MPs’ expenses: Clegg’s proposal gains ground

As reported in the press last May:

Nick Clegg, the Liberal Democrat leader, called [on 13th May 2009] for MPs to be banned from making a profit from selling second homes which they bought using their Commons allowances.

He will prevent Liberal Democrat MPs making money out of selling such a property after having their mortgage interest paid by the taxpayer – and wants the rule extended to all MPs. Any profits from the sale of a property would be handed back to the Exchequer.

And today:

The head of the new authority tasked with overhauling MPs’ expenses has said profits made on taxpayer-funded second homes should be “surrendered”.

Sir Ian Kennedy told the Times gains made from rises in the value of properties should not be retained.

At the time I felt this to be one of the most important issues in the expenses scandal. It seemed especially wrong for MPs to use taxpayers’ money to gamble on the housing market and then pocket all the winnings; and right for Nick to take a stand against it.

Read more by or more about or .
This entry was posted in News.
Advert

7 Comments

  • I would expect all parties will go along with this, but when is the starting date for it, could it be back dated?

  • Anthony Aloysius St 16th Feb '10 - 11:29am

    “He will prevent Liberal Democrat MPs making money out of selling such a property after having their mortgage interest paid by the taxpayer”

    But how on earth can he prevent it?

    If a Lib Dem MP sells a house he owns and pockets the money, there’s not an earthly thing Nick Clegg can do about it.

  • Andrew Duffield 16th Feb '10 - 1:22pm

    “If a Lib Dem MP sells a house he owns and pockets the money, there’s not an earthly thing Nick Clegg can do about it.”

    Au contraire.
    Nick supports LVT, which could capture every penny of unearned gain from MPs (and everyone else) in lieu of taxing their productive worth.

  • Anthony Aloysius St 16th Feb '10 - 1:44pm

    What a remarkably fatuous comment!

    Nick Clegg can “support” what he likes, but of course he’s powerless to stop a Lib Dem MP selling a house he owns and pocketing the money. Second homes are quite likely to be sold when MPs leave the House of Commons, and in that case he can’t even threaten to withdraw the whip.

  • Anthony Aloysius St 17th Feb '10 - 9:04am

    “It’s not outwith the realms of possibility to intercept any money which would have been paid by whoever purchases the property (assuming this is legal). Just as they do with mortgages, like.”

    Crikey, this is hard work!

    Yes, of course it could be done _if_ the law were changed (though a retrospective change would be very questionable).

    But Nick Clegg himself doesn’t have the power to “intercept” his MPs’ money – not without the police taking a close interest in his activities.

One Trackback

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert

Recent Comments

  • Tristan Ward
    "it is regrettable that the freed slaves got nothing" Freed slaves didn't get "nothing". They got freedom. I don't recall many electing to stay in chains ...
  • Judy Abel
    @Jana while I think obesity is a problem to be tackled to prevent long term conditions I do think the NHS needs to get to grips with its safety issues. In the B...
  • Andrew Tampion
    "What neither mention is that when slavery was abolished compensation was paid to the slave owners out of public money for the loss of their “assets”" I ag...
  • Tristan Ward
    @ Caron Lindsay "we need a message that is nationally relevant." Which bit of: "We need more growth" "We need to do something about climate change" "...
  • Andrew Tampion
    So if I said that the overwhelming majority of remain voters from 1975 had died and that therefore the 2016 referendum was justified you'd be fine with that?...