FatCratz

Moat Cleaning at Taxpayers' Expense

A scandal has been brewing in the UK over abuses of housing expense subsidies provided for Members of Parliament. The fun part is that when something like this happens in Britain, some pretty extravagant expenses show up on the public account. Like moat cleaning.

The perquisites claimed offer a colorful reminder of the resilience of the class system in Britain: from the Tory MP who claimed for the upkeep of the moat at his country house, to the Labour man who charged for a couple of toilet seats.

The scandal crosses party lines. It turns out that in the 1980's, MPs wanted to vote themselves a raise during an economic downturn, but couldn't handle the public scrutiny. So they agreed to expand the list of expensible items. Most of the expenses are, in fact, legal under the current regime, while many others are clear abuses of the system. One such abusive scheme entails flipping "second home" designations to rack up expenses renovating multiple residences in turn, all at taxpayer expense.

The bottom line here is daylight. Most british citizens had no idea such a housing subsidy existed, and are frankly shocked that during an economic downturn MPs would have the taxpayers paying for their light bulbs to be replaced, or their swimming pool to be cleaned, or for $1,100 television sets. It just shows what politicians will try to get away with when they don't think anyone is looking.

Neither Snow, Nor Rain, Nor Lack of a Date

A recent GAO report shows some questionable expenses on a government charge card by a postal employee:

A postmaster used a government credit card to subscribe to two Internet dating sites, the study said, and the employee also used a government computer to access pornographic sites. The postmaster racked up $1,100 in charges for the dating services, it said, and "the activity went unnoticed" by U.S. Postal Service for a full year. After an investigation, the employee paid back the $1,100, the study said. He was also removed from his position.

As for me, I think getting a Postmaster a date may be a legitimate expense.

Shockingly, the study found that nearly half of charges to government cards in 2006 were improper. Nearly half.

The article lists a number of colorful examples, but another group of USPS employees take the cake (and the appetizers, and the wine, and the cocktails):

In another case, USPS spent $13,500 on a dinner at Ruth Chris Steakhouse for employees who were attending a national postal forum in Orlando, Florida. The dinner included more than 200 appetizers and the agency paid for about $3,000 of alcoholic drinks, including more than 40 bottles of wine and top-shelf liquor, the study said.

But I'm sure the rest of the expenditures for the "postal forum" was money well spent.

Who is Tracking Fraud?

As we noted in an earlier post, the incentives regarding fraud differ widely in the public and private sectors. Fraud is not the worst thing for a government agency, the discovery of it is.

So fraud enforcement is habitually under-funded and staffed. Thus, no surprise that "...no one at IRS had examined teleconferencing-related charges for unusual charges or potential waste and improper use," according to a recent report, and that, unwatched, employees abused their privileges:

On one calling card alone, an employee charged $59,000 for improper overseas calls made over a 12-month period in 2007 and 2008, according to the report by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration. The report offered no estimate of the total amount of money wasted in improper use of the calling cards.

...$8.4 million was charged to IRS calling cards between October 2005 and April 2008. IRS employees primarily use the cards to dial into teleconferences, accounting for $7.4 million of that spending....no one at IRS had examined teleconferencing-related charges for unusual charges or potential waste and improper use, the report states. IRS hasn’t validated its calling card inventory in more than three years, the report states. It analyzes one month of telephone call activity every quarter, and the report concludes that isn’t enough to prevent fraud.

Do you know about a case of fraud that's too small for an IG to investigate, or wouldn't merit a report in the Federal Times? Report it here.

The truth will set us free. People behave better when they know people are watching.

"An Exaggerated Public View That They Are All Thieves."

The British official in charge of policing charged taxpayers $14 for two pornographic films.

Jacqui Smith... said it was "a mistake" that the adult movies, which her husband watched, ended up on her expense report. She apologized Tuesday, saying she was angry at herself for the slip-up, and has returned the cash.

No word yet on whether the $800 sink and $1,400 fireplace and the $1.30 bathtub plugs that Smith expensed were also mistakes.