<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Ban on MPs claiming mortgages could end up costing taxpayer more</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.leftfootforward.org/2009/11/ban-on-mps-claiming-mortgages-could-end-up-costing-taxpayer-more/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.leftfootforward.org/2009/11/ban-on-mps-claiming-mortgages-could-end-up-costing-taxpayer-more/</link>
	<description>Left Foot Forward is a political blog for progressives. We provide evidence-based analysis on British politics, news and policy developments.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 03:48:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris</title>
		<link>http://www.leftfootforward.org/2009/11/ban-on-mps-claiming-mortgages-could-end-up-costing-taxpayer-more/comment-page-1/#comment-2306</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 2009 21:34:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.leftfootforward.org/?p=3436#comment-2306</guid>
		<description>This blog seems to be against self enrichment for tories but when it affects labour it is more expensive, therefore wrong.

Surely the principle should be that MPs in general should not have a vested interest in rising property prices as they all own 2 homes?  Surely the incentive to prevent property price bubbles would be more if the expense system should not enrich those using it.  Expenses should be fully incurred in course of job - looking at what has been claimed in the past it is clear that it has been used to provide things which are not.

&#039;While it may seem unfair for MPs to get contributions towards a long-term asset they will own, the ultimate goal of this review must be to create a fair system that costs the taxpayer the least amount of money.&#039;

Surely the aim of an expense system should be to reimburse for items wholly used within course of job upto a set limit, as per the rest of the populace.  Jack Story, are you a PPC by any chance?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This blog seems to be against self enrichment for tories but when it affects labour it is more expensive, therefore wrong.</p>
<p>Surely the principle should be that MPs in general should not have a vested interest in rising property prices as they all own 2 homes?  Surely the incentive to prevent property price bubbles would be more if the expense system should not enrich those using it.  Expenses should be fully incurred in course of job &#8211; looking at what has been claimed in the past it is clear that it has been used to provide things which are not.</p>
<p>&#8216;While it may seem unfair for MPs to get contributions towards a long-term asset they will own, the ultimate goal of this review must be to create a fair system that costs the taxpayer the least amount of money.&#8217;</p>
<p>Surely the aim of an expense system should be to reimburse for items wholly used within course of job upto a set limit, as per the rest of the populace.  Jack Story, are you a PPC by any chance?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Thompson</title>
		<link>http://www.leftfootforward.org/2009/11/ban-on-mps-claiming-mortgages-could-end-up-costing-taxpayer-more/comment-page-1/#comment-1393</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Thompson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Nov 2009 18:37:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.leftfootforward.org/?p=3436#comment-1393</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t have a problem with the state paying for a mortgage for an MP if it is cheaper. As long as 100% of the capital gain reverts to the state when the MP sells the house.

I actually think the best solution is for the government to purchase enough homes for all MPs close to parliament and allow MPs to live in them whilst they are serving.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t have a problem with the state paying for a mortgage for an MP if it is cheaper. As long as 100% of the capital gain reverts to the state when the MP sells the house.</p>
<p>I actually think the best solution is for the government to purchase enough homes for all MPs close to parliament and allow MPs to live in them whilst they are serving.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

