{"id":92,"date":"2015-07-13T17:16:50","date_gmt":"2015-07-13T17:16:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/scscsussex.wordpress.com\/?p=92"},"modified":"2015-07-13T17:16:50","modified_gmt":"2015-07-13T17:16:50","slug":"the-story-that-never-goes-seems-to-die-parliamentarians-and-their-expenses","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.sussex.ac.uk\/centre-for-the-study-of-corruption\/2015\/07\/13\/the-story-that-never-goes-seems-to-die-parliamentarians-and-their-expenses\/","title":{"rendered":"The story that never seems to die; Parliamentarians and their expenses"},"content":{"rendered":"

The case of Ashley Mote (see here<\/a>), the former MEP who has been sentenced to five years in prison for fiddling over \u00a3400,000 out of the European Parliament, brings, once again, the issue of parliamentary expenses to the forefront of public debate. To be fair to most of the MPs involved in the 2008\/09 debacle, Mote\u2019s case is on a different level to some of the indiscretions committed back then. Mote has been convicted of deception, false accounting, concealing criminal property and theft \u2013 that\u2019s a fair bit heavier than quite legally using a system to, for example, claim \u00a33,371 for a new set of furniture (Nick Ainger, Labour) or \u00a3980 for bookshelves (Peter Bottomley, Conservative – see here<\/a> for a full list of who claimed for what in 2008\/09). Moat, it would appear, is in a small but quite distinct league of criminals who don\u2019t just bend the rules to suit their own interests, but choose to flagrantly flout them; the famous five MPs\u00a0who went to prison on account of expenses\u2019 claimed (David Chaytor, Jim Devine, Eric Illsley, Denis MacShane and Elliot Morley) can, with the addition of Moat, now become known as the the Sleazy Six.<\/p>\n

Moat\u2019s case is not, however, a particularly useful one in helping anti-corruption scholars work out ways to move the debate on what could, should and should not be claimed on expenses forward. He\u2019s clearly broken the rules, he\u2019s been caught and he\u2019s going to pay for it. But working out what is and isn\u2019t appropriate in terms of expenses claims is still not as easy as many people think it should be. At the beginning of 2014, for example, the Daily Mail (see here<\/a>) ran a story expressing nothing short of outrage at the pettiness of claiming 30p for a jam doughnut (Rosie Cooper, Labour \u2013 for the record, I\u2019d very much like to know where these 30p doughnuts are available, as that is an excellent price), 4p for travel (Tristam Hunt, Labour), 7p for a paper clip (David Cameron, Conservative), 49p for a door mat (John Barrett, Lib Dem \u2013 are MPs now shopping at Poundland? That\u2019s a super deal) and 19p for Blu-Tac (Pat McFadden, Labour).\u00a0 The downright insignificance of some of these claims to one side, the Mail was also enraged as they (the MPs) simply \u201cdon\u2019t seem to get it\u201d.\u00a0 What precisely they don\u2019t \u201cseem to get\u201d remained tantalisingly unclear, as no effort whatsoever was put in to outlining what the perfect expenses regime would look like.\u00a0 That, it seems, is not the Daily Mail\u2019s job.\u00a0 It\u2019s much more straightforward to point out some of the quirks within the system, some of the grey areas and some of the more bizarre claims.\u00a0 Ideas on how to put this right?\u00a0 No suggestions forthcoming.<\/p>\n

It is easy to see both why voters will be annoyed at seeing MPs claim money back on the most trivial of things and why the Mail (amongst others) refused to outline how we might move this debate forward.\u00a0 The \u2018new\u2019 post-2009 expenses regime, headed by the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority<\/a>, is undoubtedly tighter and better regulated than the system that came before it<\/a>, but making value judgments on what is and what is not an acceptable expense is actually very difficult.\u00a0 MPs have long grumbled that IPSA is a bureaucratic nightmare, although few have dared say that in public.\u00a0 IPSA\u2019s challenge is to create a system that can be consistent, fair and flexible.\u00a0 MPs have different needs (i.e. if your constituency is Newcastle upon Tyne Central then you should surely be entitled to claim more in travel costs than if you represent, for example, London-based Twickenham) and they face different challenges in their daily work patterns; the expenses system needs to reflect this and needs to be quick enough on its feet to recognise the difference between legitimate and illegitimate claims.\u00a0 \u00a0If anyone reading this blog thinks they have the answer, then IPSA will no doubt be very keen to hear from you.<\/p>\n

Dan Hough<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The case of Ashley Mote (see here), the former MEP who has been sentenced to five years in prison for fiddling over \u00a3400,000 out of the European Parliament, brings, once again, the issue of parliamentary expenses to the forefront of…<\/span><\/p>\n

Read more ›<\/a><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":359,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"spay_email":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.sussex.ac.uk\/centre-for-the-study-of-corruption\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/92"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.sussex.ac.uk\/centre-for-the-study-of-corruption\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.sussex.ac.uk\/centre-for-the-study-of-corruption\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.sussex.ac.uk\/centre-for-the-study-of-corruption\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/359"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.sussex.ac.uk\/centre-for-the-study-of-corruption\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=92"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.sussex.ac.uk\/centre-for-the-study-of-corruption\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/92\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.sussex.ac.uk\/centre-for-the-study-of-corruption\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=92"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.sussex.ac.uk\/centre-for-the-study-of-corruption\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=92"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.sussex.ac.uk\/centre-for-the-study-of-corruption\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=92"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}