I think we see a stark difference in the parties when we look at the leaders’ attitudes to this expenses business. Gordon wants the leaders to come together and decide, behind closed doors, a new “system”. But what is needed is not a new system but a new attitude to integrity by MPs themselves.
Imagine – hypothetically – that McDonald’s, Burger King, KFC and Pizza Hut got together and decided their new standard on food hygiene. Suppose they decided that overall the current hygiene standards weren’t too bad because only a few people died of food poisoning each year. A bit of tweaking was decided but not too much.
Imagine – hypothetically – that Nokia, Sony Ericsson and Motoroal got together and decided how much of a profit-margin they should be allowed to make on the next generation of phone handsets? You would cry foul, wouldn’t you?!
Political parties are competitors. They have to be, otherwise it wouldn’t work. That doesn’t mean it is acceptable to spread lies about your competitors but it also doesn’t mean that it is AOK to sow up the market behind closed doors. In a system of democracy where parliament is sovereign it makes no sense to have a set of “externally” audited rules. It makes no sense to give the power of the judgement of acceptability to a politically appointed panel of “grandees”. The only accountability available to MPs is the accountability to a free press and the accountability to the electorate.
The solution to this supposed mine-field is really quite simple. Each prospective MP should put in his or her manifesto what he or she proposed to claim in expenses. Not necessarily in cash terms but in terms of what they hope the taxpayer will fund. So if I was standing in my local constituency I would say “I live in the constituency already and it is pretty close to Westminster so I don’t need any extra funds for a second London home”. A candidate in Glasgow might say “I need a flat in London and a weekly return ticket from Glasgow to London so I will claim for that”.
If a political party wants to make sure its overall integrity is not questioned it might make sure that any candidate running on its ticket puts in only a sensible request.
What we don’t need, yet again, is a set of rules so complicated that nobody really understands it. Complicated rules, yet again, which lead to confusion, loop holes and systematic abuse. Simple rules, full disclosure and public accountability. That is all we need. What we do not need is a cosy agreement between competing players. If that is the answer then, yet again, we are asking the wrong question.
One thing which is really positive about this wrong charade is that it shows actually how vibrant our democracy is. Far from putting our democracy in a bad light, the exposure of our corrupt MPs shows how engaged people really are. Now we, as voters, have to make sure we put pressure on our institutions to change in the way that we so obviously want. For too long voters have simply assumed that MPs do their work so that we don’t have to. It is time to assert ourselves once more and get this country’s house back in order.
The MPs expenses row has been great fun – it’s always fun watching MPs squirm – but in political terms it is a mere sideshow. Nothing that has been revealed over the last few weeks will have much effect on the way people vote in General Elections.
It’s also worth bearing in mind that compared to the gravy train of the EU and the billions that sucks out of our pockets each year it’s a bit like taping up your letter box to keep the heat in while leaving the door wide open.
“Each prospective MP should put in his or her manifesto what he or she proposed to claim in expenses. Not necessarily in cash terms but in terms of what they hope the taxpayer will fund.”
Excellent idea- apart from being good in itself, it will have the added bonus of getting the public to scrutinise the claims of those who want to represent them. It isn’t a secret that the majority, even of voters, know little about these events & this is largely a result of apathy. This level of interest in expenses can bring about serious change if it gets people demanding proper representation in the corridors of power.
In 2008, I decided not to bother with the local elections at all as my candidates were all so worthless. (Those who were elected have simply ignored every letter & email I’ve sent them, whereas my MP is actually quite good despite being entrenched in one of the safest Labour seats known to man). You see- they think I’m apathetic whereas in fact I take a very close interest in all this shite & have simply not been engaged.
Anyone seeking my support in future elections had better make some extremely good suggestions re: what to do with my money & that. I wouldn’t actually call myself anti-politics or anti-politician, in fact my lingering idealism is what makes me so angry as I cannot shrug all this off.
On the other hand, imagine – hypothetically – that Nokia, Sony Ericsson and Motoroal got together and designed a standard phone charger. There’s potential for good here.
[...] Blue Eyes Has A Solution to the Expenses Problem [...]