'Feeling empathy for Gordon' blog discussion

ManyDollarz

Q). Anyone know why we, the UK tax payers, needed to pay GB for two lots of John Lewis window blinds for children: Noahs animals @ £33 each and one 122cm Noahs animal @ £39? How exactly do these help in his duties? Anyone still feeling any empathy for the greedy GB now? We're all equal, but I'm more equal than all of you.

Page 10, This appears to be a receipt for the roller blinds from John Lewis.
h ttp://mpsallowances.parliament.uk/mpslordsandoffices/hocallowances/allowances-by-mp/gordon-brown/Gordon_Brown_0405_ACA.pdf

The "noahs animal" ones are for a child's room.
w ww.johnlewis.com/6790/Product.aspx

(remove the gap at the beginning of the URLs to get them to work).

PhylPho

ManyDollarz wrote: »

Q). Anyone know why we, the UK tax payers, needed to pay GB for two lots of John Lewis window blinds for children: Noahs animals @ £33 each and one 122cm Noahs animal @ £39?.

You're making a mystery out of something that's really not mysterious. If you look at the small print of the claim, it states the kiddie's blinds were bought for T. Blair, a little smiling person upon whom Brown took pity when he lived next door.

nomorespending

I think no less of GB for his comments - had he said yes shes right we shoudl keep them all out of the country I wouldn't be voting for him. But as he didn't I will. I like him, I believe in Labour and in GB . He is still standing, and he is a good man ( in my eyes). I wouldn't trust the consrevatives to do what is right for the greater good. In labour i trust that they will where they can take us all into account when they make their decisions and not just what is best for those with power and money.
It not worth much and i'm sure someone will come along to shoot me down with facts and figures, but it is what I belive and how i feel.

wireframe_2

I don't think its that he called her a bigot, so much, although that was clearly wrong - it was that he stood there and smiled and "listened" to her for 6 minutes, and she asked him questions and he gave her the party line, and then, as soon as he was in the privacy of his own car, he slammed the door, and the first works out of his mouth were "that was a disaster, why did I have to talk to her, she's a bigot", totally ignoring, forgetting or dismissing the legitimate she expressed and outlined as a taxpaying voter.

How do you now he doesn't do that more, maybe every time he speaks publicly and has to answer questions. According to some aides, we wwere lucking he didn't call her something worse than a bigot, with the "robust" language he uses. So you have an unelected leader, who appears not to give a flying monkey spank what concerns or views people have whilst on the campaign trail.

That and the fact he bankrupt the country as chancellor (and inherited his own financial mess (ironically) as PM, heh.).

PhylPho

nomorespending wrote: »

I think no less of GB for his comments.

> I like him, I believe in Labour and in GB . He is still standing, and he is a good man ( in my eyes). I wouldn't trust the consrevatives to do what is right for the greater good. In labour i trust that they will where they can take us all into account when they make their decisions and not just what is best for those with power and money.

nomore spending:

If you had a quick think about it, you'd easily relate "power and money" to the Labour Government, its ministers and its hangers-on.

Having done that, you'd also quickly discern the *true* opinion which the "good man" has of you by casting your mind back to the standing ovation he got when telling the Labour Party that thanks to his fiscal brilliance, he was now "able to anounce" a cut of 2p off the basic rate of Income Tax.

Wow! Gosh! Sensational! Labour cuts Income Tax!

Hurray for the good man Brown! Hurray for the Great Chancellor! And, er, hurray for a fantastic vote-winner to ensure another Labour election victory and Labour's continuing hold on power, and money.

Yet inexplicably for one so "good" though, Brown omitted to mention he was knowingly and deliberately about to penalise every low income earner in the country by abolishing the 10p tax band.

Er, gosh again.

How could so "good" a man filled with the milk of human kindness towards the poor and the disadvantaged. . . forget to mention he was going to enable those with money to have more money, but those with little to have even less?

How could this Labour Party you seem still so fond of be the Government that "takes all of us into account" after as telling an indictment as that?

Not much need to give you any more facts and figures, really, about your "good man" and how he displays his "goodness". Or how at the birth of the Blair-Brown era, Labour -- at the drop of a Bernie Ecclestone cheque -- died as the political party so many of us older folks once knew.

Paul_Herring

nomorespending wrote: »

I think no less of GB for his comments

To be honest, I think a lot of people are in your situation. Those who thought he was a !!!!!! before still think he's a !!!!!! and won't vote for him. Those who think he could walk on water before, still thinks he can. There are (comparatively) very few people who are floating. Indeed, most who are voting by post have already voted.

By the way, exactly how many people are eligible to vote for Mr. Brown this time? As opposed to the < 0 people who voted him in as PM last time?

I like him, I believe in Labour and in GB . He is still standing, and he is a good man ( in my eyes).

I see the pond he's going to cross is still frozen over.

ManyDollarz

PhylPho wrote: »

You're making a mystery out of something that's really not mysterious. If you look at the small print of the claim, it states the kiddie's blinds were bought for T. Blair, a little smiling person upon Brown took pity when he lived next door.

Tongue in cheek, right? I could only see the inclusion as £105 at the bottom of pdf page 17.

Bearing in mind the stipulation on the Member's Additional Costs Allowance claim form ACA2: "Claim details notes - You can only claim for: additional expenses wholly, exclusively and necessarily incurred to enable you to stay overnight away from your only or main home for the purpose of performing your Parliamentary duties." And also on his Declaration on ACA2 page 2 of 2.

But child's roller blinds! Child's? And it's been claimed for, after reading that statement? !!!!!!. Good man alright.

PhylPho

ManyDollarz wrote: »

Tongue in cheek, right? I could only see the inclusion as £105 at the bottom of pdf page 17.

Oh, all right. It was tongue in cheek -- and expensively painful, too, seeing as how the NHS dentist where I used to go mysteriously vanished along with so many others during the administration of the country by the political party responsible for the Welfare State in the first place.

Though then again: today's party sure as heck ain't the one my parents and grandparents knew.

As to the blinds, well. The truth is, they were what's known as a "pilot purchase", something the Government regularly indulges in, usually IT projects which get tried out and are found to be unworkable and cost £billions but how else are you gonna discover if they're fit for purpose?

Ditto, the childrens' blinds. Were ZanuLabour to be re-elected, then it seems every honest hard working British family, everywhere (I think Gordon Brown may have copyrighted that phrase, so I acknowledge the source herewith) would have received, in the post, a parcel from John Lewis with fabric for their childrens' bedrooms.

Following complaints about the waste of money incurred in despatching such blinds to elderly people living in Sheltered Accommodation, a Government Committee would have been set up leading to the establishment of a new Whitehall department to ensure that ZanuLabour delivered as accurately on its blinds as it delivered on its policies.

However, as even post-review deliveries would still include the aforementioned elderly couple in Sheltered Accommodation (because they were already enjoying the £250 proceeds of The Child Trust Fund they had also undeservedly been given) the exercise would have had to be rolled up anyway.

Just like, er, the blinds.

PhylPho

Paul_Herring wrote: »

I see the pond he's going to cross is still frozen over.

Well, um, not according to the Met Office.

Not only are things beginning to heat up.

It's definitely a Barbecue Thursday on May 6th. . . where the political climate is concerned.

ManyDollarz

PhylPho wrote: »

It's definitely a Barbecue Thursday on May 6th.

I wonder if GB will be barbecuing all those mice, which we, the Tax Payer plc, so graciously paid £352.50p to catch, at his North Queensferry (band G) des-res, since their eradication was so obviously "wholly, exclusively and necessarily incurred for the purpose of performing your Parliamentary duties"!!! :iloveyou:
(pdf page 5: http://mpsallowances.parliament.uk/mpslordsandoffices/hocallowances/allowances-by-mp/gordon-brown/Gordon_Brown_0607_ACA.pdf )

The Green Book, 2006.

Parliamentary Salaries, Allowances and Pensions

Page 6, Introduction, Use of Parliamentary allowances.

"...any expenditure claimed from the allowances has been wholly, exclusively and necessarily incurred for the purpose of performing your Parliamentary duties."

http://mpsallowances.parliament.uk/mpslordsandoffices/hocallowances/allowances-by-mp/2006%20Green%20Book.pdf

ps. I notice Mousetraps.org.uk sell Professional Odour Remover - For bad smells!! £16.95p +vat pp
And it says it works even if the dead carcass is not removed!!