Zero tolerance for Tory sleaze

14 June 2008

The Spectator on why there should be zero tolerance for sleaze

It is especially damaging, then, to learn that Tory MEPs have pressed their noses deep in the European trough. As we write, 15 out of 28 Tory MEPs are still refusing to comply with David Cameron’s request to disclose their expenses. It is not enough for them to attempt to reassure us that they are not breaking European parliament rules. The extravagances of the European parliament are widely known; taxpayers have every right to expect that their elected representatives will exercise restraint.

What impresses no one is the conduct of Sir Robert Atkins, an MEP for the north-west, taking a flight to his son’s wedding in the US and trying to reassure people that it is all above board because he ‘was campaigning or discussing current political issues with Republican party members’. Never mind what he thinks the rules can be construed to allow, does he really think that British taxpayers’ money should be spent campaigning for the Republican party?

As far as Conservative party chairman Caroline Spelman is concerned, the nature of the secretarial duties supposedly performed by her former nanny during 1997/98 seem to get murkier by the day. It is not enough for her to excuse herself by saying it was all an innocent mistake: she could have put the matter to rest by offering to pay back, with interest, the money she saved through the arrangement. By failing to do so she has prolonged her own agony and helped to keep a negative story about the Conservatives in the press for several days.

David Cameron has rightly been credited with decontaminating the Tory brand. It is hard to remember, though it is extremely important to do so, that for years the mere mention of the Conservative party resulted in an upwards curl of many voters’ lips. The lowly image of the party in 1997 was partly a result of the length of time it had been in power, partly of the indecisive leadership of John Major and the gross miscalculation of joining the Exchange Rate Mechanism. But another good part of it was sleaze, and the perception that Conservative MPs were in politics principally to enrich themselves.

Previous page 1 | 2 | 3 Next page

Richard Holden

June 12th, 2008 9:49am Report this comment

The MoD spent 1000x as much as the article suggests on its headquaters, spending £2,3 Billion, not million. That could have been spend doing up our service personnels body-armour and accommodation, rather than improving offices.

Melanie Whitehand

June 13th, 2008 4:23pm Report this comment

It is a shame that these rather damning examples of sleaze may undermine all of the good work done by Team Cameron. If any thing it should add weight to the argument that the E.U. is a gravy train and there is no justification for it! The average Conservative voter is quite possibly furious that these reports will not be helpful in the present political climate.

John James

July 4th, 2008 1:54pm Report this comment

Our MPs are correctly referred to as "The Honourable..." and are elected to represent us.

It is therefore quite reasonable to expect our MPs, of all political flavours, to behave honourably. That means claiming expenses that those they represent (and who ultimately pay their expenses) would consider reasonable.

It doesn't mean "flexible interpretation" of the rules to fill their pockets to the maximum allowed, let alone dishonesty.

But, perhaps more importantly, a truly honourable man or woman would do his/her best to improve those rules to ensure they are seen to be fair and reasonable. And thereby stamp out any opportunity for abuse by any less-honourable members.

Post comment