speed across the country. We all know what this means-I am finally in
a position to break the recent silence in this corner of the
The topic of the moment is the expenses scandal which is currently
gripping Parliament, and it would be rude for me not to pass comment.
Like most people, it would seem, I am not impressed with the way MPs
appear to have abused the system. Sorry if that disappoints you,
As many have already pointed out, all this 'within the rules' malarky
is actually missing the point. As public servants, MPs have a duty to
behave morally and fairly and it is questionable as to whether or not
some of the MPs embroiled in this scandal have done that. There must
be many examples of people in government who have been openly critical
about those who have sought to use loopholes in the law to their
advantage; shouldn't MPs be leading by example?
Of course, there is also the question of who made the rules in the
first place. To defend one's behaviour on the basis of it being
within a set of rules influenced by one's self seems highly dubious to
me. This is why I think that the expenses reforms being debated at the
moment should possibly have a delayed introduction. That way, the
thoughts of how it might impact the individuals concerned today might
be of a little less concern and we might be able to hold out more hope
for an unbiased and transparent system in the future.
We've also had the bizarre revelations this week that at least one
Labour MP continued to claim on a mortgage because "he'd forgotten
he'd paid it off." Such people should be removed from their positions
of responsibility immediately. If those of us who are cynical about
the excuse this gentleman made are right to be so, then we're talking
about someone who hasn't got the balls to admit they got it wrong, and
who thinks he can bend the truth and pull the wool over our eyes. The
title of 'honourable' is certainly undeserved, and I would prefer not
to have such a slimy, gutless, cheating person making decisions about
the way this country is run.
On the other hand, let us assume that his wife was right when she
insisted rather emotionally to the press that it was all a genuine
mistake. Let us assume that he did genuinely forget he had paid off
his mortgage. I'm not sure I'd even employ someone this incompetent to
make my tea, and it would be very foolish indeed to trust him to vote
wisely in parliamentary debate.
Amongst the furore though, I can't help wondering how many of those
expressing outrage are more than a little hypocritcal. How many of
those who have written self-righteouss letters in to newspapers have
themselves ordered the most expensive item on the menu just because
their company was paying? How many of these evidently perfect citizens
would actually resist the temptations placed before MPs at the moment?
Everyone is capable of conjecturing from the comfort of an armchair,
but until they've proven that they would do better in the same
situation, those who criticise loudly are only spouting hot air like
their representatives in government.