How often have we heard or read that, eh? Especially at the moment, politicians (who, as a group, are not generally held in particularly high esteem at any time) are coming in for that kind of attack more and more.Although the present wave of sleaze allegations, of which some at least appear to have a basis of truth in them, is eroding further the public-at-large's trust in and respect for elected representatives, it would be a mistake to generalise here as in any other walk of life.
Put the boot on the other foot. Say I were to ask you what your profession is. If you were to reply "Builder" I could easily claim "Ah! A builder. They're all cowboys, aren't they?" Or, say you were an Estate Agent: my response might be "Oh yes, they're all dishonest, as is well known!" Again, if you were a teacher: "They're just a load of lefties who are producing the druggies, vandals and spongers we see amongst today's youth." And so on.
The moral of all this is that just about any profession can be tarred with one's broad brush, if one falls into that all-too-easy trap.
Probably the daftest thing about the current spate of sleaze allegations against MPs (mostly, though not entirely, Labour MPs including Ministers and an MSP) is that much of the difficulty has arisen from over-complex reporting requirements introduced by the Labour Government. It is now fairly well known that the motive behind this was to try to "catch out" Conservative MPs, but Labour has been hoist by its own petard.
Okay, the system of MPs' allowances and all the rest of it has become so involved, and rather silly in places, and I am tempted to side with those who have suggested doubling the basic "salary" (actually an allowance in itself) and scrap all the other allowances -- possibly apart from (as one commenter has thoughtfully excepted) travel by public transport, but with receipts of course. Any incidental costs or whatever would be expected to come out of the additional salary/primary allowance (or whatever you want to call it). This would also eliminate a chunk of bureaucracy recording and processing the present claims, saving public money.
As someone who could also be lumped in with my counterparts at Westminster, I am of course very conscious of all of this. It doesn't help what I am trying to do here in Medway, if my activity is being perceived in the same light as those elsewhere who have not behaved in a proper manner.
For the record (and in our case it is a public record, I believe) I personally have never made any kind of expenses or other such claim since the day I was elected. I absorb it all, no matter what or how much, and always have done. Besides anything else, I hate filling-in claim forms anyway!
4 comments:
I take your point. I never claim back travel expenses as it just feels completely wrong, but the system for MPs is clearly too complex - the same goes for declaring donations as well.
I agree that (from what I understand) their system is indeed too complex. Remember who introduced much of that in recent years, though...
The whole things needs straightening out and making a lot smoother and more obvious (a0 what to do and (b) what is really going on. That should, if properly re-designed, benefit both MPs and the watching public.
Now, as for the details of how to do this, I haven't a clue! I don't suppose most outsiders could, at least not in isolation. It should be possible. I wonder what other countries do? (and I certainly don't mean the EU!)
Hi JMW,
re You're all the same.
From my perch, it seems that people don't WANT to vote for any of the three main parties. None of them are to be trusted, snouts in the trough, all politicians are sleazemongers etc etc. Politicians are politicians - all are power-hungry con artists, who make up a fairy tale manifesto just to get into power. Once in, the will of the electorate is ignored.
It's a shame that ballot papers don't have a section "I do not wish to vote for any of the above-named candidates".
Sorry to hear about Lady T, and Francis Pym.
Killemall...
I agree about the public perception, as you say, and I fully expect turnout to be noticeably lower at the next General Election, regardless of what is now done to clean up their act in Westminster (and beyond).
From now on, it is likely to be just a damage limitation exercise, I feel. Is that the perception froma the vicinity of your perch, or have I got it all wrong?
Post a Comment