MP's to escape duty on booze and food price rises.

I mentioned before about how MP's whilst demonizing the devils brew, ensure that when it comes to themselves they get cheap beer.

In fact it is quite telling that they are unable to sell beer to these expense drawing parasites without making a profit, as this shows they have to get a subsidy from public funds.

The House of Commons Refreshment Department operated on a subsidy of £5.5 million of taxpayers’ money in the 2007/08 financial year, equivalent to total annual tax receipts from 35 pubs. The subsidy, not published in the House of Commons’ Annual Accounts, was £693,000 higher than in 2006/07, a 15% increase.

It accounted for 43% of the Department’s operating costs, meaning that the taxpayer coughs up £4.30 for every £10 spent refreshing our politicians: even before they claim back their outgoings without receipts through the notorious expenses system.

There are at least 12 bars in the Parliamentary estate, excluding the various dining rooms, brasseries and banqueting suites. Unsurprisingly, given the MPs write their own laws as well as ours, they operate without a licence and have no restrictions on hours.

Given the level of subsidy, it is unsurprising that MPs can enjoy much cheaper drinks than their constituents. A pint of Foster’s in Stranger’s Bar costs £2.10, compared with a national average of £2.80 (33% higher) and a London average of around £3.00 (43% higher). A House of Commons 8-year-old Scotch costs £1.35, while our politicians can enjoy a Pimm’s on the Thames-side terrace for just £1.65.

The term "Unable to organise a piss up in a brewery" leaps forth here. 

But it gets better, by the word better I mean of course worse as the worthless expense fiddlers have decided to cap food prices as well as their drinks as the telegraph reports

Oh lets not forget that we as taxpayers also fund these porkie champagne socialists to the tune of £400 a month.

Link - The food allowance was hard to justify at £400 a month without receipts—but there was a case for a daily subsistence allowance for days when evening work at the House prevented Members having their own food at home—this should apply to all Members and not only those who claimed the additional costs allowance.

So not only do they get cheap drinks and food, but can also claim back the costs for said food and drinks off of the taxpayers. 

A double fiscal arse raping there. 

No wonder they see no problem - until its leaked and we the public complain - about sticking some grumble porn flicks on the old expenses.

.