Outrageous!

[Barman]

The Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA) – the body charged with administering expenses for MPs and their staff – has surpassed itself in what appears to be an effort to lose any remaining shreds of credibility.

It emerged over the weekend that IPSA’s board came up with its proposals to hike MPs’ pay while luxuriating on a two-day “away day” at a plush Surrey hotel boasting “sumptuous surroundings”, an “exquisite restaurant” and an 18-hole championship level golf course.

In its 2011/12 Annual Report, IPSA stated that one of its key aims going forward was to “bring down our operational costs… without compromising public trust”.

While we are yet to discover exactly how much IPSA has billed taxpayers for the caper, there is no question that they have compromised public trust with this unnecessary and wasteful expedition.

What possible justification could this unaccountable quango have for holding its deliberations at the Selsdon Park Hotel? A spokesman for IPSA told the Sunday Telegraph was that it was “important for the board to meet off-site to consider these proposals.”

WHY?? What’s wrong with meeting in IPSA’s offices in Westminster?

The IPSA spokesman even deigned to suggest that Selsdon Park was offering best value for money because they had explored more expensive options.

IPSA has come in for criticism before over its running costs, which have led me to accuse it of being a “bureaucratic monster of a quango”.

But the decision to head to a luxury hotel to discuss MPs’ pay means that the body has now lost any sense of moral authority to safeguard taxpayers’ money.

Clicky! 

[Nick]

Why am I not surprised? 

[Baldy]

 

[boogs]

The Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA) – the body charged with administering expenses for MPs and their staff – has surpassed itself in what appears to be an effort to lose any remaining shreds of credibility.

It emerged over the weekend that IPSA’s board came up with its proposals to hike MPs’ pay while luxuriating on a two-day “away day” at a plush Surrey hotel boasting “sumptuous surroundings”, an “exquisite restaurant” and an 18-hole championship level golf course.

In its 2011/12 Annual Report, IPSA stated that one of its key aims going forward was to “bring down our operational costs… without compromising public trust”.

While we are yet to discover exactly how much IPSA has billed taxpayers for the caper, there is no question that they have compromised public trust with this unnecessary and wasteful expedition.

What possible justification could this unaccountable quango have for holding its deliberations at the Selsdon Park Hotel? A spokesman for IPSA told the Sunday Telegraph was that it was “important for the board to meet off-site to consider these proposals.”

WHY?? What’s wrong with meeting in IPSA’s offices in Westminster?

The IPSA spokesman even deigned to suggest that Selsdon Park was offering best value for money because they had explored more expensive options.

IPSA has come in for criticism before over its running costs, which have led me to accuse it of being a “bureaucratic monster of a quango”.

But the decision to head to a luxury hotel to discuss MPs’ pay means that the body has now lost any sense of moral authority to safeguard taxpayers’ money.

Clicky! 

Makes my blood boil ...   I can understand the need to be off site but why not a hired meeting room nearby no need to stay somewhere  and If for some unknown reason there is a need then a budget hotel with function / meeting facilities should suffice ... That is what the rest of us mere mortals need to do but... oh no were are just the tw#ts paying for it...
 

[Steve]

Sorry but maybe the tax payers alliance are too easily outraged, far be it for me to suggest they are shamelessly attention seeking.

Just checked and you can walk in that hotel right now and get a double room for £90.   Not a lot nowadays.

Hopefully we can bill the TPA for the cost of preparing the answers they demand in detail so regularly.  It'd be hypocritical of the TPA to refuse.

[Barman]

Sorry but maybe the tax payers alliance are too easily outraged, far be it for me to suggest they are shamelessly attention seeking.

Just checked and you can walk in that hotel right now and get a double room for £90.   Not a lot nowadays.

Hopefully we can bill the TPA for the cost of preparing the answers they demand in detail so regularly.  It'd be hypocritical of the TPA to refuse.

But why do they need a two-day beano off-site to discuss what should be part of their every-day remit?

Why can't they do the same as almost every other business - sit in the board room and get sarnies brought in...?

[Steve]

Does IPSA have a boardroom as such?  I doubt it has a conference room big enough for all the people they needed for that decision.
 
Even if it did, offsite meetings are fairly standard fare for organisations wanting to make important decisions.  Way too many interruptions, way too many "I just need to pop out for for a quick meeting", way too many waiting for X and Y to turn up because someone nabbed them in the corridor, way too many "I have to leave at 5 cos . . . .".

Offsite meetings just work (well mostly).  2 days in a room, one overnight stay.  One late meal on day one to heal over the arguments of the preceding day's work.

[Barman]

Does IPSA have a boardroom as such?  I doubt it has a conference room big enough for all the people they needed for that decision.
 
Even if it did, offsite meetings are fairly standard fare for organisations wanting to make important decisions.  Way too many interruptions, way too many "I just need to pop out for for a quick meeting", way too many waiting for X and Y to turn up because someone nabbed them in the corridor, way too many "I have to leave at 5 cos . . . .".

Offsite meetings just work (well mostly).  2 days in a room, one overnight stay.  One late meal on day one to heal over the arguments of the preceding day's work.

No meeting rooms in for instance.... The Houses of Parliament...?

They seem to squeeze in all those select committees plus they are fully catered....

[Steve]

IIRC they'd have to pay for meeting rooms there and there are very few rooms there offering the required lack of interruptions.  And then of course it's far more expensive forattendees to stay over and eat in London.

The TPA is just wild arse guessing and we will have to pay for their little games. 

[Marley's Ghost (Imbiber of Spirits)]

Bollocks! It's just another example of "Snouts in the Trough"!

[boogs]

Bollocks! It's just another example of "Snouts in the Trough"!

 

[Nick]

One might write to them 

compliance@parliamentarystandards.org.uk

[Steve]

Bollocks! It's just another example of "Snouts in the Trough"!

Why of course, if you want it to be true it must be true

Just like Cameron Diaz coming round later for a spot of 'fun'

[Marley's Ghost (Imbiber of Spirits)]

One might write to them 

compliance@parliamentarystandards.org.uk

One might indeed, and exactly, pray, how much notice are they likely to take?

IMO, 7 tenths of FA!

[boogs]

Bollocks! It's just another example of "Snouts in the Trough"!

Why of course, if you want it to be true it must be true

Just like Cameron Diaz coming round later for a spot of 'fun'

Say hello from me      Mrs K off out then