Kit Kat, light bulbs and face paints among items Mark Fisher charged to the taxpayer
STOKE-ON-TRENT Central MP Mark Fisher claimed 34 pence for a four finger Kit Kat and £2.58 for a bottle of Toilet Duck on a £58.45 expenses claim for stationery from Staples.
In the same claim was a bottle of Fairy Liquid for £3.58, a box of facial tissues for £5.12 and a pack of light bulbs for £4.56.
Overall, in the last four years Mr Fisher claimed £30,430.16 in offices expenses – the majority of which went on office rent, photocopying, phone bill and office supplies.
Mr Fisher bought a Sony laptop worth £599.99 in December 2007 and then claimed the same amount for a Toshiba laptop from PC World in February 2008.
Other claims included £40.32 of Christmas stamps, a Collins Essential Dictionary for £12.99, 12 fun chunky crayons and a face painting kit for £4.58.
Last month it was revealed that Mr Fisher's second home cost taxpayers £50,334.45 over the past four years.
Overall, out of the six Stoke-on-Trent and Staffordshire MPs, he claimed the lowest amount of second home allowances, although his mortgage/rent costs leapt from £4.952.94 in 2006/07 to £15,002 in 2007/08 after he moved to a more expensive London property.
Mr Fisher told The Sentinel he was 'horrified' to see that parts of the claims had been 'blanked out'.
He said: "I was not consulted and did not approve the decision to blank out any information except for the personal details of my staff.
"I will be making steps to ensure all of the information is in the public domain on my website as soon as possible.
"Even my address was blanked out which is ridiculous as everyone knows where I live.
"It just makes people suspicious that MPs have got something to hide."
Mark Fisher MP Stoke-on-Trent Central:
Incidental Expenses Provision
2004/05 – £7,380.36
2005/06 – £7,088.44
2006/07 – £8,478.11
2007/08 – £7,483.25
Communications Allowance
2007/08 – £6,361.82
8 Comments
by David, Burslem
Monday, June 22 2009, 8:22AM
“In fairness to Mr. Fisher, and if the claims are read thoroughly, it appears that although the crayons and face paints both appeared on the receipt he did not actually claim reimbursement for them.
What is more concerning are the dual claims for the same item (at least 2 computers, for example) and, still worse, the number of claims for goods purchased from Banner Business Supplies that are blanked out. The practice of hiding the details only appears to relate to transactions from 2006 and earlier - why? Some fairly substantial amounts of money have been spent, with the total running into hundreds, if not thousands, of pounds. Spent on what exactly? Paperclips? Or more computers?
Mr Fisher should not be 'horrified' to see what was blanked out; all MPs had the final approval on what was hidden. I await the appearance on his website, as he has promised, of the amended documents.
How can any of them ever be trusted again?”
by Alan Collinson, Gawler, South Australia
Sunday, June 21 2009, 7:57AM
“I am horrified at the greed of the MP's. As they are already vasty overpaid for what little they do I suggest that the so-called expenses be abolished immediately and all they have claimed whilst in parliament be repaid.”
by R.Brayford, Newcastle
Saturday, June 20 2009, 5:16PM
“Wake up you constituents of his, what does this privileged Old Etonian have in common with you?
He does not now live in his constituency and never will, preferring the country life!”
by geoff, Telford
Saturday, June 20 2009, 4:47PM
“I hope every one remembers these people when they come knocking and asking for our support. They are nothing more than common criminals that have been dipping there fingers in the OUR TILL for years. Hope they are tried and sentenced , I think they should have ten times the sentence of the Dole and Social fiddlers or even chop there fingers off , like they would be if caught in some foreign countries. I Hope these thieves are listed by the media next time they come calling for our votes .
gb.”
by Norma, Blurton
Saturday, June 20 2009, 1:45PM
“It does not matter which party they support it is plain and simple fraud and as such they should be charged and then receive a criminal record which is what would happen to us voters. I feel they would not have paid it back if they had not been found out.”
by john, knypersley
Saturday, June 20 2009, 12:25PM
“If you had gone to Asda Mark you could have got a KitKat for 30p and saved the taxpayer 4p, although you would have probably claimed for the petrol money and the parking. Hope you didn't choke on it!”
by philip, tunstall
Saturday, June 20 2009, 12:02PM
“lets put 2fingers of that kit kat up to you Mark Fisher!”
by Daz, Oz
Saturday, June 20 2009, 9:34AM
“FAT GREEDY PIGS the lot of 'em!!!
They should be sacked and prosecuted like evryone else who falsely claims.”