Friday, May 16, 2008

What's the point in ordering them to pay costs?

So the High Court has ruled we can see MPs detailed expenses on second homes. What caught my eye however was the bit of the report that said,
The Commons authorities have also been ordered to pay at least £33,500 in costs.
So let me get this straight. That is taxpayers money being paid from one pot into another pot belonging to state. Isn't that a zero sum game really?

They may have been ordered to pay £33,500 in costs, but in reality its been the free use of court's time because the overall amount of money that the Government holds remains the same doesn't it?

12 comments:

Tony Kennick said...

The costs are not the court's costs but the legal bills of the people that bought the original case. So our money has been wasted in lawyer's fees.

Blackacre said...

Not necessarily - they will go to lawyers who may be externally employed for this case rather than government employees.

Anonymous said...

What about the wages paid to the legal eagles and court staff?

machiavelli said...

Sorry Dizzy, Parliament isn't Government.

And as Guido will tell you, paying costs is pretty standard 8¬)

Cleanthes said...

Dizzy,

It's considerably worse than that, because there are two sets of (taxpayer-maintained) accounting trolls to feed to log the payment and receipt.

I very strongly believe that all fines levied against public bodies should be expressed as % of salary and charged to the individuals responsible at the time. The accounts of the body itself should not be touched. It MUST be individuals who make redress to the taxpayer.

Anonymous said...

Off Topic

Anythoughts on this Dizzy?

Communications Data Bill


Explained a little more here
Communications firms forced to log internet use

Anonymous said...

No, WE have to pay for very expensive non government lawyers!

Anonymous said...

Actually I would imagine that due to some sort of administration it's a less than zero sum game. Ie we lose /even/ more money...

Martin (the cunt) should be made to pay this out of his own wages. He doesn't need the wages for anything else so he might as well!!

Z.

dizzy said...

"Sorry Dizzy, Parliament isn't Government."

Who pays for Parliament? The pixies?

Anonymous said...

"I very strongly believe that all fines levied against public bodies should be expressed as % of salary and charged to the individuals responsible at the time. The accounts of the body itself should not be touched. It MUST be individuals who make redress to the taxpayer"

yep ..good point

Its like MP's are getting free legal aid

Anonymous said...

Anon 16-May 17:02. Great idea, someone tell Dave that's what we want.

Even worse was when the EU fined DEFRA for screwing up the farmers compo; DEFRA raised the cash by cutting back the budgets of its' other sections like The Environment Agency which meant cutbacks on much needed flood prevention.

Real projects for real people > gone.

Alex said...

This is the same as "record fine for Network Rail" - millions going from one government account to another for no apparent purpose.