First he came for the politicians …

Here’s a cheap way:

1. Make a (short) list of allowable expenses.
2. ALL expenses to be covered by receipt.
3. Publish all expenses for each MP on the internet.
4. End
5. Cost – one typist to enter the details. Perhaps an unemployed MP’s wife.

This would be self-policing. Constituents/reporters would scour the resulting information for anyone stepping outside the (spirit of the) rules.

Steve

As for the family member rule – why not introduce guidelines (or rules if you prefer that word) that are not legally binding but that spells out in black and white ‘no family members to be employed’ and have MP’s publish a list of their employees. Of course, some MP’s may just stick two fingers up at the public (although it would be foolhardy after the furore over expenses) and do it anyway but surely it’s better that whole of parliament sticking up two fingers and not even trying to assuage the publics concerns over this?

After all, don’t special rules apply to MP’s anyway in some cases, like expenses not being a benefit in kind as far as the taxman goes? Seems that when the laws bend in favour of MP’s exceptions can be made but when it’s the other way round it’s an insurmountable problem?

The real Government in Brussels could carry on as normal, nobody would notice, and the country would save a fortune.

And you Mr R. could go back to creating wealth for the county.

Some times the best plans are the simplist.

The better point here, over and above the fact that genuine hard working family members would be tarred with the same brush as fraudsters, is probably the retrospective nature of any new enactment. Better to let both present and future employment of family members be properly scrutinised for approval rather than impose a blanket ban?

Reply: The plan is to introduce rules, not legislation.

This is a silly argument.

It may well be true today, while the government is holding rates down, but it is unlikely to be true in the near future when the Tories will start hiking rates to try and suck back in some of the excess money Gordon is printing.

Far more to the point, the difference between rent and interest is a drop in the bucket in the context of the national accounts. What is far more important is that the current system gives MPs a strong motivation to go along with the horribly damaging permanent property boom mentality.
If they are only getting rent paid and have no direct financial stake in their taxpayer funded property, their motivations will be closer to the rest of us.

Which would be nice …

Sooner or later the law of unexpected consequences is going to start to have an effect.

I don’t mind family members being given proper jobs, as long as it is arranged through the organisation that sorts out administration in Westminster. They can then do all the annual assessments to prove that the staff member is there for a good reason, and remove them if not. The trick is to stop this from being an illegitimate means of taking more money from the tax payer.

Banning claims for the purchase of second homes is more about the “flipping” scandal. Whether it saves money is almost a secondary issue. What we expect is for MPs to behave in the same way that they legislate for ordinary members of the public, including collecting receipts for absolutely everything they claim for.

Why cannot the majority wake up and smell the bacon.

No one needs to purchase a second home as all are provided with state owned apartments (very simple and basic rooms) within a few minutes walk of their government buildings (note no expenses for travelling).

Their MPs are all provided with an office within walking distance of their Government buildings, all such offices, staff and the running costs are under the direct control of government/civil service, and paid by Government directly. Not by individual Mps.

Expenses are miniscule compared with those in the Uk, and are subject to complete transparency and publication, ALL earnings investments and the like, outside of MPs salaries are published.

This sounds like the system many of us bloggers were suggesting was sensible last year.

Cannot understand what the problem is in the UK, apply similar to the above with exactly the same tax allowances as everyone else gets in the UK.

Subsidising MPs House purchases, first, second, or third is a bloody nonesense.

Why can the majority wake up and smell the bacon.

The gravy train has to end.