Rebuild democracy

Published on Saturday 16 May 2009 19:53

IF MEMBERS of Parliament pause for a moment this weekend and bend their ears to a rumbling sound in the distance, they should be in no doubt what they are hearing.

It is the sound of the approaching tumbrils – the low carts used to transport the victims of the French Revolution to the guillotine. Okay, today, Britain's very own version of The Terror may not be quite stalking the land, but MPs should by now be aware of the strength of feeling over their expenses. A country with 2.2 million unemployed, with every household tightening its belt as the recession deepens, has been sickened by the sight of dishonourable members living the high life at the taxpayers' expense.

Politicians have never been high on the public's list of favourite people. And our political system is not one that can truly boast the enthusiastic endorsement of the electorate. But these twin pillars of an effective democracy – faith in politicians, faith in politics – are now at risk. Systems of government must enjoy the tacit support of the governed. After the events of the past ten days that is no longer the case. The outrage from the public is real, intense and justified. It may at times resemble a lynch mob, but the grievance is in proportion to the scale of the offence.

Let us be clear. The defence of "Oh, everyone was doing it," or "It was an accepted part of the Commons culture," or "It was the only way to keep our wages at a decent level in the face of a cap on MPs' salaries," won't wash. In the latest round of revelations, one MP's expense claim for lunch was revealed to be two scotch eggs and six mini pork pies. Not exactly luxurious living, and forgetting about the insight into eating habits, it reveals just how drilled in to the psyche billing the taxpayer was. These individuals colluded with a flawed system that allowed them to be greedy and mendacious. In fairness, not every MP is guilty; some refused to get involved, but it would appear they were the exceptions.

More revelations are sure to come – there are, after all, 650 MPs in the Commons. But at this stage in the saga it is time to start separating the sheep from the goats in this sorry herd. A distinction now has to be made between two different kinds of MPs. In one category are those who willingly milked the system, taking advantage of allowances for second homes, furnishings and food, often knowing that this money was not an honest reimbursement for money spent but a means of topping up their wages. These MPs will have to face the wrath of their local parties and, next year in the general election, the voters. The second group did all this too, but they also cynically exploited the many loopholes in the system: double dipping; flipping the designation of first and second homes; claiming for mortgages that had already been paid off; buying ostentatiously expensive goods using taxpayers' money. These MPs face a reckoning, and it will not – it should not – be a pretty sight. Those accused of fraud should be prosecuted and the other worst offenders cut adrift from party and Parliament. There is no place for them in a British political system that now has to renew itself and begin the long and challenging task of winning back the voters' trust.

The great unknown in the short term is how angry, disaffected voters will respond. Will they be so scunnered with politics they won't grace any party with a vote? Will they use this moment to turn away from their traditional allegiances and ally themselves with smaller parties? Or – in what could be one of the most interesting culture shifts at Westminster – will they prefer to choose a new generation of independent MPs elected on the strength of character alone?

The Lib Dems are positioning themselves as a safe harbour for the disaffected. But there are other siren voices calling to a volatile public. The British National Party, an extreme right wing force, which in normal political times can usually be dealt with effectively through the calm deployment of reason and decency, may benefit from the air of tumult. This is perhaps the most pressing reason why the efforts to remould British parliamentary democracy must begin now. Restoring faith in MPs' expenses is not now enough, it is about restoring faith in Westminster government.

Wha's like us... Royal Scots Dragoon Guards

THE world of classical music is usually a rarified one of pampered soloists and conductors wearing black tie and tails; not the kind of arena in which you would expect to find a bunch of tough Scottish squaddies who hadn't had a bath for months.

And yet when the Classical Brit Awards were announced last week, the best album prize didn't go to the highly fancied Andrea Bocelli or Katherine Jenkins; it went to the Royal Scots Dragoon Guards for a CD recorded partly while they were stationed in Basra, in southern Iraq. Work on Spirit Of The Glen: Journey had already begun in Edinburgh before the unit was ordered to Iraq last year for a six-month tour. It is the first ever album recorded in a war zone.

The pipes and drums are an intrinsic element of Scotland's proud military heritage, with a pedigree of excellence going back hundreds of years. But what makes this award all the more heartening is that the winner was chosen by the UK-wide audience of the Classic FM radio station. Proof, if any were needed, of the breadth of appeal of one of Scotland's greatest exports.

Moment of truth

THE Church of Scotland enjoys a role in this country that is disproportionate to the dwindling number of believers who file into its pews on Sunday mornings. In the years before devolution, its General Assembly acted like a proxy parliament – a forum where Scotland debated the moral, social and political issues of the moment. Since the establishment of Holyrood, it has had a lower profile in the public consciousness, but it is still an important litmus test of the nation's mindset. So the current schism on sexual morality has a significance beyond the Kirk.

At the heart of this debate is a question: should the Church be a compassionate place that welcomes all those who seek a relationship with their god; or should it be a place only for those whose lives conform strictly to the teachings of the Bible? If the Church seeks consistency, then many strict teachings and interpretations from the Bible have already been relegated to history.

Allowing congregations to choose their minister is also to be lauded. The Kirk is either relevant to the age it operates in, or it is a museum piece. The conservatives have chosen an extreme motion, arguing the clergy should be closed to "anyone involved in a sexual relationship outside of faithful marriage between a man and a woman", which would discriminate against unmarried heterosexuals as well as homosexuals. Surely there are greater criteria that ministry should depend on.