Thatcher.. seemed like a good idea at the time!

You can hardly have failed to have heard, seen or read something about the recent MPs’ expenses scandal with the onslaught of media coverage on the subject. We all agree that generally, the system has been open to abuse for far too long, with MPs claiming for the most ridiculous things; from a box of matches to horse manure. It can only be a good thing that this incessant liberty-taking has finally been exposed, and obviously something needs to be done, but as usual the ensuing hysteria has obscured the main point of all this, and sensible solutions are as far away as ever.

The blame for MPs taking the p**s in the first place rests squarely on the shoulders of one Margaret Thatcher and her cronies; back in the 80’s and early 90’s she kept MP’s wages down so that the perception was that MPs were tightening their belts along with the rest of us, but she let it be known to Parliament that members could top up their salaries with expenses claims and a laissez-faire policy was unofficially adopted with regard to this. The inevitable result was the situation we have today… politicians are unfortunately only human, and most people will push it a bit if told that the scrutinization process won’t be too strict, so there’s nothing surprising in that.

The current salary for an MP is £64766, which is hardly excessive for someone entrusted with helping to run the country. It is well below the amount received by a busy GP or management level banker, but the biggest problem with the current system is that many MPs have additional private income from trust funds or private business arrangements which in many cases will far exceed their salary as a member of parliament.

Surely the fairest system would be to means test MPs so that the ones that give their full attention to the job in hand are rewarded for their focus, altruism and dedication, whereas the ones that have ‘divided loyalties’ and potentially ulterior motives for their decisions based on their own business interests, are not. it doesn’t seem to have occurred to anyone to question the fact that some MPs main motivation for having a second home in London may be that they have other work in the capital, and therefore there is no way that the taxpayer should be meeting the cost of this accomodation.

It’s about time someone showed some common sense here; let’s set up an agency to go round assessing whether MPs spend enough time on the job, and means testing them to see if they merit being given expenses… its the only fair solution!