1. “Moat? I didn’t claim for dredging my moat. That was the estuary. I couldn’t get the yacht up to the mooring.”
2. “Manure is utterly essential to carrying out my duties as an MP. It greases the cogs of the political system.”
3. “Using taxpayer’s money to build my property portfolio was a selfless attempt to kick start the housing market.”
4. “The bathplug was doing the taxpayer a favour. Since I’ve started claiming for my water bill, I hadn’t been bothering with a plug.”
5. “Dog food was a legitimate expense, Corby is employed as my parliamentary assistant. It comes under staff costs.”
6. “My gardening expenses may appear extravagant, but Prince Charles doesn’t come cheap and I have excellent vegetables.”
7. “They were energy saving light bulbs. That’s more an investment than an expense.”
8. “I don’t know what my constituents are complaining about. My planters give them something nice to look at.”
9. “Maintaining my estate is at the taxpayer’s expense is just fiscal stimulus. I am helping fight off the recession by contributing greatly to local employment.”
10. “You’re right. I defrauded the taxpayer. I’ll be handing myself in to the police.”
Showing posts with label MPs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label MPs. Show all posts
Monday, 18 May 2009
Monday, 11 May 2009
An Apology from the Rt. “Hon.” John ‘Seven Homes’ Lewis MP
Dear Constituents,
I feel that, following revelations in the Telegraph regarding the expenses of MPs, I should issue a statement on the matter. It is damaging for trust, for the House and for our political system in general.
Some have commented that my seven homes are indefensible. I have also attracted criticism for supposedly ‘flipping’ my second home between them over the past year. This was not a matter of personal profit, but personal security. If I had the choice, I’d have only one home, but, as it stands, I have to have seven for security purposes. These ‘decoy homes’ are a means of ensuring my security so that I am fully able to execute my parliamentary and constituency business. As for the flipping, this was not because I wished to decorate my homes at the taxpayer’s expense before selling them for a profit. It was merely to protect the identity of my primary residence, and to ensure that terrorists could not work out which of my homes were mere ‘decoy homes’. The trauma of having to move between seven homes, including one in Tuscany, has been a burden I was willing to carry to fully serve my constituents.
The furnishing of these decoy homes is integral to this security strategy. It is also essential that they are furnished in keeping with the area. If I were to paint a Notting Hill home in anything other than Farrow and Ball it would be obvious to any terrorist that such a home could not be real. I have been forced to sell homes and purchase new ones due to intelligence that they had been compromised. Any profit made was not actually profit, but “profit” designed to give the appearance of profit, normalising the rapid and suspicious sale of the house. As “profit” is not actually profit, it is exempt from CGT.
All the above claims were made within the rules and all were granted by the fees office. I, however, accept that this isn’t enough, which is why I must apologise. I am most awfully sorry that I have been caught following the rules. In future I shall be certain to ensure that this does not happen again.
Yours in dutiful service,
Rt. Hon. J. Lewis MP
P.S. Must dash - doorbell. That will be the furniture delivery.
I feel that, following revelations in the Telegraph regarding the expenses of MPs, I should issue a statement on the matter. It is damaging for trust, for the House and for our political system in general.
Some have commented that my seven homes are indefensible. I have also attracted criticism for supposedly ‘flipping’ my second home between them over the past year. This was not a matter of personal profit, but personal security. If I had the choice, I’d have only one home, but, as it stands, I have to have seven for security purposes. These ‘decoy homes’ are a means of ensuring my security so that I am fully able to execute my parliamentary and constituency business. As for the flipping, this was not because I wished to decorate my homes at the taxpayer’s expense before selling them for a profit. It was merely to protect the identity of my primary residence, and to ensure that terrorists could not work out which of my homes were mere ‘decoy homes’. The trauma of having to move between seven homes, including one in Tuscany, has been a burden I was willing to carry to fully serve my constituents.
The furnishing of these decoy homes is integral to this security strategy. It is also essential that they are furnished in keeping with the area. If I were to paint a Notting Hill home in anything other than Farrow and Ball it would be obvious to any terrorist that such a home could not be real. I have been forced to sell homes and purchase new ones due to intelligence that they had been compromised. Any profit made was not actually profit, but “profit” designed to give the appearance of profit, normalising the rapid and suspicious sale of the house. As “profit” is not actually profit, it is exempt from CGT.
All the above claims were made within the rules and all were granted by the fees office. I, however, accept that this isn’t enough, which is why I must apologise. I am most awfully sorry that I have been caught following the rules. In future I shall be certain to ensure that this does not happen again.
Yours in dutiful service,
Rt. Hon. J. Lewis MP
P.S. Must dash - doorbell. That will be the furniture delivery.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
