Skip to content

Objectively, possibly, but politically…..

Since Ms McVey was re-elected in 2017, they have both claimed £1,625 a month in rental expenses, with their combined accommodation expenses since 2017 amounting to close to a quarter of a million pounds.

According to the register of interests, Mr Davies has declared an income in excess of £10,000 for a property in London. It is understood that this relates to a flat in Waterloo, which he has owned since 2005.

Ms McVey did not respond to questions. Mr Davies told Led by Donkeys: “If I owned the flat outright and I could stay there without incurring any cost then I would agree that I should do that, but that doesn’t remotely apply in my case.

“As far as I am aware, all workplaces cover the accommodation costs of people working away from home, and I am surprised…[you]…think that should no longer be the case.

“That, of course, will lead to only the wealthiest people in the country being able to become MPs.”

Well, yeah, logical and all that. But politically? I could do this myself but you peons have to pay for me instead?

Not gonna fly, is it? The couple are on £250 k a year, minimum, plus very generous expenses. Getting on for 10x UK median household income, without the ministerial top up, or whatever made privately. The average reaction is gooing to be that he can pay his own damn mortgage.

9 thoughts on “Objectively, possibly, but politically…..”

  1. The solution is for whoever runs the parliamentary estate to buy a couple of 1970s socialist monstrosity tower blocks in Tower Hamlets (I’d even put a security guard on the door, call it a concierge if they want) and issue each MP a flat for free and a season ticket to their constituency and one for the underground.

    Then there won’t be any need for any of them to claim accommodation or travel expenses.

  2. Following the 2009 expenses scandal, rules were changed so that MPs cannot claim mortgage costs back. Therefore, Mr Davies could not claim any mortgage interest on the Waterloo property, even if the couple lived there.

    Last night he criticised the rules, saying that the arrangement had been “forced” on him by the body which was set up in the wake of the expenses scandal.

    He said that he would have been “happy” to continue claiming mortgage interest on the flat he owns, “but that option was removed from me”.
    Esther McVey claims thousands for London rent despite MP husband owning flat one mile away

    If only we could all have such generous and lucrative employers.

  3. There’s no need for the government to buy any property at all. There’s plenty of under-occupied government office buildings in London. Convert a few floors to one-bed flats and we’re sorted. These buildings already have security, so that won’t be an extra expense.

  4. I wonder how the commies did it under Stalin, where the attendees were from all over the Soviet Union and therefore had no option but to live with whatever state solution was provided?

  5. Bloke in North Dorset

    Its not the money, which in the great scheme of things won’t appear as a rounding anywhere, it the sense of entitlement and lack of political nous that upsets people. Its almost as if we didn’t have an expenses scandal 15 years ago.

  6. There’s no need for the government to buy any property at all. There’s plenty of under-occupied government office buildings in London. Convert a few floors to one-bed flats and we’re sorted. These buildings already have security, so that won’t be an extra expense.

    You’re missing the point of putting them in a glory of central planning, in an area richly enhanced with imported diversity. One or two of them with IQs higher than room temperature might start wondering why they need the security. (Yeah, I know, it’s unlikely. But still…)

  7. hes fckn wrong as well. If your work permanently requires you to work in 2 places accomodation is not an expensable cost. Neither is travel between the 2.

    I ran into it a few years back. Some twat in govt should at least sort that out. (unless they have in the last 5 years)

  8. What Swanny says: us peons can’t claim accommodation or travel expenses for equivalent work. An MP should be aware of this.

  9. @Bloke in Wales – “The solution is for whoever runs the parliamentary estate to buy a couple of 1970s socialist monstrosity tower blocks in Tower Hamlets”

    I wouldn’t be so generous. Make them stay in properties which conform to the latest standards of “affordable housing”. Then we might see the standards rise. Especially if they are not allowed privileged transport (such as chauffer driven cars, or taxis on expenses), so must use public transport, bikes, or electric cars with the associated difficulty of charging them at housing that has no garage and probably no off-road allocated space.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *