Snipe - The Scoop

Thursday, 26 February 2009

Boris Johnson's fire chief triples his expense claims

Brian Coleman has almost tripled the amount of expenses he claims from the London Fire Authority, Tory Troll can reveal.

The figures released to this blog, show that the man Boris Johnson appointed to chair LFEPA claimed a whopping £2275 in 'subsistence and travel' between 1 April and 31 December 2008.

This is almost three times what he claimed between April and December the year before.

To put that into context, the other 25 members of LFEPA claimed just £1395 worth of expenses between them over the same period.

Now quite why Brian Coleman needs any extra 'subsistence' after accepting over 60 free dinners is anyones guess.

As is why he would need to claim extra travel expenses from LFEPA after claiming £18,000 from the Assembly over two years.

And when he's also been looking for top ups to his £100k allowances then some serious questions still need to be asked.

No Restraint

The news that Brian Coleman has almost tripled his expense claims comes after Boris Johnson advised Assembly Members to show 'restraint' during the recession.

Asked about his member's allowance grab at last month's Mayor's Question Time, Boris said:

"I'm generally in favour of restraint and as far as I'm able to direct it, I will direct restraint..."

"I'm in favour of us all setting an example."

Well he certainly can't accuse Coleman of not setting an example to Londoners. It just happens to be a spectacularly bad one.

19 comments:

Helen said...

A one-off payment for a diamond-studded sedan chair might be more economical in the long run...

Anonymous said...

From Rog T at the Barnet Eye
Check this interesting article out about public service

http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/brian-coleman/2007/12/local-government-service

AdamB said...

What a total hypocrite.

Brian Coleman (aka Mr Toad) has got to go said...

This is another great expose. Keep on!
___________________

Brian Coleman (aka Mr Toad) has GOT to go!:

Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=24061317432

MySpace:
http://www.myspace.com/mr_toad_has_got_to_go

harold said...

This is most unfair on Mr Coleman whose public service motives are completely misunderstood.
The man is a Keynsian and he is intent on stimulating the economy during these hard times. Contrary to the notion that expenses should be cut back, his increase in spending is helping innumerable trades. Just think those taxi drivers spend their money on a meal out and that restaurant stays inbusiness. That restauranter spends money on provisions and anothyer shop stays in business and so on.
For some reason this theory doesn't work with the low paid and people receiving benefits.
However, we have to thank Mr Coleman for keeping the champagne and quail market bouyant.

AdamB said...

...and the blogging market I guess.

Rog T said...

Adam, I don't normally give away my best scoops (such as Coleman's New Statesman hypocracy) but I was really busy all day and I hated the thought of any of your army of readers missing it.

Anyway if any of them want to see my take on it, here you go !


Bipolar Brian - Who is he

David Mitchell said...

You really couldn't make it up could you? Most people would have taken the hint that they should reel it back in a bit the first time they came in for criticism. Brian truly is the gift that keeps on giving.

AdamB said...

And taking.

twenty4ten said...

Is this a Labourlist subsidiary? Without joie de vivre.

Anonymous said...

Taxis to and from Hampstead Heath can be terribly expensive...

titus-aduxas said...

Wow, this is something. Coming so soon after the affair with those 4 Labour Lords, the Standards Commission finding the PM guilty of expenses wrongdoing and good old Jacqui Smith in the frame for her 116000 pound expenses "gravy train", the Speaker's wife claiming 4000 quid for private taxi fares, then there's Mr Jowell's 450000 mortgage payment from the very dodgy Mr Berlusconi, not to mention the whole saga of the Govt giving dodgy bankers obscenely huge pensions as a "reward for failure", just like the obscene pension that Two Jags Prescott got.

Yes, there sure is a lot of it about............

AdamB said...

There certainly is.

Anonymous said...

"a whopping £2275 in 'subsistence and travel' between 1 April and 31 December 2008"

Come off it - that's about sixty quid a week.

Yes, it's probably more than any politician deserves, but it's hardly huge amounts compared to the £1,000,000,000,000 that the government have pissed on their chums' banking crisis.

Rog T said...

Adam,

Seems to me a rather typical Tory train of thought going on here. They seem to think that it is OK for a complete non-entity such as Coleman to carry on like this, because there are other problems in the world.

Well I say that as Coleman is the worst offender in London politics and I'm a Londoner, reading and writing London blogs he's no 1 priority to be exposed. If our friend Tit... wants to expose other shenanigans great, mores the merrier.

And as for £60 a week not being much, that's on top of £102,000 "Allowances" and a normal person's lifetime of free dinners.

And as to the lack of Joy de Vivre here - here's a little joke.

Q: What is the difference between how Brian Coleman's behaviour makes me feel and a bucket of sick?

a: The Bucket

Dan said...

Rog T - pleased to see you're angry about our leaders screwing us with their expenses. Coleman's 'whopping £2,275' quid is right up there with those wonderful London Labour MPs, the Keens, ripping us off for several hundred thousand pounds worth of expenses, second homes etc. Can we have something about that please? or maybe not eh?

Tom said...

"Can we have something about that please? "

I think there's plenty of stuff about the Keen's (or 'K££ns' as they're known round here) on the net already. Looking at Coleman is what's known as 'balance'. Ann Keen is my MP, incidentally, and our local forums are full of plenty of vitriol aimed at her and her other half, not least because of the third runway. You'd have thought basic self-preservation would have told her to oppose that.

[also, they're MPs, which is higher up the food chain than Mr. Coleman. The point about Coleman is that he sucks up public money excessively given his status and compared to other AMs, at the same time hectoring people about restraint. It's the hypocrisy as much as the greed.]

Rog T said...

Dan,

If you ever engaged your brain enough to check what I've written, you'd know that I've criticised various Labour figures in the past for a host of things, including expenses. Given that the subject of Adam's blog is Brian Coleman, it seems logical to focus on Brian Coleman's excesses here. It's called discussing the subject. I'd suggest that if you have a topic you think is interesting you start your own blog? or maybe not eh?

Don't Call Me Dave said...

Exposing obscene allowances should not be a partisan matter. I complain when Labour politicians have their snouts in the trough, and I’ll complain when Conservatives do likewise. I’m not a hypocrite. Unfortunately, comparing the reality of Brian Coleman’s actions and his excellent article in the Spectator, I am forced to conclude that he is.