The irrepressible expenses scandal

"If the final conclusion of the reviews…were to give the impression that the only people who could afford to become Members of Parliament were those with very substantial incomes," Prime Minister Gordon Brown stated, referring to the auditing of MPs expenses by Sir Thomas Legg, "then that would be a very big blow to the opportunities and possibilities of those from poorer backgrounds".

With every comment made on the expenses scandal, it seems as though the velocity with which the political quicksand is dragging the reputation of MPs down increases. The public outrage at the way Westminsters' expenses system allowed for MPs to make claims on things such as refurbishments of second homes, gardening, and mobile telephone bills from taxpayer’s money is undeniably justifiable. It is undoubtedly a severe blow to public trust and political legitimacy when the very people who are supposed to be the representatives of taxpayers, turn out to be exploiting the system. Unfortunately, not all MPs seem to recognise the gravity of the situation.

The outrage caused amongst MPs by the appointment of Sir Thomas Leggand and his following investigations have led to MPs complaining about the auditing of claims, some also refusing to repay money, and agreeing with the Prime Minister that the consequences might be putting people off politics. As MPs have stated they find Sir Thomas’ retrospective reprimands unfair, claiming they followed the law in the first instance, it should have been clear that the expenses system in question ought to have been used in compliance with common sense. The auditing however, offers all MPs who have benefited from the dodgy claims to give themselves a clean slate by paying back the money—this might prove invaluable if they wish to gain a seat in parliament next May.

With Labour and Tory MPs raising questions concerning Sir Thomas’ own expenses, the road to political farce is becoming increasingly short. Whether Gordon Brown and David Cameron’s statements that MPs who do not repay the money they have unfairly received will be barred from standing in the upcoming elections will have any effect on the attitudes of MPs is yet to be shown. In any case, the main priority of parliament these days appears to be to sweep this scandal under the rug as soon as possible, so as not to further hinder public relations in the face of coming elections.

The severity of the situation extends beyond growing public discontent, proved by the investigation of twenty-seven MPs for possible breach of tax-laws. Such MPs undoubtedly give their colleagues who do their job and manage fine on their salary of about £65,000, a bad name. As certain high-profile MPs are revealed to have opposed a decision to publicise documents on expenses-claims a few years back, we see a recurrent trend; either MPs do not understand the degree of justified discontent felt by the public, or they have simply decided that claiming extravagant expenses is within their right. It all comes down to their attitude towards spending other people’s money.

Not all MPs have come out as villains in this predicament, but there are enough of those who deliberately took advantage of a weak system in need of reform. The dangerous ground here is mixing personal morality with politics. This is where there is a serious need for a more legitimate and accountable system.

If the House of Commons is unable to regulate itself, the electorate will be forced to do it for them.