These MPs are living in cloud-cuckoo land if the they think that some
outside scrutiny of the ridiculous flawed system will solve
anything. The system itself must be abolished altogether.
Personally I would -pay MPs a total fee for the job to include all
their costs of two homes and staff and allow free travel from their
constituency to London and in London. Distance from London could
provide a modest weighting in the fee. There would be no expenses at
all and no claims and thus no fiddles. How they divide the fee up
would be their problem. I would also reduce the number of MPs by
around 20%. Fewer MPs would cost less and there would further
saving by abolishing the Fees Office.
Tinkering at the edges with the present crooked system is an insult
to our intelligence.
From the first disclosures about the Tory front benchers it would
appear that there were fewer offenders and their culpability was also
not so deep. This has mostly been a disease of a thoroughly corrupt
Labour party. riven with internal dissent and given to scandalous
"spinning" and character assassination. Cameron would, however, be
well advised to sack from his shadow cabinet any who have made
serious misuse of their expenses and to withdraw the whip from any
considered to have brought the party into disrepute.
xxxxxxxxx cs
As the frenzy over MPs' claims continues into a fourth day, senior
figures from all parties will meet this morning to discuss how to
salvage Parliament's battered reputation. Plans to bring in a private-
sector company to run the expenses department has raised fears,
however, that the move is being used as a smokescreen to suppress
future embarrassing revelations.
Senior Labour figures say that the future privatisation of the Fees
Office to process claims would exempt receipts from publication under
Freedom of Information rules. This was branded unbelievable and
unacceptable by Tony Wright, chairman of the Public Administration
Committee.
This comes after the latest wave of damaging revelations: Kitty
Ussher, the Benefits Minister, spent £20,000 on a makeover of the
Victorian house she had lived in for five years; Tony Blair claimed
for the interest on a £296,000 mortgage on a home bought for £30,000.
In the first revelations about senior Tories, The Daily Telegraph
revealed that Alan Duncan, the Shadow Commons leader, claimed more
than £4,000 for work on his garden over three years. It also had
details of claims from the frontbenchers Michael Gove, Francis Maude,
Andrew Lansley and Chris Grayling.
David Cameron, the Conservative leader, apologised as the allegations
were made public, saying it was a bad day for Parliament and the
Conservative Party.
A former Commons Deputy Speaker took the unusual step of urging
Gordon Brown to hold an urgent general election to save the
"foundations of democracy". Lord Naseby, formerly the Tory MP Michael
Morris, said that the situation was quite dreadful. "I think frankly,
if this runs and runs, then Parliament should be dissolved, I think
they have to start again," he told BBC radio. "The Great British
public has lost their confidence and I think that it is extremely
serious. And if it is that serious then there is only one way of
dealing with it, that is to dissolve Parliament."
MPs on the House of Commons Commission, which oversees the running of
Parliament, will meet today to approve a new independent unit to
process expenses. The unit, expected to cost £600,000 a year, is
being seen as a desperate rearguard action to protect Parliament's
reputation.
Sir Stuart Bell, the Labour member of the House of Commons
Commission, said that the unit would at first be staffed by outsiders
and eventually offered to tender for companies such as Capita or Cap
Gemini. "It will be staffed by skilled people from outside Parliament
and once the unit is established [plans] are already under way that
it should be given over to the private sector," he said.
Under the new system MPs would have no right of appeal if their
claims were rejected. Commons staff have complained that they put
their careers on the line if they mount serious objections to
expenses claims.
Sir Stuart said yesterday that receipts would not be released for
public inspection if they were processed by a private company.
"Receipts would be available under FOI in the unit [when it is part
of the Commons] but when they go to an outside unit they would not."
Instead, information would be released under 26 broad categories,
such as mortgage interest and council tax.
MPs on two key Commons committees, the Finance and Services Committee
and the Administration Estimate Audit Committee, say that they were
not informed of the fine print of the plan. Commons sources said that
the privatisation of the Commons expenses department would not
guarantee that it could be shielded from freedom of information
requests.
Dr Wright, who believes that MPs are unable to reform the system
themselves, said: "If this is another cunning ruse to exempt MPs from
the scrutiny of freedom of information, it is as unbelievable as it
is unacceptable."
Posts
