We now pay the price for honest politicians

[chrishansenhome]

Many of you may be aware of the expenses crisis that has engulfed the Mother of Parliaments. Many of our MPs and peers have been systematically claiming reimbursements for household goods that some of their constituents can only dream of possessing. One MP was reimbursed for a floating duck house to place on his pond. Another soaked us for several thousands of pounds for cleaning his moat. Three MPs and one peer have been formally charged with fraud (none of the MPs are standing for office in the next election, due by June).

An office was set up to audit MPs expenses and claw back some that were either illegal or unethical. A permanent office to scrutinise MPs expense claims has been set up, with the head of that office making £100,000, and £6 million in total being spent to run this office.

The amount that has been claimed back this year from MPs? Around £1 million. So we've lost £5 million to get back £1 million. Not a great bargain by any means, but a price that has to be paid, it seems, to get transparency and honesty in government. And that £6 million cost is a recurring expense, aimed at keeping MPs legal and ethical.

The £64,000 question is this: Wouldn't it be cheaper to elect honest people as MPs and scrap the expenses office?

Just askin'.

Comments

[legalmoose]

Why not have the audit function run out of another office that does general audits government-wide rather than a specific office just for that audit function? Something along the lines of the GAO (Government Accountability Office, formerly the General Accounting Office) here in the states?

[trawnapanda.livejournal.com]

Wouldn't it be cheaper to elect honest people as MPs

first, catch your hare

good luck with verifying your proposition.