the background while the wrongdoers are back in charge setting out the measures for reform. WE WANT THE WRONGDOERS OUT! Then maybe we'll have the right people leading change and reform and will lead the system to where it needs to go with public support.

However, there are members of the public and media that have jumped on te wagon and have taken things to an excessive and unnecessary extreme. I'm not going to forget the scandal, I am angry but I don't need to keep hearing about these issues all the time. I have no doubt this issue will be raised over and over again in some form until the next election, which will only further fuel the fire of anger and hatred the public already feel. Unfortunately, people need to know when to use restraint and that is a lesson our media class seem to have trouble with on many occasions.

Yes, the fact he said it is an outrage, the fact that he covers up afterwards by apologising only makes things worse and I feel this story is justified in being reported. However, let's not blow this out of proportion. As has been mentioned....

Our democracy has been tarnished and this could take time to rebuild but the longer we continue to treat our democratic institutions and those who represent them in such a manner, one can only wonder what will become of the institutions and those who work for them in future.

Here's a solution. When it comes to the next general election (or bye election) don't vote for anyone who is or has been a member of this parliament, whatever party. Even if they were not involved with the expenses scandal they all knew about it and apparently did nothing to change the system.

"The last thing people want to hear is an MP whingeing about his pay and conditions.

"It is a huge honour to be an MP and my remarks, although meant in jest, were completely uncalled for. I apologise for them unreservedly."

Mr. Duncan should realise that he's no longer a back-bench glove puppet. Perhaps he will realise that, while still an MP, he is now Mr. Speaker. And quite well paid too, thank you.

As such, he is supposed to help manage the way in which "normal" MPs behave. Whinging about the hard times that MPs have doesn't go down too well while unemployment grows. And that unemployment stretches across all areas of the economy and every level of qualification and capability.

Most people "live on rations" - normally paid for out of their own real income. Most people weren't allowed £400 per month "eating allowance".

Get your head down and be a Speaker, who maybe especially at PMQs, demands proper engagement with the dignity of the House.

Here is an idea for Alan Duncan...

Introduce a higher rate income tax band for anyone earning more than an MP - say 75 percent. This will ensure that MPs feel that they are one of the majority of their constituents!

Like Boris Johnson, Alan Duncan is just another Tory. However it is a shame that there is such a vast dichotomy between that which the Tories are, and that which they spin that they are, - but it is as it ever was. In the end, all his outburst proves (and Boris Johnson's re feeding chickens) is that the level of greed in those who wish to run the country is just as high as those in the City and on the football fields of the country. Similarly today we learn that the FSA has remained spineless in not restraining pay in the city - same recipe - say one thing, and do another!

We need a maximum wage as well as a minimum wage!

PS(to 25) and what about a wealth tax!

@ janchild - "At the moment most of this obnoxiousness exists amongst the nouveau riche of New Labour but there are still one or two in the Tory camp who despite all that's happened recently really don't seem to have any idea of what life is really like for the majority of people living in Britain."

You are joking right?

The Tories during the 80s were just as bad and still are.

Both the Tories and Labour are just as bad as each other. Neither party have a clue what the average joes life is like and frankly the majority of MPs in both parties don't seem to care, we're just there to be a statistic for them.

Trouble is there is no alternative to either the Tories or Labour, Lid Dems are a limp wrist and the BNP certainly are not a good choice.

What is a shame is that in 97 we were looking forward to a new era of responsible politians. The sleeze and personal engorgement was a thing of the past. Trouble is nothing changed.

Will DC sort this rabble out or is it just political boom and bust? Doesn't appear to be getting the message into their thick skulls yet.
And on planet Labour the sand is so high they do not have to bend down to stick their heads in it.

Meanwhile some of the lucky people to still have a job are being paid LESS to do the same.

18. At 1:29pm on 12 Aug 2009, jolo13 wrote:
oh come on has everyone lost their sense of humour? by saying "MPs have to "live on rations" it is pretty obvious he was joking...And Laura was doing so well..or does this piece bear the heavy hand of NR?

==========

if you watch the whole clip its fairly obvious that the term 'rations' is used humourously its with a very bitter connatation.

as for his comments to the effect that nobody who has ever acheived anything will ever again be attracted to westminster, does that not speak volumes about the way he sees himself & other mps in contrast to the 'plebs'?

Laura, with this frequent--and high quality--blogging, you are giving us a real treat. I do hope you'll continue to write your own blog after Mr Robinson gets back from his holiday.

As for Alan Duncan's comments, well, there is an assumption that no-one who's any good at anything would go into politics for a measly £60-odd K salary if expenses were just expenses and not an effectively doubling of salary.

That's a big assumption. Surely there are people who would go into politics as a public service? After all, £60K is perfectly enough to live on. Frankly, I'd rather have an MP who was motivated by a desire for public service than one who was only in it for the money.

It'll be interesting to see what Cameron does, 6 weeks ago Mr Duncan would have received a severe public rebuke from Cameron, and may have been put in front of the deselection comitee.

I know 6 weeks is an enternity in politics but will Mr Camerons principles on mps expenses hold firm?

#20 saga

I wonder if the Cameroons will be 'progressive' in the Michael Ancram sense and make an example of Alan Duncan now. I don't suppose they would want anyone asking them any awkward expenses questions, would they?

Hmmmmmm, wonder how long this will last before I get referred to the mods.

As demonstrated more than once on HIGNFY, Duncan's sense of humour is not shared by everyone. Although he does to a good Tony impersonation.

Given his past business history and present connections he should not be short of a few bob. He has less reason to moan than most.

***

24. fairlyopenmind wrote:
Mr. Duncan should realise that he's no longer a back-bench glove puppet. Perhaps he will realise that, while still an MP, he is now Mr. Speaker. And quite well paid too, thank you.

Que?
Do you mean Shadow Leader?

#8 jonathan_cook

How exactly is a general election going to clean up British politics?

I would suggest that you're being somewhat naive if you don't think that this greed is a cross bench issue.

What's more, the 'dirt' in British politics is not just limited to expenses. What about the other jobs, the powerful lobbying groups, the ministers walking into jobs with suppliers, the press/media barons, etc ,etc?

Actually, talking of press barons, I know that the Conservatives and their supporters are Eurosceptic, however, it's strange that they don't want Europe telling us what to do but they're quite happy to be ordered around by an Australian American guy. Hmmmmmmm, puzzling.

The tribulations of being wined and dined by corporate interests and having to shield bankers from responsibility. It's not easy protecting the interest of the wealthy in these trying economic times. The "little people" simply don't understand. Having helped lead the nation to the brink of economic diaster, is there no appreciation for the efforts to fund the arts. MP's are so unappreciated!

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Is it always a joke to Alan Duncan, he has prior form on this topic in feeling that MPs are underpaid and badly done by, so he obviously feels this way in private but not in public. The dictonary definition of this is hypocrisy.
Fine if he feels hard done by, I am sure by his own successful career standards £64k plus expenses is a pittance not worth the hassle but to the majority of the population it is not.

I seem to remember for similar offenses on the topic David Cameron threatened Anthony Steen with removal of the whip 'so fast his feet won't touch the ground' if he did it again.

Well Alan's done it twice, perhaps Alans' feet shouldn't touch the ground?

I propose that the MPs live in a couple of purpose built blocks of very basic ensuite rooms with desk areas and communications provided, eating in a central dining hall from a nourishing but simple menu, get free 2nd class travel to and from their constituencies, and then a token very modest income to cover any other expenses...not more than 15,000 a year. Then only those with a real desire to serve the nation would stand......what about that, then?!

Convenient for this to come out today, when it actually happened a fortnight ago is it not? After Lord M's lamentably poor article in the Guardian and the execrable performance in his various interviews, I suppose something pro labour had to be dredged up.

Has Lord M anything to say about paying off GBP 0.75 million of his mortagage? Alright for some. Shame about not being able to hide the unemployment figures, but look on the bright side: if they used the pre 1997 method of calculating the unemployed it would be at the 5 million mark.

As for Alan Duncan it merely confirms what most of the elctorate have known for some time: most MPs are not the sharpest tools in the box!

@24, fairlyopenmind wrote:

"Mr. Duncan ... is now Mr. Speaker."

I suppose there is a passing resemblance between Messrs Bercow and Duncan, but the latter's ambition invariably gallops ahead of his popularity (within the Commons or just the Conservatives) - he wanted to be Tory Leader, remember.

Has there ever been a vacancy that AD wouldn't leap upon the first passing bandwagon in his desperation to fill?

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

"Living on rations" eh? But it was only said in jest!

Quite the contrary I should say,its we who are still paying for their "rations"

It cost taxpayers £6.1 million last year to subsidise food and drink in the
House of Commons.

But officials now say that the subsidy will "be trimmed" to 41% from 45%.

Whoop whoop!

Johnathon Cook wrote- the general election we need to clean up British politics, but then seemed to imply the Conservatives would be able to do this. I now have to make an expenses claim for new trouser, as I have micturated in my current pair.

The only way this will clear up is (ahem...irony here moderators!) with a guillotine on parliament square.

"bendigaidvran wrote:
Here's a solution. When it comes to the next general election (or bye election) don't vote for anyone who is or has been a member of this parliament, whatever party. Even if they were not involved with the expenses scandal they all knew about it and apparently did nothing to change the system."

This comment is, I'm afraid, indicative of the problem. There are many conscientious members of parliament who work hard both to serve their constituents and their country. To lump all of the MPs together is a particularly unhelpful process and deeply unfair to many committed public servants. If good, honest MPs are held accountable for the actions of those MPs seeking personal enrichment, then only those who go into politics for the perks will stand for selection. Yes, we have to clean up the Commons, but emulating the cry of Arnaud Amalric (‘Kill them all; God will know his own’) is not the way forward! While his form of expression leaves something to be desired, Duncan’s ‘joke’ has at least a kernel of truth to it.

The idea that all MPs are suffering because of a few is to say the least , wearing a bit thin. They all had the opportunity to change the system but did not, in fact they more or less voted for the status quo when the chance of reform was offered. The parliamentary system we have is rotten to the core in both the elected and non elected sectors. I suspect the only way to repair the system is to remove all of the sitting members, debar them from office and start again with new members and new conditions of employment. Sadly they have protected themselves so well over the years that the electorate no longer have the power to remove them by peaceful means, and there is no Cromwell riding to the rescue.

@ 24 fairlyopenmind

Alan Duncan is Shadow Leader in the Commons, not Speaker of the House of Commons. That's John Bercow.

I don't thionk anyone can take a remark such as 'Living on rations' as anything else but flippant.

Unfortunately for an MP any remark can be used out of context to suit someone's purpose and they are fully in the firing line at the moment.

He's apologised although I'm not sure for what.

There are far more important events in today's news and we should not be distracted by such a feeble story.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

MPs being forced to live on rations would be no bad thing. Rations might straighten a few of them out, a bit, Mme. Duncan!

It is time for a near revolution in the way government and parliament is run. In the three branches of authority we have - Executive, Legislative and Judiciary - there needs ro be a clear distinction between what is party politics and what is governance.

MPs should have no automatic right to expenses and their salaries should be linked to lenght of service and rank. The problem with MPs is that they are party animals, whereas the civil service and the judiciary are impartial servants and moderators.

A newly elected MP shoudl have a starting salary of around £40,000, rising £2,400 per year of office.hence an MP who has been returned in elections and has clocked up ten years service earns £64,000. They may puff themselves up as important but they do not have any training and as elected members their primary role to their electorate is to develop, moderate and adminster the primary and secondary legislation running the country.

I also suggest that MPs who hold a junior ministerial position should receive a £20,000 p.a suppliment, so a bright new MP with amazing talent can enter the house potentially on £60,000, rising to £84,000 in ten years if, and only if, they retain the junior cabinet rank throughout and the incentive is then to make safe, sane, and accountable decisions in office to avoid being sacked as a minister. Cabinent Ministers should receive a bonus of £40,000 making an MP with ten years experience (either in opposition or in government) eligible for a salary of £104,000. A cabinet minister who makes a fist of his/her job will suffer the £40,000 pa drop which apart from making eyes water will keep them focused on making sure the job is done well.

Shadow ministers should get half the bonuses but at no time must there be more showdow ministers in any party than there are Cabinet Ministers in Government. Hence if there are ten labour cabinet ministers then the can be ten tory ones, ten lib-dems, and so on. A party with fewer MPs than the whole cabinet can only have the bonuses paid to all its MPs if they act as shadows up to the maximum of actual party MPs.

Minister's offices should be packed with civil servants. Party animals such as press officers and the like should be paid for by the party, not the taxpayer. Hard but brutally fair since it is the parties that are actually unnecessary for government, not the ministers. Expenses calimed by all MPs should solely be for work functions and not perks. MPs with grace and favour residences should have a modest rent deducted from their salary to compensate for the ease of commuting.

The ordinary taxpayer cannot claim expenses for commuting to the normal place of work, and neither should MPs be allowed to. They can only claim standard class fares for business trips - if they go first class, they must pay the excess themselves. Cabinent Ministers can have 1st class travel.

I could go on!

Irate Voter

@ 40 bcumulus

That is a very bad idea. You say that 'only those with a real desire to serve the nation would stand'. In fact only those who were very rich or had the support of a well-funded special interest would be able to afford to be MPs. There was a reason that the requirement of paying MPs was in the People's Charter (1838) - it allows those without significant private means to stand. Reducing the ability of the most able to stand would be a large step back for truly representative government.

fs @ 37

Because he is not Golum Brown

come on Fubar, no need for name calling

anyway, you can't just vote for someone because he isn't somebody else - you have to conduct a detailed, sober assessment of the policies on offer, and then come to a (mature and balanced) view

that's what I'll be doing

#23
"When it comes to the next general election (or bye election) don't vote for anyone who is or has been a member of this parliament, whatever party."

Taken to the logical conclusion, that should be not to vote for any of the parties involved, either. After all, would you vote for a clean candidate who was willing to stand for a corrupted party? Surely, that candidate would be making a moral compromise? Ergo, they've immediately corrupted themselves.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

44. jbjannieb wrote:

"Living on rations" eh? But it was only said in jest!
Quite the contrary I should say,its we who are still paying for their "rations"

It cost taxpayers £6.1 million last year to subsidise food and drink in the House of Commons.

But officials now say that the subsidy will "be trimmed" to 41% from 45%.

=

I work in a service industry. My clients effectively pay my wages; I work for them. If I work hard enough I can earn a decent wage, and I value my clients for that. If my clients are suffering with the economy I suffer.

My business travel is included in my fee. Would I expect my clients to pay for my family's food and decorations for my house? Definitely not.
The MPs website is called TheyWorkForYou.com - they work for us, some of them work very hard. But don't take the Micheal with all the extras. Join the real world.

At No.45 today, surely micturation is not a hanging offence? Then of course with the hugh amount of new laws passed during the recent 11 years, I may have missed one or two.
Is guillotining a less messy method of execution than hanging, I somehow doubt it? I think that this comment is condemning Alan Duncan rather harshly but Mandelson has decided it thus, even though it was 6 weeks old.
Still Mandelson's misdeamenor was many years ago but it was not punished at all, why?

20 Saga

No idea what point you were answering on Jonathans 10 as the mods have chopped it.

Just checked Alan Duncans expenses records. Ho ho ho. Took us for 23,027. This included 1,223 for gardening but did not include 3,194 also for gardening which the Fees office suggested was "not in the spirit of....". I love it, no refusal just a suggestion that it was not quite right. Remember this is the MP who resigned from a previous govt over housing transactions.

Meanwhile Cameron still has a nice house in the country that we are paying the interest on, 12,972 last year. Nothing wrong with that. He is just taking advantage of what is there for the taking. Quite why he feels he can then sit in judgement on others who have taken advantage in their way baffles me.

Something about pots and kettles comes to mind

Alan Duncan is an idiot. I work longer hours than he does, get 23 days holiday + public holidays, get paid £16000 per year from which I have to pay NI and tax, cost of travel to work daily, mortgage, food, council tax, water rates, electricity, gas, gardener!!, car tax, dentistry, spectacles, prescriptions in fact everything. No expenses to be claimed from the public purse, no time for second jobs while I scive from my main job. I challenge Mr Duncan to exist on this incomes and nothing more.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Oops indeed, a few more Alan Duncan comments and Brown won't even need postal votes to squeeze a hung parliament out of the next elections, and subsequently team up with the lib dems and introduce alternative vote elections as means to smoke out the conservatives.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Alan Duncan's approach to the MPs expenses issue has been bizarre to say the least, starting with this comments on the BBCs "Have I got News for you" programme he appeared on.

24 FairlyOpenMind - You have the wrong person completely !!!!!! John Bercow is "Mr Speaker"......

Alan Duncan is not the sharpest tool in the box, and seems to have a habit of putting his foot in it and then apologising. To my mind he has done this too often, his initial comments show how he really feels, then it's "oops, mea culpa" when they get out, hoping that by eating humble pie he will somehow be given the benefit of the doubt.

Except he wont.

===

20. At 1:40pm on 12 Aug 2009, sagamix wrote:
jonathan @ 10

you see David (mortimax) Cameron as the man to "clean up" politics, do you?

why's that?

===

Thought you would be banging that same tired drum again! Cameron and his mortgage claim is almost as bad as the Chancellor of the Exchequer, you know saga, the man in charge of the nation's finances and currently presiding over a whopping £175 billion shortfall for the coming year, avoiding paying his taxes by a) flipping his second home four times to avoid CGT, and getting US to pay his Stamp Duty, and then getting us to pay for an accountant to help him minimise the other taxes he does have to pay.

Surely, saga, that is more shocking, wouldn't you agree?

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

49. At 4:08pm on 12 Aug 2009, virtualsilverlady wrote:
I don't think anyone can take a remark such as 'Living on rations' as anything else but flippant.

============================================

In context he made the remark to someone who had felt strongly enough about expenses to dig a pound sign in his lawn.
Making such a flippant remark as it undoubtedly was in that specific context was IMHO basically a verbal two fingered salute.

He is the shadow leader of the house, the opposition figure directly covering the oppositions response to expenses and if elected and keeping the same role in government would be the person to complete the fixing of it. I think it was more than a footnote for that reason alone, does it show what to expect from the next government? I tend to believe DC's outrage was genuine, but lets see shall we?

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Cameron will have to get rid of this frivolous clown if he wants my vote at the next general election.

This is not the first time Alan Duncan has shown arrogance about his expenses. Take a look at HIGNFY earlier this year! How does he keep getting away with this attitude?

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Wouldn't expect anything else from Alan Duncan, as usual it shows the level of arrogance befitting his ilk, he thinks he is better than anybody else so deserves more. Whilst his leader is claiming to understand the gravitas of public feeling on the issue, this legend in his own lunchtime spouted out their true feeling with the usual withdrawal after. As is pointed out Alan Duncan will probably make a worthy sacrifice for Cameron to show his Don Quixote zeal.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

I would like to voice my disquiet that the BBC showed secret filming again. This in my view is yet again taking away our rights to be allowed to comment, our freedom of speach, in private when we think we can be open. Gradually, this is being erroded. We don't appear to have freedom of speach anymore. His comments were not racial, not hurting anyone, just his views at that time. I may not agree with him, and think that he, along with other MPs are far from gaining my admiration, but nevertheless I uphold his right to say what he wants to, and should not have to worry about a hidden cameras, and certainly not the BBC or any other media making it headline news.

Alan Duncan is so out of touch with the average person and the salary that most people have to live on. I was made redundant from a £35k job as a software developer at 56 years old, a salary I felt very fortunate to have, I have since been unable to secure any work and have to live off benefits

People like him live in a different world from the vast majority of the general public. He should be ashamed of himself, no doubt his show of contrition is not genuine but only because he has been caught out.

ok if this and any other MP has a problem with their wages then let them live in my shoes for a year, im a carer for my disabled wife and i recieve lowest rate benefit to live on. unlike MP's who get expenses and above inflation pay rises.
these MP's are only human and should respect the basic fact that they were voted into their offices by people like me and can be removed just as easily.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

For someone in his position and with his experience he has shown very poor judgemnent and weaknes of character. I hope he is sacked.
When will they learn?

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Laura:

I am a forgiving person....I think that Mr. Duncan comments are not acceptable and he, is very much required to make the apology....

NB: I am not affiliated and/or associated with any political party in the United Kingdom...

=Dennis Junior=

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Isn't it frightening that people like this might be running the country next year?

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

91 Bertsprockett

No it isn't.

The frightening prospect is that we have to wait through another nine months of incompetence, dishonesty, spin and fiscal incontinence before there is the slightest prospect of making the change that we desperately need.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

dont you just feel sorry for him. poor soul.. rations? get in the real world mr duncan, a lot of people are on rations,keeping the roof over their head means they cut down on a lot of things in life at this moment, so rations for them mean less food, heat and basic things,, you will never have to experience these im afraid. i would love to have your house and car and food that you probably put on your familly table
get in the real world please,,,,and understand what rations means in real terms..

i am not going to swear cos it prob wont get published you make me mad mad

Living on rations!

The statement is laughable. £63,000 a year. Numerous holidays. £25 a day for food where receipts still do not have to be shown. A 40th pension scheme. And redundancy payments of a whole years salary! (lets hope he will be one that is made redundant!)

If these people think they can do better in the outside world then let them stand aside. I think that there would be many capable candidates out of the 2.44 million unemployed out there. Try living on £60 a week dole Mr Duncan!

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

87,93 derekbarker
95 jrperry

Good for derekbarker

Toryboy jrperry; Yes it is.

One can only admire the skill of Alan Duncan in being able to express two completely contradictory views to the TV cameras. With this ability, surely nothing can faze him.