Only the catharsis of a general election can end the expenses saga 

barnacle bill

Don't hold your breath on this one as the turkeys will not vote for an early Christmas.
However by flocking together from all sides of the Commons they are storing up trouble when we do get a chance at culling them

Vulture

At last the penny drops! Now you get the picture, David. Joe and Josephine Public are rightly steaming and want those thieving MPs guilty of corruption prosecuted, forced to disgorge their ill-gotten gains, and in the worst cases, jailed. Failing that, they will not vote for the guilty ones at election time. We may get a virgin intake, as Dave evidently fears, but better that than this Parliament of whores.

ken from glos

CORRECT.

Michael Booth

Not quite ... only the electorate can renew the House of Commons. Bring on the General Election.

Frank P

We should have a general election? Now that's a novel suggestion, David. Still, it's nice to know you're finally catching up with the commentariat. Every little 'elps!

However, most of us have now moved from that stage - due to the lack of response from those with their dirty mitts on the levers of power; we've been talking for some about adorning the lamp-posts of Westminster with those who have betrayed our country; the heroes of the present and the past who have shed their blood for it; the culture they held dear and worthy of their sacrifice and the tenets of Judeo-Christian religion that was the catalyst for its erstwhile success and leadership in world affairs.

Some of us are now not at all sure that the alternatives on offer as we go through through the same old, same old of a general election, will be sufficient to make an iota of difference to the rot that has already set in.

How do you feel about that line of thought?

RMH

Anne W loves change so much, she changed churches/religion because of it!

Simon too

This parliament is dead on its feet. It needs to reform itself but has no credibility - the parties proposed "reforms" may suit the party machines, but are themselves a more fundamental corruption of Parliament.

The war in Afghanistan is adrift. In the residue of this administration's term it is next to impossible either to move forward effectively, or to move back.

Even the authority of this administration to deal with our current economic woes is constrained by the limited term left to it.

The Prime Minister may still be able to deliver HM a majority in the Commons, but to what purpose? This PM is not going to make a decision. It is time that HM called a general election.

Chuck Unsworth

Er, no. It's not The Commons which ought to restore trust, it's individual MPs who should do so - by their actions. It is clear that the cess-pit of Westminster is incapable of putting its Houses in order. It's also blindingly obvious that any action which both Houses take will - certainly and rightly - be viewed with scepticism and suspicion. All that has to happen is for MPs to publish and account for their 'expenses' in full. It's our money, not theirs. They need to explain what they have done with it and why they believe that the standards applicable in every other walk of life do not apply to them.

All this garbage about 'rules' (or do they mean 'Rules' in Maiden Lane?) is mere window dressing and froth. What we all know is that whatever 'system' these people choose to put in place, they will certainly spend vast amounts of time and effort in finding ways around it - to their pecuniary advantage.

This is about moral standards, decency honesty and personal integrity. It is damn-all to do with 'rules' and 'systems'.

And yet they still don't get it, do they? Well, the answer is at the Ballot Box and in the Courts.

Bert

Its so bloody obvious that each MP should account for their own actions to their own constituents.

A general election is clearly and urgently required to restore confidence in Parliament and government.

Tinkering by Flash and the nationalisation of Parliamentarians is probably a socialist wet dream but the health of our democracy requires accountability to the country not bureaucrats.

Forgive my ignorance but given the lack of confidence in the Brown government just what would be required to force a motion of no confidence?

David Ossitt

“Only the catharsis of a general election can end the expenses saga”

The expenses saga as you call it has revealed much more than the rot and corruption at the very heart of Parliament and the House of Lords.

What it quite clearly shows is that we have a politically compliant police force and judiciary.

We have seen clear evidence of corruption, theft, embezzlement, fraud and all of the various kinds and manner of creaming-off of moneys from the public purse into politician’s pockets.

But no one has been charged with any crime; no one has had their collar felt.

This is outrageous; heads must roll, not in the body politic but at Scotland Yard, this is clear evidence that the police are as corrupt as the politico’s.

We need a reformation, bring in the Army.

Percy

We must also have some new legislation so that idiots like Lord Martin of God knows where can be removed from the House of Lords.

presterjohn

an election won't change much - just bring in some new fools

and the rules were fine and enforceable - which word in "wholly, exclusively and necessarily" isn't clear?

it's a matter of enforcement. if the custodes can't guard themselves, doesn't it go up to the queen? or is this another hole in our constitution?

James

Gordon Brown....Election....my keyboard would barely let me type the those words in the same sentence!

Lord Monteagle

�Only the catharsis of a general election can end the expenses saga�

Not quite! Why should piggie MPs then be able to pick out pockets further with the payouts they get for lasting until a General Election. They should fall on their swords or be sacked. Then we should have a general election

anne allan

MPs keep shrieking about the unfairness of the rulings being retrospective.
Where were they when retrospective legislation was inflicted on the electorate? Choosing bookcases at John Lewis? Finangling the finer points of their mortgage claims? Supervising the landscape gardener?
With the possible exception of a few barnacled class warriors fiercely nursing their atavistic hatred of the financially astute, they sure as hell weren't stopping the destruction of a basic tenet of democratic rule.

Thomas as in doubting

David,
When you see Harry,tell her to wait and see WHO will clean up parliament..and it WON'T be any of them!!!!
Top of the ballot paper to you.

Nick

Rules Rules Rules.

A few months ago MPs were complaining the rules weren't clear.

Now the rules are clear, they are complaining yet again.

Retrospective they shout. Oh dear. Section 58, Finance act 2008 is retrospective taxation. In the words of Corporal Jones, they don't like it up 'em.

Interest, why aren't they paying interest.

3 1/2 years ago the Commons had this to say to me.

> If a Member uses their allowances inappropriately, officials in
> Finance and Administration would normally ask for repayment. If a
> substantive public complaint is made this would be referred to the
> Commissioner on Standards and Privileges and then the Commissioner
> might investigate. His report would go before the Committee on
> Standards and Privileges, and the House would vote on sanctions. In
> recent cases Members' salary has been temporarily stopped, and they
> have been suspended for a time.

I've made a test complaint about Gordon Brown, asking for him to be refered, and for the interest on his expenses to be paid.

If it isn't then the IR need to tax him on the benefit

Nick

J R Hartley

As it seems hanging is so out of fashion, I say lets organise and publish the details of those honourable members who have had their expenses referred and have not coughed up.

If they want to settle their tab then fair enough, if they are refusing - then let us as the electorate have the details to hand when we come to make a qualified decision come election time.

London Calling

I find it very strange to hear Gordon Brown and David Cameron talk about expenses as though they were in some way separated from the issue. Gordon talks about his MP'S as people who should pay back monies owed with no mention of his own
£20000 expense claim, whilst David scorns his own with the threat of them having to step down if Conservative members don’t pay up whilst he is being asked by Mr Legg to produce more information on his mortgage payments. Meanwhile the venom spills in Westminster as ministers are having secret meetings no doubt to create a fight back so they don’t have to pay back anything, sweep it under the carpet and put a new system in place. Passing the buck to the commons is to be in denial that any wrongdoing has taken place by claimants, this is a mess and from the publics view a travesty of justice and a mockery of democracy.

The election is fast approaching and the public are not holding their breath….

Bring on the Clowns…

2trueblue

I doubt that we will get an election until way into next year. The real issue is the MPs are living on another planet. They go up to Westminster as our servants and think that they are not accountable to us. They vote on how much they are paid and also on how the sort out their expenses.

The gardening and cleaning bill is the least of it.

They have bought houses with our money and pocketed the profit. Now we are talking about hundreds of thousands of pounds here, and they then found another way to maximise that gain by 'flipping' so that having taken the money which is not theirs (morally, not something they understand) they then avoid CGT. Some of them have flipped as many as four times. Think about the profit from that. Now that is really something that I can not get my head around. Why is that allowed when we are paying the mortgage? IT is our money, our investment, our risk. These are our MPs that we voted in and they think that is ok.

Verity

We urgently need a reform of our second chamber. At the moment, no matter how grotesque the misdemeanour in the H of C, if a government wants to reward someone (for services to the party, not the country) or wants someone out of the way of the voters, but wants to retain their services, e.g. the egregious Mandelson creature, they can stuff them into the House of Lords.

I propose a return to the hereditaries - who were never compulsive legislators, nor, indeed, compulsive attendees except when a debate particularly interested them - with some system of limiting the number of lifers. Perhaps 10 for each party. It should also be within the terms that the lifers could be removed for louche or dangerous behaviour ... as in "Lord" Ahmad threatening the Home Secretary with 10,000 Muslim boys coming round if she didn't ban a fellow, respectable, ELECTED MP from the Continent from entering our country. Said MP having been formally invited by Lord Pearson to show his film in the House.

"Lord" Ahmad has little respect the reputation of the House, given that he was illegally texting while driving at speed on the motorway and was involved in an accident in which there was a death. I think he had to do some porridge for that. That should mean expulsion from the Lords.

Additionally, it should have been possible for Patricia MaWhinney, elevated for no discernible reason to being "Baroness" Scotland, to be told to vacate her office in the Lords and go elsewhere when she was caught employing an illegal alien ... added to which she was flouting a law she had been instrumental in bringing in.

Now they've got Gorbals Mick, elevated for no discernible service to the country. (Oi! Mick! Still distributing government air miles among your family?)

The destruction of our ancient and revered (at home and abroad) House of Lords was part of Tony Vile's programme of the deconstruction of Britain. Matters cannot be allowed to rest as he left them.

The H of L should be restored to the hereditaries with a set number of appointees (who can be dismissed and stripped of their titles for behaviour that could bring dishonour on our ancient House). It is OUR House of Lords, not theirs.

Robert Eve

Brown won't call an election until the EU beat the Czech president to a pulp.

Roy Gould

There should be some body (dare I say Quango) formed that overseas Goverment which has a tick box which said Gov must fulfil and if they don't then the body can force it to go to the country and have an election straight away - the time is now before this lot do any more damage.

Noa Zrk

Verity.
Spot on as usual with your identification of the need for House of Lords reform. The way in which it has been stuffed with Labour placemen, many of whom should been elevated to Pentonville, rather than Westminster, is a national disgrace. I disagree with you though in the remedy. Hereditary peers are not the answer in a democracy. This should be a freely elected second chamber acting as a counter balance to the overweening power of the Commons and the cabal arising from it which mis runs the country. As there is no chance of the Turkeys voting for such a limit on their powers it could be known as the flying piggery.

TomTom

Elect the Lords using Euro Constituencies and repeal the Parliament Acts allowing the Lords to block Money Bills as in the US and Germany - then we can get budgetary control.

Lion of England

People say they just dont get it? I think the british people dont get it,YOU ARE THE Soverigen
POWER, They dont get it because they have placed thenselves above you the people what we need is the
disalution of the lords and vote in Independents
who dont have to follow the PARTY LINE political partys are nothing more than would be kings and
Qweens if the People finaly go on to the streets
in the Millions and demand the ghange right now,
instead of beeing druged my stupid Tv programs.
And waiting for the non Elected prime Minion to say yes you can now vote,well i would say his Name but as soon as i see his Name or the other two i can just PUKE,STAND UP AND DEMAND YOUR RIGHTS. A VERY FRUSTRATED ENGLISHMAN.