Leaders: Political expenses ‘errors’ should be things of the past

A SENIOR political figure; allegations of unpaid rent on a flat for which an expense allowance had been claimed; calls for an investigation by the relevant watchdog. Oh, no, not politicians on the fiddle again?

Surely so much damage has already been caused by parliamentary expense abuse scandals that yet another one is barely plausible?

Baroness Warsi, the co-chairwoman of the Conservative Party and frequent panellist on BBC TV’s Question Time, is the latest to find that a life in the public spotlight comes at a price. There are two separate matters now under the spotlight. One, in dispute, is over a subsistence allowance for which she claimed in 2008 before the parliamentary expenses scandal erupted into the public spotlight. This was to cover the rent for use of a flat in Acton, West London. Lady Warsi says she made an “appropriate payment” to a friend, a Conservative activist from whom she was renting the property. The owner, however, alleges that he received no payment from Lady Warsi. The landlord is understood to have had an earlier political falling-out with her. Lady Warsi has agreed to an inquiry.

The facts of the second, separate, issue are not in dispute. Lady Warsi admitted to not fully declaring rental income from a Wembley flat after she moved out in June 2010. The baroness said she took full responsibility for that “oversight”. The full amount Lady Warsi earned from renting her property has not been revealed. The baroness had declared the property on the register of ministerial interests but she failed to inform the register of Lords’ interests that she was letting the property. Lady Warsi now says she has put this omission right.

There cannot be a self-employed or small business owner who would not sigh at this and exclaim: “Welcome to the real world.” Politicians who constantly urge transparency and disclosure as a prescription for the ills of everyday life have a special obligation to obey the rules they are eager to impose on the rest of us. Many do not have the luxury of being able to excuse non-compliance as an oversight.

As for the matter of whether or not rent was paid on the flat, it will be for the Lords Commissioner for Standards to decide whether to pursue the issue. The payments in dispute pre-date the start of the new regime. And amid the partisan party political noise now surrounding this affair, some perspective needs to be kept. The property was used only two nights a week over a period of six weeks at the start of 2008.

Nonetheless, the publicity this matter has generated is ample reminder of the requirement on parliamentarians and indeed all those who hold office at the public expense, that not only should financial claims be above board, but be seen to be above board. In the post-expenses scandal world, it is imperative if public trust in politicians is to stand any chance of being restored.

Border reached on drink-drive limit

FEW will dispute the principle behind the latest plans by the Scottish Government to lower the drink-drive limit in Scotland.

The specific proposal – to lower the limit from 80mg of alcohol per 100ml of blood to 50mg – will be brought forward later this year, with the aim of giving practical effect to the change “as soon as possible”. Campaigners and leaders across the political spectrum in Holyrood have welcomed this as a step in the right direction.

As always, however, it is the practical effect of legislation, not its benign intent, on which it will be judged. While the new law will still allow drivers to drink, many already feel the current regime is so strict as to make it prudent not to drink at all before driving, no matter the legal limit. The new legislation will encourage many others to reach a similar conclusion.

Some fear the lower limit may catch “morning after” drivers who find they are still over the limit even though they feel they have slept off the effects of alcohol taken the night before and that their judgment is no longer impaired. However, the point remains that if the driver is found to be over the limit, the driver is over the limit: a fact that in itself should have a sobering effect.

However, one potential problem is that if Scotland takes a harder line on drink driving, the legal limit could be different between Scotland and England, giving rise to the anomaly that a driver may be considered fit to drive on the English side of the Border only to be measured as over the limit on the Scottish side. Those used to routinely crossing the Border without worry would find they now need to proceed with care.