MPs' expenses: 'Brown and his MPs should be ashamed'

Published on Friday 23 January 2009 08:58

Evening News Comment WITHOUT undue fuss, the details of MSPs' expenses published by the Scottish Parliament includes a breakdown of taxi trips, motor mileage, surgery advertising and a host of other costs claimed by the Holyrood politicians over the year.

Contrast that with Westminster where, until a U-turn earlier this week, it looked as if their opposite numbers were intent on doing everything they could to stop full details of their own expenses being made public.

The Brown administration should be ashamed of its attempt to exempt the details of Commons expense claims from the Freedom of Information Act – and the estimated 150,000 it spent fighting a High Court ruling requiring full disclosure.

On Wednesday, Gordon Brown finally did the right thing and abandoned the fight, so it now looks as if details and receipts of MPs' expenses from 2005 will be published, although it could still take several months.

It is incredible that in this age of supposed openness and transparency, politicians could argue for such secrecy and expect to get away with trying to claim immunity for themselves from a law they expect others to obey.

It is this kind of attitude which brings politicians and politics into disrepute and fuels public suspicion that they are milking the system for their own advantage.

Holyrood's system of allowances was set up to comply with the Scottish Parliament's principles of openness and accountability. But former Tory leader David McLetchie's resignation over his taxi claims and the scandal over former Liberal Democrat MSP Keith Raffan's dodgy mileage claims showed even a scheme devised with scrutiny in mind was not watertight.

How much more open to question must be the Westminster regime, which has traditionally been far more lax than the one here?

Even the new, supposedly tougher expenses rules will not require MPs to produce receipts for all their claims.

Westminster could learn something from Holyrood and the effect scrutiny can have on politicians' spending.

The latest figures for MSPs' expenses show the grand total for last year is down slightly on the previous year, despite the extra claims for "winding up" costs from those who stood down or were defeated at the 2007 elections. And Lothians MSPs' claims were down 21 per cent.

Isn't it staggering that any politician, never mind the Prime Minister should have opposed something which so clearly encourages extra care with taxpayers' money?