Gordon Brown Labour Party

Gordon Brown

Brown first thought of himself as being ‘Labour’ and his sense of social injustice was roused when he accompanied his father on visits around Kirkcaldy seeing the pain of unemployment and the misery of poverty and squalor as the mining and textile industries collapsed. Growing up he discovered Tawney, Tressell, Cole and other socialist texts which inspired him. He also found inspiration in Blake in poetry, Potter in drama, Lawrence in literature and the socialist leader James Maxton in Scottish history. These, he argues, fueled his passion and activism, reinforcing his own political experience. For Brown the ethical basis of British socialism has several themes: the view that individuals are not primarily self-centered but are co-operative, that people are more likely to thrive in communities in which they play a full role and that people have talents and potential that the free market will not allow them to fully realize. In addition, one of the most enduring of Brown’s themes is the commitment to equality.

Mindful of President Obama’s recent reference to the Special Relationship, I am minded of questions raised in congress some year’s ago

1. Why did the UK Parliament commit to Brussels, splitting away from the Atlantic Alliance, “The Special Relationship” giving up it’s National identity?

2. Why did the UK Parliament abandon it’s military commitments to Iraq midway through the war?

3. Why did the UK Parliament politic elite secretly open discussions, “excluding the USA” with the Taliban in Afghanistan?

4. Why did the UK Parliament further cede British sovereignty to Brussels? (Remember the non-existent referendum promised to the UK public)

5. Why did the UK Parliament fail to properly finance the military at the time of the Afganistan War? NOTE1

NOTE1

At the beginning of and for a substantial period of time after, the British public and press bitterly complained that British servicemen were being sent into combat, poorly trained, ill equipped and in open topped land rovers. Resultant of this, many British soldiers were unnecessarily killed and maimed by I.E.D.s. In contrast, the USA and other nations equipped, (at the start of the war) their servicemen, with protective personal armour and highly effective mine-resistant vehicles. Additionally, At the time of battlefield confrontation British servicemen failed to benefit from effective air support, helicopters, or protection from heavy mortars.

The highly respected, “EUreferendum” blog reasoned simply that the foregoing failures were attributed to, inadequate financial allocation and “jobsworths” in the Whitehall and Westminster bureaucracy. Finance is remitted to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who at the time was Gordon Brown. Yes, the same Gordon Brown who, sacked from government and sidelined by the Labour Party has returned to Scotland with the message that we Scot’s are better together.

I think not Gordon, a substantial number of the young men and women maimed and killed in wars not supported by the people of Scotland were Scot’s. We cannot forget. Vote, “Yes” to independence.

Advertisements

Mail Deliveries To Remote Areas to be Scaled Down

Royal Mail says postal deliveries to remote areas under threat

Privatized company’s CEO calls for action from Ofcom to prevent undercutting from rivals threatening universal service obligation Royal Mail boss Moya Greene said: ‘Royal Mail is required to deliver six days a week, overnight, throughout the whole country, to stringent quality standards and at a uniform, affordable tariff.’ Royal Mail has warned that postal deliveries to rural areas are under threat because rivals are being allowed to cherry pick easy and profitable deliveries in towns and cities without having to run services to isolated homes such as on Scottish islands.

After the furore over its sell-off last year, which sparked accusations the soaring share price at the float had effectively lost the taxpayer £750m in a day, the company issued its warning on Thursday over the universal service obligation as it reported a 12% rise in operating profits to £671m. Moya Greene, Royal Mail’s chief executive, said rival TNT Post UK’s ability to pick off profitable routes in big cities was “striking at the economics of the universal service obligation” – its statutory duty to deliver to every address in the country, six days a week, at the same price. TNT Post UK has launched “final mile” delivery services in London, Manchester and Liverpool, and plans to deliver to up to 42% of addresses by 2017. Greene said Royal Mail subsidized expensive deliveries to rural areas from the profits it made from services in big cities, and any increased threat from rivals could cost it £200m in revenues by 2017.

“TNT Post UK can cherry pick easy-to-serve urban areas, delivering easy-to-handle post to homes less frequently than Royal Mail and to no defined quality standard,” she said. “Royal Mail is required to deliver six days a week, overnight, throughout the whole country, to stringent quality standards and at a uniform, affordable tariff. “Everyone should really sit up and take notice of what effect this cherry picking will have.”
Greene called for “timely regulatory action” from the regulator Ofcom to prevent undercutting from rivals threatening the universal service. The boss of TNT Post UK, Nick Wells, said Royal Mail should stop “whingeing”. He insisted his firm’s competition posed “absolutely no threat to the universal service”. “We are delivering choice for our customers, and that is good for the market overall, as well as creating jobs,” he said. “The regulator has repeatedly said there is no threat to the universal service. Royal Mail should stop this sabre-rattling. We have a small market share, there is absolutely no threat to the universal service.”

An Ofcom spokesman said: “We do not believe that there is presently a threat to the financial sustainability of the universal postal service. “We would expect Royal Mail to take appropriate steps to respond to the challenge posed by competition, including improving efficiency.” The regulator said it had a “duty to secure” the universal service and “powers to step in to protect it” if it came under threat. Ofcom is to review the universal service next year but is unlikely to recommend any changes. Royal Mail is committed to maintaining the universal service until at least 2021, and any change beforehand would have to be put to a vote in parliament. Canada Post, where Greene was chief executive until she joined Royal Mail in 2010, earlier this year announced plans to phase out some door-to-door deliveries.

Royal Mail’s strong profits – £671m before transformation costs on revenue up 2% to £9.46bn – reignited anger over the government’s controversial flotation of the 500-year-old postal operator last October. The shares, which floated at 330p, spiked 38% on their debut on the stock market on 11 October. It was the biggest one-day rise in a privatization since British Airways in 1987 and the shares went on to reach 618p. On Thursday they dropped 10% to 519p after the warning over the threat from competition.

Responding to the profit figures, Chuka Umunna, the shadow business secretary, said: “Ministers’ case for their Royal Mail fire sale has now been completely demolished. We know Royal Mail was profitable in the public sector, but David Cameron’s government privatized Royal Mail’s profits after making the taxpayer pick up the tab for its historic debts. “Taxpayers have been left short-changed by hundreds of millions of pounds at a time when families are being hit by a cost-of-living crisis, while the City investors the Tory-led government prioritised giving Royal Mail shares have been laughing all the way to the bank.”

Brian Scott of the Unite union, which represents 7,000 Royal Mail managers, said the strong financial results showed taxpayers had been “fleeced”. “Instead of these profits flowing into the Treasury’s coffers to pay for schools and nurses, it’s flowing into the pockets of shareholders, some of which enjoyed ‘mates rates’ when Royal Mail was sold off on the cheap,” he said.

Royal Mail’s revenue from letters dropped 2% to £4.63bn last year, but parcels increased 7% and now make up 51% of overall earnings due to the continued rise of internet shopping. However, Greene warned that Amazon’s creation of its own delivery service was knocking sales. She said Amazon’s delivery arm was capable of delivering 60m-70m parcels a day, compared with the 75m for Royal Mail’s Parcel-Force arm.

Royal Mail hopes to counter intense competition by making the company more customer friendly. It is opening 100 of its delivery offices on Sundays and will pilot Sunday deliveries within the M25 over the summer. It is also making it easier for customers to track parcels returned to the seller. Rupert Neate and Sean Farrell The Guardian.

The Rise of the Special Adviser & Hopefully The Fall

Special Advisers are usually well educated University types with a political leaning. Tony Blair created the animal at the start of his tenure. Until that time such persons were remunerated by the MP that took them on. Blair changed the game and took all of them onto the books of the Civil Service. Projected recurring costs now £8million and rising. They are expected to discharge their duties observing the, “Civil Service Code of Conduct” but in practice they ignore it.

Blair McDougall is the, “No” Campaign Director. A Labour Party activist he was recruited, towards the start of the Labour Governments tenure, (under the leadership of Tony Blair) to a previously non-existent post, (one of many) of, “Special Adviser” within the civil service. Notwithstanding his role was a political appointment, “his salary and operational costs and expenses” were paid by the Taxpayer. In fulfilling his strategic role he acted as special adviser to;

1. Ian (now Lord) McCartney. (2004-2007) Held a number of ministerial portfolios within Labour governments. Allegation lodged that Blair McDougall had devoted time to his manager’s failed challenge for the post of Deputy Leader of the labour Party, (conduct expressly forbidden under the Civil Service code) see;

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/research/special-advisers/special_advisers_and_public_allegations_of_misconduct_1997_-_2013.pdf

2. James Purnell. (2007-2008) Rising star within the party. Resigned from Government 2009. Stood down from Westminster in 2010.

a. Appointed, “Special Adviser” to the, “Public Sector Group” of the, “Boston Consulting Group”, (worldwide policy advisory organization).

b. Appointed Chair of the, (left leaning) think tank, The Institute for Public Policy Research, (IPPR).

c. Appointed, (2013) Director of Strategy & Digital, at the BBC, a very influential post. Resigned membership of the Labour Party and any other political posts, for the duration of his employment. It is possible he might return to mainstream politics in 2015. See;

http://www.bbc.co.uk/aboutthebbc/insidethebbc/managementstructure/biographies/purnell_james/

3. Organized and directed David Miliband’s failed campaign for leadership of the Labour party.

4. Sent to Scotland to head the, “no” campaign.

Afternote:

1. Recurring costs to the taxpayer for the, “Special Advisers” group of political appointments approximately £8million annually.

2. Former, “Special Advisers” subsequently elected to parliament, Ed Balls, James Purnell, Ed Miliband, David Miliband & possibly the most famous of them all the former Director of Communications and Strategy, (for Tony Blair) Alastair Campbell.

3. Many others have also gone on to accept influential highly paid posts in the private sector.

4. The secret of the expanding, “Special Adviser” group is networking. Though their employment may be spread across a wide variety of political and business activities, (within the UK and worldwide) they work hard maintaining contact and influence within the group so that their future may be guaranteed.

5. The Scottish electorate needs to be alerted to the growth of the, “Special Adviser” group. Vote, “Yes” to independence, thwart the efforts of, “Special Adviser”, Blair McDougall and other, “carpetbaggers”.

Better Together team games for student members

Blair McDougall: “Right then, this is a new game designed to test your reasoning ability. If I name a fruit, run to the right wall of the office and if I name a colour, run to the left wall of the office, understood?

Students: “Yes, understood”.

Blair McDougall: “Right____ready, set, ORANGE!!!!

More About David Coburn UKIP

UKIP In-fighting (Scotland)

In Autumn 2013, Serious in-fighting within the UKIP Party in Scotland, which had been going on for over a year had come to a head when Lord Monckton questioned, “irregularities” in the candidate selection process, which was seemingly interfered with from London. Lord Monckton and very many of his Scottish Colleagues objected to this imperialist behavior. Because London would not pay any heed to the wishes of the Scottish Membership, and he did not get the support of the London NEC. Lord Monckton and his many loyal supporters then resigned from UKIP Scotland’s Leadership.

This resulted in an estranged Scot, Dave Coburn (UKIP London Chairman) being selected as the Lead Candidate for a seat in Scotland. Coburn operates via a newly formed UKIP, “Puppet Regime”, set up, (in the aftermath of the foregoing disagreement) in the West of Scotland, under the direction of a, “Misty Thackeray” in Lanarkshire.

David Coburn, UKIP, (after a serious amount of in-fighting, leading to a number of Scottish leadership resignations) was included on the Scottish list by Nigel Farage and subsequently elected, scraping through with 10.4% of the Scottish vote. It transpires he wished to become an MEP because it would help him get into Westminster, (House of Commons) through the generation of, “lots of television and radio coverage”.

Presumably the expected extra media coverage will prove beneficial at the time of the 2015 General Election, (Mr Coburn is to stand for election for the Bexleyheath and Crayford, London constituency). David, (considered to be as effective a communicator as his good friend Nigel Farage) is, Chairman of UKIP in London. His place of residence is in London.

He currently rents accommodation in Edinburgh but it is unlikely he will transfer his place of residence to Edinburgh any time in the near future. Perhaps forward looking to the 2015 election. Evidently, (assuming his bid for parliament is successful) he will attend the House of Commons, as an MP. Commuting to and from the European Parliament so that he will be able to claim a salary and all the expenses that would be available to him. Quite where this, “modus-operandi” fits with representation of members of the Scottish electorate that voted him into office defeats me.

His behavior is seemingly widely practiced by UKIP MEP’s who attend the European Parliament, (from time to time) for the sole purpose of claiming as much money as possible by way of salary and expenses, (about £1million each parliamentary period). They rarely, (if ever) participate in debates which might influence policies in favour of the UK so their entire purpose of being is fruitless and expensive for the UK taxpayer but blissfully financially beneficial for UKIP members.

Nigel Farage himself recently admitted legally claiming £millions from the European Parliament, (all of which seemingly ended up in his pocket). 29 MEP’s and £29million, nice one. The Scottish electorate has opportunity, in September to set up systems ensuring effective and proper representation. Vote “Yes” to independence. Banish UKIP back to England.

An Interview with the Original UKIP founder Alan Sked

An Interview with the Original UKIP founder Alan Sked, (Professor of International History at the London School of Economics

His opening statement, “The party has become a Frankenstein’s monster”. He may have founded Ukip, but Alan Sked’s moderate, Brussels-boycotting party has gone rogue – and the academic is desperate to stop the bandwagon he first set rolling. Alan Sked founded Ukip as, “a non-sectarian, non-racist party with no prejudices against foreigners or lawful minorities of any kind”. The founder of Ukip is trying to prove to me that, when he was in charge, the party wasn’t racist.

He handed me a party application form. It makes for fascinating reading. In 1993, along with backing British withdrawal from the EU, prospective members had to be sympathetic to the following: “It is a non-sectarian, non-racist party with no prejudices against foreigners or lawful minorities of any kind. It does not recognise the legitimacy of the European parliament and will send representatives only to the British parliament in Westminster.” So no £1Million expenses fees then.

“They got rid of all that after I left,” says Sked, who resigned the leadership shortly after the 1997 general election. He claims that the tolerant, liberal and democratic party he founded was taken over by right wingers and that, outgunned and outmaneuvered by Farage and other leading figures after that election, he had no alternative but to quit.

“They took out the bit about no prejudices against lawful minorities and, as soon as I disappeared, they all decided they wanted to go to the European parliament and take their expenses.” But those changes alone don’t make 2014 Ukip racist, do they? “The de facto leader of Ukip since 1999 has been a racist political failure, ” Sked counters. He means, of course, Nigel Farage. But even if Farage’s recent statements about not wanting to live next door to Romanians suggest he is xenophobic, is there any proof he was racist when he and Sked worked together in the mid-1990s? Sked laughs at the question and recalls an incident from 1997 when the two men were arguing over the kind of candidates that Ukip should have standing at the looming general election. “He wanted ex-National Front candidates to run and I said, ‘I’m not sure about that,’ and he said, ‘There’s no need to worry about the nigger vote. The nig-nogs will never vote for us.'” Farage has denied that he said these words and always insists that he is not racist.

How did Sked feel to hear such language? Who uses such racist words unless they think they’re addressing a fellow racist or suspects they can co-opt the hearer into sharing their racist agenda? Sked shakes his head. “I was shocked,” he says. “I had never heard people use those words. At the time, others thought he was being funny. I didn’t. They showed what kind of man he is.” Sked argues that far-right wingers who have worked for the National Front in the past now work for Ukip. “If he [Farage] runs in South Thanet, his agent will be a man called Heale who was a National Front organiser in West London.” Sked means Martyn Heale, Ukip’s branch chairman in Thanet and former National Front branch organiser in Hammersmith. It was after Sked left that he was allowed to join Ukip, rising to become Farage’s election agent in the 2005 general election.

“The party I founded has become a Frankenstein’s monster,” sighs Sked. “When I was leader, we wouldn’t send MEPs to Europe because we didn’t want to legitimise it. My policy was that if we were forced to take the salaries, we would give them to the National Health Service – they wouldn’t be taken by the party or individuals. Now Ukip say they’re against welfare cheats coming from eastern Europe, but in fact they’re the welfare cheats.” Sked’s suggestion is that Ukip MEPs do little to no work in Strasbourg and Brussels but take as much public money as possible in the form of salaries and, especially, expenses. “They do nothing in the European parliament and take the money. Farage has become a millionaire from expenses.” Farage, of course, told foreign journalists in 2009 that he’d taken £2 million of taxpayers’ money in expenses and allowances as an MEP on top of his £64,000-a-year salary. “There’s no reason to vote for Ukip,” says Sked, “because if they believed in what they said they wouldn’t be there.”

But aren’t Ukip MEPs in Strasbourg and Brussels there to expose the workings of the European parliament, and aren’t their expenses funneled into promoting the party’s message that the UK should get out of the EU? Sked giggles. “Oh, that’s nonsense,” he says. “They’re hardly ever there. They just turn up for expenses. They don’t turn up for key debates.” And when Ukip does vote, he suggests, there’s no party line. “When there were only three Ukip MEPs, the LSE European Studies institute found they voted three different ways.”

A few days later, I rang Sked to get his take on last week’s local authority election results. Political pundits are widely suggesting that Ukip’s victories demonstrate the party’s emergence as a fourth national political force. Sked says he expects the party’s European ineptitude to be replicated in town halls, “I feel very sorry for voters who are now going to have as Councillors people who aren’t very sophisticated, who have no local government policies and who have no experience in running things. All Ukip is good for, if their behaviour in Strasbourg and Brussels is anything to go by, is taking public money.”

What of Farage’s suggestion that Ukip will hold the balance of power after next year’s general election? “He’s a fantasist. They always do well in Euro elections because they’re the obvious party of protest, but the idea that they’re going to come from nothing to be holding the balance of power is ridiculous. I don’t expect them to get any seats.”

Any vote for Ukip in the European poll, says Sked, was wasted. “If you elect a Ukip MEP, you’re just going to elect another incompetent charlatan that you’re going to turn into another millionaire. They go native in Brussels, take the expenses and the perks and do fuck all.”

This isn’t perhaps the language one expects from a history professor, a former student of AJP Taylor and a world authority on the Habsburg empire. But Sked is an unusual academic who became so anti-EU that his students complained to former LSE director John Ashworth. Nothing came of the subsequent inquiry. Nowadays, though, it looks as if the LSE is restraining Sked from dispensing dyspeptic Eurosceptic jeremiads to impressionable youth. The man who was the LSE’s Mr Europe in the 1980s now teaches courses on the history of the US and the rivalry between Prussia and Austria from 1618. He is currently finishing off his book Abraham Lincoln: The Critical History of an American Icon, due for publication next year, in which, he says, he will present the man venerated as “the great liberator” of African-American slaves as a “racist, war-mongering, illiberal president”.

Sked reckons it was his experiences teaching at the LSE that turned him into a Eurosceptic. Between 1980 and 1990, he was convenor of European studies at the LSE and chaired its European Research Seminar. “I would meet all these European politicians and bureaucrats who came over, and the cumulative effect was that I realised it was time to get out. We had an Italian senator and MEP once. I said, ‘How many mafiosi do you have in the European parliament?’ He said, ‘Oh, we only have about 12.’ I spent 10 years meeting these loonies.”

In the 1992 general election, Sked stood against Conservative chairman Chris Patten for the Anti-Federalist League in the marginal seat of Bath. Sked had experience of elections, having stood for the Liberals in 1970, but he had no history of humiliating Tory bigwigs. At a debate for the candidates, though, he did just that. “I stood up and said, ‘Yes or no – do you apologise for the poll tax?’ He had to say no. The headlines the day after said: ‘Patten refuses to apologise for the poll tax’.” Patten subsequently lost to Liberal Democrat candidate Don Foster – a scalp Sked claims was his.

“That remark cost Patten the election. I know he blames me for never becoming prime minister,” says Sked. “So, if I did nothing else in my life, I did this one good thing. Considering what a mess he made of everything from the BBC [Patten resigned as its chairman earlier this month] to Hong Kong [Patten’s was the colony’s last governor], he would have been a dreadful prime minister. My life was not in vain if I spared the country that.” The anecdote is worth recalling, because Sked hopes to repeat what he did to Patten in Bath in 1992 to Ed Miliband in Doncaster in 2015. As leader of his New Deal party, launched last autumn, Sked plans to stand against the Labour leader on a Eurosceptic platform. “My idea was, having created Ukip to put pressure on Tories on the right to make them Eurosceptic and campaign for a referendum, I would do the same thing for the left,” he says.

But there is more to New Deal than Euroscepticism. It calls for the renationalisation of British Rail. Why? “The railway that’s the most efficient is the east coast line and it’s under direct control. The franchise didn’t work. It came under public control and it gets the fewest subsidies of any rail company. It’s rather silly when half the others are owned by the state railways of Germany. Why have we allowed the German state railways to run our railways when the British state isn’t allowed to? It’s madness.”

So why has he, a former neo-liberal, plumped for state ownership? His reason is simple: “As Keynes said, ‘When the facts change, you have to change your opinions.'” Sked has even been tweeting links to articles by left-leaning Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz that rail against income inequality – unthinkable for today’s Ukip, whose own Twitter presence can be unwittingly hilarious.

“I’m basically a liberal, but we have huge inequality,” he says. “My grand plan is that minority parties would manoeuvre the majority ones. This is my megalomania. I should probably be taken away by the people in white coats.” Perhaps, but he’s no more deluded or megalomaniac than the other ex-Ukip figure who set up his own party, former Labour MP and TV presenter Robert Kilroy-Silk, who founded the widely forgotten Veritas party in 2005.

And he’s no more deluded or megalomaniac, perhaps, than Sked’s Ukip successor, Nigel Farage. “He’s been de facto leader of the party since 1999 and he hasn’t won a single seat [at Westminster],” says Sked. “How he thinks he’s going to get the balance of power I don’t know. He must be swallowing his own propaganda.” But some voters believe that propaganda, in part because Farage has managed to charm parts of the electorate with his beer-swilling everyman image. “Behind that image is someone who isn’t bright,” says Sked, who recalls trying to give the public school-educated Farage remedial grammar lessons: “I spent two hours trying to explain to him the difference between ‘it’s’ with an apostrophe and ‘its’ without and he just flounced out the office saying, ‘I just don’t understand words.'”

Sked recalls, too, the letters of complaint he received from Salisbury, when Farage stood for Ukip in 1997’s general election. “I remember one that said, ‘I’m very glad your candidate believes in education, but until he learns to spell it, I’m not voting for him.’ That’s the kind of person people are voting for when they vote Ukip. Why does anyone have time for this creature? He’s a dimwitted racist.”

UKIP & David Coburn

RIGHT-WINGER David Coburn left students from all over the world in the lurch after taking tuition fees in advance. UKIP’s top Scottish candidate in next month’s European elections left foreign students thousands of pounds out of pocket after he shut down their language school. Right-winger David Coburn left the students from all over the world in the lurch after taking tuition fees in advance. Coburn, 55, is described in a UKIP election leaflet as an “international freight forwarding business owner”. He ran the Lexicon School of English in London’s Kensington, which was dissolved in 1993 by the Companies Registrar after failing to file accounts. But Coburn improperly carried on trading, despite an outstanding rent bill of £45,000 and was still taking in cash until just before he closed the school. Angry students said they were left in extreme financial difficulties with one describing Coburn as an “absolute b*****d’’.

After Lexicon’s collapse, other language schools offered the students free courses. Two of Coburn’s other companies, Heliogabalus and DC Trading, were dissolved in 2010 and 2012 respectively. Coburn, now renting accommodation in Edinburgh, said: “I have had a lot of businesses. Some have been better than others. “The students all transferred on to other schools. It was the time of the Gulf War starting and everyone was having trouble. Businesses were doing badly all over the place. “Plus there were lots of cheap language schools opening up which undermined everyone. If you can’t make money out it, you have to close it.” Scotland has six European seats up for grabs this year and UKIP are hopeful of grabbing one, with Coburn top of their list.

Alex Salmond has previously insisted that an independent Scotland would have more liberal immigration policies than the UK. Coburn said: “Mr Salmond seems to want to fill the country with people from God knows where. “That’s what has happened in England where people are desperately unhappy about it and are voting UKIP.” Coburn also insists that Scots living outside Scotland should have a vote in the independence referendum. He said: “Salmond is destroying their citizenship. If they don’t get a postal vote in the referendum, it is not worth a candle. It is a fraud.”

Money for Old Rope

Taxpayers to Fund Westminster Drop outs

I expect a clear “Yes” to Independence in September will ensure Scottish taxpayers will not be required to find an extraordinary amount of money being payment to MP’s voted out or voluntary standing down at the next General Election in 2015.

So that readers & taxpayers are informed payments include;

1. Resettlement Grant: (tax free) £30,000+ (compensation for loss of MP status).
2. Redundancy pay: (tax free) £20,000+
3. Winding up Payment: £45,000+ Funding for office staff and any other incidental expenses.
4. Pension pot: £50,000 rising to £550,000, (for long serving MPS).

It is projected that in excess of 330 MP’s and their staff will qualify for the foregoing financial packages. Cost to the taxpayer £20Million. The, “Gravy Train” comes over the hill and she blew.

Annual operational costs of maintaining Westminster political systems is approximately £650Million. The split:

a. House of Commons. £365Million.
b. MP’s. (salaries, expenses. £175Million.
c. House of Lords. £140Million
Total Cost Annually. £680Million

Lifetime of Parliament. £3,755,000 YES!!!! Nearly £4Billion.

The Scandalous cost of maintaining the UK parliament cannot be justified. We Scots have, (in September) the opportunity to escape from the madness that is the UK. Vote yes to independence. We will also gain from a redistribution of financial assets at the time of independence