Honourable no more?
It is with great sadness that I have to announce the death of the "honourable member".
Let's be clear, I am not arguing that there are no "honourable" men and women left in Parliament. There are many.
I am not saying that every "revelation" in recent days has proved MPs to be "on the take". A number of those stories have simply not stood up to scrutiny. Even the Telegraph was forced to clarify that it wasn't claiming any impropriety in the arrangement Gordon Brown made to share a cleaner with his brother (whose wife writes a revealing piece in the Guardian today).
Nor do I believe that even the worst practices revealed in the past few days justify the corrosive cynicism of the "I told you so... they're all it... they're all the same" crowd. It is now very easy for voters to compare and contrast the behaviour of individual MPs.
My point is simply that for the past 20 years or so MPs have behaved in precisely the way that they have legally prevented other groups from behaving. Trade unionists, doctors, the police and many many others used to argue that they could be trusted to manage their own affairs. Few would argue that now.
Yet the House of Commons has run itself as if Members of Parliament can and should be assumed to be honourable and, by implication, better than those they govern.
It is this idea that underpinned the creation, the exploitation and the attempt to cover up a system of allowances which has now caused such damage to the reputation of all those involved in politics.
It is now clear that parliamentary reform is likely to be imposed on MPs by external pressure from the standards watchdog, auditors and the electorate.
In the short term, many at Westminster fear that voters will react by rewarding smaller or fringe or extreme parties. The elections to the European Parliament are for an institution few voters know or care much about. Voting is done using a system of proportional representation which maximises the chances of smaller parties. In the past the Greens shocked the political establishment with huge gains in 1999 as did UKIP in 2004.
There is, of course, absolutely no guarantee that any politician not yet in Westminster is "honourable". One of those elected to the European Parliament on a UKIP ticket - the MEP Tom Wise - is currently facing charges of false accounting and money laundering which he denies. He is no longer in the party.
Honour in politics is something that, as in the rest of life, will have to earned, proved and upheld and not merely assumed.
No surprise then that the prime minister has finally felt moved to apologise albeit "on behalf of politicians, on behalf of all parties for what has happened in the events of these last few days".
I'm 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~19~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Nick
An apology is due from you too for reporting over many years that only a very few MPs fiddled their expenses when it was widespread and Guido Fawkes and others were pointing it out all along.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
You are in danger of sounding like a kid who just found out his dad is not working abroad like mum said but is in fact in prison.
You should know very well that parliamentary history is replete with tales and scandal and corruption, none of which meant the death of honour
Stick to reporting the facts and let us decide who deserves to be thought of as hnourable or otherwise. It is your job to leave your hurt feelings out of it.
Complain about this comment
If there were an ounce of decency left in parliament then they should call an election an let the voters decide if they have behaved in a morally acceptable manner. But that would mean democracy......will never happen
Complain about this comment
David cameron needs to show clear water with Gordon Brown - the "system broke" line too similar
Dave should ask tory mps to pay back any overclaims.
Dave should highlight how many nurses can be funded from the overpayments to cabinet ministers....
Is a socialst someone who avoids tax ?
The greatest opinion poll is in three weeks
dont vote for the government!
Complain about this comment
The dissapointing thing is the attitude of so many of them.
They think that they havent done anything wrong.
They have been all high and mighty with us.
The Nanny state has told us to do this and not do that. all the while pretending to be on the moral high ground.
Now this exposure shows that they werent on moral high ground at all.
There are large numbers of these people that have no morals at all.
Margaret Moran was immoral in the extreme fliping her second home 3 times finally fixing her husbands dry rot.
Lord Naseby has it correct.
They have No Moral right to govern any more and Parliament should be dissolved
Complain about this comment
We are told the tory front bench is millionaires row...
Is the truth not that Parliament is now the millionaires club ?
With Jacuie smith pulling in £300,000 this year in total, is the new labour front bench not a set of champayne millionaire socialists.
Why is nick not highlighting this hipocracy ?
GB says his raising children out of poverty.... how many more could be done if the labour ministers were frugal ?
Complain about this comment
There is now only one honourable thing left for the moral compass and his honourable members to do...
Dissolve parliament.
Nothing less will restore the honour of parlaiment.
He knows it.
Complain about this comment
As for Gordon's "sorry" on behalf of all More Pleasers.....:
Is it just me thinking this? "Was he the bloke who last week on youtube just wanted to hand it over as cash in hand for turning up? (In order to avoid showing the punters what they use our money for)"
If enough of the other useless pigs had backed him, this is the "new system" we would now have.... thanks to his wonderful leadership.
The man is, literally incredible.
Complain about this comment
At the end of last week, Joanna Lumley was hailed a hero in much of the media. It was well deserved. But there were two heroes last week. The other one didn't seem to get much of a mention. Heather Brooke should get credit for tirelessly campaigning, for the last five years to get MP's expenses brought out in the open.
Using the Freedom of Information Act she won her 'Information Tribunal' case in February 2008, which ordered the expense details be disclosed. Success you might think. No. The Speaker of the House rejected the ruling, hired an expensive legal team, at our expense BTW, and appealed to the High Court. Escalating the case from a Tribunal to a High Court was expected to 'see off' Ms Brooke. It didn't. She met them in the High Court, set out her case all over again, and won. In May 2008, the High Court judges ruled disclosure of expenses and second homes. The House of Commons, obliged to follow the order, stated they would release the information in October 2008. This time success? No. October came and went. When pressed, they revised the date to December 2008. December came and went. When MP's returned in the New year, they attempted to pervert the ruling by claiming MP's shouldn't be subject to Freedom Of Information Act! A similar attempt was made again in March 2009.
Eventually, it was stated the information would be published inJuly 2009. In the interim, the information has leaked. What has been the response? That they've called the Police to investigate the leak of information that should have been released last October says it all.
I didn't know much about Heather Brooke until looking at her website over the weekend, but five years ago it seems she smelled a rat, and after much digging, has found a whole colony.
Complain about this comment
Nick, I disagree with you that there are honourable members left in parliament. They are all tainted because they all stood by and let it continue with a nod and a wink. It is also lamentable that we have to put up with the faux moral indignation of journalists and newspaper barons that inhabit far murkier moral environs than the fiddling MPs. Those calling for elections are also wrong because electing new people to find different ways of screwing the public purse is not the answer. We need a different democracy, that is not based solely on electing a ruling elite who know best. If you put someone above you, dont be surprised if the **** on you.
Complain about this comment
"No surprise then that the prime minister has finally felt moved to apologise albeit "on behalf of politicians, on behalf of all parties for what has happened in the events of these last few days". "
Gordon Brown has apologised for "the events of these last few days"?
Shouldn't he be apologising for the events of these last few years?
It seems to me he is simply sorry that the details have come out.
Complain about this comment
I think it has gone too far and I beleive the only soltuion is for the goverment to disolve parliment and call an general election.
Complain about this comment
When trust is betrayed it is seldom restored.
This country is in need of serious political reform...or a revolution!
Complain about this comment
David Cameron and Nick Clegg were very quick to join Joanna Lumley in the photo-opportunities recently. Why weren't they so keen to stand alongside Heather Brooke?
Complain about this comment
Just listening to Radio 5 Live and a discussion between Peter Oborne, Alex Bell and others.
The 'audit' which is being put in place could, if MP's decide, mean that information of MP's expenses would not be available under the Freedom of Information Act. The result - no more public scrutiny of MP's expense accounts. If the audit is carried out by an outside contractor (it's already in the bag for C(r)apita!, the FoI becomes irrelevant.
During the converstaion Oborne suggested the following: -
Those member's 'caught in the act' resigning their seats
Criminal preosecutions where proof can be found. Something I would suggest was not that diffciult.
The resignation of the Speaker, Michael Martin
Where do I vote for Peter Oborne?
Complain about this comment
stuart bell has been doing the rounds explaining that in the future all expenses will be above board and open.He also says that once an outside body starts auditing the expenses that the expenses will fall outside of the FOI act covering parliament.Call me dumb but how open is that?
Complain about this comment
Interesting that Gordon didn't apologise for the fact that MPs were claiming every penny they could get there sweaty hands on, but for 'mistakes'.
I always thought that a mistake was something you did accidently?
Complain about this comment
Dear Nick
This whole Parliamentary expenses issue highlights the need for checks and balances from political party constituency level down to the House of Commons.
As a member of Labour's National Executive Committee, recently elected in the constituency section, I am taking soundings about what we should be doing when we meet next on 19 May. Labour Party members suggestions range from deselection of sitting MPs alleged to be on the make, repayment of expenses deemed to be for personal gain, to the need for a Code of Ethics for all Labour candidates standing at the next General Election.
These ideas are in addition to those currently under consideration by Parliament. Nevertheless, they are seen as part of the process of encouraging ethical behaviour on the part of Labour's elected representatives in line with Labour values.
Peter Kenyon
http://petergkenyon.typepad.com/peterkenyon/2009/05/labour-party-needs-to-act-over-its-mps-expenses.html
Complain about this comment
Nick, why is it "honourable" that the "Right Honourable" Gordon Brown can earn GBP194,000 and have two London properties provided "grace & favour" by us, 10 Downing Street and Chequers, and yet we have to pay his cleaning bill for a third London property?
What is honourable about that?
What is honourable about legislating a set of tax rules for the general population and then living under a completely seperate set of rules themselves?
Nick, you still don't get it at all, do you?
Complain about this comment
7. At 11:30am on 11 May 2009, awooga99 wrote:
GB says his raising children out of poverty.... how many more could be done if the labour ministers were frugal ?
=======================================================================
He means the children of Labour MPs only.
Complain about this comment
A nice peice from Gordans Sister in law, but she dosnt say why it took the cleaner 5 hours a week to clean Gordans wifes flat during a period when it was not regually used and only 3 hours to do theirs, none does she tell us why Sarah did not pay a penny towards the cleaning bill dispite being the sole owner of the flat.
I go back to my main point why was the PM allowed to claim expenses on a flat that for Tax/Investment reasions he had transfered full owner ship to his wife before moving into Number 10/11.
Complain about this comment
The accomodation expenses claimed by most MP's seems to be 23000 pounds. Does anybody know, incl Nick Robinson, how many nights they're required to be at Westminster.
How many weeks does Parliament sit each year - 25 weeks or so? So they just need somewhere to stay Monday night, Tuesday night, Wednesday night, and occasionally Thursday night. About 90 nights a year?
Complain about this comment
Our MPs snouts are so deep in the expenses trough that their tails have gone curly. Its little surpise they can barely come up for air long enough to oink "we operated within guidelines"
So to save them the trouble (we appreciate they're very busy people) Rip Her To Shreds has gone all creative on their behalf, and this week on our Spotify playlist - following in the hallowed footsteps of Jarvis Cocker
We want to live like Common's People....
www.riphertoshreds.co.uk/the-beat-goes-on/spotified/the-playlist/
Rip her To Shreds
Complain about this comment
No surprise then that the prime minister has finally felt moved to apologise albeit "on behalf of politicians, on behalf of all parties for what has happened in the events of these last few days".
I think he may have been moved by the fact that Cameron had beaten him to it again.
Nick
Is your latest brief to persuade Labour supporters not to vote for the fringe parties?
And do all Brown's claims really stand up to scrutiny?
Complain about this comment
"Let's be clear, I am not arguing that there are no "honourable" men and women left in Parliament. There are many."
Simply making a statement like this does not make it so. Who are these "honourable" politicians (even typing those words makes me laugh)? We need names and examples of their supposedly honourable behaviour (and simply saying they didn't exploit the expenses system as badly as others is not good enough). No one "honourable" person would be part of the racket MPs have clearly been running for years getting even their most trivial home expenses bad by the tax payer (when we can't even get tax relief on the season tickets we need to get into work).
Sorry, but statements that we can't tar all politicians with the same brush without any attempt to support that statement and in the absence of any supporting evidence just make me really angry at the moment.
Complain about this comment
Today, on BBC Radio 4, Mr Robinson seems to have implied that The Telegraph is biased.
I can not remember Mr Robinson questioning The Guardian's political stance. Neither that of the BBC, which very well knows that the conservatives will fund it less generously than any other main stream political party.
I can't wait for Mr Robinson producing a feature about labour purchasing favourable reports and comments in The Guardian through channeling many public sector jobs adds to that paper and its website. This has been a very clever scheme indeed. Campbell deserves praise for this one.
PS The expenses gravy train does not exist - it was reported in The Telegraph!
PS2 Illegally generating income from subletting your constituency office, as Brown did, is perhaps even worse than milking the expense system, since it is, em, illegal. Now that HMRC is looking into MPs' tax returns, we can expect Brown's returns to be examined for income from subletting his constituency office. It would be nice to hear Brown say that he always declared the rental income.
Complain about this comment
I had a row with my wife a few weeks ago saying that in my limited experience - as someone who worked in local government - MPs were not venal and utterly flawed. Today I had to say that she was right and I was wrong.
Nothing short of mass resignations is going to go any way to restoring public confidence; no MP who 'switched' the designation of 'second home' to get more public money for re-furbishments and can remain. None of them. Only MPs with a 'clean' expenses history can go forward.
Why this has to happen was clear to me when I read The Guardian this morning, where MPs like Vaz and ministers like Blears were quoted, and it occurred to me that I did not trust a single thing they said, nor felt they had the moral authority necessary to be part of government.
We need to purge Parliament. God only knows where this might end, but our elected representatives only have themselves to blame.
Complain about this comment
The problem for Brown, Nick, is that he has had the chance to act. He could have acted by sacking Jacqui Smith when her arrangements became public - declaring her sister's bedroom as her "main residence" was clearly milking the taxpayer and the system. He could have acted to sack Tony McNulty when his dubious arrangements became public. Brown could have apologised for such behaviour weeks ago, but he did not! Brown could have entered into meaningful negotiations with other party leaders on how to clean the system up weeks ago, but he did not.
The problem for Brown is that he cannot think outside the box of narrow party political advantage. He is simply not up to the job of being Prime Minister! Call an election now!
Complain about this comment
Nick - please get a buzzer to be used everytime you hear an MP saying "I did nothing outside the rules" or "My claims were approved, because I got paid."
Complain about this comment
What a thoroughly depressing episode. Just when we need inspirational leadership from our politicians, we get confirmation that they are indeed motivated by the lowest common deniminator - greed. One wonders how some have the effrontery to be seen in public.
Given that the Crashmeister has 'apologised', no doubt he will feel he can now move on. In reality, I doubt that this parliament can now achieve anything meaningful. There is clearly no prospect that Crash will do the decent thing, so perhaps the other parties should agree, en masse, to resign their seats and force a few hundred by-elections, taking the opportunity to drop the worst offending troughers while they are at it.
It would certainly put the Labour Party in a bit of a spot and may encourage some of the more honourable members to follow their lead.
Complain about this comment
There is a point that the "Westminster Village" has missed in all of this.
How can the Great British public trust their politicans to run the country in a thrifty manner (which is long overdue) if they can't even spend and claim on expenses in a thrifty manner. Why should we be surprised that billions have been wasted over the last number of years when they are so profilgate with our money for their expenses.
And another thing, It seems to me that all weekend the media have been itching to get the low down on Tory expenses. This is an indication that the tory stuff is a bigger news story, further showing that Labour are finished. Also note how Gordon Brown was again shamed into apologising only after Cameron had again taken the lead by doing so last night. Are the tories now the power but not in power?
Complain about this comment
The most obnoxious aspect is the claim that so long as they abide by the rules (set by MPs) they have done no wrong and are absolved from any personal responsibility to act reasonably and in accordance with the spirit of the intention of the allowances.
They can no longer point the finger at Fred Goodwin - only the sums are different; the principle is the same.
Complain about this comment
Nick
Could you put together a forensic analysis of the MP expenses fiasco for us with a more objective view. What about a league table of expenses claims, total amount and broken down by category? This could also include distance to parliament and the time the MP spent in London. Then, instead of having the highest claimants at the top of these leagues lets have the lowest. They are the examplars that show what can be done on an MP wage and allowances. Champion their cause to shame the rest. Difficult I know without all the expenses information yet.
Complain about this comment
I am very sorry to say, but I will now be voting BNP
Complain about this comment
Is anybody watching the Army? A coup d'etat is quite possible.
Complain about this comment
They just do not appreciate what they have done - and are totally failing to answer the issues. Hazel Blears stands there beaming all over saying how she has "broken no rules" and "done nothing wrong" but totally failes to answer why the taxpayer needs to buy her two TVs in a single year. At least Prescott has gone quite, but he really should be explaining why or hard earnt cash went to pay for his mock Tudor beams (ignoring "the bad rules"). Broad sweeping comments on the rules they set are not enough - there are specific problems that need answers.
When pensioners are "heating or eating", why are we paying for MPs to own a house, whilst at the same time they are getting rental income from the same property (or e.g. parents living in it) and also paying for a "grace and favour" home to be provided. When they just go quite and make statements about "acting within the rules" it just makes everything worse.
This country is run by rules (sometimes called Laws). These rules (or Laws) are set by Parliament. We need to know that this body can set sensible rules. If they cannot, we need people who can. Browns last minute attempt to change the system for an already discredited system just so he can say "we've changed it" is just a joke. Labour, the party in power, have has many years to sort these "bad rules" out and done nothing.
Complain about this comment
Nick - PLEASE stop spinning ZanuLabour guff for once and for all - we, the taxpayers, pay your wages, do not forget it. As for Hon Members - do not make me laugh anymore, it hurts.
As another HYS contributor said -report the FACTS for once and get a REAL story sometime - look at Guido for help.
Complain about this comment
Yes, I said on the other blog: Brown apologising for what has happened during the last "few days" is not enough. He needs to apologise for the years of moral and economic bankruptcy he has imposed upon us.
As regards the European Elections they are a huge chance for us to seriously vote in people of integrity and honesty with the conviction that they are acting for the greater good of us all. We need to be able to TRUST them and the next government (can we wait until next year for a GENERAL election?).
Complain about this comment
I agree with your point that the presumption of being honourable for an MP is now in tatters.
The lurch to minor or even extreme parties you mention is a threat to the major parties which they don't like.
However, is this not just democracy in action - sending a signal to our current rulers that the voters have been taken for granted for too long and indeed not even properly listened to on many issues.
Surely this is a healthy thing and will lead over time to the renewal of confidence in our elected representatives.
Complain about this comment
I wish to make a contribution to the debate over the expenses claimed by Members of Parliament. There is a great variety in the housing and the types of expenses they claim for. Make it an even playing field. After the Olympics, redesign the competitors' accommodation to give every MP a London base. If they decide not to use it, then give them an equivalent allowance towards their own choice.
Complain about this comment
Nick, by implication you are saying that those MPs who, while not having their hands in the till themselves, but must have known and ignored their colleagues dodgy dealings, should still be credited with the term 'honourable'.
Sorry Nick, but the whole House is tainted and will remain so until it is dissolved.
Complain about this comment
Grandantidote and Fredalo on the blog recently closed agrreing to visit a plague on all the MPs houses:(sorry but it was closed before I had time to make my point).
#565 and 584:
Very convenient to lump all the parties together as a bad lot and not worth electing just because of The MPs expenses. These issues although they currently loom large in the publics image of politicians is only a small part of the bigger picture. The woeful policies on immigration, the mismanagement of the economy, the spin and lies at every turn, the lack of leadership and plain old fashioned judgement are far greater issues when all this has died down and decent, fully transparent rules are in place. Tar all parties with the same brush on expenses certainly but in the larger scheme of things we still have to deal with a financial shambles partially created by the current Government. Let's get back to what really matters.
Complain about this comment
The people of the UK do not want an appology they want it put right:
All MP expenses errors corrected
All MP expenses excessive claims repaid
All MP expenses fraud investigated and prosecuted
All MP's that have made unreasonable claims to stand down at the next election
All MP's expenses that would normaly be taxable taxed
All MP's capital Gains to be treated properly and taxed.
All MP's that have fraudulently avoided capital gains tax prosecuted.
A replacement expenses system that applies rules such that all future expenses are wholly, necessarily and exclusively in support of their role as MP's and fits the ethos that we all expect.
Complain about this comment
Is Gordon really sorry or only sorry they got found out?
I was intending to make a comment about the Speaker - Michael Martin - but then realised I could not do it without using language that would never pass the moderators.
Complain about this comment
I believe the Michel Gove situation this morning has clearly shown that this Parliament cannot and will not, ever gain enough credibility to enforce laws and the necessary hardship that will be required to turn this country around.
On the face of it Gove is bang to rights. If this is not the case and he has a perfectly reasonable argument to re-designate his primary residence it does not matter because all MPs credibility has now be shattered so there is nothing he or anyone else can say to rectify that.
This current collection of MP's can no long form an Honourable Parliament and need to renew their mandates. This is the only way we can move forward.
I think Cameron and Clegg should force all of their MPs to resign and force hundreds of by elections.
This would leave Brown with a fate a comply. Call an election or be seen to be acting out self-interest hanging on to power.
Then was need a root and branch reform of Parliament and it workings to take away the elected dictatorship we suffer.
We need MP's to have secret ballots so that bad laws cannot be whipped through.
Complain about this comment
It may not have been 'improper' the arrangement between Gordon Brown and his brother, but why do we have to pay his cleaner? Surely out of his salary of £194,000 he can pay for something. Or do all politicians now think that the salary is just a perk and any expenses they have for whatever reason the taxpayer should be obliged to foot the bill?
Complain about this comment
What is really sickening is how many of them are trying to hide behind the rules, when it's stated at least twice in the rule book that MPs are themselves responsible for the nature of their expenses. Not the fees office, not any regulator or parliamentary body, the buck stops with them. There can be no trust in MPs if they have their hands in the cookie jar every time the electorate turns its back for a second. At the same time, they also want us to give increasing power to the police, curtail our civil liberties, hold obscene amounts of data on us and tax us until we have no choices whatsoever about how we lead our lives.
The one thing that this has shown overall is that if a system is open to abuse, the government will abuse it.
Complain about this comment
I take no sides in apportioning who is on the take or not. I'm not going to blame Gordy for this, its a red herring, they are all at it. I dont want to see anyone attempt to take the moral high ground and try and distance themselves from this, ie Cameron saying sorry, then Brown. It was the whole of parliament that said no to Browns proposal a few weeks ago, rightly or wrongly, this still told us that Parliament at that point had no thoughts on their wrong doing. Only now when caught with their hands in the cookie jar, are they trying to wriggle and worm their way out of it.
Bottom line country is in a mess, corruption is rife, time to do away with the whole damn lot of them, and start again with a new improved system of government, there will never be a better time to do it.
And to prove that there is real reform, and to act as a warning to future government, we need to see some prison time handed out to various members
T Blair, G Brown to start the list , but you can add more here, that IS the only way to say sorry.
Complain about this comment
'within the rules' sounds more and more like 'only following orders' to me - its no excuse.
Complain about this comment
What leave the significant bit to the last paragraph of your post Nick?
This has turned into a day of two apologies, two Browns and too late!
After hiding away for days in the bunker while the flippin' New Labour expenses scam exploded in his face, Brown suddenly pops up to say 'sorry', sort of.
But interestingly only after the Tories were exposed and Cameron got in quick with an apology for his lot. I can't get my head round exactly which bits Brown is apologising for. What a joke.
Whatever your political colours, it's all a tad too little too late.
More interesting is the highly unusual move of Tory peers who usually keep their noses out of commons affairs now calling for a general election to clear the air.
I would suggest that's the political story Nick and anything else is a smokescreen.
http://theorangepartyblog.blogspot.com/2009/05/cameron-quick-to-use-s-word.html
Complain about this comment
Labour's scheme of buying favourable reporting in The Guardian through placing public sector jobs adds illustrated:
From The Guardian's website a few minutes ago:
Senior Practitioners
hampshire county council. hampshire. £29,598 - £33,315 per annum.
Library Assistant
tfpl. our client is looking for a saturday library assis. £8 per hour.
Senior Teacher (Ethnic and Language Minority Suppo
surrey county council. surrey area office (to be agreed). UPS TLR 2.2.
Complain about this comment
Just been listening to both Brown and Cameron saying SORRY, and boy how HOLLOW this "WORD" now sounds after the events of the past 3 Days in Wasteminster Politics.
If, by ANY MEASURE of a chance they have any honour left in them, then there is but ONLY one thing left for ALL M.P.s' to really do, and that thing is to RESIGN on Mass so that the People can now decide whom they want to re-elect to Parliament in the future, and thus will be more ACCOUNTABLE in Terms of being worthy of their trust.
So being SORRY is NOT the Answer: RESIGNING IS. SO CALL A GENERAL ELECTION. NOW, and test the water in the Court of Public Opinion.
Complain about this comment
I quote the Archbishop of York who said
"Parties once had a principal belonging to them absurd perhaps and indefensible, but still carrying a notion of duty, by which honest minds might easily be caught.
But they are now combinations of individuals, who, instead of being the sons and servants of the community, make a league for advancing their private interests. It is their business to hold high the notion of political honour. I believe and trust, it is not injurious to say, that such a bond is no better than that by which the lowest and wickedest combinations are held together; and that denotes the last stage of political depravity."
It was, I believe, William Markham who said this in 1777. No much has changed in almost 250 years -
Complain about this comment
We all need to calm down and try to solve the problem pragmatically. Yes, the idea that the men and women elected to represent us are fiddling in the till is just repulsive and brings shame on our country and our Parliament. But GB is right to a certain extent because the 'rules', such as they are, are woolly, and simply invite creative interpretation. It's been going on so long that expense claiming has become institutionalised and it's quite possible that many MPs simply thought that that's how the game was played.
As with children, if there are no boundaries then chaos reigns, with each MP pushing at the boundaries to see how far they can go. They should not behave like this of course, but it's human nature to try it on, and a decent corporate organisation should realise that rules have to be set in stone. There has been a gross failure of the management system, and this needs to be put right. Where clear breaches of the rules can be proven then disciplinary action must be taken, but I suspect that there are so many omissions and loopholes that this will prove impossible. All the screaming for a general election, revenge, and MPs blood won't prevent this happening again unless the rules are changed some clarity is brought in. This is a serious matter, requiring serious thought, not shouting and witch-hunting.
Complain about this comment
Nick
Thank you for sharing your epiphany with us, but as part of the Westminster lobby did you not have any prior suspicions, any inkling, that some of these politicians you've shared the occasional drink with, had off-the-record conversations with, just maybe were not all 100% above board and pure as the driven snow?
608. yellowbelly1959 on previous blog:
I think he was using irony, and quoting from "Animal Farm".
I got that, thanks yellow, but I was also doing irony, not well enough by the looks of it.
Complain about this comment
The whole philosophy of government needs to change from the "current do as we say not as we do" to leadership by example. The nations leaders must take the high ground and show moral integrity which the nation can follow. How can a ruler expect people on the average wage who cannot afford one home let alone two or more to accept the living standards demanded by MP's paid for out of their taxes?
Complain about this comment
The issues around the public's perception of MPs won't be resolved simply by fixing the expenses system. In addition the main offenders must be fired from the cabinet and shadow cabinet by their respective party leaders. Only punitive measures of this sort will demonstrate that Brown and Cameron are truly committed to the improvement process.
Complain about this comment
· 5. At 11:27am on 11 May 2009, awooga99 wrote:
David cameron needs to show clear water with Gordon Brown - the "system broke" line too similar.
Theres no clear water to be seen here because the system is the same one that has been in force for a long time & (ab)used by all of the Political Parties.
Camerons a smart cookie & he knows that the further he takes this, the further he digs himself, & his party, into the same hole as Brown.
Notice how quiet Cameron became when he realised that the Telegraph was about to print some of the Tory expenses a couple of days later.
All MPs are brothers in arms when it boils down to their own existence.
You also wrote:
Dave should highlight how many nurses can be funded from the overpayments to cabinet ministers.
Or he could highlight how many auditors jobs the savings will create as well since this is a far more likely scenario.
Im afraid that all of this is small fry compared with the economic melt down that is taking place before our eyes.
Don't let the smoke screen cloud your vision.
Complain about this comment
Utterley disgraceful action by all MPs. They all knew it was going on yet did nothing. The Speaker should be sacked as he is totally in on all the scamming and trying to prevent the informtion going public is criminal. Thank goodness for GOOD journalists.
Nick,
you have tended to shy away from this subject ever since the MPs asked about your expenses; are you hiding something too?
Can I submit a FOI application for your expenses being a public funded body?
Complain about this comment
A Brown "apology" - but this is the man who had nothing to do with McBride and the email smears. McBride "cannot be found" to talk to the HoC.
Doubtless the honourable members of the Labour Party are trying to pressure the HoC members?
But in the end the truth about Iraq and McBride and the economic fiasco will come out and hopefully all before the next general election.
Complain about this comment
Read the opinion polls and see what the people really think about this .. our 'dear leader' has the lowest party poll record since they began in the 1940's - just about says it all really..
I remmevr John Redwood's sense of humour about the 1997 wipeout on election night - please can I request that McNulty is the Labour spokeperson in 2010 - I'd like to see that ..
Complain about this comment
So Nick, how about some views an what you think is unacceptable behaviour?
Is claiming a second home allowance fraud when the person is already provided with a grace & favour home?
Is "flipping" addresses to claim on both houses acceptable?
Is "flipping" addresses to evade capital gains tax illegal?
Is claiming expenses on your seaside home acceptable?
What should happen to those who engage in the above?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
All together now, to the tune of the Red Flag
"The working class can kiss my ....(you know how it goes)
I`ve got my M.P.`s job at last".
Not to mention the pension, the directorships, the second careers.
Get rid of them and their dishonoured system. They could all become authors, they have enough imagination, good at creating works of fiction, and they don`t seem to suffer from writer`s block.
Can`t wait for the next thrilling episode.
Complain about this comment
I could have sworn that David Cameron apologised yesterday.
Why no mention of that on your blog? Is it
a) You forgot.
b) It doesn't matter
c) It makes your blogg look as Mr brown is sincere when to all and sundry he is merely catching up?
Complain about this comment
The thing that worries me is that so much of our MPs remuneration is coming from playing the housing market using their expenses and overgenerous pensions.
This has to have an effect on public policy - if the housing price bubble had been 'pricked' early by the Bank of England raising interest rates it would have cost our property sepeculating MPs a lot of money. It is no coincidence the measures to deal with the credit crunch were designed to protect the property market and banks. The pension system obviously needs reformed because the promises made are unfundable given increased life expectancy, a population bulge in those approaching retirement and reduced yields on investments. However, MPs as a major beneficiary of public sector pensions have a vested interest in protecting them. Billions are going to be sucked from productive industry to bail out public sector pension funds e.g. £6 to £12Bn for Royal Mail depending on who you believe.
The cost of MPs expenses and pensions is small compared with the structural damage to the economy from distorting MPs compensation. How can reforms succeed when our MPs own finances are dependent on property prices and public sector pensions.
Complain about this comment
Of course you're making excuses for them, so eager to suggest it's only a tiny minority who are thieves and scam artists - you're part of the same cabal of metropolitan liberal-left media-politico elites. Sneaky leaks from the government and other MPs are your bread and butter. The BBC would defend them to the ends of the earth.
Complain about this comment
If you look beyond the froth and self righteous indignation, no-one has exactly made a fortune, have they? If we keep on pillorying our MP's with often slanted and distorted claims of wrong doing, what will we risk eventually getting? MP's who can afford the expenses from their substantial private means,so having little connection with the lives of the rest of us, or, even worse, the extremist ideologue who pursues their objectives with little regard for themselves-the Party is all. Do we really want a Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot type in charge. I don't mitigate the tax "avoidance" aspects, or the seemingly petty claims, but I do worry about constant media denigration of politicians of all parties.
Can we see journalists and editors expenses please as well as their salaries, pensions funding and bonuses? Or will pigs fly first?
Complain about this comment
Don't forget, all we've seen so far are the expense claims of cabinet and shadow cabinet members - there's still all the backbenchers to come... bound to be some juicy stuff there.
Here's a prediction - there will be at least one MP claiming expenses for a 'second home' in London that his wife doesn't know about.
Complain about this comment
17. At 11:39am on 11 May 2009, digitalabingdonian wrote:
stuart bell has been doing the rounds explaining that in the future all expenses will be above board and open.He also says that once an outside body starts auditing the expenses that the expenses will fall outside of the FOI act covering parliament.Call me dumb but how open is that?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Very good point, and a most worrying one.
As I said on the previous blog, it would appear that rather than trying to clean up their act, the Parliamentarians are desperately seeking another way of concealing their dirty deeds.
No wonder the public think they are a load of crooks.
Complain about this comment
Come on Nick, all this talk of a 'bygone era' in which politicians were considered virtuous and Parliament an honourable institution, doesn't really ring true does it?
Certainly since the eighteenth-century, the term 'politician' was a slippery one and, as your recent Radio 4 programme on Walpole made clear, a trade that revolved around MONEY.
And would Machiavelli have been surprised at the Commons' 'startling' money-grabbing expenses?
Let's be clear. Politics is NOT and has never really been a morally pure, 'honourable' profession; a scrupulously honest politician is a short-lived one. But let us not despair. Within this framework of slipperiness, the British political system is *not* corrupt. Cash-for-questions, cash-for-honours, and fiddled travel expenses look like a children's tea-party compared with, say, mafia-run Italian politics or the corrupt Croatian (or even French) systems.
Should journalists not amplify this message a little more? More European context please.
Complain about this comment
Now let's see : an unnecessary , highly destructive and damaging war . Destruction of Britain's reputation . Massive attacks on the freedoms of the British . Bad culture . Economic slump 2002 , economic disaster 2007 , 8 , 9 +++ . Rorting the system - snouts well and truly in the troughs both in parliament and for their mates . Relying on spin rather than actuality - avoiding the responsibilities . Massive government overspend . Many mismanaged government department improvement projects - inefficiency and wastage built in rather than taken out . Destruction of Britain's competitiveness . Destruction of Britain . ... and the list goes on and on ... And the opposition is no better . No wonder the politicians do not have any credibility . They are supposed to know what they are doing . And they are supposed to be professional , moral and responsible people . We would have been far better off if we had elected a set of shop keepers - at least the economy would have been managed properly . Now we have parliament fiddling and rorting while Britain burns !!! What does it take to sort out these people ? In previous times it was a revolution - hopefully it won't get to that . These politicians just don't seem to get to grips with the gravity of the situation they have created . People - sort it ! And quick !!!!
Complain about this comment
I Agree Nick, The term honorable is dead and gone. The expense row and the Gurka issue, are only a few to mention. I have lost all trust in MP's, and have decided not to vote at the next election because MP's are not there for the country, but are there for themselves.
Complain about this comment
Always the Creedy never the needy. I would love a 68k job and these people have the nerve to not only take the cash but bump it up with a load of 'expensies'. Doesnt suprise me that Nick robinson writes with some sympthy as Im sure there are many media types at the BBC that claim very simliar 'expensies' at cost to the tax payer.
Complain about this comment
In all this handwringing I do not see te costs of all the PM's trips around the world and expenses incurred there. Are they all within bounds of acceptability ?
Complain about this comment
I think there is a difference between expenditure that looks excessive but was nonetheless money the MP actually spent, and things which if done by "an ordinary person" would possibly result in jail time.
If someone on benefits claimed twice the rent they actually paid over an extended period, they would have a visit from the police and face prosecution even if they offered to pay the money back, as the ad says, No IFs No BUTs.
I also hope that HMRC is able to take retrospective action against all those MPs who did up properties using their second home allowance, and then avoided Capital Gains Tax when they subsequently sold those properties.
Complain about this comment
Just to throw in an aspect that seems not be covered.
Under what circumstances can the monarch step in and desolve Parliment ?
Does the monarch have such authority ? If so, this must surely be a case where such authority should be used. The credibily of Parliment has been shedded. Trust has gone. The democratic system has been corrupted and the country should be given the opportunity to remove those MPs who have so abused our trust.
Complain about this comment
This parliament needs to be dissolved and a general election called.
There are 4 issues which justify this:
1. MP's and ministers have been abusing expenses
2. There has been an attack / smear unit operating inside Downing Street
3. The PM has knowingly mis-led parliament according to Labours former general secretary.
4. We have an unelected PM committing the country to billions of expenditure debt and he has also reneged on manifesto commitments.
Call an election.
Complain about this comment
Well, just heard Nick Griffin on Daily Politics and my feelings are justified. I will definitely vote BNP. The others have discredited themselves and the Labour Government are responsible for eleven years of hell and mess and niavity. They have let this country become overrun with people who want to call themselves British and, as Nick Griffin says, if we go to Pakistan would we become Pakistanis? Of course not. Before you criticise me come and see where I live and others in the country live, in ghettos overrun by foreigners trying (and succeeding) to take over our country, customs and laws.
There it is. Simple and unadorned. Mad, niave, do-gooder, politically correct Labour stinks. Conservatives have a few rotten apples too many too.
I am voting for change but not for the established incompents. Watch the European elections. Big eye opener. Huge.
Complain about this comment
The Key Question: How many politicians complained about it before the system they created/profited from was exposed? ... The next Key Question: How many politicians tried to stop it being exposed?
With regard to honor, a phrase used by Chaucer to Adhemar (in the film a Knight's Tale) comes to mind and can be used for any politicians who did not complain about it earlier ...
"You have been weighed, you have been measured, and you have been found wanting".
A new breed of politician is now needed - where values are demonstrated and not simply espoused. A new form of 'economics' is also required - one not based on "Poweromics" *
Let's hope we have not long to wait before hard-working people wish it so and are given more meaningful forms of democracy to make it so. One vote every 5 years hardly does this, especially as most votes count for very little as it's only marginal constituencies that normally determines who Governs - proportional representation would arguably be a start - but we don't even have that ... more Poweromics I'm afraid!
David Clift, a Future 500 leader, founder of Leanomics** and a Poweromics* blogger
* Poweromics = People use position and power for their own personal gain, based on poor moral values, self interest and greed.
** Leanomics = People take responsibility for adding value and continuously improving the situation for others (e.g. customers, communities, overall environment), based upon fundamental values such as trust, honor, responsibility and respect.
The internet has changed the rules and will transform everything, including 'politics' and 'economics'. Google's mantra is "Do no harm". The Leanomics mantra is "Do good".
Complain about this comment
Once again Cameron leads and Brown follows.
Also, I notice that Brown does not say sorry for himself - but sweeps the world and his wife up in the apology - thereby tying to act as a spokesman rather than telling the truth - that he is one of those with the biggest snouts in the taxpayers pocket.
I would like to think that in 3 weeks Brown might get the message when he is wiped out at the polls - and decide to go by summer. But that would be the act of an HONOURABLE man.
So it's a Winter of despair to look forward to then.
Complain about this comment
In the outside world, if you bring your place of employment into disrepute then you would lose your job and all entitlements
I would suggest as a first step, all monies not defendable are paid back straight away to the public purse, and all expenses stopped until such time as a new system is in place (this should concentrate people's minds)
The Police and Tax man investigates all these expenses for possible law breaking or tax avoidance, and then prosecutions undertaken. All such MP's to be disbarred from their pensions
The house to be dissolved at the first opportunity, and a new mandate sought
Otherwise Nick I'm not quite sure what you intend in the article. Seems quite poor and probably needs many more words...I suggest you think about writing an essay discussing the options
Complain about this comment
Regrettably,I differ. MPs in Parliament are there to represent and protect the interests of the people but what these episodes and others over the years show is the opposite. What now needs to be asked are these questions:
What is Parliament for and does it fulfill that purpose?
If not, how do we reform it root and branch?
How do we ensure that the wishes of the electorate rather than vested interests here and abroad are paramount?
Who (not auditors) should be ensuring that MPs act with propriety, honesty and integrity?
Only when a meaningful public duscussion takes place on these issues will meaningful reform be possible.
Complain about this comment
Having now read the green book on allowances and how and in what spirit they should be claimed many of the people have totally ignored the rules knowing that they cannot lose their employment for breach's so they have taken the chance to line there own pockets.
It is now blatantly obvious why they also wanted to make sure that we weren't allowed to find out about it through the freedom of information act and the delays in publishing the results should be investigated why have we had to wait and in who's interest was it.
When reform comes an apology will not be enough i'm afraid and breach's of the rules should result in a by election.
Lets be fair about this there should be criminal prosecutions in many of these cases many that have been mentioned are nothing less than systematic fraud.The "saying the rules are wrong line" from messers Blears and company just doesnt cut the mustard because until they were outed they hadnt mentioned once how wrong they were,whilst still lining there own pockets.
Only an election will decide if the public believe them ,let us decide who we think has been giving value for money.
What also needs to be done is to go through all the Euro MP's claims too and quickly because i am certain we will find worse happening there.
Complain about this comment
So now Brown has apologised about these "mistakes". For goodness sake, does he really expect us to believe that these were mistakes? "Oops, I accidentally made a claim for an antique fireplace at the taxpayers expense?" It's laughable. What makes this situation even worse is that they cannot stand up and admit they have done anything wrong. They have routinely abused their privileges and in some cases clearly enriched themselves at the taxpayers expense; and they did everything within their power to stop us finding out. But now we are supposed to accept that these were all mistakes? Who do you vote for now?
Complain about this comment
Oh please, don't treat us as one short of the dozen. Whenever there is money involved honour tends to come a very close second last. This has and will still continue to be norm either if you have so called democracy or being governed by someone with an alleged divine right! Simply when a thief is caught with their hands in the till, if it were a Muslim I'm pretty sure the offending hand is cut off. Only then will you see a return to the Honourable status be assured!
Complain about this comment
I was only thinking the other day of the way Mark Anthony managed to turn the crowd so that, to their ears, the phrase "honourable men" meant the exact opposite. Now, thanks to its use by our politicians, the phrase "within the rules" also means its total opposite.
It's time to totally modernise our political system to a post Enlightenment style system, like most of Europe and the US, not this feudal-based system that has no written constitution and is so open to abuse.
Complain about this comment
In case anyone doubts Gordon's sorry, take a look at the way he would have already solved the problem if it wasn't for his own pesky MPs..... and Cam and Clegg....
Flate rate.... cash in hand.... that will learn them to ask what we spend it on.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBXj5l6ShpA
Sorry...
Complain about this comment
Apologising for the events of the last few days is contemptible. The events of the last few years is what we want apologies for and where appropriate people should lose the whip/be sacked etc.
Tax avoidance is something the PM has lectured about over recent months to such an extent that some in the public eye have suggested they would leave the country. Personally I am not in that position but were I to be I would be very sorely tempted to leave, as it seems one rule for MPs and one rule for the rest of us. Capital Gains Tax being avoided in such a manner as Hazel Blears would be a major investigation by Inland revenue and a prosecution - I fail to see how this cannot be the case with her!
Complain about this comment
There is a distinct parallel between MP's expenses and the recent banking crisis. It is called greed. It was sustained by the idea that money was easy.
As anyone who has had to produce a pay cheque each month knows money does not come easy. It has to be worked for and sometimes it doesn't go right so you take the consequences. This is life, this is how it is and so why is it that those in Westminster and the City took the alternative view and insulated themselves from reality with other people's money?
We are now living in the aftermath of the biggest bender in the history of Britain. There is an annual budget deficit of GBP 225 billion. It is going to take years to rebuild the banks and our economy. The people who should be taking the lead in resolving these issues are proven to be functionally immoral.
We have a big problem yet it is down to us, the little people to deal with it. Yes, we need a General Election but we need it to be an angry one and MPs voted for not on the basis of party but on the basis of integrity. We need independent candidates to run against the biggest swindlers to point out their moral deficiencies at every turn of the campaign.
We must make sure the swindlers, whoever they are, are held to account and made to drink bitter and angry waters.
Complain about this comment
I beleive Mr Brown has today apologised on behalf of all politicians for the 'mistakes' that have been made with regard to expenses claims. Although many have defended their claims by responding that they acted within the rules it was obvious to them then and to us now that they knew it was morally wrong and they were cheating the system. The fact that these people have stood solidly behind the word 'honourable'for all of these years leaves me speechless. However, let them begin to restore trust ... the government admitted some time ago that they had made 'mistakes' with peoples tax credits and then forced these poor people who didnt know they had been overpaid, to fully pay back those amounts. They were given no choice. Now let an independant commitee look at all those expenses claims and decide which are legitimate and those that are not. Those that are not should be forced to pay back all of that money in exactly the same way the public were given no choice in the matter - then watch them squirm!
Complain about this comment
Gordon Brown has just apologised at the RCN for the problems of the "Last few days" and there you have it. The problem for MP's is that they have been found out, which has happened over the last few days and not with their practices, which have been going on for years. Far from being contrite, they are just upset at having been found out, and Browns Freudian slip proves it. I agree that they should have the Rt Hon, removed and that it should be reinstated, on an individual basis when earned. What amazes me is not just that these MP's have misjudged the public mood, by their trite "It was within the rules" bleatings, they further indicate that they are actually INCAPABLE of interpreting the public mood. and a politician who cannot judge the public mood is about as much use as a handbrake on a canoe. I really do think that this Parliament should be dissolved
Complain about this comment
#55 LippyLippo: Nice to see a bit of common sense.
While I agree with your basic argument entirely, I have to say that my previously expressed confidence in the essential probity of MPs has been badly shaken (and that probably is an understatement). The fact is that not all MPs have been acting in this disreputable way - I think for example (based on hearsay, I admit) that Hillary Benn's total claim amounted to £147. If he and others were not conditioned by decades of following the herd then people like Gove and Blears should have been able to resist as well
Complain about this comment
The UK has a vast history of political distrust and satire, why on earth would someone claiming £100 for a load of lightbulbs suddenly have people walking the streets with pitchfork and flaming torch declaring their faith is shattered beyond anything that's gone before?
People practically expect politicians to be dishonest and distrustful and we like a good moan when they're found out. The horrified reaction from some sections of the media at such things is not only amusing, it's also pretty telling that they never uncovered it themselves. Or perhaps, turned a blind eye to it as well.
Complain about this comment
I won't be voting on June 4th. No party deserves my endorsement. I hope that many other citizens will take a similar decision so that the turn out is profoundly low and serves a severe and chilling rebuke to the politicians.
Complain about this comment
Kentspur #28 - yes, I had much the same discussion with my wife with, it has to be said, much the same result!
Gordont10 #69 - maybe, maybe not. But why are they allowed to claim £400 per month for food. Does their salaray not allow them to be able to afford to eat? One person can only eat so much, no matter where they live. Is it right that someone can claim for dog food? How is that wholly in pursuit of their job as an MP? Is it right that on a basic salary significantly above what the average joe earns they cannot manage to buy two sets of coat hangers? I'm lucky that I earn a good wage by many standards, and I'm incensed. I hate to think what people much less fortunate than me muct be feeling.
When do we get the "none of the above" option on the ballot paper?
Complain about this comment
23 Richard
Parliament is due to sit for 128 days this session, so your estimate of 90 nights is about right.
The time has come not to bury the facts as the PM is now suggesting but to open them to public scrutiny. We don't need outside auditors we need to have all the expenses on the internet where Joe Public can audit them.
Add to that a reduction in MP's at Parliament and we will be moving in the right direction.
Complain about this comment
Nick - despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary you still try to defend the indefensible. It is clearly the view of the public that "they are all at it" and trying to say anything else is laughable. What's worse is that they all know they have been "at it" for years and if it had not been for people asking questions they would never have been found out.
I agree with a previous poster - anyone who utters the words "I acted in accordance with the rules" should be forced to call a by-election.
Complain about this comment
'I am not saying that every "revelation" in recent days has proved MPs to be "on the take"'
Good grief! Just would would it take to convince you that MPs are "on the take"? I think that that's been proven beyond reasonable doubt in The Court Of Public Opinion.
Complain about this comment
I recently came across this most amusing and apposite quotation:
It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged. (G.K. Chesterton).
Complain about this comment
Nice to see Gordon apologising. If he offered to pay back the expenses for his second home (when he already had a free one in Downing Street) and ordered all his MPs also to pay back any "iffy" expense claims, then I might even think he meant it. But I'm not holding my breath.
Complain about this comment
Now remember the embarrassment of senior Tory figures, cabinet ministers, as they lost their seats in 1997? As we thought we had swept all that sleaze away, as we moved away from that growing gap between rich and poor, as we thought things could only get better? 12 years of abject, total failure to live up to what was promised. Not that the signs didn't come early enough. Robin Cook's "ethical foreign policy" only lasted five minutes.
Complain about this comment
Why the need for a new independent body to police future expenses, why can't HMRC do it, they seem to be trusted with the rest of the population.
Complain about this comment
Over the years when MP's pay is reviewed and they are awarded a pay increase, MP's have regularly declined the pay award in order to set a moral example for pay restraint especially in the Public Sector and in negotiations with Trade Unions.
These MP's expences revelations not only dishonours Parliament as a whole, but disgraces MP's ever further for claiming the moral highground regarding pay whilst milking their expences for all its worth.
Not only that, these expences appear in some cases, (according to news reports), to be for items that are not essential for Parliamentary business, but rather for feathering the nest for themselves and partners.
This looks like an example of gross moral and political hypocracy on top of the finacial mismanagement of 'credit crunch'.
Emperor Nero allegedly fiddled whilst Rome burned - Is our government on the fiddle whilst this country goes bust?
Complain about this comment
64. At 12:25pm on 11 May 2009, Laughatthetories wrote:
Sic, Zydeco and yellow,
Thankyou for responding to my comments on the government's record on child poverty. However, for some inexplicable reason, you all failed to address the main question (purely an oversight no doubt):
"Can you list what previous Tory governments have done to tackle this issue and what plans the current 'team' have?"
===
Why not google it?
I also note you did not dispute the arguments put forward by these posters, purely an oversight, no doubt!
Complain about this comment
Yesterday I sent an e-mail to 10 Downing Street suggesting a very simple solution to the allowances problem. Give them tax releif on £150 a day when they are working away from home. That is what I was allowed. Good enough for me,good enough for them.
You can safely bet that any changes to there allowances system will mean that they help themselves to more of our money.
A general election will not help as the same load of low life,the political class,will still be elected.
The whole system is rotten as well as the people running it.
Complain about this comment
#96: Sorry, but that's completely the wrong response. If you don't vote, the same old politicians will get in. Go and vote for one of the fringe parties by all means, but not voting just lets them get away with it.
As for me, I'll be voting Green. I can confidently say that there isn't a single Green Party MP who's been fiddling their expenses.
Complain about this comment
39 Flame Patricia
Yes we could dissolve parliament and call a snap election, Then if we all follow you and Sprezza we could have a BNP government in power in about a month, perhaps with Ukip in opposition, that would leave us all feeling reassured now that the country would be in good hands.
Complain about this comment
This whole mess serves to illustrate how susceptible humans are to taking advantage of circumstances. MPs are no different, I believe they went to Westminster with high ideals and no intention to act this way, but peer pressure will ensure they fall in line with the old hands. Anyone remember Serpico? It takes a rare breed of person to to refuse all such temptation, especially when it's accepted practice by all, even Ministers of State. The one virtuous person then stands alone as a pariah and what chance do they have of reselection. We are all to blame for this, because we allow the situation to continue. How many times have you contacted your MP to express your dissatisfaction. Personally I never have, but intend to do so fron now on. None of the above is not an option, we must all put in a bit of effort to ensure our representatives live up to their job and meet our high expectations.
Complain about this comment
The guilty MPs' are supposed to be educated and yet they are admitting that they don't know right from wrong.
These people are doing nothing short of stealing from their employers,
If I stole from my employers I would face instant dismissal.
Everyone of those MPs' that are guilty of these crimes, yes they ARE crimes
and yes they ARE criminals! should be instantly dismissed without appeal.
Complain about this comment
Nick, I'm all in favour of balance - but I think you give them way too much credit.
I'm sure they'd all love to draw a line in the sand here and now, and "promise" not to be caught with their hand in the till again - but that just isn't good enough.
All MPs who have been "flipping" should be held to account and pay it all back if they can't justify the reason for moving.
And just because thay've sold one property to buy another, does not warrant them additionally claiming for new furniture, plasma screen televisions and barbeques for that new home - what happened to the furniture from their other property. They should all be audited for every item bought costing over £100. And if they can't produce that item from the residence it was bought for, they pay the money back - simple.
And finally, anyone who has sold one flat/home and subsequently bought another, should be paying a significant portion of the profits from that sale back to the taxpayer.
Complain about this comment
Hi Nick - there are some great comments posted here on this blog, just such a shame they're never yours. Like the MP's you have totally missed the point in public anger here. I couldn't give a tinker's cuss whether the rules are being adhered to, or how "honourable" these people think they are. I do care that they think it is reasonable for me to pay to feed them whilst in London, and that claiming for every penny they can get their grubby little mitts on is OK as long as "it's within the rules as they were laid out".
I'm in the "fortunate" posiion of paying about £2k per month in direct taxes. I used to think this money kept pensioners warm, educated the kids in schools, provided well trained doctors to keep me healthy. Now I know it keeps 5 FAT GREEDY AND DESPICABLE MP's fed and watered each month. I sure look forward to seeing my bill for Gordon's dinner on my next payslip.
Wake up and report the facts, then reflect these with current public opinion. We don't care what the rules are, we want RESIGNATIONS. If you can't understand this you might do well to tender your own.
Complain about this comment
Let them have their perks, and in return let them defend jobs, foster industry, guarantee justice, enforce public safety, respect the citizen, promote and defend the nation.
Which means cancel their perks does it not.
Complain about this comment
The Telegraph have been VERY cack-handed in reporting these expenses indiscretions, to the effect of downplaying some of the WORST indiscretions and spicing up some of the most minor misdemeanors.
One shadow cabinet member has been splashed all over the front pages for no more than claiming less than £5 worth of Dog Food, if that's all the dirt on her, was it really worth dragging her name through the dirt.
On the flip side are people like Alastair Darling and Jeff Hoon, 4-time-flippers who hardly got a mention on Friday for switching their 2nd home designations MULTIPLE times in a year.
Then there is the whole Grace and favour + 2nd Homes scandals. There was a followup article about Mr Brown to clarify there was no allegations of wrongdoing over his cleaning bills. Yet no mention whatsoever about the fact the taxpayer has been paying for the upkeep of a THIRD HOME of the Prime Ministers when he has the use of 11 and then 10 Downing Street for the last 12 years!
Like I said, terrible reporting by the telegraph as far as quality goes. Whilst I am glad they brought these to light, they really shouldn't act like a common place tabloid rag with their reporting, and just relay the facts, leaving the public to make up their mind, not sensationalize cases on a whim.
Complain about this comment
flamepatricia 39
I would very much like you to address the post I sent to you on 'Parliaments Reputation Brought Low'. please.
Complain about this comment
Poweromics = People use position and power for their own personal gain, based on poor moral values, self interest and greed.
Poweromics is running rife all around us, with most people in positions of 'power' feeding from the 'trough'. If you want to to see more examples of it, and expose others so the problem will get solved, then take a look at this blog too ...
http://poweromics.blogspot.com/search?q=poweromics
Traditional 'media' is not going to do it for us (due to more Poweromics!), so we need to take responsibility and do it for ourselves.
David Clift
a Future 500 leader
Complain about this comment
69. At 12:30pm on 11 May 2009, gordont10 wrote:
If you look beyond the froth and self righteous indignation, no-one has exactly made a fortune, have they?....
===
Gordon, you must be very well off if GBP1.7 million isn't a fortune to you.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/5293586/Geoff-Hoons-property-empire-built-on-taxpayers-money-MPs-expenses.html
Complain about this comment
What I'm confused about is why MPs in Westminster appear to think they are in such a unique position in having to live in their constituency yet work a large portion of the week in the political epicentre, in this case, London.
There is a simple solution to this problem - the government should buy 650 evenly sized serviced apartments, convenient for westminster. This would have the following benefits:
- The government would only have to lay out the money once for the apartments, rather than repeatedly year after year paying the mortgages on properties for MPs to keep.
- If the price of the property increased, it would be the taxpayer that benefitted, not the MP.
- There would be no doubt over cleaners/furniture/security etc. The flats would be centrally maintained in a consistent fashion, just as easily happens in corporate housing up and down the country.
- The MP would not have to live there- so those lucky enough to have sisters/mothers/lovers with alternative accommodation could do so, they just wouldn't make any money out of it, avoiding allegations of impropriety.
- For those who argue that many MPs actually have the family home in London - if the MP still wishes to buy a family home in London they are welcome to, however it is not down to the taxpayer to fund this and nor do I think MPs should be encouraged to have their base outside of their constituency - being a member of the community is vital to the role.
- There would be no need for any other expense other than travel. Every other employee in the country manages to feed and clothe themselves on their salary - MPs are not disadvantaged by having to eat *expensive* london food as their salaries are consistent and not regionally variable. It is bizaare to think that such basics should be funded by the employer- if so, what is the salary for?
- As soon as an MP lost his/her seat and no longer had a professional reason for requiring accommodation in London during the week, the government could reclaim the housing, preventing extra mortgage/rent payments to those who are no longer employed. The same would hold if MPs were promoted to a post which had a property included as part of the role.
- The furniture in the flat would still belong to the government - there is no other employer who would give employees laptops/phones etc and allow them to keep them when they left the job. This is what allowing MPs to buy sofas/kettles etc amounts to.
MPs may well be slightly underpaid for the role they fulfil, but pretending as though we are faced with a unique employment scenario, the complexities of which can only be overcome by allowing MPs to claim whatever/whenever they like is simply wrong.
Complain about this comment
It's no suprise that an anagram of 'parties' is 'pirates'
I suggest Captain Brown Beard and chums should walk the plank...
Complain about this comment
Even in apology, Prime Minister Brown blames others.
Complain about this comment
Unhappy with your MP have a look at this inland revenue website taxevasionhotline.co.uk
- where there have been blatant abuses of the system regarding non payment of capital gains tax the authorities should act as detailed below:-
"HM Revenue & Customs Tax Evasion Hotline
HMRC is committed to targeting tax evasion. We know some people don't pay their fair share of tax, which is unfair for the rest of us. Now you can help us do something about it.
The Tax Evasion hotline deals with income tax, corporation tax, capital gains tax, inheritance tax, VAT and National Insurance.
The Hotline can take your call on 0800 788 887 (Lines are open Monday to Friday 8am to 8pm, Saturday and Sunday 8am to 4pm), or you can submit a report here.
No information - however trivial it may seem -is too small. It could be the key to stopping fraudulent or criminal activity.
Make a report online now."
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
An apology doesn't cut it I'm afraid. This isn't a case of putting a sticking plaster on a small wound, the expenses system requires open heart surgery.
My recommendation is that an independent body from one of the top four firms of accountants is given 4 weeks to produce a new system of MPs allowances and expenses which is more in keeping with good Corporate Governance and Best Business Practice.
Parliament should be dissolved and an election called immediately upon receipt of the independent report. MPs putting themselves up for election would therefore, by default, be in agreement with the commercial terms under which they become MPs if elected.
This would also afford the constituency associations an opportunity to consider whether their sitting MP is worthy of representing them in Parliament and to deselect those considered unworthy and/or are facing the prospect of an Inland Revenue investigation.
Complain about this comment
isn't it interesting that the politicians have been criticising another "profession" that had self regulations and messed up in the "last few" months? Namely the bankers. What is interesting, you can see a direct link between the bankers' mistakes and the politicians' pockets. The politicians set the regulatory framework whithin which the bankers operated. Removed all the restrictions on loan-to-values, so that they could lend as much as they wanted and push up the house prices. In the meantime, they got the tax payer to pay for their interest payments on their "second" homes and the capital improvements, and "flipped" these homes at a profit (exempt from capital gains tax, since they were in fact their first homes for tax purposes) and then "flipped" the benefit to another home etc.
What we here is a nation of "dealers". Everyone is on the make, for a quick turn. The regulations and the laws, the so called "rules" all allow that. The bankers only oiled the system that the politicians liked and benefited from. Let's not even mention how much the Exchequer made from the whole racket.
None of the above is surprising. But when the politicians started blaming the bankers alone for all of the mess (may be they were worried about the latest house they were about to flip?), that was just bad Karma. Now they are in the same spot.
Complain about this comment
Astonishing - In the real world of commerce invalid expense calims are deemed an act of gross misconduct and potentially a "sackable" offence. With all the furore over "flipping" the focus needs to be in the detail.... Perhaps Blears can expalin or justify why she bought a new TV in March 2004 for some £900 and then when she changed her second home in December 2004, saw fit to buy another TV for £850ish .. cant wait to hear whos fault that one is..
Complain about this comment
On the BBC website today:
'Conservative leader David Cameron says MPs must say sorry over controversial expenses claims, as the focus of leaked claims turns on his own party.'
How about saying sorry AND repaying the monies that were controversial?
Ms Blears yesterday on the BBC:
'The system is wrong. It needs to be changed.'
Knowing that the system was wrong she still went ahead and claimed those expenses that she thought was 'wrong'. Somewhat hypocritical wouldn't you say.
Complain about this comment
The MPs' expenses furore will ultimately result in our paying more for these people long after they cease "work"
The reason? The problem will be solved by an "independent" review body concluding that MPs' salaries are too low (the "expenses" arrangement arose, I believe, in order to pay them more, without it showing on the headline salary bill)
Headline salaries will therefore be increased, in line of course with those of senior executives in the private sector, during this shabby shower's tenure, then they will all benefit, in perpetuity, from the enhanced pensions that salary increase will trigger. Heads they win, tails, we, the public, lose!
Gordon "safe hands" steered the ship onto the rocks, and will get a bonus for it!! He continued to follow the course Thatcher set, and enjoyed the short term benefits the financial sector provided, while taking credit for them. Wealth creation? I think not! Marx and Engels predicted the collapse of the capitalist system, simply not the moment of the collapse. (and they were Champagne socialists too) This lot don't even make any pretence of being socialist.
What say others?
Complain about this comment
Below is a letter i just wrote to my MP.
This is the first time i have ever wrote to my MP, i am hoping that it will be read. I have to say at this point that i am directing this to all MPS in the state of Westminster, it just so happens Mike Hall is my MP and a labour MP at that.
I am 28 yrs old and was 17 when Labour came to power. I am from a working class family that has always voted labour. My mum who still works and is in her late 60's has always voted labour. I saw my mum today and we had a chat and things soon turned to politics.
To say she is disgusted with the behaviour of MP's regarding expenses would be an understatement. "Thieves" she said, "morally corrupt, good for nothing leeches". She has always voted, all through the 80's faced boom and bust but always voted labour.
You have all let her down, recent events have brought into sharp focus the true state of this country. Britain is controlled by a small number of political class in London all on the take, out for themselves just like their friends the bankers. We live in a democracy in name alone. Bonuses and expenses, consultancies, and Lords taking bribes from businesses. No one is punished just word games on the news....and on such a point, the "apology" from Gordon Brown was a joke made of spin and word play. Ive not heard one MP sound contrite and sorry, no humility.
I want a politician who is not motivated by salary or expenses just as i dont want a banker that is motivated by bonuses. I want someone who is motivated by the job, someone who would do the job for minimum wage......would you be a politician for the minimum wage? I doubt it, but millions of us work in horrible jobs for £6 per hour and still have no money at the end of the week because of the taxes and the cost of living. My girlfriend and i have a good education but cannot get a job that pays....maybe we should become politicians?
So what are we to do? Its obvious you will lose the next election and then we will have a bunch of public school elitists in power. Who should i vote for? The banking and expenses scandal has highlighted that you are all the same...so i shall not vote because it is doesn't matter....we live in a de facto dictatorship, the political and banking elite are all the same, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, we are tracked on cameras everywhere we go, our DNA is on databases, and we will have identity cards forced upon us. Have you read 1984?
I digress. So my mother who has voted labour all her life, worked hard jobs all her life turned to me and my girlfriend and told us to leave this country "nothing here for young people anymore" she said. Hopefully in a couple of years i will have emigrated to Australia, just like at least 5 of my friends.
You are all a disgrace. You have let us all down.
Yours sincerely,
A working class man.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
'UKIP if you want to..' We need a BBC Political Editor who is not 'asleep at the switch' over the years these rapacious scoundrels were ripping off the public while a compliant BBC did zip, zilch, nada, nothing to blow the whistle on them.
When will you get back to proper investigative journalism at the Beeb, instead of Auntie suckling on lobby briefings in a symbiotic parasite relationship which does nothing to expose the mendacious 'maximise the claim' culture which has developed ??
Complain about this comment
Suggestions - for starters :-
Ref. Expenses : Establish a hotel for MP's in London . Pay for travel expenses to and from constituency - ie. in accordance with standard business claimables . Pay for constituency office expenses - fixed budget items . Nothing else . No rorting . No doing up of houses . No houses in constituencies - assume the politicians already have a house in the constituency - after all they are supposed to represent the constituency so should be local residents . No second houses . No cars - use public transport like the rest of us . No increase of MP's salaries - they are high enough as it is - and if they grumble about that tell them to get a proper job !
Ref. Politicians : Min. 40 years old , min 10 years real life - proper job - experience - ie. not a political \ union etc. job .
Replace the commons and the lords with :- 1) a house of the representatives - to formulate the bills , 2) a house of the executive - the specialists - to manage the operation of the government and to govern by regulation , 3) a house of the people - to pass or deny - eg. via Internet voting - all bills put forward by the house of the representatives .
Get rid of the judicial precedent system and absorb it into the house of the executive - if a law needs interpretation it is up to the executive to interpret it .
Complain about this comment
119. At 1:14pm on 11 May 2009, Politikate
I entirely agree with you.
We have just such an apartment block, currently being built in London, which will be available from August 2012. It's called the Olympics atheletes village. That would fit the bill nicely.
As to MPs being able to claim GBP400 for food each month, even when Parliament is not in session, it is even more discraceful that it first appears.
MPs also have the luxury of heavily-subsidised restaurants at the Houses of Parliament. Subsidised to the tune of GBP5.4 million by us last year
Complain about this comment
#78 Yes in theory the Queen can dissolve parliament and call an election over the head of the PM. It's very unlikely that she would do so and certainly not over this.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
You wrote "Nor do I believe that even the worst practices revealed in the past few days justify the corrosive cynicism of the "I told you so... they're all it... they're all the same" crowd."
And just why not?
Don't you really believe that for every "revelation of dodginess" that escapes "out into the open" there are dozens, if not hundreds, more swept under various carpets of political convenience? "Well, I think we'll just keep quite about that one, old chap. It would only cause a stink if it got out!"
It's the very same nonsense as we get from the bankers. I refer to the Nat West story about 'impartial' advisors - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/moneybox/8041694.stm
Don't these people realise that spin and hype neither builds, nor re-builds, trust? If politicians (or bankers) want to regain the trust of the people, they need to prove themselves as worthy of it. Not in sound-bites and photo-opportunities but in their day to day behaviour over a significant period of time, because - as my mother would have put it - handsome is as handsome does.
We don't need whizz-kids, or smartie-pants. We need wise, just, well balanced, reasonable, trustworthy MPs. And if they are unable to prove themselves to be that, then they - just like bankers who have turned out not have the great abilities they claimed to - should walk.
Or perhaps, on reflection, we need some sort of piece-rate / performance related pay system for them. No salaries, just X quid for a parliamentary question, Y quid for a committee attendance, Z quid for whatever.
I bet they would all start working their butts off for the sake of the people then!
Complain about this comment
#78: The monarch can dissolve Parliament, or prorogue it (suspend its proceedings without dissolution). See http://www.royal.gov.uk/MonarchUK/QueenandGovernment/QueeninParliament.aspx
In fact only the Queen can do that, and the PM has to ask her to prorogue Parliament if he would like it done, to call an election for example.
If the Queen were to do it without being asked it would undoubtedly be seen as a departure from established practice, and would have republicans in uproar. It would be deliciously ironic though that a hereditary head of state calls the elected representatives to account.
Complain about this comment
Why didn't you break this story?
Complain about this comment
The stupidity of the situation is two-fold.
first and foremost:
essentially most MP's with there "meagre" 64k a year salary arent actually feeling it are they. They are claiming expenses back to support there lifestyle. some of the worst culprits such as Jaqui Smith are actually in the position where by there personal expenditure on essentials and those things needed to live doesn't cost them a penny. making there salary every year a "bonus".
how many people get to work all year long and not incure any relative costs. get paid to come to work. get paid to renovate your house get paid to watch telly. i mean if that happened to everyone then we'd all feel better about going to work. similarly for corporations. how would you feel paying a PA or secretary 25k a year and THEN having to fork up 100k worth of expenses.
Secondly: every single MP that has been caught out has had the gaul to ADMIT openly the have claimed back the money which they pilfered from the tax payers pocket and will stand there on the news saying "the systems wrong, it should have been changed years ago" anyone with a moral sense above the level of a neandethal should realise that this is wrong, and heres a nugget of information " DO NOT TAKE ADVANTAGE OF IT"
Complain about this comment
In addition to a previous rant....... I was in the armed services many years ago, and remember once, seeing notice of a Court Martial decision made upon an excessive travel claim made by an officer. At this remove, the best I can remember is that it was a Squadron Leader or Wing Commander, who overclaimed by £45. Decision? Cashiered, lost pension. Strike command Headquarters, High Wycombe, mid-late 70's (should be obtainable under FOI)
I don't think an apology and repayment were offered as an option. (that was an attempt at irony!) Is an apology and repayment enough now?
He was probably more use to the public than the expenses collectors we see now on our screens.
Complain about this comment
As someone who has always had faith in our democracy and Parliamentary system I am left totally numbed by the revelations. What has shocked me more than anything else is that so many of our senior MPs, ministers and shadow ministers do not know the difference between right and wrong. What they have done is wrong, plain and simple. Within the rules, perhaps, but still morally wrong.
Having voted in every election for for over 30 years, I will not enter a polling station for any election until this matter is resolved. Perhaps then we can elect some MPs who DO have some personal morals.
Complain about this comment
The damage this issue has done to the morale of the average hard working and honest public sector employee is incalculable. The manifest failure of parliament to self-regulate and apply a similar code of ethics to that it expects to operate in other areas of public life is simply breathtaking.
The apologies we have heard so far are worthless - only swift and effective action to change the current system has any hope of restoring some faith in our elected representatives, all of whom knew this covert exploitation of the system was going on.
Complain about this comment
Well the Naughty step is getting a bit crowded with all these reports.
The MP's should be reminded of how people outside the Westminster bubble live, the constant struggle to pay the mortgage, utility bills and concil tax.
The pensioners whose taxes are being used to subsidise their greedy MP's when the pensioners cannot afford to heat their homes. The Prime Minister is claiming more for a cleaner than a pensioners receives on the basic state pension.
The hardworking families whose lives are made a misery by the inefficiency of the tax credits system.
Not for any of these people money for mock tudor beams, expensive pot plants or removal of their mole hills from their back garden - these people are just struggling to exist.
But all our MP's can say is "it was within the rules" they have no shame - and now it would appear the MP's have been warned against appearing too contrite by the PLP.
They are out of touch and unfit for office - if there was any justice the parties would remove the whip from and deselect offending MP's but there are sadly no longer any standards in public life.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
I am not at all clear by your use of the term "Parliamentary Reform". Do you mean that Parliament is about to be reformed so that we have fewer greedy MPs, or do you instead mean, there will be reforms of the system of allowances to avoid abuse by the aforesaid, MPs? In any event, you are so far behind the curve of public opinion, that it probably doesn't matter what you think or say.
What I find most worrying about the low level of importance that you attach to the topic is the fact that you also work for an organisation that has in the past been subjected to criticism for poor use of public funds. Is it the case that you are simply in a glass house and are therefore wary about throwing stones?
I really would appreciate it if you could grow some cojones and then tear into these snivelling apologies to the extent that you get a full and honest apology from each and every one of the senior members of the parties involved with a commitment to sack the offenders.
#64 Yourhavingalaugh
The only effective way to address poverty is to return to lower levels of unemployment, lower levels of tax and greater numbers of children living within a two parent family. Having stated this, I am unable to see the relevance of your question to this topic.
Cheers
Complain about this comment
do the leaders of these parties believe a smarmy sorry will forgive years of public funds being miss-apropriated by MP's lining their own pockets claiming things like dog food, nappies etc etc.
personaly i would bring back the stocks and place them into them as punishment those who claimed hundreds of pounds for personal living etc should be forced to repay every penny with interest and removed from public office. ooops that would cause a general election and this government wouldnt allow that.
all public funds should be open to review from an independent organisation that owes nothing to any political party.
Complain about this comment
I realy do not see the problem or the need for a another body to judge their expenses. The inland revenue has beed deciding for a long time what constitutes a legitimate business expense.
All MPs have to do, is to abide by the taxmans guidance which should apply to all of us.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
I love to disagree with you, I really do.
However, I see this story almost as a declaration of all-out war by the newspapers on Parliament. The story now has very little to do with investigation. Many of us - who are not party biased - have been absolutely appalled at how utter and complete the misrepresentation has been in this latest round of "exclusives".
The system needs changed - I am not new to the game of saying it should change. The sad part is that the newspapers - a grubby bunch even to people who think they know how grubby they are - are now trying to set the moral high ground by being even more immoral.
I hope parliament becomes as "vindictive" as they are portrayed and uses every tool at it's disposal to hit back. I distrust the media in recent times even more than our representatives. And I don't particularly trust them, either.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Nick Robinson and the rest of the lobby reporters are part of the same cosy conspiracy - a club of back-scratchers keeping the merry-go-round going of expenses, pensions and exchanges of Westminster gossip between insiders ("a senior source has told me"). Sod the poor bloody taxpayer. Trebles all round.
No wonder Nick is bleating about MP's being "honorable." I don't recall him ever unearthing anything like this in the past, it would have all been swept under the carpet as somehow not worth reporting, if the BBC had received the information.
The Telegraph deserves a medal for revealing in stark and grisly detail how our MPs are money-grubbing and self-deluded.
Nick and his ilk have failed to do their jobs. They should look at themselves for once.
Complain about this comment
I've read the article in the Guardian written by the PM's sister in law. All very jokey. About how her bruv in law doesn't keep his flat clean. It's nothing more than a diversion. She abjectly fails to question whether this is a legitimate expense. Why should the taxpayer be paying for his char. Why don't you ask that question Mr Robinson? I don't see anything in the Green Book which permits MP's to claim for their cleaning lady. It's a total piss take.
Complain about this comment
True contrition requires a an acknowledgement of wrong doing, a purpose of admentment and an act of restitution.
Complain about this comment
1. In this case is it not true that the details of who spent what were to be partially hidden, e.g. their names - i.e. preventing accountability? Which entirely justifies the publication of these leaked versions. The governments plan was to hide this for purely political reasons - so they deserve all the flack they get.
2. Do we have to pay to get the 'best people' to run our society. Shouldn't public office be something that the right people accept is a service that they are NOT paid top dollar for - else you get people who are gready... Um.
3. Flipping a 'home', refurbishing, then selling and going on to the next at public expense is greed and not a valid expense.
4. Most of these problems would be solved by having a block of overnight flats, no purchase, furnishing, cleaning or security issues - and the economies of scale too.
5. MP's should NOT be able to make their own rules for expenses, saleries or pensions!
You really can't take advantage of expenses like SOME of them have been doing and then complain about bad publicity and then just make up your own rules again... unless of course you happen to be an MP. Honorable - apparently not many of them really are.
Complain about this comment
I have to agree with the person who suggested that those who had taken the most are now being allowed to hide behind Tory petfood and labour tampons.
And I have no doubt the BBC is intent on nice short pieces on the whole thing just in case someone mention A Darling andd H Blears too often.
On the hanging theme with apologies to Hillaire Belloc , purely because my memory lets me down,
Here richly , with ridiculous display , The politicians corpse was laid away.
While all of his acquaintance jeered and slanged,
I wept, for I had longed to see him Hanged!
Complain about this comment
MPs do not govern. The government governs. I dont think the BBC has any credentials to pass judgement on MPs. I think the BBC should keep its opinions to itself.
Complain about this comment
Oh what a frenzy the media has managed to stir up on here and in the public minds about MPs expenses, how the Labour Government must be rubbing its hands knowing how conveniently they are being let off the hook. Jaqui Smith must be over the moon with glee.
This is my last attempt to put forward another view.
I ask this:-
I am a young person who has worked hard and saved, I have taken nothing on credit and asked no one for anything, I pay my taxes. However there are people out there in the public who have taken loans they could not afford, have saved for nothing, lived on credit and have helped to cause the credit bubble we are now in. There are those on benefits who have cheated the system. They have now along with the Government caused me to gain nothing on my savings, I will probably have to work till I am 7O to pay Government debt. There was plenty of warning that a credit bubble was about to happen. The public did not care they went on spending anyway. My tax money was used to bail all these people out, while I who have done nothing wrong suffer for it. How is this situation any different from MPs. These are now the very public who cry they have been wronged. This is the very public who did not care about moral issues they still kept voting for Labour to fund their spend culture.
The politicians are not the only ones who need to exam their conscience I suggest. Perhaps if the public stopped letting the media and the Government leading them by the nose we may see some changes on the real problems facing this country.
Please do not give me the one about they should know better because we elect them and they are in a position of trust, because parents are a a position of trust for their children and they have still mortgaged our future.
Complain about this comment
A few of the long snouted culprits have actually committed fraud. They must be seen to be prosecuted and punished in the same way that any member of the electorate would be prosecuted and punished for such
conduct.
Complain about this comment
This year Parliament will sit for just 128 days, less than half of one year, and the lowest figure since 1979.
So why the need for a full-time 'Second Home' and it's associated 'expenses'?
Each MP is paid around £250,000 salary & 'expenses' per annum.
Each MP has 78 days paid holiday per year.
Need I go on?
Until an external audit panel comprising solely of members of the public-only is formed, no one will ever believe any excuses trotted out by MPs about expenses.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Dear Nick,
Mass-corruption on a grand scale? Tax avoidance and false accounting? Oh how I wish I could become a MP and live such a grand lifestyle.
The system is fine Nick as it already is, you just have to publish all the claims at the end of each month to see how quickly this legitimate thieving dies down.
Easy init?
Xxxx
2010 (Or this June)
Complain about this comment
119. At 1:14pm on 11 May 2009, Politikate wrote:
What I'm confused about is why MPs in Westminster appear to think they are in such a unique position in having to live in their constituency yet work a large portion of the week in the political epicentre, in this case, London.
Or in Margaret Moran's case Southampton!!
Complain about this comment
May I make a suggestion : There is a fabulous old building that they could use - just down at the end of Lower Thames St. - Petty Wales St. - down near the bridge - in EC3 . It's got a beautiful view of the Thames and quite a bit of history . I'm sure with a bit of doing up they could get sufficient apartments out of it . It's close to Parliament and they would feel quite at home there .
Complain about this comment
Nick
If Gordon Brown is so sure that these expenses claims were "mistakes", presumably all of these "mistakes" will be rectified by payments being returned?
If this is not the case then will HM Revenue and Customs be increasing MP's tax bills by charging for Benefits in Kind which is what happens to the rest of us if our employers pay for personal bills on our behalf?
Complain about this comment
Whilst I understand some peoples emotions, surely all can see that this is not a PARTY issue? With all the main parties having an almost equal level of guilt, the problem must surely be across all parties.
Unless someone can tell me otherwise, what exactly is wrong with every MP who has been exposed, honourably standing down and letting the electorate decide? Is not the judgement by ones fellow man the purest form of justice?
If I may paraphrase Shakespeare, "There is something rotten in the state of UK" Decency and so called honour would be well served if those accused stood down and put themselves up for re-election. Anyone not re-elected does not have the support of the public and should repay any "Questionable" expenses. Should that be too complicated, then why do the party leaders tell those who have been called into question to stand down. That would go a long way to restore faith would it not?
One thing is for sure, papering over the cracks is not going to do it. Our so called "Leaders" need to do something very very positive indeed.
Complain about this comment
I am reminded of an old, but today very relevant remark made many years ago:
'A shiver passed along both front benches looking for a spine to run up'.
Can these parasites be prosecuted?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Since the Telegraph's articles about expenses, we now know what, I think, we all knew:- that MPs are not going to accept just £70K per year pay. All other avenues available to them they will exploit.
How much of their day do they devote to their inventive way of claiming? It really must take an exhorbitant amount of their day, what with filling in the forms and then following up the complaints with letters. So much for day to day politics.
As for the Daily Telegraph and any other journalist - you are all loving this. You've found the MPs fingers in the cookie jar and you all want to slam the lid down. However, it is equally well known that journalists have an ample expense account which is exploited to its fullest too. I'm also sure that the fat cats in business are also cashing in on what they can get. Capitalism exposes the greed of this type of ambitious person - if someone else is getting something that they are not, they'll make damn sure they get it too. And so, their self-importance slowly, but surely, drags this country to its knees.
Complain about this comment
I know simplicity is not something that MPs like, but the answer to their problem is
1. Build a new block of flats (2 & 3 bed - dependent on family size) for all MPs to stay in. They've already had new offices.
2. Furnish all rooms the same.
3. Pay for travel to and from London - have a fixed budget for food, etc. They can also pay towards having their flats cleaned.
4. If they don't want to stay in the flats - mistresses, etc - then pay for their own billets, out of their own pockets. As in any democracy, they should have a choice.
5. Unnecessary breakages, etc - including destruction of flats due to wild political parties, especially for those in power too long - should be charged to the MP concerned.
6. Only one toilet seat breakage charged each year.
And, the beauty of it is, that the apartments would still belong to the public. That way we can throw them out of their lovely apartments every time an election comes round. Then they'd have some sympathy for the rest of us - they'd finally know what it was like to lose their job and be evicted from their home.
Complain about this comment
Now that Gordon Brown has learned to say "sorry" he is throwing the word around all over the place. It's too easy to say sorry. Buying a house, doing it up at our expense and then selling it (pocketing the difference) smacks of fraud. Send the Fraud Squad in to investigate. Gordon B has promised to take action ... I wonder how much white wash that will involve and will it be claimed back in expenses.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Nick, the real damage caused by MPs' consistently shabby behaviour concerning expenses is not to themselves but to Parliament itself: the danger is that at the next general election, a significant percentage of the electorate, who believe that "all MPs are at it", will simply not bother to vote at all, rather than vote for smaller, fringe or extremist parties.
Unfortunately, statistical analysis of voting patterns at recent general elections has demonstrated that a low turnout tends to favour the Labour party above all others.
Complain about this comment
honourable
adjective
1. worthy of being honored; entitled to honor and respect;
2. adhering to ethical and moral principles;
Nick, according to this dictionary definition of "honourable" is a label that can be attached to no MP who has followed the letter of the law and not the moral and ethical principles. Our politicians are in no way worthy of being honoured and quite frankly the lack of respect being shown for the people of this country shows that they are not worthy of it in return.
I am not just talking about the expenses issue (though it angers me) I am talking about the bickering, the party spinning and the point scoring. The way things are (including the major parties at least) is all about beating the other party not about serving the people. What a shambles our democracy is.
On a side note: can you clarify that if the MP's expenses are audited by an outside body whether they will then be exempt from FOI? If so this is a scandal. Also how much are we going to have to pay for this outside body to babysit our leaders?
We need leaders of integrity
Complain about this comment
It's so disappointing and worrying.
The Credit crunch-Bank crash was bad enough...it was always a question of ethics and even morality...and the economic fall out began there, and not in some arcane technical misattribution of the correct price of risk; the effects invariably follow the cause, and a kind of collective ethical squalor was the real spring from which all else followed.
Likewise with Parliament---the system is rotten and corrupt and beyond defence, but the way MPs gamed it, for even greater advantage, is even worse. And 'not me Guv' isn't much of a distance when those pleading a degree of innocence could not have been unaware of the general stink.
The real danger of course comes in the phrase; "That's it I'm voting BNP/not voting/..." and so on. The lessons of History show what happens when an economic crash meets weak Governmental leadership---and when discredited ruling classes fail to address the reality of public anger and unrest.
Here we have the two things co-inciding together and as a result an increasingly threatening political climate.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Honourable? No more! Is that a Question, or a Statement of FACT, for
I wonder if Cameron will demand at PMQ's this Wednesday for an immediate General Election has he has been doing now for a number of Week's, while knowing full well that he along with his Party as well as within both Labour and the Lib-Dems we will no doubt also see a heavy lost of "Old Boy" Seats whenever a General Election is finally called [ The sooner the better, if ONLY for the Voters themselves.].
Whenever I watch PMQ time I am instantly reminded of the T.V. Series Only Fools and Horses, for Cameron comes over as a Pupil from the Del - Boy School of Charm with the looks of saying "We are ALL Millionaire NOW," while Brown acts like Rodney [ Dave to you and me ], and Uncle Albert is the Speaker, while the rest of the onlookers sitting on the Benches make up the regulars of the Nags Head.
If only the Ripping - Off, and Milking of the Tax-Payer Money was as FUNNY to the Public, as it has been to ALL Politicians for now over many Years, then you would be onto a Winner. Lovely - Jubbly for ALL in the driving Seat of Power and Control "only".
Complain about this comment
Is the verdict in yet from the Court of Public Opinion? Will Ms Harman accept her well-deserved punishment along with all the others or is she to lodge an appeal? Or does she think that Parliament, being we are told supreme, is above the jurisdiction of that particular court?
Complain about this comment
Nick. Can you explain something for me. My (English) regional newspaper in reporting the latest M.P.'s expenses indiscretions led with those of the Sinn Fein "M.P.s" and their two or three in a bed flat sharing but each charging what estate agents consider the full rent. Have you and all those drawing up news bulletins and "commenting" (I struggle with the phrase "reporting" when thinking of the BBC and U.K. politics because there always seems to be an agenda) overlooked Sinn Fein. I suppose with their allowances in N.I. as well it all amounts to a tidy overall "income" in any one year. Now there is an idea for some investigative reporting by you or someone at the BBC. Oh hold on! Republicans are treated with the same kid gloves as adherents of the religion of peace at the BBC, so I had better not hold my breath!
Complain about this comment
That's an unfair, 'Westminster' way of characterising things. According to the the Wikipedia page on the D'Hondt method (and with an accompanying citation), "This system is less proportional than the other popular divisor method, Sainte-Laguë, because D'Hondt slightly favors large parties and coalitions over scattered small parties. [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]
A fairer characterisation would be to say that the Westminster system of first-past-the-post maximises the chances of the largest parties.
Complain about this comment
Dear Nick
SMALL BEER
I'm not justifying anyone plating fast and loose with my taxes, but to-date I'm starting to see a trend forming.
So far I can't help thinking that in THE COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION the activities of Conservative members (so far) look like SMALL BEER compared to Labours'. Non, in my opinion, compare with alleged actions messrs Smith, Blears, Hoon and McNumty.
As for David Willetts all I can say is well done in getting 25 light-bulbs changed for £100. I seem to remember that last year, or perhaps the year before, the BBC reported that it cost about £300 to get ONE light-bulb changed in one of Labour's PFI hospitals. That's real Conservative cost saving in action. I hope the cost of the bulbs was included.
When comparing the two parties, lets face it we expect the Conservatives (to a man, sorry person!!!) to have a good accountant/finance wizard.
Labour however is the party of the people - fighting for the working man. Blair said so. Brown says so. Blair said that Labour "must be whiter than white."
So what do we have now? The whiter than white party leading the way in expenses sleaze.
Such a pity such ambitions for the people in 1997 have foundered on the personal ambitions of a few greedy people.
Complain about this comment
Absolutely agree with this.
It reminds me of the concept of 'integrity testing' - set up a situation where people could cheat if they wanted to, then see who has enough 'integrity' to resist the temptation.
(Some) MPs have failed miserably.
Complain about this comment
As I can't imagine there being a single MP who will step out and say "I had no idea what was going on" then the lot of them in parliament have proved to be dishonourable in every regard.
There are many hard workers in this country who do more things for this country than our supposed elected representatives though I'm sure they would disagree and what do most of those hard workers get - Far less than these greedy politicians who claim for everything they can get their hands on. It seems that the people who really matter, who make up the majority of this country are considered to be the residue at the bottom of the bucket by MPs. We live our everyday lives struggling to get by with what we have, having to pay everything out of our pockets and on top of that we have to pay for everything for the politicians too because apparently, their salaries (even though they're in the top rankings of high earners in this country) aren't enough to live on.
I'm fed up of the lines "I did nothing wrong" and "What I did was entirely within the rules". MPs have no ethics and morals, they're so above the people they're supposed to represent that looking down must be very painful for them. Don't worry, the taxpayers can easily afford to sort those problems out too. After all, we're supposed to be made of money according to Labour. Highest debt in decades and supposedly we're in the best possible position to get ourselves out of this mess too, I'd like to know what documents and numbers these people look at.
What annoys me is that most of them can't acknowledge any wrongdoing and those in power who constantly tell you that they understand what the average person is facing in these difficult times are out using our money (I'd almost be prepared to call it stealing and what punishment do these criminals get? - nothing, because rules don't apply to them in their little world) for things that the average person gets no help towards.
Considering what our PM has done to this country and mentioning the certain quotes "I will do my utmost" and "No time for a novice". I ask these questions - Doing his utmost to what? If our PM is the expert, would we be better off with a novice?
I feel that the word Labour in the Labour party has lost all meaning, this party is so beyond representing the normal workers of this country now that they should give up calling themselves Labour completely.
I consider these acts by the politicians to be on the verge of treason against their country and people. I can't think of a worse crime for the top representatives of this country. We've lost the democratic ideals this country once had, all the politicians are as bad as each other and I even consider this country to be on the verge of dictatorship status. Democracy only works when you feel your voice counts, it's been many years since I actually thought that my voice mattered in this country.
I agree that we may as well just dissolve parliament, the only thing upsetting MPs is that they finally got caught out. Now all reforms are going to do is to make sure that the public can't find out what's going on while the MPs continue to live it up while being audited by people who are probably just as corrupt as they are.
If politicians truly want reform, they should agree to being paid £20,000 per year, be entitled to standard claims such as travel and being given some allowance for staying away from home, etc. Then let them see what it's like to be closer to the average person in this country. The way I see it, we'd be better off building a cheap hotel near Westminster, make enough rooms available then make all MPs who need somewhere to stay when in Westminster stay at this hotel with basic facilities provided (like a Travel Lodge/Travel Inn). That way they don't need second home allowances.
Whatever happened to 'Power to the People'?
Complain about this comment
I heard Peter Oborne on the radio earlier and I endorse everything he said. There should be arrests, resignations, by-elections and the Speaker's apology and subsequent departure.
My chief anxiety is that this shaming of many MPs will result in the BNP polling extremely well in the forthcoming European elections and thereby acquiring a patina of respectability that their despicable and pernicious views don't deserve.
The Dishonourable Members' greed, self interest and feeble protests of innocence are emblematic of English culture these days. I despair, I really do!
Complain about this comment
There are no real surprises here. Given the number of lawyers in Parliament and their attitude to laws / rules, of course ways around the intent of the rules will be found. It is a little disappointing that these same lawyers were apparently unable to draft more watertight rules for themselves.
I don't believe that "honour" will be enshrined in any rules drafted by MPs themselves. We of course need an independent set of new rules to be defined and an independent group to control the execution of them, surely not beyond the "Mother of Parliaments". And openness too... in case they should forget.
Complain about this comment
If I hear the justification 'within the rules' one more time I will be projectiley unwell. For goodness sake who designed the rules and is it not true that Sir Fred's pension outrage was also 'within the rules' and so is tax avoidance neither of which has found the moral highground recently in the House. Capital Gains Tax avoidance has already been given an airing but what about Income Tax on expenses which seem no different to me from benefits in kind and on which the rest of have to pay. The food allowance for example seems no different to me from the old luncheon vouchers scheme which as I recall foundered on tax complications. Can someone please ask the question.
Complain about this comment
Sorry to keep you waiting for my latest apology. Now that I've started saying sorry, I don't seem to be able to stop, do I?
I am sorry to have to say that I am sorry to be having to say that I am saying sorry for having to say sorry again about being sorry about chaps being caught with their fingers in the till again here in the Palace of Allowances.
You know, I'm often asked how we honourable chaps can justify having two parliaments for Scotland. The one at Westminster seems superfluous, ordinary people say to me. But ordinary people don't qualify for extraordinary second-homes allowances with all the trimmings, do you?
Sorry, I can't sit here apologising all day to you dishonourables. I've got an expensive claim to submit. Sorry, I mean an expenses claim. Sorry about that little mistake, and all the other little mistakes. Oh, all right. I'm sorry about the big ones too, on behalf of ALL parties, not least those that haven't been making these mistakes and haven't asked me to apologise for them, for which I'm definitely not apologising . . . until I start blushing. Drat it. There I go again. Where's my make-up?
Complain about this comment
Well Nick, you started off with an all too common caveat "I'm not saying there are no honourable members, there are many". What evidence can you provide to prove that statement? From what the public sees, we don't mix in your elevated circles, ever man Jack and woman Jill of them knew what was going on and none had the strength of character to stand up in the house and blow the whistle loud and clear....they were either filling their own mess tins or were too frit to rock the boat. They failed, both individually and collectively, to honour the oath they took and in their duty to their constituents. It seems that it is virtually impossible to find 650+ honourable men and women to represent the people. We have to reduce their numbers...to say 200 and demand a higher calibre of aspirants for the privilege of being an MP.
Now, they must not be allowed to walk away when they leave or are kicked out of office with their ill-gotten gains intact...like the bankers have. We need some urgent legislation to ensure that they can't cash in their property portfolios without paying back what they gained by fraudulent means. The so-called independent audit is a non-starter..it will consist of a group of lawyers and accountants who specialise in finding loopholes to circumvent rules and the law.
Parliament must be purged of dishonest members together with the men in tights, the serjant of arms and all the other pantomime characters.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Would Brown have apologised this morning if Cameron hadn't done so?
Complain about this comment
Now they have been exposed, the bleating 'apologies' start to flood in.
The only apology worth listening to, however, is the one that adds "and all expenses claimed by me that were not wholly essential for me to carry out my duties and responsibilities as an MP will be repaid within 3 months".
Repayments not made in that time frame should be subject to further, professional investigation with the intention of bringing prosecutions where the "wholly essential" criterion is not met.
The guilty cannot be allowed to 'weasel' their way out of their conscious, deliberate exploitations and frauds simply for 'agreeing' to the introduction of a new system for claiming expenses that are essentially incurred in the course of carrying out their duties.
John C.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Nick
I agree whole heartedly with so many other posts.
It is not for you to judge. Just present the facts without the spin that you and the media seem to continually criticise of everybody else. We do not need or find acceptable your flavour on the news.
Complain about this comment
It seems to me that Parliamentarians are less concerned about recovering or retaining my trust as Honourable Members than they are about saving their own thick skins.
Unless/until Parliament is dissolved and each and every aspiring politician has to pitch for a job, I fail to see any meaningful response emerging from any of the political parties right now. It's the same old story - them and us.
We seem to be on the receiving end of institutional daylight robbery with no justice in sight. What in heaven's name does it take for democracy to be restored here? The problem is compounded by Gordon Brown's singular lack of decency, statemanship and, above all, moral fibre. A greater man would have by now dissolved Parliament, called a General Election and returned power to the people.
Not so Brown; a political gangster with neither a mandate from his Party nor the people of this country, he'll not relinquish power that easily. Brown seized power illegitimately and now it will have to be seized from him. I'm not sure Mr Cameron has twigged this state of affairs yet.
Complain about this comment
I cringed when I saw the PM appologising" events of the last few day's " he said there has being a systematic abuse of Tax-payers money for years. Politicians are scared that fringe party's might gain power as a result of this abuse. Damm Right they will. Until the cosy Three party system is broken up forever, nothing will ever change. I for one will vote for anyone but a sponger put on a Party list for European Elections, from the established partys.If the establish party's wish to keep their core support they should sack the dishonerable members straight away.
Complain about this comment
Why can't the MP use their salary to pay for any expenses construed to be non-official expenses i.e. anything unrelated to their official roles/ activities?
I pay for my own food using my salary.
Complain about this comment
It's all good and well saying dissolve government but it would be pointless. All the political parties are at it, nobody would be worth voting for. If this was some person working for a little bit on the side they would be strung up and be hammered. These monkeys, and that's monkeys from all political backgrounds, are quick enough to come out and say sorry when its all a bit to late. Anyone can say that. I doubt they would be saying anything if all this didn't come out. I have never known such a bunch of self serving pigs like the modern day politician. People with three homes and anything else they can get their hands on. There are people in this country struggling to survive on minimum wage, living from one pay to the next and these pigs struggle with their wages and perks and sometimes second jobs "as so called directors or chumped up speakers".
Complain about this comment
I read that our friend Lord Peter Mandelson, upon resigning his seat as MP for Hartlepool, quite legitimately, within the rules, claimed monies to refurbish the property he owned within the constituency, before the by election was held.
Does anyone know, if on selling this property, Capital Gains Tax was paid.
Complain about this comment
Lucky your apoplectic correspondents don't live in Italy - the corruption of politics there is on a scale that makes the Westminster expenses row look unbelievably petty.
Lets not get too carried away- many jobs and industries have a long and dishonourable tradition of expense fiddles being 'accepted practice' - I would be interested to know if the Daily Telegraph plans similar revelations about journalist's expenses any time soon...
For most ordinary mortals, howevr, the taxman provides the greatest control on what can be claimed as a legitimate business expense. Seems MPs viewed the 20K second home 'allowance' as just that - an allowance they were entitled to, not a maximum claimable amount. Why are they not taxed on anything that does not fall within normal HMRC guidelines on legitimate business expense?
I agree this mess needs clearing up and a proper set of guidelines, controls and audit put in place. How about outsourcing it to a professional expense management company?
But it doesnt shake my faith in politicians or democracy - actually I do think MPs are underpaid for what they do and we would be better off with giving them all an additional 20K in salary if as a result we got a better class of MP.
Complain about this comment
A bold Prime Minister, who's prime concern was the well-being of the country, could lance this boil in three simple steps:
1. Publish the full and uncensored official details of all MPs expenses forthwith.
2. Declare a General Election for 4 weeks hence. (Plenty enough time for the public to evaluate their MPs expenses and see whether they - and their party - deserve re-selection and/or re-election).
3. Hand over the matter of MPs pay and expenses to an independent body to come up with a new system of expenses/allowances within 4 weeks to be applied in the new Parliament (4 weeks is plenty of time: its not rocket science).
If a course like this was adopted, then within less than two months Parliament would be purged of the worst offenders and will have regained its legitimacy in the eyes of the public. And, importantly, the new government of the day could get down to the serious business of governing at this time of economic crisis.
Alas, as mentioned above, this depends on the country having a 'bold' PM who's prime concern was the well-being of the country.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
The fact that these MPs think they can stay in power after this merely proves how arrogant they are. We've been conned and ripped off - the only solution is to have an election. Let the taxpayers decided who has the right to sit in Parliament. Let's also not forget the House of Lords too....they must be grateful for all these revelations distracting us from their shenanigans!
Complain about this comment
Given the level of concern, might I suggest that some of you do as I've taken to doing with politicians?
On the premise that most politicians assume that "matters will soon blow over" and "most people aren't that bothered [about anything]" which is born out by "I haven't had THAT many complaints" so it has to be "a conspiracy carried out by the [Labour]/[Tory] press", I now e-mail my complaints to the Councillor, MP or Minister concerned and follow it up with a short letter.
There's nothing better than a bulging mailbag or overflowing inbox to bring home to politicians just how concerned the voters are.
Complain about this comment
Nick, Parliament should be dissolved forthwith. Members of all political parties now need to be held to account by their paymasters, the electorate. There are MPs of all political parties who should hang their heads in shame and resign. However as they, by their own actions, are not honourable then the electorate should be given the chance to sack them.
The danger is that the electorate, frustrated, will use the European elections to vote for extremist parties in reaction to the excess of the body politic. We need a General election now , for the good of democracy.
Complain about this comment
Im so angry with mps tripping off the same reply 'its within the rules' they have abused a system with their greed and to think they believe the solutIt does not take away the fact that they have been feathering their nests for years with british taxpayers money. How can we ever believe anything they say again. I for one most certainly will be changing channels everytime I see a politician on television. They are supposed to be honest and integral men and women and their greed has lost that status in my eyes. How many other areas of public sectors are being abused, how many others have got their snouts in the trough. We are paying for greedy bankers, greedy politicians and the only way to make retribution is to pay the money back, why should we suffer because your avarice overtook the reasons you became an mp. You are not that important that you need to hire aircraft at our expense or big cars and the rest.
Complain about this comment
Gordon Brown married his wife Sarah in 2000. His expenses claims detailed in the DT were for the years 2005-2006 and 2006-2007, during which time Gordon was a married man, living in not only his constituency house, but also either No.10 and No.11. He was not some harried domestically-challenged bachelor as his sister in law misleadingly tries to portray him.
Why are you posting links to the Guardian Nick? This the only newspaper you know of?
Complain about this comment
The justification "it was within the rules" is similar to the defence of "I was only obeying orders" used at Nuremberg. It doesn't work if the rules, or the orders, are themselves morally unacceptable. We hanged those who used the "orders" defence at Nuremberg.
Complain about this comment
Isn't it amazing that with all the endless revelations about the expenses of politicians from all three traditional parties, running into huge sums of money, the only politician Nick Robinson chooses to name in his blog is one who was from a small party, but who is now long gone because that party isn't afraid to deal with people who get into trouble with their expenses, very firmly.
Picking on a smaller party which has dealt with the expenses issue sensibly and has no major problem in this area, is quite wrong.
Shame on you Nick.
Complain about this comment
Tell me something.
Who appoints the "independant" enquirers,commitee members etc.?
Would it be the politicians by any chance.
Think back to Blairs "Hutton Enquiry" surely it was clear then,if not before,that all of "the establishment" are liars and cheats.
Complain about this comment
"David Cameron and Nick Clegg were very quick to join Joanna Lumley in the photo-opportunities recently. Why weren't they so keen to stand alongside Heather Brooke?"
I'm puzzled by this. Nick Clegg's consistently supported Heather Brooke's campaign, as far as I can tell, including some pretty vocal opposition to the bill to exempt MPs from the Freedom of Information act. And he published full details of his expense claims last year (as did the Lib Dem front bench). I'm not saying there's nothing to criticise there, but at least we've been able to see it for a while.
Complain about this comment
I have just watched Gordon Brown deliver an apology on behalf of all MPs in respect of the expenses issue. Once again it seems that only when he is painted into a corner does he apologise, remember the 10% tax rate? Are we supposed to fall for this "heartfelt" apology once again.
How dare he compare MPs with doctors and nurses. I think another apology is due Mr Brown. Better still give the British public a chance to say what they feel about this scandalous affair.
By the way has anyone noticed that the famous Hazel Blears smile seems to be missing now?
Complain about this comment
Just a thought to add here.
All we've seen are MPs' expenses. What of the civil servants expenses? Cabinet secretaries, private secretaries, etc. I'll wager they make the MPs' expenses look trivial in comparison.
Perhaps something an investigative journalist can get stuck into... if only I knew where to find one...
Complain about this comment
I watched Biker Blear the other night she is good not a flicker as she told Britian how she had done nothing wrong and she really had the right to do as she pleased and she did not have to answer to anyone. Not taken in by sister in law their is enough money in the family to have a cleaner and for them to pay for it out of their pay like others, but we had this covert rage that they had been brought into it and how they helped Gordon he is not a teenager and can look after himself what was the cleaner cleaning the family silver or part baby sitting? what ever it was tax payers money and I will bet that this is the tip of the iceberg as there will be some home somewhere that was forgotten about so they pay it back from their salary if they refuse, just like benefit fraud. I view them as a bunch of hypocrites I bet the shredder is working over time in Cameron's offices the reason why many of them are loaded is because this is what they do. But it is good to see it open and transparent as they are always talking about the truth frees.
Complain about this comment
I honestly think it's time for the Queen to step in . I know she does a brilliant job on a ceremonial \ figure head basis but she is supposed to be also head of state and this is one time where she needs to put her foot down and tell Gordon Brown to call an election for 6 weeks time . This is enough time for everyone to get into place - independents and all . 4 weeks means Conservatives , Lib. Dem's and extremists with Conservatives possibly winning and the same old thing occurring again . The big danger is that if the extremists get in the 2 nd. republic might just be formed . 6 weeks means a broadly independent based parliament is possible . Or - hint - hint - hint - independents start lining up yourselves now .
Complain about this comment
162 surrey pensioner
'A shiver passed along both front benches looking for a spine to run up'.
I really like that one old chap fits the situation exactly.
Complain about this comment
as a limited company contractor I have to abide by schedule E expenses
claims. IR35 was specifically brought in to target those norty tax dodging contractors by the politics of envy new labour back in 1999 one of there first goes at so called steath tax's and tax avoidance etc.
There where some quit "offensive" remarks made at the time by treasury officals concerning contractors and "there" avoidance policies. this was quoted by a high court judge saying that had not help the implementation IR35 during the PCG judicial review that followed
IR35 was about treating self employed contractors as permies for TAX and NI and then as truely self employed for unemployement and sick purposes ie got no money. therefore the worst of both world but brown thought this was a fine and fair upstanding policy. which has totally failled
when they have got there snouts in the trough big style.
That that is another story the press failed to report in anything like it full impact and the reasons behind its introduction, thus letting new labour of another hook.
Complain about this comment
One blogger has written about "exposing the hipocracy", an understood typo, but which actually means "rule by horses". May I suggest "onocracy", which means "rule by donkeys"?
Complain about this comment
There must be an a clear answer but ,,, how can it be right and fair to claim for food ? Thats not an mp cost but a cost of staying alive
Complain about this comment
An outbreak of swine flu in the UK. MPs described as pigs with their snouts in the trough. No connection I suppose?
Complain about this comment
Oh yes, I'll add in my bit of apologising too. I'm sorry for missing out this bit in my last post.
Between the bankers, the politicians and the regulators we have found ourselves in an unprecedented recession. The politicians didn't want to legislate, the regulators didn't want to regulate and the bankers were left playing with their money that never actually existed. So far it seems that all the regulators and politicians want to do is blame the bankers for their excessive bonus culture that meant taking bigger risks would mean bankers would get paid more.
That's ok, the government have said they will crack down on this bonus culture that led this country in to such a mess, even though it's supposedly all America's fault anyway. Yes, that's right, it's America's fault that our PM couldn't foresee this mess, put nothing in place to prevent it, encouraged it to happen by only wanting a light touch of controls, created no legislation, didn't enforce regulation in any way and as for the bankers, well they must have all originated from America.
Talk about denying responsibility and accountability.
But wait a moment, there's something very familiar between the Bonus culture and the Expenses culture. Aren't the expenses effectively bonuses, so therefore, like a good government that treats all equally and keeps its promises on all things we shall now clamp down on the Expenses culture that has become the cancer of Parliament.
But wait a moment, what do these reforms have to do with clamping down on expenses?
Surely, the best way to clamp down on the abuse of the expenses system would involve getting rid of the system but as we're all aware, MPs don't want to lose their bonuses, did I just say bonuses, I meant expenses, and they will use every trick and power they have to ensure that they don't lose out.
After all, the best chancellor we've ever had over the last decade has already stated that the way he would reform the system would be to give MPs their standard salary plus a standard daily rate for attending parliament. And this, coming from a Labour PM.
It seems to me that every time something comes up, it's always someone else's fault. It's always the fault of the previous government or the person who made the rules, etc. The political blame game and school yard politics define this era of parliament.
Why is it I always hear more blaming or sidetracking or avoiding from politicians than actual messages of policy and what they will do for us. Well, it's obvious because we already know what they do for us, they take our money and spend it on themselves and anything left over that doesn't fit within the rules goes towards public services.
And they wonder why people are less interested in politics these days.
There should be a rule, all those who apply to become MPs should immediately be disqualified from being an MP.
Complain about this comment
Unless I'm wrong - I believe that 'expenses' are none-taxable. I haven't picked up any news-coverage on this key point. The 'rest-of-us' pay for capital gain-tax, food, home-improvement at out of taxed income ....... The 'fiddling' of the system is nothing less than fraud and I would suggest that the first job of the independent body is to review the claims made and where appropriate push for criminal charges. Money claimed outside of the rules needs to be reclaimed - the fees office just wasn't up to the job.
Complain about this comment
Just an extra thought to add here.
If a minister is willing to screw the tax payer over for as much money as possible in morally questionable decisions, are we to believe that these same individuals, architects of massive government procurement contracts and PFI schemes, are able to resist the temptations of kick-backs and directorships to ensure the "correct" decisions are made?
Perhaps something an investigative journalist can get stuck into... if only I knew where to find one...
Complain about this comment
Last week they all chirped " It's within the Rules".
Today the mantra has changes to ' We all apologise".
The only thing they are really sorry about is that their deception and greed has been found out.....and they are going to have to devise another system to get their snouts into.
Parliament has no credibility any more. There needs to be an election NOW and everyone who stands for election first needs to demonstrate his/her suitability for the office. Then there needs to be put in place some independent body to monitor MPs to ensure they actually maintain reasonable standards of decency.
There needs to be an investigation by the police and tax authorities as well...immediately.
Complain about this comment
To bring this little soap opera to a fitting climax, let's hope that one or two of the more Neanderthal dishonorable members are dumb enough to take the Telegraph to court.
Seeing Woolas or Blears being systematially torn limb from limb by a decent barrister would be good couple of hours entertainment - far better than the average "probing interview" by a BBC reporter.
But even if that doesn't happen, I'm still betting the Telegraph hasn't even started on the really big stories yet....
Complain about this comment
The worry is that the row over MPs expenses is pushing other issues into the background. The recent budget is one such. As we now know the figures presented then; awful though they were had in fact been compromised in a clumsy attempt to make them appear better (if that's the word) than they really were. Unlike 'expensegate' the international money markets, upon which this country's cashflow now depends don't have to wait for Brown to call an election in order to take action.
Complain about this comment
A lot of good will now come of this, because of the corrosive cynicism of the "I told you so" crowd. It's that crowd that has the MPs jumping through hoops, as they should be, given what they've been up to. Britain's still ahead of the world, after all.
Complain about this comment
Is it just me or is it hard to imagine Gordon with yellow marigolds on?
I hate to defend Gordon but do you really expect him to pop down to his old home (which lets face it he's going to need in a few months) to do a bit of spring cleaning?
Would you expect Obama to clean all the toilets in the White House? No , but it appears we expect Gordon to?
Again I hate to defend them, but MPs work very long hours, Gordon probably works past midnight each night and then gets up before it's light in the morning to do it all again. And while your relaxing at the weekend he is probably still going!
However, what I don't understand is if I work on site for more than 2 years that becomes my home and all my expenses become taxable.
How do MPs get around this, or because they are MPs are they exempt?
Complain about this comment
There is a suggestion of sense @165. The second home system is an abuse waiting to happen and a far easier way of managing things is to let Parliament be the landlord.
Parliament buys property in London and MPs are allocated properties upon election and payment of a bond. Outgoing memebers submit their keys to their landlord. MPs may choose to exchange properties between themselves for the sake of convenience if they so wish. The accommodation is furnished to an approved standard (including telephone and internet connections, of which Parliament will refund a fixed part, to accommodate personal calls and internet use) and the proprties are either treated as Grace and Favour living quarters or a peppercorn rent is levied. In this way, unscrupulous speculation is stamped on and MPs have the London homes they say they need. There is a level playing field: everyone who needs such property gets roughly the same as anyone else. Why wouldn't such a system work?
There are other ways to streamline the expenses system but this would certainly help with one aspect. As The Guardian leader pointed out on Saturday, it is really vexing to hear MP's complain about their level of salary. Yes, they may not earn as much as many London-based professionals (like all those deserving bankers, for example) but they certinly earn more those most of the people they represent. It is time that expenses were not treated like a top-up fund for salaries. If they think they deserve to be paid more, then they should start convincing the electorate that they do, then we can dispense with the anachronistic system that has become such a point of contempt.
Complain about this comment
I notice that Harriot Harperson has disappeared off the radar. Having been wheeled out in the early days of the scandel and lecturing the populace that MP's were upstanding people, keeping strictly to the rules, she now seems somewhat 'off message' by the latest developments.
No doubt she will re-appear shortly with a passionate appeal for reform of the rules that only a few days ago, she thought totally acceptable. I will get ready to cringe yet again.
Complain about this comment
They do not all live in the UK. Take, for example Berlusconi, who is quite prepared to change the law to get himself and cronies off a fraud charge. As for South Africa, you have a hard time finding a single straight politician, so why is anyone donating mimmions that they know will go into the back pocket?
Complain about this comment
I normally pay scant attention to the screeching noises of the Mail and Telegraph, but I am moved to write in about this simply disgraceful abuse.
The institution of the Westminster parliament has largely spawned (for all its flaws and foibles throughout history) stable, decent government for most of the English speaking world. The institution is supposed to express the people's sovereignty by and over themselves, and is a buttress against a tyrannical monarch. Even today, the Queen herself is not allowed in the House of Commons, as she is not a commoner.
Our institutions and their descendants in the United States, Australia, Canada, India etc are held in the highest respect by those still struggling for a political voice, those disenfranchised and oppressed throughout the world who believe in democracy yet have no way of expressing it.
The sheer grubbiness and filth of the current cadre of politicians from both sides (why kid ourselves, they are barely different in background and class whether they are red, yellow or blue) is simply breathtaking. Elections will not fix anything as long as the candidates being offered up are members of the lifelong "greasy pole group". Nor will apologies without action.
Imagine deliberately screwing a system to get free capital gains? Imagine being able to build a property portfolio for nothing? Claiming food as expenses to be borne by the taxpayer ... these are simply monstrous acts of gross and callous disregard for the taxpayers. If we were in the private sector in a regular employee/employer relationship, these people would have received P45s a LONG time ago.
No longer should we stand for this. I would rather be governed directly by the Queen herself (she probably would not need to claim back a 5p plastic bag) than submit to laws constructed and passed by this group of pseudo-criminals.
Just as an example, we criticise the American system a lot, with especial attention on how you can only be rich before achieving a presidential nomination. I can assure you though, that if any candidate had a history that even approached the disgraceful levels of grasping greed that we have seen in the UK, that candidate would automatically resign. (see earlier this year regarding President Obama's nominees for Treasury and Health Secretaries)
Perhaps there is a lesson to be learned by the Mother Country from her children after all?
Complain about this comment
169. At 2:08pm on 11 May 2009, 123geronimo wrote:
...On a side note: can you clarify that if the MP's expenses are audited by an outside body whether they will then be exempt from FOI? If so this is a scandal. Also how much are we going to have to pay for this outside body to babysit our leaders?
===
If it is by a private company, yes it is exempt from FOI requests. Neat trick eh?
Estimates say around GBP600,000 for this mini Quango.
Complain about this comment
MPs should all have their main home in their constituency. They should then submit their expenses, detailed with receipts, to a panel of their own constituents, once a month. This panel to be randomly selected from those who have voted in the previous election.
A little democracy....
Complain about this comment
212. At 3:17pm on 11 May 2009, Ton-y-botel wrote:
One blogger has written about "exposing the hipocracy", an understood typo, but which actually means "rule by horses". May I suggest "onocracy", which means "rule by donkeys"?
===
I keep challenging Nick to call it a kleptocracy ruling us, more apt, but he has resisted the temptation so far.
Complain about this comment
Post No 2. "The assertion by Phil Woolas on R5 last night that only rich people could afford to become MPs on a salary of a mere 64k p.a. without the additional allowances is gut-wrenching."
When the inept Mr Woolas has to managed on what he is worth in the outside job market he will have to learn how to live on a salary of much less than £64k a year. Most employers wouldn't pay him in brass washers.
Post No. 19 - Peter G Kenyon - "Shutting the stable door...." are we?
And why does Brown always make important announcements outside of Parliament? Perhaps he does owe the nurses - and everyone else for that matter - an apology but the proper place to deliver is in the House of Commons. If the PM treats Parliament with contempt can he really be surprised that the MPs do to.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Hello Nick
Your comment on those in the Westminster village fearing that voters may react by favour smaller, fringe or extreme parties in the forthcoming European elections is interesting. Yesterday I suggested that one way that voters could show their displeasure of all those who claim to be what you describe as 'honourable members' would be by not voting at all in the forthcoming local elections. However, your comment gives an additional possibility - cast your vote, but make sure that it isn't cast for any party that has had members at Westminster and who have thus, directly or indirectly, supported the gross misuse of expenses which we now, despite considerable efforts by all those elected to serve us at Westminster, see exposed (this is not, of course, to suggest that this is the only element of misbehaviour that is rife in politics - it's merely one that has been exposed rather than kept quiet).
This could give local democracy and indeed European democracy a real boost - those who have not previously had the chance to wield power get a chance to wield it. The downside is that it may allow extreme views to become enshrined in rules - but, as many MPs have said, if it's OK by the rules then it's OK - isn't it?
Complain about this comment
Why do we have to wait for a review body.This is simple they are paid a salary to do a job.In addition to this a high % have to work away from thier constituency 3 nights/week.Thus all expenses incurred in working in parliament are paid as per standard civil service rules.ie.Basic hotel and food allowance and first class travel from thier constituency to westminster, all backed up by reciepts,if outside of the inner London catchment area.If inside they recieve the inner London allowance.Whats difficult why do we need another expensive review body and full auditing etc.This is the set of rules that the rest of the population has to follow to stop paying taxes for additional "perks".If the argument is that the salary is not sufficient,which I do have sympathy with, as lets be honest some nondescript climate change manager earns more, then reduce the numbers and increase the salary for the remainder.
No wonder we are in the cXXp financially if we have a government that needs a review to take a basic business decision.
Complain about this comment
What is it that General Lunderdorf once said about British soldiers .. "Lions led by Donkeys". Seems that things haven't changed much in a Century, except that perhaps the description should be more aplty named to "Lions led by Boars". Yes. pun intended.
So, after Gordon Brown admonishing the rest of us with his crass baying of "the recession being character building", while we struggle with our mortgages, our taxes, indirect and hidden, council taxes, food bills, energy bills, fuel taxes, they are all caught short with their noses in the trough, yet still oink unrepentantly that they are "within the rules".
This is the most serious political crisis I have known in my adult life, and I don't know if, in the eyes of the population, they can ever regain that trust again.
Complain about this comment
When are the Speaker and Sir Stuart Bell going to take the walk of shame?
If its the system to blame then surely those who oversaw the system should now go.
Surely we are not going to have the usual labour diatribe," I am the best person to put this right. That is what I am doing. Getting on with things."
Complain about this comment
someone may have said this already, but if I wanted a cleaner I would have to pay for it, wouldn't I? Out of my own wages, surely? I don't understand how it is ok for a cleaner's bill to be on expenses? I mean, I am a fairly lazy sod, I rarely clean the house after working all day, I should by rights clean it myself, but I am really really busy and if I wanted a cleaner I'd have to find a way of paying for one out of my wage. I don't see how this is allowed on anyone's expenses?
Complain about this comment
211. At 3:14pm on 11 May 2009, IR35_SURVIVOR wrote:
as a limited company contractor I have to abide by schedule E expenses
claims. IR35 was specifically brought in to target those norty tax dodging contractors by the politics of envy new labour back in 1999 one of there first goes at so called steath tax's and tax avoidance etc.
There where some quit "offensive" remarks made at the time by treasury officals concerning contractors and "there" avoidance policies. this was quoted by a high court judge saying that had not help the implementation IR35 during the PCG judicial review that followed
IR35 was about treating self employed contractors as permies for TAX and NI and then as truely self employed for unemployement and sick purposes ie got no money. therefore the worst of both world but brown thought this was a fine and fair upstanding policy. which has totally failed
when they have got there snouts in the trough big style.
That that is another story the press failed to report in anything like it full impact and the reasons behind its introduction, thus letting new labour of another hook.
While I totally agree with your statement, I'd like to add that the probable reason it went un-reported was that the incompetant Dawn Primarolo & Brown actually bought in this bill on the back of the health reform bill which was bought into means test disabled people.
That was the story that took centre piece and not the tax bill that has caused havoc and pointless cost to entrepreneurs in the UK.
I would also like to add that when this this tax bill came before the house there were approx 7-12 MP's debating the bill but when it came to voting amazingly all the Labour MP's appeared out of the bars at Westminster to vote for the legislation.
Democracy........................WHAT A TOTAL LOAD OF ........
Complain about this comment
Nick
And to think that Pensioners are means tested to get pension credit.
Relatives are means tested to get £50.00 carer's allowance per week.
Pensioners are means tested on savings to fund there stay in the care home of there choice.
"And would'nt it be nice for any pensioner to have his/her light bulbs changed and charged this to the State.
It makes me sick.
Complain about this comment
Brilliant ideas for the MP's dormitory, should go down a treat with the ex-public schoolboys but can we get Guy Fawkes to do a proper job with the house warming this time?
Complain about this comment
If they think launching a independent body to over view expense claims will solve the disgust the tax payers feel they are really in for a shock.
What is needed is for parliment to be disolved and ALL mps to attempt (and i use that word cairfully) to win the right to serve us.
This parliment is getting the vote of no confordance from the english people. Hope fully one MP will have the guts to call for a voite of no confordance on MP;s behaivor thus forcing an election.
Complain about this comment
With reference to post 223 above:
'If they think they deserve to be paid more, then they should start convincing the electorate that they do, then we can dispense with the anachronistic system that has become such a point of contempt.'
If MPs don't think they earn enough they should do what normal people have to do...find a better paid job (if they can!).
Most normal people don't get round the problem by cheating and fiddling the system...or if they do, they would expect to be sacked the moment they are found out!
Complain about this comment
And finally from me "fed up with this shambles"
Why are we not sending a large boxed van around to the second homes of these parasites and get some of the furnishings that we as taxpayers own, IT IS NOT THERES TO OWN, WE PAID FOR THIS SO LETS GET IT IN STORAGE.
Please can somebody mention this to them. Its our Furnishing, BBQ, Cushions etc
Complain about this comment
Michael Martin should be ashamed of himself. Still no admission of guilt and continuing his relentless pursuit of the 'mole' who has exposed all their dirty little secrets. What has the Speaker got to hide!!
Well said Kate Hooey for pointing out the complete waste of police resources and time.
Still referring to themselves as Rt. Honourable and Honourable members I notice.
Complain about this comment
No 178
Bit of a rant but your penultimate paragraph makes a good point. Given HM Government's property holdings in the London area you'd think there has to be a surplus building or buildings which could be converted into modest 35-50 sq metre flatlets. Functional - more Argos Catalogue than John Lewis - somewhere to shave, shower and stash your kit while away on essential business. Shuttle bus to HofC when in session. Pie and Chips, fish and chips or even nut cutlet and chips in the basement canteen. It would be interesting to see estimates and likely break even vs known cost of allowances.
No 207
You may find the Civil Service is your answer, not your target. Now it's been many years since I was a civil servant but in those days, work away was always covered by a "subsistence allowance". Varying according to location of work and status of recipient this was generally a cash-in-hand payment calculated to give you the difference between what you would have spent at home and the cost locally of modest overnight accommodation, a square meal and a couple of pints. No fancy hotels, no fancy meals - just enought to make sure you weren't out of pocket by having to work away from base and all for minimal administration. With Sir S Bell estimating an annual 600K of taxpayers money to set up a new outfit to oversee the overseers of our MPs' expenses - all at a time when everyone is banging on about less government - it makes you wonder if Brown's original "attendance allowance" idea had some basic merits. Not the finished article, certainly, but possibly an improvement on the proliferation of auditors, accountants and assorted bean-counters currently being proposed.
Complain about this comment
Nick you appear either stupid or insincere. The Prime minister has not apologized for the sleaze he has apologized (not for himself but for all partys) and not for sleaze but for "what has happened in the events of the last few days" What has happened in the last few days is that we the public have found out. So either Brown is apologizing for the leaking or the press revelations but not for the fraud and immoral taking and spending of tax payers money.
I do not believe that you can interpret Browns crafted words as an apology and therefore must conclude that you too have another agenda.
Complain about this comment
222
True to an extent, but they also have ludicruosly long holidays.
And I work very long hours also, as do many others, who do not receive basic living expenses on top of our salaries.
Complain about this comment
The BBC refers to Brown's sister in law's defense for the cleaning arrangment with his brother. As indicated above by another poster, the sister in law writes Brown was a bachelor when the arrangement started. But the claims date from 2004 to 2006, while Brown married in 2000. Strange. And it seems the BBC should have checked the facts of the story before referring to it.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Well as we are getting on with swine having their snouts in the trough that rather leads into George Orwell's Animal Farm :-
Napoleon: Gordon Brown
Snowball: David Cameron
Boxer: John Prescott
Squealer: Peter Mandleson
Benjamin: Ken Clarke
Complain about this comment
Now that the truth about MPs expenses has finally been brought into the public arena, it is time for Local Authority Councillors' expenses to be similarly disclosed. I'll bet there are a large number of "nuggets" to be revealed.
Exploitation of the taxpayer is not limited to MPs.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Hi Nick
The Politicians just do not get it, the tax system in the UK should be the same for EVERYONE. I have my own business and had a tax investigation.
They only allow me £2 a week to use my home as my office.
They will not allow me to buy a suit on the company because of duality (I will use the suit for personal use).
They disallowed a hotel receipt because I took my wife to the hotel for the night, even though I proved I was there on business.
We can only recover mileage at 40p a mile if we prove that it was business use.
I am ok with the above only if it applies to EVERYONE, in all walks of life we can justify why we are different to everyone else but the tax laws must be for everyone.
The Politicians say they are different, I know plenty of people that commute to London to do the day job and work late at night WHY DO THEY KEEP WITHIN THE TAX LAWS!!! because they have to.
The one thing that really gets me is that Labour are socialists and believe in re-distribution of wealth but this LOT only believe in the re-distribution of our wealth not their wealth.
Also Labour are socialists and do not believe in the SILVER SPOON (Nepotism) at birth, they moan moan and moan, until they become wealthy then what do they do, help their own children with the same SILVER SPOON which actually tells me that they are not true socialists but only jealous of people's wealth.
This LOT (Labour) are only interested in themselves and their family and should be sent to the wilderness of politics, they have failed in everything they have touched.
Nick you should hold them to account because if you dont you are also letting the very people who pays your wages down and also letting the country down.
Complain about this comment
At 237 UK-SILENT-MAJORITY wrote:
.....this bill came before the house there were approx 7-12 MP's debating the bill but when it came to voting amazingly all the Labour MP's appeared out of the bars at Westminster to vote for the legislation.
Which therefore begs the question 'What do MPs do for their money?'
They are told how to vote by the Whips so they don't have to have any knowledge or insight about what they're are voting for.
If questioned by the media they merely have to repeat stock mantras.
When written to or emailed they hardly, if ever, reply.
Apart from house-juggling and expenses claim form completion, do they actually have any duties in the House?
Complain about this comment
What we have is a true state of emergency.
The country is in crisis and so is parliament. There is no one party clean enough to govern the country. Indeed no one seems to be governing the country at all.
The panic shown by the speaker today should leave the people of the country in a very worried state of mind.
Par;iament should be dissolved and an executive of the best and there are still many of them most honourable members appointed to an executive to run the country on a cross party basis until out parliament is properly structured and a general election can be called.
This is an unprecedented event so unprecedented action needs to be taken as a matter of urgency.
All MP's expense claims need to be published so those who are unlikely to be voted back in can take the decision to resign. There is also the question of why we need so many of them now that most of our laws seem to be passed in the EU.
The same investigations should also be undertake on those MEP's who represent us in Europe. There should be no tolerence of anyone representing this country to exploit their position for questionable personal gain.
Complain about this comment
Say, for the sake of argument, you have an expenses system that is clearly wrong and allows you to claim for second homes, allows you to dodge Capital Gains Tax, allows you to flip residences to allow you to double dip for more expenses ... in other words the current system of expenses in Parliament ... do you (A) raise your hand and say "hey this system is wrong and needs to be fixed" or (B) wring out every penny you can, say nothing about it until the press catches on to how wrong the system is and then say "I did nothing wrong - besides it wasn't me it was the system". We all see how many politicians opted for (B) and how few opted for (A). They have no right to claim any kind of "honour" in this sorry business. If they had honour they would resign.
Complain about this comment
Parliamentary reform is the bare minimum required. In my opinion a General Election is the only way to sort this out.
Complain about this comment
I see Michael Martin gets it right again. Let's take the telegraph to taks for publishing these matters. After all, the public is up in arms at the Telegraph, isn't it?
The man is a disgrace to his position. In the words of a famous democrat - 'In the name of God, go'.
And go now.
Complain about this comment
Perhaps the real surprise is that we haven't had a major anti-terror operation this weekend, with tanks deployed at Heathrow, mass arrests and shutting down the Tube "as a precaution". Maybe that's a measure of the extent to which Brown has lost control of his government - he can't even co-ordinate a good terrorist scare when the news agenda needs a bit of massaging.
Complain about this comment
My Ideas for MPs pay reform are.
1/ They are taxed under the same rules as everyone else, especially regarding benefits in kind.
2/Remove all 2nd home allowances and build a hostel (and I mean hostel, not something as luxurious as a holiday inn)where MPs can stay if they have to remin in London overnight.
3/Their Home has to be in their constituency and they have to be ordinarily resident there.
4/All complaints that they are paid a small wage are thrown out the window. Their wage is a very good wage for most of us. Besides you should not be an MP for the money!
5/Finally they should have all perks and priveleges removed until they can show that they have earned them.
Complain about this comment
I completely agree with those advocating government owned flats of a budget hotel style (could be used for tourists when Parliament is in recess), but I would like to see them only get second class return to their constituency - where they work when not in London (don't they?) and where their main residence is (isn't it?). I can be 100% certain that within a month or 2 the quality of rail travel for second class traveller would improve immeasurably.
Complain about this comment
After noon nick By the look of this lot iv'e just read A lesson has been learn't or has it not gorden? fancy appologizeing thats an addmitance that he knew all along that they were fiddling he should have no doubts as two not calling a general erection and stuff the lot of them.
Complain about this comment
Now is our chance - if enough people stand as independent candidates with no affiliation and no previous 'form'. Take the Salary on offer and be honoured to do the job youre elected for and do away with this lot of professional politicians who are mainly in it for the money! We have been stuck with them for too long.
I, for one would vote for them and I'm sure many others would. WHAT A CHANCE TO CLEAN OUT THE CUPBOARD!!!
Complain about this comment
At least Gordon hasn't blamed the Americans .......... yet!!
Complain about this comment
Do those who sit as MP's and MSP's have their snouts in two troughs ?
Complain about this comment
In addition to the valid point raised by No 245, I am confused by Brown's "apology". He seems to be apologising for mistakes that were made - but apart from Jack Straw, has anyone actually admitted making a mistake over anything more than a couple of pounds? I was under the impression that many and varied MPs have justified their actions on the grounds that their expense claims were "within the rules".
Also, has Brown said the mistakes should and will be corrected by repayments from all the relevant people?
Parliament has been brought to its knees in dis-repute. The only answer is for an election that attempts to start to re-build trust. It needs to happen NOW.
Complain about this comment
This whole affair is just one more example of the sheer contempt in which the current political class hold the electorate of this country. Over the last decade, democracy in the UK has been brought low, and we will all suffer for it. Institutions and customs that have endured for hundreds of years have been contemptuously trampled or tossed aside. Constitutional reform has been botched for party political advantage rather than effective governance. Honesty, always at a premium in politics, has been completely abandoned for spin and subterfuge: "When you see the evidence that I have, you will understand why we must go to war." "Manisfesto promise for a referendum? Not now we've won the election thankyou very much." "Britain is well placed to withstand the global economic downturn." etc. etc.
There must be honourable and honest men and women in parliament, who are there for the public good, but my word they are hard to find. We have allowed a political elite to establish itself, going from university through political researcher to member of parliament and into government, without any experience of life outside the Westminster bubble. Rather than see themselves as public servants, representing the wishes and needs of their electors, they have carved out a lifelong career in politics to the exclusion of all else. No wonder they don't or can't understand the public anger over all this. If any evidence of this sorry and unhealthy state of affairs was required, we need look no further than Gordon Brown's ridiculuos assertion that politics is a profession; it isn't, or at least it shouldn't be. Many of the "honourable" members, particularly on the back benches, would be hard pressed to find work on the open market, especially in these difficult times, and even in the good times not at anything like the basic rates of pay they enjoy at Westminster. Winning a seat in parliament should not be like winning the national lottery. If they don't like the pay and conditions then don't apply for the job. As a meerkat might say, "simples".
Complain about this comment
I hope that when the Police find the mole he get given a Peerage and all those MP's who will be leaving after the next election should not find a comfy couch in the HOL.
As far as the Speaker is concerned, I always thought he was out of touch, today proves it.
Complain about this comment
Nick Robinson is a public servant paid from taxpayers' money, like the " dishonourable men." He'll be worth listening to when he publishes his expenses.
Complain about this comment
The Green Book makes clear that expenses should only be claimed bearing in mind potential tax implications.
Because a sum is approved and paid - it does NOT make it tax-free.
(Poor darlings... "Gracious, I can't concentrate on this important correspondence with that awful artexed ceiling hanging over my head!" "How can I possibly talk to my constituent in the garden during the evening if I have no patio heater!" "Shush, people. That damned mole is undermining my confident response to a matter of state...")
Bring in the nastiest Tax Inspectors in the land (they could go through a Simon Cowell selection). Warm up the rottweiler lawyer. Then pay them a bonus for every pound they identify and deliver as tax from MPs' expenses which may have been nodded through the Fees Office - but was clearly NOT incurred to allow an MP to do his/her job.
Darling and Brown witter on about "efficiency savings". Here's their chance to understand what it feels like!
Complain about this comment
Whilst the Speaker talks to the police about the leak investigation - perhaps he could point them in the direction of the real criminals in parliament
Complain about this comment
227. yellowbelly1959
Judging by a Point of Order made after the Speaker's statement, the private company arrangement will not exempt expenses from FOI requests. Not entirely sure though.
222. Sceptic_Kev
I don't mind contributing (in a very small way) to the upkeep of no.10, his workplace, but I do object to paying for the cleaning of his second home, considering he earns way more wedge than I do.
After his statement this afternoon Speaker Martin had a go at Kate Hoey, Norman Baker and Patricia Hewitt for daring to suggest a more considered approach to allowing the Met in and to bringing forward the expense disclosures. The head trougher clearly has no idea how angry the public are and shows no signs of contrition either. He should be the first to go.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
While on the subject of "honourable members", surely there needs to be further investigation of Blair's claims. He had a small mortgage on his constituency home [fine] but then took out a huge mortgage, extracting the equity from the property in order to finance the purchase of his Connaught Square mansion. Surely we should not have been made to pay the costs of this increased mortgage, which in no sense related to his ability to carry out parliamentary duties?
Complain about this comment
It is oh so easy to just blame "the system". MPs knew very well what they were doing. They were trying to screw as much as possible out of "the system" for their own gain. There is however a much wider issue at stake here and that is the ease with which those in public service, civil service, public sector employees generally are able to claim expenses and spend public money without anything like the degree of scrutiny and control that exists in the private sector. I suggest Nick that if any real good is to come out of this whole affair and the concern over bonus payments in banking that preceeded it that the claims of all public bodies be available for scrutiny. It would be messy but boy would it focus the minds of Councillors and civil service personel if the knew "Joe Public" was watching. Unfortunately, Joe Public is fast becoming a minority in this mad dash for ever more levels of bureaucracy.
Complain about this comment
I see now that Parliament is now playing "Hunt The Whislteblower" again! MPs are outraged that their personal details could be made public and therefore used in an unauthorised or illegal manner. So now we can look forward to another money wasting Police investigation into infringement of the Data Protection Act etc, etc. All to make "The Whisleblower" look like the guilty party here!
Parliament should be reminded that they are the ones that were found out. They have been "caught with their snouts in the trough" and feeding like gluttons at our expence for years.
Well, I am outraged too!!!
First - World financial meltdown. The bankers either knew it would happen evertually and did nothing, or were too blind to see the writing on the wall!! Now we have to bail them out with taxpayers money!
Now - The "Expences Scandal". The bankers were at it, feeding greedily from bonuses, - now we find politicians doing the same when claiming expences. They have become a disgrace and are disgraced, but fail to accept their guilt with any graciousness or humility.
We just get a "Hunt The Whistleblower" smoke screen and an unconvincing, "I'm sorry", because MPs got caught.
Instead of trying to find out who spilt the beans, Parliament should see themselves as others see them. They should pay back that which was paid out if it was not a personal MPs parliamentary expence. If this cannot be done, or the claim was made dishonestly, suspend the MP from The House and consider a Police investigation then.
The Whisleblower has done us a public service and shown us what MPs are really doing with taxpayers money.
I would say call an election, but what difference would it make? It would be more snouts in the trough, just a different breed.
A King lost his head once, and soldiers evicted Parliament for the likes of this. Its Oliver Cromwell in reverse!
Complain about this comment
Call an election? What difference would that make unless people refused to vote.
By not voting Parliament would be humiliated and look foolish to other countries.
I think the political party governing system we have is juvenile and an expensive sham.
Surely we could devise a democracy where we voted directly from a list, for a fixed term, qualified, experienced people to work for us in specific posts necessary to run this country in an efficient manner?
Complain about this comment
As they are all now apologising then they are admitting they have done wrong...bring on the fraud squad and the HMRC.... it is fairly simple, all members found with their hand in the till must resign thereby triggering a general election....
Complain about this comment
Nick - I would be grateful if you could explain a few things to me, because to be honest I don't see what all the fuss is about.
I don't see how all the reporting/comment including yours actually help the 'expense' situation or indeed reflect the truth of the situation as opposed to a scattering of facts that are never revealed in full context. I would hope that someone with your experience would understand in a journalist context the difference between 'facts' and the truth. We have had lots of facts but no truth.
Let me explain what I mean - i am fortunate to have an ordinary but well paid job and I live in Wiltshire. If another job was advertised even one of public service or I was interested in being an MP, I would have to consider the salary before going for it. Lets say that this new job is the same salary as my current salary but there is a catch - I'm expected to say spend 1/2 the year in London and whilst travel expenses are covered it is not very attractive because I know I will need to spend many nights in London and a reasonable Hotel (with space to work and maybe a small kitchen) will cost at least £160/night - so for say 100 nights thats at least £16000/year. So not looking very attractive and that does not include other costs like laundery, food for a meal I might cook myself and other incidentals. Also I hate staying in Hotels for any lengths of time as you have to keep checking in and out and moving stuff around and its not really a good place to work or have as a base. So i would probably want to rent somewhere or maybe use some of my own money to buy somewhere as an investment (assuming prices go up!?). This will obvious all result in additional costs to me that I wouldn't have if I carried on in my present job. I would expect the net cost of all the options open to me to be at least £20,000. Everyone needs to understand this reality - every professional (who has spent time in London) in the country would say the same.
But wait there is an allowance to reflect the inconvenience/cost of having to spend time in 2 locations of about £22,000 /year . Thats more like it but strangely rather than just pay us that we have to claim against it which is Ok but it does mean that for my colleague who through is own good fortune already has a second house in London then it will be harder for him to make use of the full allowance. This seems a little unfair - I dont see why the tax payer should benefit from the fact that someone already has a home or access to a family home in London - after all its an allowance and individuals personal circumstances should not come into play. Yes its called the 'second home allowance' but its effectively compensation for the job that requires you to operate in two locations.
But wait its Ok the rules allow you to claim for quite a wide range of things and even flip your designated second home so that everyone has an opportunity to access the full allowance that they are entitled to regardless of circumstances. Employers should not expect employees to subsidise the job. Also if you own a second home it could go down in value substantially and we wouldn't expect the taxpayer to compensate for the loss.
So to conclude I dont see a 'culture of greed' across Westminster. I see maybe a few MPs mainly the ones that live quite close to London to have benefited but having said that you need to draw a line somewhere as to where the London 'Allowance' kicks in and maybe it could do with moving out a bit. Its just an allowance that is part of the terms of employment and the rules require you to claim it with receipts. Personally I would like to see it just paid as a lump sum (say about £35,000 before tax) and forget about it.
London is an expensive place and we can not and should not expect our elected MPs to pay or subsidize their own accommodation and expenses to do the job.
Yes many constituents live in much poorer conditions but if we dont make the job financially viable then we wont get the right balance. The alternative will be conviction politicians but not necessarily very competent or the independently wealthy - which in my opinion would be a lot worse. The present system allows anyone (even professionals with well paid jobs) of whatever background or aspiration to see being an MP is a public service which is what it should be.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
By no means all, but many, MPs have the skills, intellect and drive which in private industry would allow them to make multiples of what they are making in public service. If we want high-quality people in parliament we will have to offer them attractive terms. Let's scrap the underhand expense system and pay them properly.
Complain about this comment
#222 thats what my point in #211 and the imposition and hypocracy of IR35
was about but over reporters do not seem to want to follow the leads put up by other bloggers. its not costing them anything
Was lsiten to Peter Critchen on BBC R4 to at 9am and how the press political circus at parlianment works and how broken and bankrupt it is.
Two many people looking to further there careers (or greed as some people might see it) rather than doing REAL reporting. The reporter are up to there necks in this mess too. As there failure to report has allowed the NEw labour porject to stay in power and turn a blind eye to issues and giving a hard time to HMG. And thus allowing voters to make informed decisions.
It all one big gravey train and the plebs like use are paying the price but maybe June 04 will give a massive shock to some
Complain about this comment
It does seem the fashion these days for polititians to say sorry since they are far more likely to be forgiven by the electorate if they do so. I suspect the only reason they are sorry is because they've been found out much like a small child. They all knew they were in the wrong but saw it as a perk of the job. The argument that "they didn't break the rules" may be factually correct but all these polititians made sure the rules in place were beneficial to them in the extreme.
It's time that MPs expenses were subject to the tax man's rule that, to be allowed, they must be wholly and exclusively incurred in carrying out one's job. How the likes of nappies and TVs are alllowed beggers belief because the tax man would laugh himself silly if we tried a similar claim and then launch an investigation to see if we were trying to evade tax i.e. a criminal offence.
Complain about this comment
Despite the fact that the electorate has seen fit to allow MPs to police themselves, has the word "honourable" ever really been anything other than an oxymoron when applied to the word "politician"? Politics is about power, power corrupts and human nature does not change.
This is just another revealing of Westminster dirty laundry and if the politicians there are clever enough they will, in time, be able to lull the electorate back into a false state of complacency.
Complain about this comment
What a disgrace. The Prime Minister using an NHS platform, playing on the goodwill of an honourable profession, to protect and defend tge behaviour of MPs on the make. How low can you sink.
Complain about this comment
As and when we are deemed worthy of being consulted in an election, the great British Public should send an army of 'white knights' to Parliament on 'Martin Bell-style' anti-corruption tickets, targeting those MP's from all parties who have most abused the system. (Sadly we can't (yet) purge the Lords, but perhaps those 'noble members' who have had their snouts in the trough might see which way the wind was blowing and resign?)
Complain about this comment
Speaker Martim is chairing the committee meeting this evening that allegedly is going to provide an answer to the current 'problems'
As he is a major part of the problem and this afternoon clearly demonstrated his intention of keeping the trough flowing, how on earth can he be part of the solution?
Complain about this comment
When were they ever honourable? Back before they were paid out of the public purse probably. The Labour party started the gravy train in order to enable ordinary union members to become its MP's when they stood for the working man. The system of expenses were probably created before that as any one comming to parliament would lose income and have expenses, but never before today has the extent of the blatant fraud become known. I always how Ted Heath managed to run a yacht, now may be I know, and all those past Labour PM's and other officials who owned land and farms. Perhapse the investigation should be conducted back to 1945 to see when the rot set in.
Complain about this comment
I have long thought that the term Honourable Member was an Oxymoron. Little I have read over recent weeks and months has caused me to change that view.
Complain about this comment
Personally I'm shocked at MP's. They are supposed to be among the most responsible people in the country. I was not naive enough to believe that they were the most upstanding citizens in the county, or that they approach perfection, but this goes beyond simple bad governing.
These events highlight the complete failure of our parliamentary system. Democracy should elect the 'right' people to the government, but it does not. Instead we are 'gifted' with career politicians. Those whose first interest is neither the country as a whole, nor the people in it, but themselves.
Maybe I am throwing the baby out with the bathwater, but if I cannot trust those who are not directly involved to stop this happening, to ring the bell and say something is wrong, then I think I am justified.
Complain about this comment
MPs' Expenses
In line with what I said months ago;
I would rather think they were guidelines, other than rules as MPs are supposed to be trusted members of society
And the guidelines clearly state that it should be beyond reproach.
I am of the view that this was meant just to ease on the constraints that they might incur so they can more effectively perform duties to their constituents
These guidelines may not have been too stringent so as to allow for exceptions, which do happen sometimes especially for certain area MPs.
The fact that a few MPs (I hope) may have taken advantage of the circumstances should not make people lose focus. An appendage to the guidelines as simple as that these expenses may IMMEDIATELY be open to public scrutiny can go a long way in dealing with such mishaps occurring again.
This issue about an independent body may be more expensive, in all ways, yet not much more effective. It is as if the politicians are trying to give an impression that it was the system that was so wrong.
To me, it is they who have not been above board.
Complain about this comment
Nick. Mr Robinson. Lend me your ears!
'I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him.'
'He hath brought many captives home to Rome, whose ransoms did the general coffers fill: Did this in Caesar seem ambitious?'
'You all did love him once,-not without cause: What cause withholds you, then, to mourn for him?'
'O judgement, thou art fled to brutish beasts and men hath lost their reason!'
'But yesterday the word of Caesar might have stood against the world: now lies he there, and none so poor to do him reverence. O masters, if I were dispo'd to stir your hearts and minds to mutiny and rage, I should do Brutus wrong, and Cassius wrong, who, you all know, are honourable men: I rather choose to wrong the dead, to wrong myself and you, than I will wrong such honourable men.'
'But here's a parchment with the seal of Caesar,-I found it in his closet, 'tis his will:'
'It is not meet you know how Caesar lov'd you. You are not wood, you are not stones, but men; and, being men, hearing the will of Caesar, it will inflame you, - it will make you mad: 'tis good you know not that you are his heirs; for if you should, O, what should come of it!
Thanx to Billy (the Bard) Shakespeare for allowing me use these extracts from the play what he wrote. Apologies to Bill for using his words to make out that parliament is like a dead gangsta who used to supply us with good cheap drugs, and the fact we asked no questions. And that since he got done in, we've heard a real nasty gangsta's in town and the price has gone up.
'Now let it work: mischief, thou art afoot. Take thou what course thou wilt!
Complain about this comment
244. Fingertapper:
Good post, but I think you have missed the point a little.
Since when has Gordon Brown been interested in reducing the size of Government anyway?
He now has an opportunity to expand it further with Expense Auditors who will push lots of bits of paper around & achieve very little, and all for the knock down price of £600,000.
Your idea of a fixed payment is good, however in recent years, those of us in the Private sector have had ours taken away by the Inland Revenue who like to make work for themselves, and us, by chasing every silly little receipt.
I agree, make it smaller & more efficient, however those of us who believe this seem to be a dying breed.
A House of residence is a good idea, but you will have to build one first & i'll bet an MP's salary that the cost of this in London will be far more than any saving that will be achieved.
Still, i'd father see Builders, Electricians, Brickies etc in work than another layer of Gordons paper pushers.
Complain about this comment
Before I reached retirement age I had a job that required the use of my own car to travel to my places of work. It had to be a reliable vehicle as I was frequently called out at night-times. It is no fun not being able to start a car at 2am on a January morning.
My disabilities restricted the type of work that I could take on. For this, I was paid a travel allowance, but had to pay for:-
(a) Initial purchase of car.
(b) Vehicle excise licence - Fully comp insurance - all maintenance and fuel.
There were two methods of claiming mileage allowance. First a small amount that barely covered fuel. Second a larger amount but had to be covered by (what is now) HMRC; keeping full records of miles used both business and private and every penny spent and submitted monthly. Not a pleasant task after a night working.
Compare this with what all M.Ps. can, and some do claim. If those in Parliament had to comply with the same rules that apply to the working man, there may be less complaint. Most people know that this not so, they can carryout the most extraordinary fiddles. This why I and many other people are SO VERY ANGRY. Many M.Ps. do not get this. The Biblical text, "You have been weighed in the scales and have been found wanting" is most applicable.
Complain about this comment
Nick
Have you realised yet that you have seriously missed the point here? With youyr reporting you are defending the indefensible, and condoning the unacceptable.
Never mind the useless hangers on like Hoon, Smith, Martin, Blears, Darling, Purnell, McNulty, Hope and Uddin for now, but let's just look at one tiny example relating to Gordon Brown. Brown, the Prime Minister of Great Britain has charged us the taxpayers, for cleaning the flat his highly paid wife owned, whilst himself living in two state-funded residences. There is no honour there, only tacky, tawdry sleaze. He shgould pay the moeny back (all of it), resign and call a general election. Retiring MP's will receive no transition payments and pension will be withheld pending a case by case review (a proper one, by someone who can think for themselves), and MP's elected will be on a new basis which will be a salary with essential business expenses justified and claimed along conventional lines. Debts to the taxpayer can be funded form the sale of second, third andf fourth homes.
This situation is too serious for half-measures and needs to be addressed today.
Finally, please make sure you report in detail on the ACA arrangments used by married MP couples (eg Balls/Cooper). Why would you not want to do so?
Complain about this comment
Never mind an apology!
The problem is not the system or any system as we all know very well that if you try hard enough, it can be broken or bypassed.
No! all the fraudulent and cheap charlatans MPs who have defrauded the taxpayer, did so fully knowingly of their actions. This demonstrates their lack of judgement, moral ethics, discipline, knowledge, common decency and so on.
I for one, everytime I see Jacqui Smith or any of the others, immediately I think: "you have been stealing from me and there is nothing I can do about it!"
This infuriates and makes me sad.
Sack, them payback our taxpayers money and criminally prosecute them!
I did not vote for this and certanly I do not pay my very modest hard earned tax money to keep those fraudulent MPs and their families in their sleeazy cossy setups!
Get rid of them!
Set an example.
Complain about this comment
I understand why mr robinson, and indeed the daily telegraph have been careful to point out that mr brown has not broken any rules.
Thats as may be, but for the last 12 years he has had a grace & favour home (2 for the last 2 years)where everything, from the servants to the food are provided by the taxpayer.
But he still obviously feels that it is also apropriate for the taxpayer to contribute towards the cost of a cleaner for a third residence.
I understand that for legal reasons the bbc and other media have to be very clear about whether he has broken any actual rules, but as a member of the public its obvious to me that claiming for this, on top of the first class services already provided at No. 10 & chequers by the taxpayer,is a clear ethical breach and very difficult for an ordinary person to see in terms other than 'milking the system'.
Complain about this comment
I do not like the underhand way in which the Telegraph has used this information. They have sensationalised Labour abuses before then drip feeding relatively inocuous Tory ones first so that the worst ones when they become known have less impact. But then that is what to expect from the Telegraph.
It is not what we expect from MPs who we entrust to make decisions on our behalf, sometimes life and death decisons. What sickens me is that it seems to be regarded as normal behaviour. How can they possible now make moral judgements on the greed of bank directors.
What happened to the notion that MPs should set an example and act in accordance with notions of morality, not what they can get away with within the rules. Let's see MPs forego next year's salary, not just a pay rise, to pay back some of the easy profits they have made out of the job.
I fear for democracy.
Complain about this comment
The farce that is our Parliament is laid bare today with the Speaker giving a statement about how "honourable" members should adhere to the spirit, not the letter of the law.
1) Michael Martin is one of the worst offenders, and has no right to lecture the house on these matters. In fact, he should stand down for bringing the office into disrepute.
2) MPs make the law, so if there is a difference between the "spirit" and "letter" of this law, it is they who are to be held accountable.
3) Bringing the police in on this matter was unwise. It does not play well to the public, and what are the chances of anyone being prosecuted, given that the High Court ruled this information was in the public interest, and should have been released. This ruling was made in October 2008. Since that time, MPs, with the full support and backing of the Speaker, have done their utmost to prevent that happening, wasting hundreds of thousands of taxpayer pounds trying to mount a legal defence against it, and after that failed, trying to alter the FoI laws so that they did not apply to them.
The fact that we can have such a poor Speaker who is patently not fit-for-purpose, only serves to highlight the dysfunctionality of our parliament.
And the fact we have to rely on independent bloggers, campaigners and whistleblowers to get this information into the mainstream media only serves to highlight how the relationship between the "indepedent" press and the government. The government says "Jump", and the press says "How high?".
Disgraceful - politicians and political journalists everywhere should at least hold their heads in shame, if they have neither the morality nor the courage to do the decent thing and resign.
A sad day for this country - there have been quite a few over the last twelve years. We sorely need a change in government, a change in representation (voting system), and a written constitution.
Don't delay it further by voting for either of the two big parties ever again.
Complain about this comment
272. greatHayemaker
Would you prefer David Attenborough as senior political editor to Nick?
BTW the female hyena is the dominant sex in the pack; Harriet Harman?
Complain about this comment
Todays events were perhaps not a surprise to many, and other may be surprised that it had gone on for so long, there was speculation in the papers but was obvious that things could not go on as they are. But enough about Katie Price and Peter Andre....
Does anyone know what Gordon Brown was actually apologising for today, when he refered to "events of the past few days" ? And who was he actually apologising to ?
As for the speaker Michael Martin, where did they get this guy ? Hopeless!
It does illustrate further the inability of the government to protect data of any sort, not that we needed any further proof.
Complain about this comment
Having listened to the speaker this afternoon, I despair of the whole affair, and I don't think we'll get a proper resolution to any of this until labour, and especially the speaker, are all kicked out.
The speaker was banging on about how a committee was going to be looking into speeding up the publication date. Then it turns out he's the one who's heading that committee (but he didn't mention that in the House).
Also, the official publication of the data will release the information in such a format that it'll be useless for the purposes that it was intended.
The telegraph definitely did the right thing by buying the raw data; the MPs are going to be covering their tracks by hiding the key information in the officially published list.
Out of all of this, the speaker has definitely come out as the chief villain, going against the courts, fighting publication every step of the way using our money for his expensive legal teams, and then even on publication decides to withhold the key information that would make it useful, calling in the police to find the mole but not being worried about massive tax fraud, and the final insult today was when he cut-off any MP who questioned the fact that he was using the police to find the mole.
Didn't work with Damian Green, and won't work here either. With Green, the CPS basically told Martin/Smith that they never should have called in the police in the first place because it was obvious from the outset that the mole had acted purely in the public interest and should not even be given any form of caution. Meanwhile tons of public money gets wasted by the speaker forcing the police to investigate purely as a desperate bid to divert attention away from the dodgy dealings of labour ministers.
Complain about this comment
The dishonourable member for Glasgow North-East should be ashamed. Angry at the press for disclosing that we paid for his taxi fares to football matches. It is not as if he is any good as the Speaker of the House, o-o-o-o-o-or-or-order!
Complain about this comment
280 citycynic
"By no means all, but many, MPs have the skills, intellect and drive which in private industry would allow them to make multiples of what they are making in public service."
I expect many MPs hope you are correct, because many of them will be putting this view to the test by looking for new employment after the next election.
The abuse of expenses isn't something I'd want on my CV, and I believe that many of them will be nowhere near as employable as they would like to think, and this has done nothing to improve their prospects.
Complain about this comment
MP's voted for the Freedom of Information Act and what a great piece of legislation its turned out to be.
I think its only fair that all property claims for the last 7 years be paid back to the taxpayer in full, plus interest.
Nothing less will do.
Complain about this comment
So, we can now see that today in almost an EMPTY HOUSE of Parliament a Statement was read out by Uncle Albert eh' SORRY The Speaker to the inturn flock gathered that there will be a major overhaul in the future in the way that all M.P.s' Expenses and Allowances are awarded, so lets think hard you Self-Serving lot about a way too carry - on as usual, without us M.P.s' ever having to let any Tax - Payers know just what really is going on ever again, for we can call this a New Look Policy fit for the 21st Century and beyond.
Then someone woke up and said will this idea ever get passed by the LORDS, Yes of course came the reply for we ALL know just how much most of their Un-Elected LORD-SHIPS also creamed off from the Public purse when they were in This Place.
Complain about this comment
222. At 3:34pm on 11 May 2009, Sceptic_Kev wrote:
Is it just me or is it hard to imagine Gordon with yellow marigolds on?
I hate to defend Gordon but do you really expect him to pop down to his old home (which lets face it he's going to need in a few months) to do a bit of spring cleaning?
Would you expect Obama to clean all the toilets in the White House? No , but it appears we expect Gordon to?
Again I hate to defend them, but MPs work very long hours, Gordon probably works past midnight each night and then gets up before it's light in the morning to do it all again. And while your relaxing at the weekend he is probably still going!
===
His wife doesn't!
Complain about this comment
If M.P.s' were in the Entertainment Business, everyone would have turned OFF Years ago, for watching the TEST CARD is more entertaining
Complain about this comment
Given that the UK Parliament remains supreme under the Constitution, what value can there be in parking the problem with another Quango or private company? History suggests that those in public office accountable to an external body simply try to find ways around the rules. Part of the point of this story is that (whether through the Telegraph now or the official system later) the facts emerge. Under a sovereign-Parliament system, the answer always has to be "keep the Freedom of the Press, and retain the right to sling them out." That's the proper test of "honourable-or-not".
Complain about this comment
#80 flamepatricia
Oh dear......
Unfortunately, what you and the BNP class as "foreigners" often include those who were born in this country.
How far back do you think we should go? The Normans, Saxons, Vikings, Romans?
When you mention "ghettos overrun by foreigners", I wonder if you are referring to foreigners in general, or did you have a particular group in mind?
Complain about this comment
Most of us who stay away from home on business do so in hotels. If you spent half of every working week in a good hotel, even in London, you'd still have change from £15,000 per year.
So how on earth did they work out that it was fair, honourable or even vaguely reasonable to claim up to £25k per year for a second home?
Presumably they overspend on everything by a similar amount, 40%, which explains very eloquently the mess they've got us into.
Complain about this comment
248. s At 4:21pm on 11 May 2009, phoenixarisenq
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
==============================
Moderators, please note that this wasn't off topic as it referred to Comment # 229, which itself referred to Comment # 212. There was nothing offensice and as it was in reference to two accepted comments it was relevant to the forum. Please reconsider. Thanks
Complain about this comment
#153 Susan-Croft
I have been reading your posts on this and the previous blog and I agree that the electorate that voted for Labour were and are complicit in the current situation.
"I am a young person who has worked hard and saved, I have taken nothing on credit and asked no one for anything, I pay my taxes. However there are people out there in the public who have taken loans they could not afford, have saved for nothing, lived on credit and have helped to cause the credit bubble we are now in. There are those on benefits who have cheated the system. They have now along with the Government caused me to gain nothing on my savings, I will probably have to work till I am 7O to pay Government debt. There was plenty of warning that a credit bubble was about to happen. The public did not care they went on spending anyway. My tax money was used to bail all these people out, while I who have done nothing wrong suffer for it. How is this situation any different from MPs. These are now the very public who cry they have been wronged. This is the very public who did not care about moral issues they still kept voting for Labour to fund their spend culture."
I am one of these people, with the exception that I didn't vote Labour and therefore do feel wronged. I'm sure there are many others out there. With this in mind what possible course of action is left open? The Conservatives are the only realistic option under the current system with no obvious candidate to act as a strong opposition (not that it matters at Westminster, only a weak government allows any opposition to affect change). As you pointed out before Scotland and Wales are unlikely to vote tory for a number of reasons (and the way things are going are no longer automatically voting for labour either), which will leave the UK in a strained position as voters in each country look to another party to represent them. Meanwhile there are those on here (rather worryingly in my opinion) that feel justified in voting for the BNP to bring about the changes they want to see as they no longer feel represented by the establishment.
I'd still advocate a complete revamp to the UK's political system at Westminster, two elected chambers and STV rather than FPTP used. Consensus politics and not the old boys network of revolving door politics.
I'm interested in what would you suggest to affect lasting change within the UK as I'm sure we would both agree we would not want to revisit current circumstances in the future?
Complain about this comment
I think that I would like to change my mind. Having previously posted on your last blog that the only good thing to come out of this issue might be that a General election be called, I am now concerned that the mood of the nation may cause some of the more unsavory parties to gain a foothold in our Government.
It is interesting to note the huge number of posts to this blog in short order, most of them on the same themes. Surely our MPs will get it!
Having already expressed my outrage and insisted that the system be changed, there seems little point in repeating myself. I have therefore tried to find a new point to raise.
It seems to me that the system began to go wrong when it was changed for the best of reasons ie to enable the less well off to be able to stand for parliament. As usual human nature was not taken into account and ways were found to exploit the system whilst staying within the rules.
A plea, do not throw out the baby with the bathwater, a lack of wealth should not be a block to an able person standing for parliament. Would some form of means testing work in respect of certain expenses?
The realist in me believes that whatever the moral issues here, there will be no criminal proceedings, they were acting within their own rules, the expenses were authorised etc. After all how many bankers have been tried in court. Let us then get on with it, change the system using the services of an independent auditor, with all details published. No claim without a receipt. Then for heavens sake deal with the economy. This is the issue that will affect our daily lives more than any other including MPs expenses
Complain about this comment
"Honour in politics is something that, as in the rest of life, will have to earned, proved and upheld and not merely assumed."
Hear, hear !
I will add that honour had to be earned DAILY. There should be a huge plaque in parliament that asks "Are you worthy to be called honourable today?"
GB's apologies for all parties is empty spin. I guess MPs will now feel they can keep their expense claims since someone has said the word "sorry". What examples and precedences they have set for the rest of society.
Power and resources are given to people, especially public servants, so that they can serve the masses, not be served. It is a privilege and honour ... off they go. There are still honourable people who are able and willing to serve.
Complain about this comment
Dear Nick,
I became fully aware of the MP's expenses fiddle in about 1989.
I made huge noises at my local Labour party and nobody was interested.
I wrote to national newspapers and they ingnored me.
I contacted the BBC several times and guess what, yes, no interest whatsoever.
No interest whatsoever until about 2005 and then only tentative interest.
In short, the corporation have known about this for years and have chosen not to report it until quite recently.
Why is this?
Might it have something to do with the cosy 'Lobby' and its equally cosy bar in the house.
Too little too late Nick.
Lance Private Jones.
Complain about this comment
First off Nick, anyone who is a student of history (as you are now claiming to be with your articles on previous PMs) knows that for most of the history of the UK there have been a lot of MPs doing the same, and much worse, many, from even only 100 years ago would have considered what has been revealed over the last few days to be small change compared to what they are doing. So do try and keep some perspective about how "hounourable" previous generations of MPs have been!
Second the BBC's reporting on this, is hysterical! You, and assumadly the rest of the Beeb belive that the public has a right to know how much of taxpayers money is spent on their tea-bags, but refuse to publish a list of who gets paid what in your own publiclly funded organisation! By my calcualtions Johnathon Ross gets paid (according to roumour - which is mostly what you report) the same as 80 MPs! Is that good use of my money?
But fair enough you, are not the Beeb as a whole and cannot be expected to change their policy, so, Nick, how much do the taxpayers pay you a year? Does that include blogs like this? How much do we pay for you wardrobe? makeup? Glasses (in all seriousness most companies whose employees need to use a computer - which you must to right this, alow employees to claim back some of the cost of their specs) and if so how much? Travel? How much did it cost the taxpayer for your seat on the recent "Gordon express" as you called it? Are you going to anwser any of these? Or are you going to continue throwing stones from your big glass house?
Complain about this comment
292. At 5:40pm on 11 May 2009, forgottenukcitizen wrote:
244. Fingertapper:
...A House of residence is a good idea, but you will have to build one first & i'll bet an MP's salary that the cost of this in London will be far more than any saving that will be achieved.
Still, i'd father see Builders, Electricians, Brickies etc in work than another layer of Gordons paper pushers.
===
Not necessarily, they are building one at the moment in Stratford,East London. It's called the Olympics athletes village and will be available in August 2012.
Sorted.
Complain about this comment
This scandal is essentially an issue reflecting upon the Labour Party.
The Labour Party should be banned from fielding any candidate in any election for between ten to twenty five years! Anyone who remained a paid up member of the Labour Party from January 1st 2009 should also be prohibited from public office for the same period.
Now that would clean up politics!
Complain about this comment
Re:222.
Brown is still going!!!
Yes, and more the pity, he's not yet GONE.
Complain about this comment
298. At 5:56pm on 11 May 2009, DialSquareDomination wrote
"A sad day for this country - there have been quite a few over the last twelve years. We sorely need a change in government, a change in representation (voting system), and a written constitution.
Don't delay it further by voting for either of the two big parties ever again."
There have been others on this blog including myself, albeit from different perspectives, advocating this exact type of change. You suggest by not voting for Labour or Conservative that this is the best way to change the voting system.
Realistically how could the electorate affect this kind of change? No political party that has mass appeal is advocating this type of policy, and even if they were how could such a bill ever pass under the current system. Short of a mass march on the House of Commons such drastic change is unlikely to happen.
Simply the political will is not there within the mainstream UK parties to implement any constitutional change. Voting outwith these parties allows unsavoury groups such as the BNP in through the back door unless there is a common consensus to vote Lib Dem or another single party (which clearly won't happen).
It may be that change is forced onto Westminster to change by circumstances outwith their control in NI, Wales and Scotland?
Complain about this comment
212. At 3:17pm on 11 May 2009, Ton-y-botel wrote:
One blogger has written about "exposing the hipocracy", an understood typo, but which actually means "rule by horses". May I suggest "onocracy", which means "rule by donkeys"?
===
And comprised of onanists?
Complain about this comment
Article 61, Lawful rebellion, we all have individual sovereignty.
Realize it, use it.
Complain about this comment
316. At 6:53pm on 11 May 2009, laughingdevil
I hope we don't pay much for Nick's blogs, they are largely a verbatim rehash of his TV news reports, and read as such.
Complain about this comment
I have been "blue" since 1987 and it is only in the last couple of years that I have realized how hated the Tories were for a large part of the 90s.
I wonder when labour supporters will wake up and realize how utterly despised they are as a political party.
Blinkers are fine but they do not work when the election results come in.
I have a feeling that they will be utterly annihilated at the next election. Which of course Gordon knows, but not giving a toss about the country he will hang on for the glory.
Complain about this comment
If Members of Parliament were honorable they would resign and allow the electorate to judge them.
They are all suggesting that they have acted within the rules or they have made a mistake, but many are clearly acting in a fraudulent manner, so why is no one in authority seeking to prosecute these people?
We have a right to demand it. If it doesn't happen some people may well take the law into their own hands.
Complain about this comment
apply the MPs favourite " John Lewis " list immediately
this will entail all MPs working a 35--45 HOUR WEEK , WITH FLEXITIME
It will entitle them all to a 5 WEEK ANNUAL HOLIDAY INCLUDING BANK HOLIDAYS
GB PLC needs to be working in line with how the rest of the country operates , or maybe they are far too busy filling in their expenses , all missing the mess we are in brought about by guess who
salaries and particularly expenses to be in line with other commercial business practise
from a list , possibly of ten companies BBC , TESCO , JOHN LEWIS , SAINSBURY , NHS ,LLOYDS BANK, etc
maybe we might then see the real politicians emerge with a true sense of purpose
Complain about this comment
I have never seen a man as unlucky as gordon brown. The man is truly the anti-midas everything he goes near is a disaster area.
It can't all be down to his personal decisions, i'm in my 30s, maybe an older contributor can remember when an administration had such a solid run of dismal results & pure disasters as the government since mr brown took over.
Take the expenses for example, that could have erupted under any of the three proceeding prime ministers, but inevitably it waited until gordon brown is in office to add its reek to the odure that has piled up around this government.
The man must be cursed, seriously, we need him out of office before he goes anywhere near the nuclear weapons...
Complain about this comment
I see that the No 10 machinery is working as well as ever! Yesterday 10 May 2009 (before Nick Robinson had posted his own views on this) I submitted a petition to the No 10 Petition website proposing
We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to: 'revoke the right of use of the term 'Honourable' and 'Right Honourable' by MPs.'
In my additional text I explained: 'The term 'Honourable' is one which reflects a standard of behaviour by an individual which extends to more than merely staying within the rules. The Concise Oxford Dictionary in defining the word 'honourable' uses phrases such as 'worthy of honour'; 'bringing honour to its possessor'; 'a title indicating eminence or distinction given to certain high officials'. Despite the fact that some MPs may, indeed, live up to the description of 'Honourable' it no longer appears fitting that MPs are automatically awarded the right to be addressed as 'honourable' simply because they have been elected. Some are more honourable than others.'
My petition was rejected because it was allegedly in the 'category' of 'Issues for which an e-petition is not the appropriate channel' No alternative channel was suggested.
Complain about this comment
We all know the problem but how to fix it.
Clearly the current bunch in government cannot get anything right and they need to be sacked as I would one of my staff who messed up his job as badly as this 'lot',
we are beyond the point of reviving the corpse, it is rotten.
I agree that the best course as advocated by another blogger is to request the Her Majesty the Queen to dissolve parliament. This is where our democracy can score over all others who do not have this ultimate sanction and the ability to express the will of the people
Complain about this comment
Re 212.
Ruled by People in Donkey Jackets while upon Horse Back. Daft or What?.
But, then again it has just been exposed in tomorrows Telegraph that 1 Tory M.P. has had his Claim paid out for Horse Manure.
So it now begs the Question as to just what has Horse Manure got to do with any M.P. Job, for I am aware that the Conservative Leader prefers to go to Work in the Norman Tebbit style "ON YER BIKE", and that the London Mayor Boris Johnson prefers in trying to Jog to make the 2012 Olympic Team, but HORSE MANURE for you'll not "ONLY" need to catch - up at Top- Speed with the Roaring - Donkey or Trigger, after bolting the Stable Door, but you would also need a large Shovel and Poop-a-Shoop.
Yes, for 1 M.P. at lease is Shooping LOW with this Claim, and ALL this MUCK only adds to the Total mess overall that U.K. Politics is already in, for Words fail me to understand this situation.
Complain about this comment
Instead of gleefully denouncing every person who ever wanted to be an MP - step up to the plate.
Stand for parliament yourself, be asked to fight for everyone in your constituency. Expected to put party before belief too often and have to vote on moral, financial, social, foreign policies and should we go to war.
Be hounded on every single penny in your receipt.
And even if you make it to the very top - the pinnacle of Prime Minister of your nation - leading your nation meeting Obama and Sarkozy. Even then they will slag off that you shouldn't get a couple of grand for a cleaner.
Please stand - you all know every solution to every problem - stand for parliament and subject yourself to it - and you will be rolling in the loot so it will be worth it.
Or do you, if you are honest, realise a lot of it is just you all being the very sheep you pretend not to be? Your master is media - do you believe every word you hear because it is what you want to hear?
I hope the good and hard working MP's are not too disheartened.
Complain about this comment
Re:329.
Yes, the Queen CAN dissolve Parliament against its wishes, althought this has not been done since the day's of Charles the First.
Complain about this comment
It's fantastic isn't it? The way politicians try to turn everything around in such a patronising way. "The system is wrong and needs to be changed" we hear shouted from the very depths of the house. "How dare they release the details of our profligate waste of their money" we hear.
Did I hear anyone say "I'm sorry, I made money from a system which has been weighted in my favour and I intend to pay it back" Come on.
If the system is so wrong then sack the people who brought the system in! ALL OF THEM!
Complain about this comment
just seen the latest tory expense claims,
i reckon we could be looking at an avalanche of resignations. odds on cameron will force the worst shadow cabinet offenders to jump, after which labour will have to sacrifice a few, as they both strive to show the public they are rooting out the rot.
Could be a fun few days...
Complain about this comment
nick the questions are simple:
1, who put this system in place?
2, who is sat on the panel/board which is paying these claims?
3, why no police action on MPs that have claimed for the same thing more than once?
4, when are revenue and customs going to be brought in to look at whats been going on?
why are you, nick robison, not asking questions that people want answers to?
Complain about this comment
ALL WITHIN THE RULES. May 11th 2009.
We have paid our taxes for MPs to pool,
To keep them all working within the rules,
We voted for them, is the fault then ours?
We made them Honourables and gave them power
They swore to be true by Oath to their Queen,
Yet for all they did was a what might have been.
For behind our backs they signed away,
Our Queen and Country by deceit one day.
They obeyed EU directives, regulations and laws,
Over-ruled our Constitution, never once did they pause,
Was all they did within the rules?
Have they just taken all of us, for fools?
It was from our taxes they made ill gotten gains,
Yet within their rules, I hasten to say.
The people are sovereign though their anger is real,
MPs had no thought of how the people would feel.
They couldnt care less as long as they made lots of money.
The people that vote though, thought nothing was funny.
They thought of the soldiers that fought an illegal war,
And in Afghanistan, poor equipment, what was it all for?
Some paid with their lives, too high a price to pay,
For those that sent them, live in luxury each day.
Their Country signed away while they were at war,
Their once sovereign Country, now no more.
Yet without folk paying taxes on a regular basis,
No Member of Parliament would now have red faces,
People were told their sovereignty was pooled,
It was, we were told, well within the rules.
Should Lisbon become active, I make clear without doubt,
No fines, no Taxes by us, to be paid out.
Gas and electric are Bills to be paid,
But all tax be deducted and on one side will be saved,
To be paid in full when this Country is free,
And a true British Government works for you and me.
For the third and last time, inspired once more,
By our own Magna Carta be it invoked once more.
Clause 61 will come into its own,
And work once more for the British Crown.
For Magna Cartas sovereignty cannot be pooled,
It is well within the PEOPLES COMMON LAW RULES.
Complain about this comment
Listening to tonights Newsnight Programme [ Monday ], I heard Brass -Neck 7 Homes Labour M.P. Shaun Woodward jump a simply Question being asked by Jeremy Paxman about what has gone wrong at Wasteminster, by he [ Woodward ] forewarding a view that NO M.P.s' shoud be "MEANS - TESTED" upon the Issue of their Expenses and ALLOWANCES.
Well, in that Case: Why are ALL those upon State Benefits who are paid at a lower Rate of Benefits then M.P.s' Means - Tested???
As Mr Woodward stated he was on the Newsnight Programme speaking for ALL M.P.s', then we are now demanding in the Court of Public Opinion more then 600 seperate Answers.
Complain about this comment
I am unable to understand this defence that the expenses claims made by MPs were "within the rules". The rules require the expenses claimed to be necessary for carrying out MPs duties. It is difficult to see how much if any of the expenses disclosed in the press in the last few days meets this requirement.
In addition, I find it hard to believe that Ms Hazel Blears has not broken the Ministerial Code of Conduct. If press reports are correct it appears that she has changed her main residence to obtain expenses under the MPs 2nd home scheme, whilst electing for capital gains tax purposes a different property as her main residence. This cannot be compatible with holding an office of state in the UK.
Complain about this comment
Several Poster's state " I am going to vote BNP " Maybe they do not remember the 1930's. The German people were suffering badly caused by a severe depression, money losing value, savings wiped out,they turned to the National Socialists and look at the outcome of that decision.
Complain about this comment
Re:339.
This Account sets out correctly what has ALREADY HAPPENED todate under "NEW" Labour. PERIOD.
Complain about this comment
It would be interesting to know if any of the MPs who have let their second homes had the permission of their lenders to do so. Readers of this blog might find it interesting to check MPs Facebook pages and see which town/city they list as their home, a certain Labour Baroness has recently changed hers, I wonder why?
Complain about this comment
Oh for a Jeremy Paxman. If he was still doing Newsnight there would not be enough room in the studio for all the bones of the MP's he had savaged.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
The term honourable member is unilaterally applied as they were deemed to be unilaterally honourable. They have proven themselves not to be so ...... yes the rules may have allowed them to do so but that does not make it ethically, morally correct or honourable to do so. I refuse to believe they were not aware that public money was paying for their claims which their constituents would have to pay for out of their own pocket - and don't forget their salaries and expenses are not recession dependant !!!
I stongly suggest that they should no longer be entitled to be referred to as the honourable member as they cannot justify this and the people to blame for this is - THEMSELVES !!!
Complain about this comment
Great headlines today, Beeb:
"MPs claimed for swimming pool. Speaker angry over leak"
Nice that there's something to chuckle about
Complain about this comment
342. At 01:25am on 12 May 2009, xTunbridge wrote:
Oh for a Jeremy Paxman. If he was still doing Newsnight there would not be enough room in the studio for all the bones of the MP's he had savaged.
===
You clearly don't watch Newsnight.
Presenter on 11/5/2009 - Jeremy Paxman!
Complain about this comment
This dysfunctional PM is sunk along with his hopeless Government. They are totally discredited having their greed and sleaze exposed with outrageous and discredited claims. Labour's catalogue of continuous,disasterous incidents have effectively buried themselves for the next 50 years. With Parliamentary moral authority completely gone, allowance claims should be suspended immediately until after a General Election.That will mean a dissolution of Parliament, but the Labour majority are desperate to cling to power and have neither the will nor integrity to do so. The next duly elected Government must implement a new and more honest system as a priority.
Meanwhile, David Cameron, to prove his integrity to Party & country must take firm action now against his own MPs. They must repay all funds deemed to have been obtained under suspect claims. Should they refuse, no matter who they are, they must stand down and be replaced at the next G/Election.The Tories cannot afford to carry such baggage.It makes it very difficult for hard working, grass roots supporters to canvass on doorsteps.
This is an opportunity for D.C to demonstrate firm leadership and show he has the moral authority to handle this problem.
Complain about this comment
Obviously Simon George (post 3) the irony of Nick's opening sentence went straight over your head.
Speaker Martin seemed to have lost the plot in Parliament yesterday as he spluttered his way through a condemnation of the media and the whistleblower.It was a joy to watch Jon Snow on Channel 4 insisting that MP's should answer the question re getting rid of him.
Many of those MP's named have committed what amounts to fraud and in particular those 'flipping,' their houses to claim further expenses.They should be arrested and charged,just as any member of the public would be. Why should they be immune simply because they are MP's?
Now this morning we have the revelation that Viscount Hailsham (Tory) claimed for having his moat cleaned...obviously an essential and that his expense claims were so high he had to make special arrangements with the fees office.
MP's can be thankful that while Brits are angry they are also somewhat laid back compared to some Europeans who would have them swinging from the lamp posts by now.
Complain about this comment
Until the 1960s, members of parliament were generally people successful in their own careers - lawyers, businessmen, teachers, trade unionists - who then went into politics. The professionals had made enough money and the trade unionists were generally supported by their sponsors. Now politics is a career in its own right. A normal career path will lead from a Politics degree to a research position with an MP, and then on to their own candidacy, or something similar. That means fewer MPs with experience of life outside the Westminster village, and more important, an imperative to make enough money in case they are unseated. It's noticeable that few MPs can actually comprehend the outrage their excessive expenses have generated. In real life, if you fiddle your expenses you get fired, but perhaps MPs don't understand what happens in real life.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Honorable no more - are we referring to politicians, the media or both?
Poweromics* is at work everywhere - as the blog http://poweromics.blogspot.com readily points out ...
And it's up to us to change it ...
David Clift, a Future 500 Leader
* POWEROMICS = People use position and power for their own personal gain, based on poor moral values, self interest and greed.
Complain about this comment
I am particularly incensed by the MPs expenses issue because I received a tax return form which even wants to know about interest which has been paid on accounts that have been taxed at source. I had £8 from an Esaver account so I suppose theyll want a slice of that even though that beastly little Blears woman is exempted. Now, although I am a Tory voter I think that all MPs should pay back their fiddled expenses to rub more salt in my wounds my income tax deduction from my company pension has been increased by £40 per month because the State pension went up on April 6th: simple math = state pension increase means extra £18 per month, therefore, well, you do the math (hate that saying but its appropriate).
As for Brown apologising shut up & start repaying our money.
Complain about this comment
Well Done Nick.
Whilst you may be reporting a serious issue, reading this particular blog submission I couldn't stop thinking of "The day Today "
I applaud you sir
Complain about this comment
We have heard cries of institutional racism and institutional cover-ups among other institutional wrongs over many years from our various governments and now it is time for us, the electorate, the tax-payer, the actual owners of this land, to stand up and shout institutional corruption in our elected officials, across all parties, it would seem.
Those that have used the system to full advantage are morally wrong - surely they must have had a conscience at the time, a moral nudge in their mind that said that although the claims were within the rules, they were a bit outside the moral bounds of right and wrong.
I work for a large company, and receive expenses if I have to conduct company business away from my main place of work. I get hotel and mileage allowance, and meals paid for in return for receipts. I have a company mobile phone and a company laptop, and can claim for some calls made from a hotel room, but they have to be justified, and they have to be in line with company policy. I have to agree my teams expenses, and my manager has to approve mine. Limits are set, and if exceeded, have to go to the next level for approval and further justification if necessary.
It seems that UK PLC does not have this regulation. Swimming pool cleaning, dog food, moat cleaning - they are not within the bounds of business for an MP.
My expenses are paid out from company funds, private funds, accumulated in the course of our business. Govt expenses come from our taxes - that is not the income of UK PLC. Trade is the national income. Income tax is meant to support domestic affairs, not the MPs bank balance.
Who steps in to police the state. In my company we are audited - where have the national auditors been? It seems to me that the problems are inherent and corruption is seen as ok because it goes all the way to the top like Blackpool through a stick of rock.
The mother of all parliaments needs to take stock, stop and step back, be dissolved if necessary, and a new breed of government, properly elected, properly mandated and regulated as 'for the nation, for the people', needs to be brought about.
If BNP weren't so homophobic and racist, I'd look to them, or UKIP, but I don't trust them either. Maybe Joanna Lumley can regain our trust in politics instead of these 'merchant bankers' we call our leaders.
Complain about this comment
The Queen should step in and advise Mr Brown that his government is not viable Then we could have a General Election and start again. We need far less MPs than we have They could be reduced to 200 They could then return to the Palace of Westminster Portcullis House could then be converted to flats for MPs Now is the time that members paid for their own pension fund, and their meals and drinks like the rest of us It is interesting to note that the American Senate and House of Representatives has a combined total of 535 members representing a population of 305, 764,000 The House of Commons has a total of 659 members representing a population of 60, 441, 000 and we must not forget we have 78 MEPs and they all have to be paid for
Complain about this comment
There is nothing wrong with the system as it is a system of honour and trust where you are reimbursed for the expenses incurred in the pursuit of being an MP representing your constituents.
The problem is with the MP's who blame the system for being faulty instead of themselves for being corrupt.
It is like blaming the 30mph speed limit for being at fault when someone is caught speeding at 40mph.
Complain about this comment
I'm off to do a bit of shoplifting today, never done it before but I am doing it in confidence that if I'm caught I'll just offer to put the goods back on the shelf and the shop owners will just pat me on the head and ask me to come back another time.
Ain't democracy great?
Complain about this comment
And what is the definition of Dennis Skinner? a) Honourable principled member OR b) Labour's failed answer to Norman Tebbit OR c) Labours 'rent a clown' trundled into distracting activity at awkward moments for his party? His performance at PMQ today was entertaining but typically bizarre as yet again he rambled but failed to ask a question. Worse, his 'green shoots' utterances 1 day after a huge rise in the official jobless and 1 hour after the rather more expert Mervyn King had pretty much said the opposite, were absurd. I bet he hasn't fiddled his expenses but doesn't he represent yet another laughable and out of touch dimension to British politics?
Complain about this comment
What I'd like is for J.Paxman et al to ask a politician the following questions or something along these lines
1] Politicians such as yourself have been claiming x amount of money for things that are quite clearly unrelated to your work, and which are deemed by the general populous you serve, to be completely indefensible
in terms of them being considered an expense item.
Can you confirm then, that you were knowingly "taking the preverbial" simply because you could and because you were greedy ? If you deny knowingly abusing the expense system, what possible credible explanation can you offer for these expenses?
2] You've knowlingly abused the expense system for years. You've known the public would be outraged but you've continued anyway. Therefore isn't the offer to pay the money back just another text book example of someone trying to save their own skin. A desparate attempt to salvage your reputation by offering to pay the back before you are most likely made to pay it back and hoping the British public is gulible enough to believe you are truely sorry.
In other words, would it be a fair assumption that YOU ARE ONLY SORRY ... BECAUSE YOU GOT CAUGHT. Otherwise you'd have stopped a long time ago or indeed never started in the first place.
_________
My thoughts : I believe, rightly or wrongly that the law is the law and therefore no matter how ridiculuos the claims were, if they were within the rules then they were within the rules, and more fool us for giving a group of people carte blanche to write their own pay cheques. However for those few people, whose expenses fall outside the rules, they should be sent down and I mean job loss, and a custodial sentence.
What annoys me most, is not the bent politicians but the insult to ones intelligence that we recieve when they publically apologise and expect us to believe they are sincere. I can't stand it when someone metaphorically "pee's down your back and then trys to tell you its raining"
Complain about this comment
I woke up this morning and thought I'd better go to work.
I put on the light, and thought I'd claim that against my company, cos if I didn't have to get up to go to work, I wouldn't need the light on. While I was having my shower, I thought I could claim the electricity back, and the water, from my company, because if I didn't have to get up to go to work, I wouldn't have needed to shower.
While I was eating my breakfast, I though, I'll claim that Weetabix and milk (hey, I'll claim for sugar too even though I don't use it - no-one will know), cos if I wasn't getting up to go to work, I wouldn't need to eat until lunch.
I put out the rubbish, cos today was bin collection day, and thought, hey, I can claim back the cost of black bags and maybe my council tax too, cos if I didn't have to get up to go to work, I wouldn't be having breakfast, wouldn't throw out that Weetabix empty carton, and wouldn't have filled up my bin quite as quickly. On my way back through the garden, I ripped my shirt on a tree branch, and thought, hey, I'll claim for a new shirt cos if I wasn't dressed to go to work, I wouldn't have been wearing that shirt.
All this and I haven't even left the house yet. I love this claim system - expenses are great!!
Complain about this comment
Ref 360.
Good thinking but you'll never make it in politics I'm afraid. MP's would have added toilet paper, soap and toothpaste. They would have had a "working breakfast" in a subsidised commons restaurant after being driven to work (even if your *cough* main home is just down the road from the house)in a taxi paid for by us or even a driver if you you were really important.
You wouldn't be putting your own bins out, you'd have a housekeeper to do that for you. And you wouldn't be ripping your shirts on branches because the gardener would have cut those back after he'd finished spreading £300 worth of horse muck and cleaning out your moat - everyone's got one of those I assume.
Right I'm off for a nice cup of tea. Where's that ruddy serving girl gone?
Complain about this comment
ref 361 - I'm new to this, but thanks to your guide, I'm learning quickly. I've employed a secretary to write my emails and update the blogs, complete my expense reports and make sure I'm staying within the rules. I can claim for her too (see, I'm already half way to completing my 'being a true sexist MP' course). I hope she doesn't send out any upsetting emails, I've heard that can happen.
Thanks, this time next year I'll be a millionaire, or better, an MP.
Complain about this comment
Why don't journalists do some investigating to find out how much it cost to buy or rent a place in London. I hazard that £20,000 is pretty reasonable and that many MPs are out of pocket.
Whilst we have our envious heads in somebody else's attractive moat we may have missed that the tax-payer is getting a bargain.
Complain about this comment
I suggested previously that the Olympic accommodation could adapted for second homes for MPs. I suspect that my idea is being taken on board as according to today's news many more millions are being donated, by the Government, to the project. That should make sure that the resultant accommodation is up to MPs' expectations.
Complain about this comment
I wonder where Honorable begins and Honorable ends... MP's don't know the meaning of the word, they can't really be that honorable when they have their noses in the trough, towing the party lines and going against their constituents wishes.
They are in it for themselves, they think they know best and we must trust and abide while they help themselves to other peoples toil, hard sweat and labour to live a life of luxury while all of us the providers scrimps and saves.
Now we know why they never listen and obey our wishes - they are honorable and know better - what a load of tosh! To call them Honorable is deceptive, fraudulent and mis-leading
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS