They’re Off

On 6th May 2010 we will be asked to elect a new House of Commons consisting of 650 honest and true members, up from the current mainly honest and true 646 members. Of those currently sitting, 144 (22%) will not be seeking re-election, an unusually high number, some through disgrace, some taking the opportunity to secure attractive redundancy payments before a likely reduction, and others who have become completely brassed off with the whole thing.

Much has been made of the ‘expenses in lieu of pay’ problem. An interesting historical perspective on this appeared in the Telegraph in November 2009: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/6629911/MPs-expenses-system-created-in-pact-between-Thatchers-ministers-and-Opposition.html

But we the public must take our share of responsibility too. If we were to accept the advice of independent panels set up to consider fair and reasonable remunerations for people in public life instead of giving way to political expediency resulting in changes which, by definition, are less than fair we should avoid many of the troubles we find ourselves in. The ‘What’s in it for me?’ brigade will continue to howl their protests but politics should be about the common good not narrow self interest. A system that is open and fair must benefit us all in the long run avoiding the sort of mess we find ourselves in now.

Read More

The Telegraph Fiddles while Britain Burns

How much more expenses poison will The Telegraph drip-feed in its attempt to kill off ministers and derail the coalition Government’s attempts to sort out our economic mess? Not satisfied with getting rid of possibly the best person for the job they are now after his successor. Who next? We must draw a line under the expenses saga.

If The Telegraph has evidence of wrong doing why have they held it back? We need to move on. If there are further stories which they think the public should know about, keep them until the economy is back on its feet. Then they can try to recoup the £110,000 they reportedly paid through a middle-man to the mole who illegally obtained the stolen data on MPs expenses.

Happy to profit from their stolen goods I heard one Telegraph columnist on Sky News suggest that they couldn’t not print a good story. Why? There are precedents, the Duke of Windsor’s affair and Churchill’s drinking to name but two. This is not to cover up wrong doing but to see the broader picture. We are at war with our financial crisis but the small minded in our midst continue to look at the minutia. Let’s have a sense of proportion please.

Read More

MPs Expenses - she was warned!

"Thatcher warned over MPs expenses scandaldanquot;

Well there's a surprise!

Read More

Cameron's trumpet

Maria Miller leaves the Houses of Parliament after apologising to MPs. Photo Warren Allott/Telegraph

“The bedrock of our society” - Women and Equalities Minister, Maria Miller!!

"Marriage is the bedrock of our society and now irrespective of sexuality everyone in British society can make that commitment. It is a wonderful achievement and whilst this legislation may be about marriage, its impact is so much wider. Making marriage available to all couples demonstrates our society’s respect for all individuals regardless of their sexuality. It demonstrates the importance we attach to being able to live freely. It says so much about the society that we are and the society that we want to live in."

In my mind's eye I can still see her at the dispatch box, brazenly lecturing the Britain people on how we should order our lives when in reality she was pressing the case of an unrepresentative minority for political purposes, creating a law which required numerous subsequent amendments to avoid, for example, a gay King’s ‘husband’ from becoming Queen!

It is now clear why Mrs Miller was so positive about "being able to live freely" in "the society that we want to live in." She had experience of living freely at the expense of the tax-payer.

The Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards found that the Culture Minister had over-claimed by ?45,000 for expenses towards mortgage interest payments and council tax but the Commons Standards Committee ruled that Mrs Miller should repay only ?5,800 and apologise to parliament for her "attitudedanquot;.

The Prime Minister regards that as reasonable for an 'honest mistake'. He said, "It was found she had made mistakes, she accepted that, repaid the money, she apologised unreservedly to the House of Commons, so I think we should leave it there." His comments will make 'the hard working people of this country' wonder why there is one law for the privileged and another for the rest of us. As one MP remarked, "If one of my constituents had claimed £6,000 of taxpayers' money for, say, housing benefit and then tried to claim that it was an oversight, that she hadn't realised that she wasn't entitled to this money, the book would be thrown at my constituent, rightly."

Having made a terse, inadequate 'apology' to the House, Mrs Miller keeps her job despite being regarded as amediocre minister who is "out of her depth".  Perhaps she feels secure as one of the few women in Team Cameron happy to act as his trumpet. A successful grammar school girl keen to make good she has been used by a privileged elite to undermine the institution of marriage in a squalid vote chasing exercise.

The Telegraph suggests that the 'apology' was used as an occasion to bury bad news but that is no surprise these days when everything seems designed to gain votes at any expense. That is evidenced by Dave looking to the Muslim vote by claiming that "halal meat will be protected as long as he Prime Minister". Perhaps that is why he prefers to shop at Waitrose with customers who are "more engaged than those who shop elsewhere". Somewhere he can rely on getting halal meats.

Nothing it seems is too difficult for us to swallow!

Read More