A great result for Strangford

Why, Rebecca? Dermot has the brand recognition that many would hate, but at least he's got it. What was the thinking behind rejecting him? It seems a bit like North Down preferring the tank commander over Reg Empey as a challenger for Bob McCartney to me.

I think it's a good selection. The UUP needs to build for the long-term. They won't win this election but they need to establish a profile for their candidate and groom him for future elections.

That's a pretty early admission of defeat WF. Don't you think McGimpsey can win?

Maybe a great result for Strangford in your opinion, but hardly a great result for Dermot Nesbitt coming third in a selection betaen by 2 nobodies.

If Gareth McGimpsey wants to stand any chance then he should change his policies - and his surname probably wont do him any favours either.

Also, I hear there were some very interesting letters submitted alongside their declaration of intention to stand. Most bemoaning the shambles of the UUP overall and indeed admissions that "Strangford will be extremely hard to win back".

You almost feel sorry for Iris Robinson (I assume your slip in the intro paragraph was not a deliberate mistake Gonzo!) - it will be hard really to get up the enthusiasm for a proper fight when you dont have a credible opponent to fight against.

GONZO ADDS: The 'h' has now been dropped... Oops!

It was and is my belief that Dermot is not right for Strangford David.

- He is an MLA for a different constituency (South Down)

- He doesn't know and is not interested in some of the major issues in Strangford eg. fishing, agriculture

- He is an MLA already and Strangford are fed up with Lady Robinson and her triple mandate greediness, we wanted someone who would have the time and would be willing to dedicate all his time to Strangford as an MP.

Clearly alot of people in Strangford agree with me as Gareth won by a fairly substansial majority.

Insider

Dermot came second actually.

and as for the letter you mention Insider, it was written by a well known trouble maker within Strangford who was soundly defeated, his game is over.

Irish Robinson! I doubt she'd like that typo! :->

Rebecca
Thank you for that illuminating insight into the capabilities of Dermot Nesbitt.

You tell us that Dermot doesnt have a clue about fishing and agriculture. What does that tell us about his ability to represent his current constituents?

After all, Kilkeel has at least as big a fleet of boats as Portavogie. Is Dermot just leaving them all at sea (excuse the very bad pun) at the moment in his role as their Assembly Member? What about the poor farmers of South Down - does he not care about them either or even understand their issues.

A damning indictment of the standard of represenation for the people of South Down.

If you dont like current Assembly Members running for Westminster then I suppose you would openly oppose David Trimble, Tom Elliott, Billy Armstrong, David McClarty/Alan McFarland, David Burnside, Reg Empey, Derek Hussey, Danny Kennedy etc who are all either selected candidates or more than likely to be the UUP standard bearers. A little consistnecy please!

Gonzo

That's a pretty early admission of defeat WF. Don't you think McGimpsey can win?

My predictions are outlined on the "Why I'm a unionist - Kane" thread.

Rebecca

Very stupid decision by the UUP..........

How many members were at this meeting?

How many were new in the last 12 months?

How many of the new ones had attachments to McGimpsey?

This is just for information in the interests of democracy and the uselss state of the UUP machine.

it's actually the effective end of Dermot's career in politics. In 5 years he'll probably be 60+, and he can hardly seek a nomination elsewhere. The Assembly will probably have gone, and if not, he may not be a minister. And 2 Unionist MLAs in S Down on the new boundaries is problematic.

Even though I have no time for Junior Undertaker,at least its a new face, with a complete commitment to the Agreement( he makes his dad look hardline), who will clearly lose comprehensively but might appeal to the liberal Unionist voter-and if he can't, then he will be part of the proof that his party has imploded. There won't be any doubt about the choice opffered by the parties.

So Unionism wins most ways from this bizarre selection,particularly since we're spared the odious McNarry roaring like a mad bull on steroids about how he's a "leading Orangeman". Looks like he didn't fancy a rematch either-so much for the big talk after the last election.

DB

In 5 years ... The Assembly will probably have gone

Is this a prediction by a DUP member that the DUP's crack negotiating team will probably fail?

Next time you hear an Ulster Unionist whinging about political dynasties remind them of this result Trimbles, McGimpsey's whats next Carrington Peacocke for West Tyrone?

"He doesn't know and is not interested in some of the major issues in Strangford eg. fishing, agriculture"

The farmers of South Down and fishermen of Kilkeel will be pleased. Pathetic.

Interesting that the UUP have selected a nobody to fight a seat for an election that may be held in February.

The DUP vote in Strangford in the Assembly thrashed the UUP.I would doubt Iris can be defeated under any circumstances.

The DUP are still maintaining their momentum.Until the UUP dump Trimble and get a policy on government and the union the people can support they are going nowhere.

Trimble went into government with the IRA even though the IRA were not interested in disarming.

The DUP will put Ulster first.

God Save The Queen.

Shhhhhhuusshhhhhh

listen carefully

turn the radio off

be quiet now.. concentrate

open the window

that distant laughter you can hear is coming from the Robinson household

Shhhhhhuusshhhhhh

listen carefully

turn the radio off

be quiet now.. concentrate

open the window

that distant laughter you can hear is coming from the Robinson household

damn i hate this stutter

maybe IRIS would explain to the people of strangford why both she and her husband are claiming expenses for accomodation in london?
Are these claims both for the same place, if so why?
If not, why are husband and wife not sharing the same flat?

According to staff at the RVH - Iris and Peter came to a 'fork' in their relationship some years ago!?

That sort of snide remark ill-becomes you Liam.

I agree there Davros

If what we want on this site is debate then that's ok, but snide innuendo and an absolute desire to take slugger into territory such as that is the surest way to bring slugger to a shuddering halt.

The issues anyone?

If Gareth wins the election, does that make him 'The Overtaker'?

I'll get my coat...

Liam has made a point, if not a very crude point. Ian Paisley has made a career out of snide comments about his opponents – homosexuals etc. His party is not like others where politics is the key issue but rather its on how righteous these people are.

He and his wife claims separate expenses for the same house so therefore they are putting their relationship into the public domain. If this were England a fifth rate tabloid would be all over them (not literally). But i think that relationship is an open secret and we should move on.

I'd be keen for David Brewster to clarify his 4.51 from yesterday in light of my 4.54.

some of us work, Willow!
I don't believe the DUP will "fail" as you put it, except in the sense of failing to roll over and accept any deal the Government seeks to impose upon them. I subscribe to the "no deal is better than a bad deal" theory, the exact opposite of UUP policy since 1998-which presumably you still support.

Does Peter Robinson not now support the fundamentals of the Belfast Agreement? If he does not then why is he still promoting its review.

Is McG. a member of the Young Unionists or was that a joke?

Rebecca
was the mysterious third person referred to by you Jack Irwin? And didn't he sue McNasty for libel? Was that the reason McNasty didn't put his name forward? Whatever happened to that court case?
And what does young McGimski mean when he says in his letter to delegates that he has a name which will appeal to traditional Unionists? Don't they oppose the Agreement :0)

I deprecate Christopher Stalford's comments on Carrington Peacocke. He would clearly be a great improvement on many UUP MLAs, and already has deeper political insight than many UUP party officers

Christopher's reference to Carrington Peacocke made me laugh out loud this morning when I started to read this thread. His mother's mention in the run-up to last November's elections of the unfortunate monicker she'd bestowed on her child was undoubtedly one of the campaign highlights. A sure-fire vote winner on top of her impeccable blow-in credentials.

What, you tell me she didn't get in? Really??

The nomination of Mr. McGimpsey raises some interesting possibilities and it does offer the electorate a different view of the UUP.

He may be relatively inexperienced but that doesn't mean that he is isn't able, It doesn't mean that he doesn't understand the issues and it doesn't mean that he can't relate to the electorate.

Reportedly, 50% of the people that vote are over 50. The young and the moderate do seem to be dissillusioned with politics.

Perhaps this is because they see the same old faces saying the same old things (not just the UUP). Perhaps what is required are new faces, with energy and vitality and if so Mr. McGimpsey would appear to fit the bill. The question is who will rally to his cause or will the cynics prevail and the cynics might consider that if everything in life was a forgone conclusion we wouldn't need to have elections.

"He may be relatively inexperienced but that doesn't mean that he is isn't able, It doesn't mean that he doesn't understand the issues and it doesn't mean that he can't relate to the electorate."

In this place, those are the very reasons why Gareth McGimpsey WON'T get in. Honestly, since when did "issues" truly matter here?

MU and Warm Storage,
He clearly doesnt understand the issues - as has been pointed out quite humourously by Davidbrew - he makes his father look like an anti-Agreement fanatic.

If he does understand the issues therefore he is deliberately ignoring the fact that his policies have been rejected.

I would be a little worried however if the only policies these candidates were quizzed on were agriculture and fishing. While there is a valid question as to why Dermot Nesbitt was so abysmal in his knowledge of these subjects, there are other subjects which need dealt with.

I hope Rebecca returns to this thread soon. There have been a lot of points made on which it would be nice to hear her response.

Who exactly did David McNarry back in the selection meeting? Has that been made public? I thought there had been a rumour a while back that he was pushing Dermot ahead for the post? Did he switch sides and did that swing the votes behind McGimpsey? Anyone know?

Apologies for the delay Will, I live in student accommodation so I don't have ready access to computers 24/7.

"Very stupid decision by the UUP..........

How many members were at this meeting?

How many were new in the last 12 months?

How many of the new ones had attachments to McGimpsey?"

70plus members at the meeting, most of them have been there for quite some time, none of the new ones to my knowledge were mc gimpsey plants as you seem to be implying. Gareth won fair and square because he was the best candidate and deserved to win.

And at least the Ulster Unionists have an open, accountable way of selecting their candidates.

As for the sway of McNarry bashing, what makes you think McNarry was supporting Dermot?

David Brewster

I do not intend to tell you what was in the letters from each of the candidates, its really nobodys business but those that were at the meeting and voting.

I wanted McNarry to run, I think he'd do a good job as MP but the simple fact is he doesn't fancy a London based job, he only came in the last time at the last min because he was asked to.

Butterknife

Gareth McGimpsey is a former member of the Young Unionists, he joined when he was at queens but as he is now 33 and too old he is no longer a member of the Young Unionists.

Thank you Rebecca - its nice to have an open and honest spy:)

Then if form is anything to go by Mrs Trimble is in for a shock.

"I wanted McNarry to run, I think he'd do a good job as MP but the simple fact is he doesn't fancy a London based job, he only came in the last time at the last min because he was asked to."

hang on Rebecca, who asked him, and what kind of party has to persuade people to seek the endorsement of the people? And isn't it strange that he was ordered in while you contend mcGimski isn't a plant.

BTW there's already a letter in todays Snooze letter from someone who got the letters complaining about your candidate's "type of arrogance which has decimated the UUP electorally"...ooops

Just as well McNasty didn't fancy a London based job, though its a pity he didn't tell the electors that when he canvassed them. And strange how in spite of this reluctance he seems to have been a serial candidate, given his earlier abysmal attempt to oust Kilfedder in North Down.

David, who is the best candiate strangford association could have picked (regardless of those who put their names forward). Who would have done best if not McGimpsey?

Rebecca,
Good to see you back on the thread again. Gives the chance to debate the issues a little further.

The McNarry backing towards Dermot was simply a rumour. Bit of a side issue.

You said that you would have liked David McNarry to run. I dont have a massive problem with that per se, were it not for your earlier comment where you said:
"He (Dermot Nesbitt) is an MLA already and Strangford are fed up with Lady Robinson and her triple mandate greediness,"

One might get the impression that there is some inconsistency in your arguments there.

Rebecca/Michael, do you have any views on the ability of Dermot Nesbitt to represent the good people of South Down given "He doesn't know and is not interested in some of the major issues in Strangford(/South Down, my addition) eg. fishing, agriculture"

Also, the letter in today's Newsletter that David referrs to says that in the successful candidate's accompanying letter it stated, "Iris Robinson will be extremely difficult to beat". However you said it was from 'a well known trouble maker'. Who was it?

If it was MrMcGimpsey then he obviously doesnt share your optimism about the safe and easy return of Strangford into UUP hands. Why do you think that is?

What do you think of Gareth McGimpsey's point about his name appealing to traditional unionist voters? Does he think that they have some fondness for people called Gareth? If not then surely he is openly trading on his surname - an accusation UUP supporters & members have made the accusation of other parties doing and lambasted them for this.

I have to say that I have no personal problem with a relative of another politician seeking office (Go GWB! btw)- I think now every political party in NI has one political dynasty or another. What I do have a problem with though is a party attacking another for exactly that and then doing it themselves - particularly when the constituency of Strangford is very relevant.

I'll leave you to answer David's point about MrMcNarry's previous enthusiasm for Westminster in your own debate with him.

Dont worry if your reply doesnt appear too quickly, I fully understand your lack of computing facilities but I do look forward to your reply.

Will
Yeah- 4 more years!!

Mr Shilliday-Bob McCartney might have a chance :0)

very constructive as ever

Will davidbrew
Elections are good things, they are about choice. The more good candidates you have the better. Perhaps, Dermot Nesbitt offered experience and civility, Gareth McGimpsey youth and vitality. I presume the better man on the day won. This does not mean Mr. Nesbit is finished. Nobody wins all the time not even Arsenal but ultimately "all political careers end in failure" (Enoch Powell). This statement has as much to do with the passing of the generations as with ability, and in this regard the arrival of Mr. McGimpsey may just be the natural order of things. I am sure that Mr. Nesbitt will not want anybody to feel sorry for him, but for Mr. McGimpsey opportunity beckons. He will face a stern electoral test but tough elections are the very basis of democracy and no political party should take the electorate for granted.

In principle, I am against political dynasties because democracy depends on competitive selection and candidates from political dynasties may start with an unfair advantage disrupting the competitive selection process. I don't think that happened in this case and I there is less of a problem where there is a generation gap and a different constituency, but whilst there maybe execptional cases (including Mr. & Mrs. Robinson) where family relationships are acceptable, if this becomes the norm then this is damaging for the whole democratic process. I think we are approaching this point in Northern Ireland.

Finally, with regard to Rebecca's position on fishing which you seize on with some glee. No candidate can be an expert in everything and no doubt Mr. Nesbitt has considerable strengths in other areas such as Education. Nomination meetings will consider all relevant factors and select the candidate they feel most appropriate. The factors are presumably different when considering different roles (MLA,MP etc) which is why one must treat with caution the selection of candidates for multiple representative roles.

I hear that the "stop Dermot" campaign originated with DT, backed by Michael McGimpsey, and presumably McNarry.Remember that famous on air gaffe from Trimble at the time of the GFA-asked to send someone to negotiate something or other Channel 4 supposedly picked up his reply "Anyone but Dermot" Folklore or not, it seems to have repeated itself.
I also hear McFarland was parachuted into East Londonderry because Cunningham House didn't want a clear run for McClarty and owing to a mistake they had't realised Hoey had put his name in.

Clearly the potential for infighting in the UUP is not just about the Agreement-recognition of a shortage of jobs in the near future seems to engender a spirit of "sauve qui peut"

you have an exceptional imigination david, theres careers in that!

We have a democratic process of selection, Cunningham House as you well know, has no infulence on any of the results.

David brewster
Following the robinsons silence maybe you could tel lthe electorate of strangfrod and east belfat why both of them are claiming expenses for accomodation in london.

Why is this?Surely a husband and wife would surely share the same place? Is this not right? If not , why?

Michael sarcasm doesn't suit you....Jonty is it not possible to claim 2 sets of expenses against 1 property - may MLAs share offices and presumably claim 2 sets of Office Costs Allowance

Michael
I admire your loyalty, but I would imagine most people find it hard to believe that Cunningham house does at least not have a view on who they would like to win.

Do you care to comment on any of the other questions/topics?

Funny how I've been right in the past about Cunningham House's machinations-for instance about John Gilliland (remember him? Me neither)being headhunted, and Tim Collins.

Also what construction is to be made on the state visit of Tank Commander McFarland to Limavady today, accompanied by Party Treasurer Jack Allen, if not a snub to the Chief Whip McClarty's candidacy? It can't just be because Alan doesn't know where Limavady is. It's to introduce the preferred candidate to the delegates in advance of Saturday's selection meeting-just as happened when Alan came up on the rails past Reg Empey in the North Down by-election.

And of course Mr Shilliday should know that trimble has to endorse all candidates as the nominating officer under the political parties' legislation, nevermind the rule changes which were pushed through last year.

DB

I don't believe the DUP will "fail" as you put it, except in the sense of failing to roll over and accept any deal the Government seeks to impose upon them. I subscribe to the "no deal is better than a bad deal" theory, the exact opposite of UUP policy since 1998-which presumably you still support.

The DUP said they would negotiate a "fair deal". By their own standards, if they fail to do so, they will have failed. Interesting that you predict failure.

Did Cunningham House/Glengall street have a hand in either of your canditures Peter/David? Who exactally in this generic term of party HQ is doing all this conspiring?

DB
Why would DT want to stop Dermot Nesbitt?

Will
Do you care to respond to any of the points I raised in response to points you raised or is this a private converstation between you and Michael?

David

why would there be a campaign to sabotage dermot? Dermot, who you take every opportunity to deride and mock because he is so loyal to Trimble?

I think you are spending waay too much time overthinking this, if you were to spend as much time overthinking every move by the DUP, or even better every move by Sinn Fein you might find a much more productive outlet for your conspiracy theories.

Will, a pleasure as ever

"Also, the letter in today's Newsletter that David refers to says that in the successful candidate's accompanying letter it stated, "Iris Robinson will be extremely difficult to beat". However you said it was from 'a well known trouble maker'. Who was it?"

The sentence was indeed said by Gareth McGimpsey, apologies. You understand I read all the letters in about half an hour. In the context of Gareths letter, he did say this but it was not in a defeatist sense as it is being reported, it was in the sense that the seat is winnable but it will take work - something I don't think anyone could deny.

"He (Dermot Nesbitt) is an MLA already and Strangford are fed up with Lady Robinson and her triple mandate greediness,"

One might get the impression that there is some inconsistency in your arguments there.

read that exchange again Will, I attacked Robinson for her TRIPLE mandate greed!

My objection to Dermot was that he is an MLA in South Down, so if he were to become MP for Strangford he would be trying to cover two constituencies which I didn't feel was a good situation to be in.

Dual mandates aren't ideal and I have alot of admiration for the law passed in the republic banning this dual mandate. But in Northern Ireland being an MLA and an MP for one constituency is conceivably possible if one was to work like a demon, especially in these days when there is no Assembly sitting.

However in Robinsons case being an Alderman in Castlereagh, MLA and MP for Strangford really does smack of greed and ego feeding, especially given her poor attendence record in Westminster and over enthusiastic claiming of every expense under the sun. And Paisleys former attempt to be an MEP, MP and MLA was just a joke.

Robinson’s denial of splitIt seems that the best way to deny a non-storey it to go on record and state that there is no storey. Looks like the merry ship of Paisley has two tiller men but steering in differing directions.

MU
I don't believe-from personal experience- that Trimble has a particularly high opinion of Dermot's abilities.

Michael-if you want an insight into the machinations of your leadership, I can suggest no better impartial account than Mr Justice Girvan's judgement in the judicial review of Donaldson and others versus Cooper and others.
Actually Trimble did approach several people-myself included- to stand against sitting MPs in the 1997 general election at selection time. Not all of those he wanted rid of were his enemies, and this predated the Agreement.

Rebecca,
Glad you cleared up the letter issue. All it seems that we may be able to agree on is that Gareth McGimpsey certainly isnt as confident of winning the seat as you are. Maybe you would even disagree with that.

You support/tolerate double mandates but not triple ones. An iteresting position.

As for the different constituency bit, I suppose Dermot was looking to the future when Strangford is going to move and take in part of the Ballynahinch end of South Down in a few years time.

Anyway though, I take it from your comments then that you do not support Alan McFarland's move for East Londonderry? I could cope with someone representing two constituencies which are close geographically and have local ties, but I would agree that it is quite a squeeze for anyone to be MLA for North Down and MP for East Londonderry.

I'm not sure whether I agree with statutory limitation on mandates - its more in my nature that it should be up to the people to decide.

I will come to this more with MU, but what about Dermot's stunning lack of knowledge and interest in some important constituency issues. How does that relate to his ability to represent South Down?

MU,
Apologies for not replying to your post - its the ill effects of not going to bed till well past 6 this morning watching the glorious return of George Walker Bush to 1600 Pensylvania Avenue. However normal life has to continue and I'm not exactly functioning on full power today.

I agree that this doesnt necessarily mean that Dermot is finished. It is something of a knock back for him however. As Davidbrew has pointed out and as I alluded to earlier, the boundary commission proposals for South Down could leave it with only one unionist Assembly seat in the future and he could see the move to Strangford as his route to safety. Also, while I appreciate that selection contests are contests to be contested, it always draws some attention when one of the party leader's closest lieutenants is beaten by a young unknown.

"In principle, I am against political dynasties because democracy depends on competitive selection and candidates from political dynasties may start with an unfair advantage disrupting the competitive selection process."

They possibly do start with an advantage - Mr McGimpsey recognises this and has openly used his surname to his advantage. But then candidates of different kinds start with all kinds of different advantages and disadvantages. The incumbent candidate usually starts with an advantage - when you are the challenger that irks you, but when you are the holder of the seat you're more than happy with that. Swings and roundabouts on that one. You can argue that women possibly nowadays start with a slight competitive advantage. Younger people may have an advantage, but then many people think that experience (even if it is only life experience through age) is a virtue. Partys want to win seats so they select the best possible candiate for the job - just selecting someone for 'dynasty' reasons I would contend would backfire on any party.

"if this becomes the norm then this is damaging for the whole democratic process. I think we are approaching this point in Northern Ireland."
As I said earlier, there are now 'dynasties' within every one of the 4 main parties in NI. However, I dont think in any way that it is 'becoming the norm'. I think that if people thought it was heading that way then those candidates would suffer electorally. Again, I let the people decide - dont underestimate the people - the great unwashed just arnt as stupid as people sometimes like to makeout.

"No candidate can be an expert in everything and no doubt Mr. Nesbitt has considerable strengths in other areas such as Education."

I agree - but in Rebecca's opinion these were 'major' issues in Strangford and while I agree there are many many other issues out there - I would contend that these issues are actually bigger issues in South Down than they are in Strangford. What about his ability in South Down.

Also, it wasnt his lack of expertese it was his lack of knowledge and interest in these issues as illustrated by Rebecca's comment. Surely a man who his Party trusted to be a Government Minister, a job which would require you to read a brief and understand it quickly, could familiarise himself enough with the issues surrounding agriculture and fishing well enough at the very least to be able to pass himself at a party selection meeting let alone represent his current constituents whose livlihoods depend on these issues.

It was only a matter of time before the legal action was mentioned - what a beauty and if Girvan J had realised that the officers were all too well aware of the conflict of interest within their midst and being spiteful not just careless they would have got off so lightly!!!! There are even those who feel there should be a round 2 whether about the UYUC Assets (the original and still the best not new UYUC lite - why support McGimpsey over Nesbitt in the Press Release?) or some other non issue. Like Frank Bruno they just don't know when to give up!

Moderate Unionist is spot on when he says elections are about choice. In selection meetings, where possible, it can only be a good thing if there are more than a few candidates in the race. If people don't have competition they become lazy and it doesnt prepare them for the rough ride ahead in the actual election contest.

On this basis I can't understand why Mr Brewster is so preoccupied with the East Londonderry selection meeting? Surely its a good thing that there are three people in the race. If David knew anything about the race he would realise that McFarland isn't having his strings pulled and wasn't parachuted in by any higher authority unlike David Burnside Hoey. BTW-is that Girvan ruling available on BALII?

Trimble did approach several people-myself included- to stand against sitting MPs in the 1997 general election at selection time. Not all of those he wanted rid of were his enemies, and this predated the Agreement

I don't remember any particular shocks at that election, so this central interferance obviously didn't work.

Peter

the UYUC put out a press release congratulating McGimpsey because Gareth is a former Young Unionist and part of the Young Unionist mission statement is to support and promote young people.

Springvale

"I can't understand why Mr Brewster is so preoccupied with the East Londonderry selection meeting?"

he has an Ulster Unionist Party obsession.

Its in nobodies interest to go to court again, especially over such a trvial issue.

http://www.courtsni.gov.uk/en-GB/Judicial+Decisions/Judgments/j_j_girc3986.htm

Girvan decision PDF

When was McGimpsey in the YUs? Dermot definitely was so why discriminate?

Because Dermot lost the election. Seems fairly obvious.

When was McGimpsey in the YUs?

I've repeated the question more slowly this time....Michael's reply implies that the UYUC backed the candidate only after he won, which surely can't be right, and only because he won....which is unbelievable if correct

Will
Thanks for the considered and rational reply (I gave up on the US election about 03:30):)

The problem I have about the "voters decide argument" is that the choice of party is usually a bigger issue for the electorate than the personality selected (obviously the candidate selected influences the electorates view of a party) but if a consituency party selects a candidate with existing mandates the electorate has little choice but to vote for them (assuming they want to vote for a particular party). I can understand why CPs would want to select tried and trusted people but ultimately this is not good for politics. It results in the same old people saying the same old things. No wonder People are becoming less inclined to vote.

I note the support from springvale on this issue.

Peter brown
i take it peter r had a property before his wife got elected. did he and his wife aquire a new property together or is iris in a seperate one, if so why?

Dont you think that as its taxpayers money they should tell us how it is being spent?

Peter

Gareth McGimpsey joined the Young Unionists when he was at queens - hes 33 now so that was presumably about 14/15 years ago, before your time.

The Young Unionists just put out a press release congratulating him when he had won, other than me voting for Gareth at the selection meeting there wasn't any Young Unionist support. But as the official candidate for Strangford the YU do support him and especially as a former member.

Not hard to understand.

Jonty they could now both be claiming expenses for the same property acquired some time ago by Peter R - property in London is expensive to rent or buy!!! Have you additional info or are you just concocting baseless rumours from groundless speculation...if you are so keen on transparency why not apply yourself to the Assembly where UUP MLAs payments for staff in some cases could approach the Swiss Family Robinson (sic)

peter, so to ask what MPs are doing will taxpayers money is now concocting rumours? I was merely asking questions that have not been answered.

Rebecca and Springvale
this IS a thread about the UUP, and as a public service I try to help even those who know least about its workings-the members*. I prefer the approach of the Free Presbyterian Moderator-"Hate the sin;love the sinner" to that of my own Moderator-"You're my best mate, you are Gerry" when it comes to dealing with UUP members who are still in denial.If you don't want to know what's happening to your party, get Mick to delete all references to it from Slugger-you know, like the electorate are going to delete all references to it from Westminster next year.

I commend the US election to you, particularly the South. 40 years ago solidly Democrat; now all Repiublican governors, and 18/22 Senators for the GOP. Perhaps there are some Dems in Texas bleating "this is a traditional Democrat seat". Ask not for whom the bell tolls etc etc.

*Mr Shilliday, for example was still in (political) nappies in 1997 and is forced to retreat behind lame assertions like hisposts yesterday afternoon

If you're such as astute political thinker then where did your political career go?
Is that the fault of the Ulster Unionist Party as well david?

Anybody who names their kid "Gareth" - a term like "James" used by Cockneys - is beyond hope.

i take it peter r had a property before his wife got elected. did he and his wife aquire a new property together or is iris in a seperate one, if so why?

This is rumours or have you any facts?

So why are the robinsons both claiming for london accomodation.

have they come clean about this yet?
Why cant a husband and wife share the same london flat/house?

if they are why are they both claiming for it???

And from another thread - again any facts to back up these assertions? UUP MPs used to share flats but did only one claim expenses - perhaps you could check this out and get some facts for us Jonty....

Maybe you could do that for us Peter for it seems you are keen to carry on the good (sic) work done by your mentor - Jeffrey Donaldson, but from within the UUP.

|Peter
wouldnt it be better for our elected reps to explain how they are spending our money? if the robinsons are claiming for 2 flats/houses then surely we deserve to know why.

Are they claimimg for two or two sets of expenses for one and if so what is wrong with that? You need facts before you can make allegations....

not allegations peter, questions. we need to know if a husband and wife are wasting taxpayers money on 2 flats when they could share the 1.

It would be quite easy to put an end to any speculation if Mr adn Mrs robinson tell us the truth

Jonty,
What is your position?, or do you prefer asking to answering?

Are you saying that if you found out Peter & Iris Robinson a)share the one flat, and b)found that this was purchased/rented post-2001 then you would be satisfied?

I realise that there is great fun to be had with this topic but rather than get in on the knock about stuff, I offer the opinion that most people were surprised (rather than shocked) at the scale of salaries and expenses.

I don't think anybody was doing anything illegal, but ordinary folk might well ask what do MPs and MLAs actually do for their money. Maybe we should have fewer elections and more referendums.

will
What i want to know is
1. Are they both claiming for one or two properties

2. iF two then can they explain why a husband and wife cant share the same property and save the taxpayer £20000

Both resonable questions

Jonty,
I dont know! You are asking me questions to which I need facts to answer - I am asking for your opinion and therefore there is absolutely nothing to stop you.

All i wanted to know was where you objection lay. So therefore, if it was proved they were living in the one house/appartment or whatever, and if this was purchased post-2001, would that negate most of your objections?

I should hope it was bought pre 2001. For all the time they seem to spend in London, a flat suitable for one would probably suffice for them both!

Jonty does make a reasonable point. If taxpayers money is being wasted or misused in this area, we have the right to know.

will
im raising questions on how taxpayers money is being
spent, you might find that objectionable, i dont

Will, you are correct, McFarland as an MLA for North Down and potential Westminster candidate for E L'Derry is stretching it geographically speaking. However, he has deep seeded roots in the area, more than fair deal Campbell can lay claim to. I don't personally see the problem. It happens in elections in countries a lot larger than our little place. For example, H Clinton is a native of Illinois yet senator for New York and M Rilfkind is the Tory candidate for Portillos seat despite being Scottish.

DB, you are right this is a thread on the UUP but I asked why you were so preoccupied with the selection meeting in East Londonderry? Surely as a member of another political party you have no standing in the issue at hand. Your info is also incorrect as J Allen did not accompany anyone to the constituencey. McFarland knows the area very well.

PB, Girvan's ruling was very interesting, lets hope there isnt a round 2 and that all those equity students dont have to quote it in their exams!

Agreed-they would have to spend too much time writing out the title of the action to answer the question!

Jonty,
Both yourself and Michael seem to have massively (deliberately?) misuderstood my point.

I am not in the slightest bit opposed to scruitny of any public figure nor opposing scruitny of how tax payers money is being spent - please recognise that.

All I was trying to do was assess where your opposition lay. You seem to be asking time and time again a question of which the answer is not on the public record, as far as I know, although I would find it very strange to have a married couple not sharing a house/appartment.

If therefore, they do share the one residence in London does that negate your opposition to both claiming the London housing allowance? My point as to whether it was bought post-2001 was that maybe P Robinson used to use a different residence before I Robinson was elected. They may then have decided to get a joint residence post the 2001 election when I Robinson was elected. I dont know however, but at least I feel that I am trying to have a discussion/debate and not simply repeating the same question ad nauseum. So Jonty, are you going to keep repeating questions or going to answer a few? I am trying to do my best here, but if others are not willing to do the same then I see little point in continuing.

Springvale
I have no problem with a person from anywhere being selected as the candidate for another area. I didnt see a problem with Enoch Powell coming from England to represent an NI constituency, and the same goes for Andrew Hunter in the last Assembly election. I do not care if someone from North Down wants to run in Timbucktoo - that wasnt the point I was making.

(Btw, out of genuine curiousity, what are his links with E.Londonderry? I had thought that his family ties were more in West Tyrone, but I may be wrong there).

I was making a point about someone being an Assembly Member for one area whilst being the MP for another. I think this could be possible for 2 adjoining Constituencies as the needs would be less likely to conflict, but it is quite a stretch from Donaghadee to Dungiven.

Hilary Clinton may well be from Illanois and represent New York, but she isnt trying to represent both states at the same time. The same goes for Malcolm Rifkind - he is Scottish, but to the best of my knowledge he isnt a member of the Scottish Parliament for a Scottish Constituency while hoping to represent an English Constituency at Westminster - while I agree that situation would be a much more extreme than the N.Down vs E.Londonderry split, it is in the same vein.

Again though, despite any reservations I may have on the McFarland situation, I am more than happy to let the electorate decide.

will
what am i oppossed to ?
The misuse or waste of taxpayers money.

Thats why i have posed the question that no dupe has answered.

If the robinsons are charging for 2 seperate flats/houses then the question is why should a husband and wife not share 1 place and save us £20000

Jonty,
Please excuse me, but exasperation is starting to kick in.

I have tried to have a debate/discussion, but you show an absolute refusal to answer questions. I cannot answer questions to which I do not know the facts - but I was asking for your opinion. You refuse to even give that away.

Jonty for the third and final time claiming 2 expenses does not mean there are 2 residences but possibly 2 sets of expenses being claimed for 1 house as many local and even unrelated MPs have done in the past - do you get it this time?

Rather than comment on the McGimpsey selection maybe the DUP supporters can explain how the present Strangford MP and her husband justify claiming £38,000 for London housing allowances when presumably they both share the one property.

It’s not as though the Robinson’s are strapped for cash, as MPs they enjoy a combined Westminster salary of £114,000, as MLAs a further £40,000 rising to approximately £70,000 if and when the Assembly is fully functioning, a total of £154,000 or around £184,000 with full devolution.

Then we have another £261,471 in Westminster expenses with another £100,000 or so in expenses from Stormont to reach a grand total of £515,471 or £545,471 with full devolution.

While Mrs Robinson has stressed (Belfast Telegraph 25th Oct) “that MPs' staff and other costs are paid directly by Westminster, and the money does not come to the politicians personally, that most of this money goes on staff costs,” in the case of the Robinson’s this doesn’t mean it leaves the family circle.

It is simple if the Robinson family publish exactly what all the money they claim is used for then we can make up our minds as to whether it

a) is legal, which I suspect it is.

b) it fits in easily with the traditional values of the DUP

c) it is justifiable to the tax payer at large or ia an example of snout in the trough politicians

.......all we need as tax payers are the exact facts about how our money is spent, nothing more nothing less, and we will decide.

Shouldn't everyone then have to publish these personal details - I know that there are others in the same boat why discriminate?

why does north antrim realist feel that the amount an MP claims for expenses is private

Peter, i am trying to find out if taxpayers money is being wasted.
why do you ahve a problem with this?

Peter brown

Do you actually know if the robinsons are claiming for one or two properties?

I believe alex s is, to the best of my knowledge, correct, as was the recent Belfast Telegraph story, in which Robinson did not deny any of the claims, preferring instead to issue a legal threat (which was funny in itself) and attacking his critic. He couldn't answer a single point.

I think that says something about the man in itself.

However, I am nearly certain the Robinsons share their luxury London apartment. They also employ three of their children, AFAIK.

None of this is illegal, but since it is morally reprehensible, the taxpayers who fund the Robinsons lifestyle have a right to know how their money is being squandered.

It is a particularly valid question given Peter's constant claims about keeping the rates low in Castlereagh. If his reputation as being prudent is undeserved, the public deserves to know, so that they can make informed voting decisions.

There was another furore not long ago over Iris's expenses when she was Mayor. She seemed to think they included new hair cuts and dresses. I think the local government auditor cleared her of any wrongdoing, but it still doesn't make it right, in my opinion.

Snouts in the trough? You better believe it.

It is sad to think that politicians can become millionaires off the backs of the taxpayers by selling simplistic bigotry...

if , as belfast gonzo says, that the robinsons share their flat, is it the case this was purchased before iris became an mp

If so then it rasises another question. If peter was able to fund his accomodation for 22 years from his own allowance why suddenly does it now take two??

It doesn't.

But it pays the mortgage interest twice as fast, meaning the profit made from selling the property on will be larger.

I think I will be writing to Westminster about this loophole. It really must go.

There are at least three other couples doing the same, according to the Guardian. You can read the article elsewhere on Slugger on one of the expenses threads I did.

It neglected to mention the Robinsons. Chicken.

regarding the Robinson's and their flat, house or whatever, when peelers got rent allowance, those who are married to other peelers got half each, why should MPs be any different, is it any wonder people choose not to vote!!!!

STRANGE how quiet the likes of Brewster and Chris Stalford are on this.

Is it because they know the truth and are embarressed to tell us, or is it that they are as much in the dark as the rest of us?

Do you actually know if the robinsons are claiming for one or two properties?

No but I'm not the one making allegations based on supposition - many MPs from many NI parties share accomodation without even being married and presumably claim 2 allowances so they can all be tarred by the same brush....

Peter, did the Robinsons NEED to clain 40k for a flat or house or whatever in London, the allowance is meant for an MP to cover their accomadation costs, is a double bed that much more expensive?

Hand on heart- how many of us here , if the chance arose , would refuse to claim money to which they were entitled ?

Davros, its only a few months ago that Peter Robinson (the Councillor) was prepared to make council employees reduntant to save ratepayers money, saving public money should start with him leading by example

£20000 would need get much accomodation in central London so read Gonzos post a little closer...it may have hit the nail on the head...

Davros to be quite honest i would as my morality and sense of natural justice would get in the way. But probally explains why i am not successful in life. A sad reflection on the world today.

now we know where the Robinsons pad is, above Harrods

Doesn't answer my question alex s.

Jack Jones was one of the very few people in Public life that had my respect in this regard. He took the average wage of his Union members.

IF SF do individually keep only a % of their salaries then they too deserve praise although I would have more respect if they let the rst of their salary stay with the taxpayer rather than party funds.

Claiming two allowances is not improper, or illegal. Those are the parliamentary rules. The Robinsions are entitled to their allowances, regardless of their personal circumstances.

However, the electorate is uncomfortable on the scale of combined allowances for multiple mandates, which when viewed in conjunction with the relatively poor attendance rate of some representatives, makes it hard to refute the charge that for some "politics is a nice little earner, you don't have to do alot and you get paid several times for doing the same job".

It just looks wrong to the ordinary voter (many of whom will never reach the salary level of even one MP salary) and it undermines the credibilty of the political process.

As Will has said, arguments can be made (but not necessarily won) for dual mandates in some circumstances, but when this extends to triple mandates (as Rebecca has commented)this begins to stretch credibility, there are only so many hours in a day and you can't be in two places at once.

MU
At least you seem to have given the subject some thought and given a considered reply to the entire subject.

I dont disagree with some of the sentiments above. However, I dont agree that attendance rate always = effectiveness as an MP.

I dont know what the going rate is for London property, but I dare say it isnt cheap.

As you have said MU, if this were a situation where rules had been broken then action would have been taken. I go back to my earlier point - let the electorate decide.

Will
and I go back to mine.
Many people vote for the party rather than the candidate (we see quite a few independents stand but few elected).

Party selection procedures determine the candidate put before the people. This is where the responsibility lies. Fewer people are engaging in the political process and politician are not widely trusted. The two are related.

Kindly explain

"However, I dont agree that attendance rate always = effectiveness as an MP."

What does?

Peter brown,
were have i alleged anything?

I simply have asked some very basic, easy to answer questions? Shouldnt how taxpayers money is being spent be clear and transparent?

why are the DUPes unwilling/unable to answer these simple queries regarding taxpayers money?

Jonty, because they spend their entire careers 'pointing the finger' at everyone else while as we now see sticking their own noses in the trough!

Doing a Robinson - is this now a verb as well as the noun:0)

Meanwhile , Phony Tony is on the pig's back according to the Sunday Times.

Blair's pension to be 'doubled'
Robert Winnett and David Leppard
TONY BLAIR has been awarded a huge increase in the state “allowance” paid to retiring prime ministers.

The sum, which is over and above his annual pension of £100,000, will equal more than £90,000 by the time he expects to step down.

Hope he has a kind, friendly and understanding tax man - oops would that be Gordon Brown knocking at his door:0)

Another blow for Cunningham House last night as the parachuting tank commander came last in east Londonderry. The suicide mission is entrusted to David McClarty. Only 65 present, down by almost 1/3 from the Assembly selection meeting, and just over half of all entitled to attend. Burnside bag carrier David Hooey frae Ahgadowey came second. McClarty will be the first non-Orangeman selected as UUP candidate in the history of the seat .

Interestingly one of the unsuccessful candidates informed the meeting that Richard Dallas-ex mayor of Londonderry and serial refuser Colonel Tim Collins had been offered the nomination but neither nibbled.

This is a public service announcement and is not intended to annoy anyone but UUP members. The price of the UUP's odds on coming third can go down as well as up. Your home is at risk if you bet it on McClarty.

BTW one positive for young McGimski is that he may well be the only non MLA standing for the UUP. And there I was thinking the UUP used to take the moral high ground about dual representation. What was it Reg said to Jeffrey when he ws prevented from standing for the Assembly in 1998?-"There can be no greater honour than representing your own people in their own Government."

Hmmmmm-lucky none of them is going to have the opportunity of dual representation

davidbrew, being an orangeman didn't save willie ross

MU
"What does?

Attendance at Parliament when its necessary is obviously part of the job of an effective MP. However, spending all your time on the green benches might get you an impressive attendance record, but it doesnt actually get anything done for your constituents.

I would say that getting the work done on the ground and delivering for your constituents is equally, or maybe more, important than listening to debates in Parliament about roads in Dorset.

Will, assuming that at some stage Stormont is up and running again then what exactly is the role of an MP if not to represent his constituents at Westminister, in fact with devolution in place the bulk of office expenses should go to MLAs not MPs, afterall with schools, roads, health care etc being in the hands of MLAs they will have the bulk of the work

Alex,
I dont think many people take into consideration what roles/responsibilities an MP/MLA has when they go to either of them with a problem about their house or anything else. They simply go to a public representative who they think can help them.

Will, yes but given time the centre of gravity will move to Stormont, in the sixties all of the main players were Stormont MPs,

will, have you , or any of the other dupes, found out yet if the robinsons have one or two london flats/houses.

or is dup hq keeping this from you??

BTW one positive for young McGimski is that he may well be the only non MLA standing for the UUP.

Memory fading in old age David?

Nominations have closed in Lagan Valley and neither applicant is an MLA.

alex
Over time the focus probably would drift towards Assembly Members. However any changes on office allowances etc would probably be made in the wider context of devolution across the UK.

my apologies Mr Shilliday-neither is an MLA, and neither will be an MP. Perhaps Daphne would set her sights at a more realistic level-like councillor for Poleglass

jonty, rumour has it they have a house although its a pity the dupes can't confirm this

one would almost think the DUPes have something to hide
If it is a house i wonder where it is and how much its worth???

Jonty
now or when the mortage is paid off, 40K per year should do nicely, then on retirment trade it in for a villa with pool naturally

you know alex, im sure many people would view allowances for accomodation as london as something that was there to help MPs carry out their job, not as an investment for their retirement.

why should taxpayers money be used to buy personal property for mps? Mps who do this should be made to sell the property again once their career in westminter is over, with the funds given to the treasury.

Will

However, spending all your time on the green benches might get you an impressive attendance record, but it doesnt actually get anything done for your constituents.

If this is so can you explain the different attendance patterns between say Peter Robinson (52%) , Iris Robinson (39%) and Jeffrey Donaldson (37%)

MU
Peter Robinson's attendance may be higher because as deputy leader of the largest party he would be called on to speak more often on issues than the others.

I dont subsribe to the view that an MP should be at Westminster all week Monday to Friday though. That was usually more of an Ulster Unionist position where they talked of full-time MPs being those who spent most time at Westminster. I am simply making the point that surely there is much more to the role of an MP that just being at Westminster.

my apologies Mr Shilliday-neither is an MLA, and neither will be an MP. Perhaps Daphne would set her sights at a more realistic level-like councillor for Poleglass

my my david, we are sounding bitter tonight

Micheal, maybe it because DUP HQ wont tell him whats going on with the RObinsons London accomodation.

dear me, casting pearls before swine is such a thankless task. Why try to enlighten those wallowing in their own darkness, I ask myself?.What's wrong with giving Daphne career guidance? Don't forget she will soon lose the pay we taxpayers give her for running an MP's office.Funny how that kind of jobbery doesn't interest jonty...not

Let's all be completely open and get all MPs from all parties to publicise their accomodation arrangements, its value or annual cost - simply because one couple are married does not entitle us to have more details about their arrangments than anyone else....

Didn't stop The Sun looking into the private lives of other UK MPs. if the Robinsons claim two sets of expenses for the same flat then this does suggest a means to an end of making a quick pound when reselling the property, then again maybe they do not share the same flat and they pretend to show unity in public but secretly dispise each other (who knows).

why should any mp be allowed to use public money to purchase a property which they will later sell .

If an mp does buy a property they should sell it when they retire or lose their seat and the funds returned to the public purse

thats what i was about to say actually, if the taxpayer pays for it, surely the taxpayer owns it.

Why cant David brewster or Peter brown tell us the simple facts? Will DUP hq not share how their MPs are spending public money.

why should any mp be allowed to use public money to purchase a property which they will later sell .

This thread is getting sillier and sillier.
Nurses, Doctors, Civil servants, Defra Vets etc can all use 'Public Money' - their wages - to "purchase a property which they will later sell".

I am selling tickets to Robinson's London penthouse: i wonder what treasures we shall find...Maybe a few red berets and gloves;)

Alex s

Will, assuming that at some stage Stormont is up and running again then what exactly is the role of an MP if not to represent his constituents at Westminister, in fact with devolution in place the bulk of office expenses should go to MLAs not MPs, afterall with schools, roads, health care etc being in the hands of MLAs they will have the bulk of the work

Indeed. I remember being curious at Robert McCartney’s bitter defeat speech when he lost North Down in 2001 to Sylvia Hermon. He implied he was quite happy to lose because it meant he wouldn’t have to do constituency work anymore. He must either have forgotten he was also an MLA, or forgotten that most constituency-heavy responsibilities had been devolved 18 months previously.

That wasn’t the only curious thing about his defeat speech. He also complained about Alliance standing aside to give Hermon a free run, somehow forgetting that the DUP had stood aside to give him a free run! He also arrogantly broke with convention by speaking before the winning candidate.

Just in case anyone missed it, check out DUP member David Brewster's post of November 1, 2004 04:51 PM, in which he predicts DUP failure to "renegotiate" the Agreement.

I do not take David Brewster's comments seriously for he has become extremely bitter in his outlook and his analyse betrays his continuing anger towards joining a party that in the pursuit of gaining popularity is jettisoning their PR gimmicks/promises – smash SF - as quickly as they can.

Don't spoil my fun, Butterknife!

davros, come back in when you know what we were talking about, no one was talking about their wages

Why cant David brewster or Peter brown tell us the simple facts? Will DUP hq not share how their MPs are spending public money.

A) Because you are as well positioned as I am to get these details from HQ - do it yourself

B) Why single out DUP MPs why not include eeveryone else?

LOL @ jonty throwing the rattle out of the pram!

Once Money is given to the recipient it ceases to be public money ! It doesn't matter if it is a wage or an allowance!It's part of an emplyment PACKAGE ! Nurses and Defra Vets get travel allowances - should we check if THEY use any of that money to pay their mortgages ? Teachers in London get an accomodation allowance - should they be prohibited form using that to help with mortgages and made to use the money for hotels ?

come on Peter - how far do you want to take this ?
If a UUP MP or an SDLP MP buys himself a G&T in the HOC bar, the DUP could argue that they are drinking on money that came from the public purse !

There's a package that comes with the job. What individuals do with their own money is their own business.

Davros

Once Money is given to the recipient it ceases to be public money ! It doesn't matter if it is a wage or an allowance!It's part of an emplyment PACKAGE ! Nurses and Defra Vets get travel allowances - should we check if THEY use any of that money to pay their mortgages ? Teachers in London get an accomodation allowance - should they be prohibited form using that to help with mortgages and made to use the money for hotels ?

Is the money an allowance that can theoretically be used on anything, or is it reimbursement of actual costs?

Peter
I dont know of any other Husand and wife mp here in the province.
Lets go back to the original questions

1. are they claiming against 1 or 2 properties

2 if 2 why cant a married couple share 1 place and
save us all £20000

You seem to love the DUP so much i thought you could phone your dupe friends to tell you

Sorry Willowfield but I am just attempted to show how petty he is getting.

I believe we should distinguish teachers etc from public representatives such as MPs.
An MP is elected by the people to be a ‘reflection’ of their moral values etc. so therefore how they use the salary is not objectionable per se, but the person’s judgement is, and it is to be highlighted even more if that public figue has based his or her persona on an ‘honest Abe’ character. Especially more so in the DUP where there is no split but it remains the Taliban of proddydom. (so sayeth a PR doctor)

Don't think there's any need to distinguish between MPs and other public servants.

Public servants can claim expenses, but only legitimate and reasonable expenses.

Why can no-one answer jonty's question? Are they claiming for 2 separate properties?

Well has an MP not got a higher duty to observe a moral code than a doctor. For after all he or say may be supporting a policy that promotes it: e.g. Major and his back to basics policy which backfired when it was revealed many MPs where getting back to basics but not with their own wives.

Don't think so. I think there's an obligation on everyone, in all walks of life - public and private sector - to behave with integrity.

Only difference is that public reps are paid with public money and their allowances, etc., should therefore be made public. I would expect similar information on private sector employees should be made available to shareholders.

Well there is a convention of individual responsibility, which suggests that an MP should resign if he or she does anything improper. Although in saying that Labour has dismissed conventions arbitrarily; it is ironic that when they where in opposition they accused the Conservatives of being in breach of many. I digress.

Aren’t you thinking more of ministers?

That’s a convention (Ministerial responsibility), which suggests that a minister is responsible for his actions and those of his civil servants. I suppose there is an argument to say individual responsibility comes in shades of grey but even so it still encompasses the rules of the House.
Anyway lets move on lol

Let's try saying this more slowly for Jonty & apparently now Willowfield's benefit. I

1) It is irrelevant whther they are caliming for 1 or 2 properties - check out the rules on parliament's website

2) shouldn't all NI MPs share accomodation with for example Party colleagues using your logic? (many already do - do they both claim ACA?)

If one person / couple is expected to disclose details shouldn't everyone - I ahve no objection with confidentiality or openness what concerns me is the lack of consistency here....

The Robinson’s may not be doing anything illegal, but is the DUP guilty of hypocrisy? The 2003 manifesto led with

Protecting the taxpayer
Controlling the cost of government

This seems inconsistent with claiming multiple allowances to facilitate attendance, but then failing to attend on a regular basis . If they are sincere, in tackling waste and reducing the cost of government, they should lead by example and surrender allowances where there appears to be unjustifiable duplication.

Peter Brown

Yes, everyone should disclose details.

Firstly,as I said earlier, when peelers married to each other recieved rent allowance they got half each, why should MPs be any different.

Secondly, its not a question of legality, its auestion of decency, lets remember the Robinson's get a lot more in housing allowance than their average constituent earns, for a couple who are quick to point the finger at the excess of others it stinks,

"I do not take David Brewster's comments seriously for he has become extremely bitter in his outlook"

I don't take them seriously either bk-but in actual fact I have mellowed with old age as Peter Brown will tell you.Doesn't mean I'm not right mind you....

I was reading a letter in the Times last week that suggested that all MPs should be housed together in a student halls of residence type thing.

Would certainly be a lot cheaper.

I don't think it's right that they are able to gain in the long-term by subsidised property. If they were renting accommodation, it would be much fairer as there would be no capital gain.

or maybe just buy a load of houses or flats and have them designated for MPs so that you only get one of them when you are an MP.

remember too that our MPs could all earn substantially more in private life. Imagine how much more Peter would have raked in as a sucessful estate agent compared to a piddling £56k as an MP.Or Gerry as a "cigarette importer/exporter". Or Martin the "security consultant".

Think of the sacrifices these people make.If we are subsidising such high quality people with housing costs then its a price worth paying to keep out the ...er ..riff raff. If we go back to the days of no pay for MPs we'll only have those who have private means to represent us-like the Hon Carrington Peacock, or Bar(m)y McElduff , the King of all the Leprechauns.

(Please note I am now in hiding and will not respond to jonty's next 100 posts on this thread)

or maybe just buy a load of houses or flats and have them designated for MPs so that you only get one of them when you are an MP.

Would be quite amusing at election time, when, say, Bob McCartney is moving out of his flat while Lady Sylvia waits outside ready to move in.

davidbrew
LOL :) Good to see a sense of humour

"Would be quite amusing at election time, when, say, Bob McCartney is moving out of his flat while Lady Sylvia waits outside ready to move in."

Yeah, that bit appeals to me, you could get some photographers to camp out nearby, would be very amusing!!

Wouldn't it be vice versa under the status quo or more realistically Weir maiting to move in?
;-p

"or maybe just buy a load of houses or flats and have them designated for MPs so that you only get one of them when you are an MP."

are you mad? Don't you think they'd all want to compulsorily purchase half of Mayfair? And, if they all lived in a compound what an attractive target they'd be for a bomb attack...oh... NOW I get it

"Wouldn't it be vice versa under the status quo or more realistically Weir maiting to move in?"

You've gone too far now Brown. Noone should have to read about Peter Weir "maiting " on a family weblog.

"Wouldn't it be vice versa under the status quo or more realistically Weir maiting to move in?
;-p"

why on earth are you even still in the UUP when you clearly have absolutely no faith or even respect for the party?

all that from david brewster , and he still cant tell us if the robinsons have one or two london properties!

Peter brown said, "Wouldn't it be vice versa under the status quo or more realistically Weir maiting to move in?"

after talking to a UKUPer, McCartney looks like he will stand, the only question is how much will he beat weir by as they both come in behind LSH

after talking to a UKUPer, McCartney looks like he will stand, the only question is how much will he beat weir by as they both come in behind LSH

Standing for UUP or Alliance this time? ;-p

Standing for UUP or Alliance this time? ;-p
?? sorry peter that one went over me! But it will be interesting to see how much weir loses the anti vote by to mccartney

Two posts in a row from jonty without mentioning Robinsons or property!

Davros i shall make up for his lapses by mentioning him as a verb:

Are any other MPs in Northern Ireland doing a Robinson?

Robinson is used as a noun in that sentence, Butterknife.

LOL

LOL Indeed !

Can be either Willowfield: noun is an action, thing or quality whereas the verb expresses existence, action, or occurrence. Ok, i'll grab my coat....:0)

grammatical guidance-
"jonty". verb. -to nyerp on constantly about something with which you have a fixation, without realising the need to develop your own ideas,a personality, or indeed to get a life

usage as in "That Willowfield would need to be careful he doesn't spend all his time jontying about b***er all"

david what is it your hiding? why cant you give us a simple answer to our qustions. Are the robinsons claiming for 1 or 2 london properties.

is it because they wont talk to you to tell you the truth?

Jonty, it smells of greed and hyprocisy , either that or Londoners pay a 'double bed tax'. "A double bed Mr Robinson, that'll be an extra 19K Sir"

so how many London properties have the robinsons?

Lovely quote from Ulster Unionists at Coleraine University:

"´We are particularly lucky here at the University in Coleraine to have David (McClarty) not only living very close to the University, but actually living in his constituency; which is more than can be said for some prominent politicians."

What a disgraceful attack on their Party leader who doesnt live in the Constituency he represents. ;-)

But handy for his wife?

jonty'
tell you what,not that it give's me a minute's interest or concern, I'll go and ask when you find out what happened to the Nobel money trousered by the turtle, and the possible political foundation his sheepish spin doctor once declared might be established with the cash.

John Hume may be a sanctimonious old bore, but he deserves enormous praise for his gesture with his share. People in glass houses shouldn't throw atones , eh?

Did you not know David, he gave it away to the lawyer’s charitable fund for incompetent and misleading advice and their practitioners.

david brewster, you seem to be confused. The nobel prize cash wasnt from UK taxpayers, whereas the Robinsons expenses are,

Why are you unable/unwilling to tell us how they are spending it? Something to hide, surely not

David

oh come on, lets not be petty.

David Trimble won the nobel peace prize, the money was prize money to him - the money we are discussing the Robinsons using is not their money that they won, it is the tax payers money. There is a world of difference.

perhaps the reason david persistantly won't tell us is because he doesn't actually know....

it floats his boat to sit online criticising the UUP but at the end of the day, he is sitting outside the tent pissing in.

"he is sitting outside the tent pissing in."

Such a delecate turn of phrase.

I have just went of Rebecca now, seems to be no lady at all:(

It is no longer the UUP's sole fault: it is also Dublin's fault to the DUPs' incompetence.
Dublin's Stance 'Could Scupper A Deal' (The News Letter)
It appears the Taliban Prods are faultless!

There is a world of difference.

£230,000 to be precise...but Robinsons figures are comparable to the Westmisnter and Assembly OCA claimed by MPs and MLAs with very large claims and very little product

It sad to see peter brown and David brewster comparing Nobel prize money to expenses paid by the taxpayer. Are they saying that MPs should treat expenses as prizes, freebies to be used without any thought to the taxpayer.

Ahem Jonty who pays Assembly OCA? Nobel or the taxpayer - stop ducking and diving....

"he gave it away to the lawyer’s charitable fund for incompetent and misleading advice and their practitioners."
can't stop now I'm off to put in a claim-back of the queue Mr Brown!

Surely if his spokesman said there was going to be a foundation it's a legitimate question? And whilst I'd love to claim the Prize was all his own work, he did have other co-negotiators-where's Ken's share? Or cecil Walker's? Sadly I wouldn't be eligible, not having been privy to the real sellout by reason of deception (see sluggers passim)

Rebecca, good to see that even though your education is equipping you with erudition and articulate debating skills you aren't capable of deploying them against an unanswerable case. Blind denial as a substitute for rational debate will see you go far in your party

"he gave it away to the lawyer’s charitable fund for incompetent and misleading advice and their practitioners."
can't stop now I'm off to put in a claim-back of the queue Mr Brown!

Surely if his spokesman said there was going to be a foundation it's a legitimate question? And whilst I'd love to claim the Prize was all his own work, he did have other co-negotiators-where's Ken's share? Or cecil Walker's? Sadly I wouldn't be eligible, not having been privy to the real sellout by reason of deception (see sluggers passim)

Rebecca, good to see that even though your education is equipping you with erudition and articulate debating skills you aren't capable of deploying them against an unanswerable case. Blind denial as a substitute for rational debate will see you go far in your party

Trying to equate prize money to taxpayers money is a joke and shows how desperate the DUpes supporters are to divert interest from the London properties of the Robinsons. I wonder why?

jonty, just for once answer a question. Life is about trying new experiences. You might even feel a sense of achievement. The only pity is I'll never get to ask you about the allowances of Mr and Mrs Trimble MPs. No doubt you'll be wanting assurances from them that they won't perpetrate the same hideous crime you lay at the Robinson's door.
While we're at it, who interviewed Mrs Trimble for the post of running his soon to be lordship's office, and the numerous other UUP family payroll members your precious tax revenues are funding? If snouts in the trough is the charge, the UUP are at least as culpable.

david brewster
all i have done is ask a few simple questions that you , or fellows dupes, are either unwilling or unable to answer.

....and studiously avoiding answering any yourself!

“The only pity is I'll never get to ask you about the allowances of Mr and Mrs Trimble MPs. [davidbrew] ”

Is this a recognition that if Daphne wins the selection to become the UUP candidate for Lagan Valley that the DUP may be willing to sell Jeffrey Robinson (sic: queens_unionist) out?

Butterknife
"Is this a recognition that if Daphne wins the selection to become the UUP candidate for Lagan Valley that the DUP may be willing to sell Jeffrey Robinson (sic: queens_unionist) out?"

Try reading it again. I think he means that we'll never be able to ask about the Trimble's expenses, because there will never be 2 Trimble MPs.

And Jonty,
Will you ever answer a question? You only do your own arguements (no matter how poor) a disservice with a complete unwillingness to enter a proper debate.

Mmmmmm one thinks a sarcastic symbol is needed.

Butterknife,
There probably was a touch of sarcasm in my post. After all, its quite possible there could be no Trimble MP's after the election.

Who would employ Daphnie then??;-)