These poor starved MP's a mere £64K a year to keep the wolf from the door. How do these poor we folk stop from passing out from hunger? Well expenses paid for by the plebs of course....Mr Mitchell, 74, submitted receipts in support of his food claims that included a 67p packet of Ginger Crinkle biscuits, Branston pickle at 68p and a bottle of Laphroaig malt whisky at £22.99.
In 2007, Mr Mitchell also claimed £2,938 for interior redecoration of his second home and £1,200 for re-upholstering sofas.
In the 2004/05 financial year he submitted a series of supermarket receipts in support of his food claims, including one from Sainsbury’s in Grimsby on April 2 that listed the Ginger Crinkles. Other receipts included bottles of wine, flowers at £3.99, 16p on “lemons” and another 16p on aspirin.
In his claim for Dec 2006, the veteran backbencher submitted a bill for “security shutters” at his second home in London but an official wrote back on Jan 12 to say that the claim “does not fall within the remit of the allowance”.
In his claim for Dec 2006, the veteran backbencher submitted a bill for “security shutters” at his second home in London but an official wrote back on Jan 12 to say that the claim “does not fall within the remit of the allowance”.
Ten days later, Mr Mitchell’s wife telephoned the fees office to query the decision.
Another official emailed to say: “Whilst security costs are admissible expenses to claim against the Additional Costs Allowance we are unsure, from the photograph that accompanied the claim, whether the shutters that have been purchased can be for security.
“They do not appear to be robust enough and have no locking facility. For these reasons we have withheld the payment.”
The email prompted Mr Mitchell to reply in a letter on Feb 13: “I am greatly puzzled why you should have determined that the provision of security shutters for the London property is 'not allowable’.
“None of the reasons you have given for rejecting the claim are reasonable. First you rejected them because 'security shutters are not allowed’ then you rejected them because they did not look secure enough? Please explain.
“Since when did the validity of a claim depend on whether or not you approved of the style of fittings?”
**Maybe he should calm down an have a ginger biscuit, hell he can have it on me. After all the cunt did the last time.
Technorati Tags: troughligate, expenses
.
3 people have spoken:
buggerey,thuggerey&skulduggery
This is the typical Labour cock sucker from the 70's and 80's that would call the Tories corrupt.
Penny-pinching, nickle and dime mother-fuckers!
No wonder we're all fucked. They're actually a bunch of sponging pakis!
Post a Comment