An incompetent and partisan Speaker, Martin’s attempts to downplay just how immense the blatant ‘theft’ of public funds by our elected Members of Parliament was to us all became the final nail in his coffin and he was forced to resign by a motion of no confidence in what was the first ‘sacking’ of a Speaker of the House since 1695. This, and the fact that Martin had repeatedly had his fingers in the till, really became the focal point of the whole expenses scandal for me. I, like countless others across the country had truly never realised how big the M.P. Expenses scandal had become, how it had been allowed to get so bad and what it would mean for our system of governance in the future.
One thing that is immediately attracted me to this book is Martin Bell. For those who remember him as a BBC War correspondent and later as ‘the man in the white suit’ and Independent Member of Parliament for Tatton who ousted the odious Neil ‘Cash for Questions’ Hamilton in 1997, he is an experienced, credible journalist and authority on the inner workings of the Palace of Westminster. He was never a member of the ‘Political class’ – those cultivated and by the big three political parties to become an expert in the practised M.P. skills of back biting, toadying, acquiescing and lining ones own pocket. Instead he immediately strikes the reader as an ideal candidate to report on what led to our political system becoming so rotten, wretched and (hopefully) salvageable in the future.
Bell starts off by explaining the history behind the great scandal. He goes back more than fifteen years and before his own experience as an M. P. and introduces the Committee on Standards in Public life. This was a relatively recent stab at self – regulation that was in mostly in response to the accusations of ‘Sleaze’ that dogged the twilight years of the Tory Government that fell in 2007. It concentrated on ethics and a ‘code of conduct’ for M.P.’s after the ‘cash for questions’ affair involving Neil Hamilton and Tim Smith. Shortly after this Labour were elected on the platform of change and things supposedly getting better but in reality things behind the closed doors of Westminster Palace were far from cleaned up. The internal regulator of Parliament – the Commissioner for Standards who reported to the Committee on Standard and Privileges – accused Tony Blair in 2006 of ‘a major error of judgement’ on ethic standards: ‘He has made a major error in judgement in ignoring standards’. When he left the post in 2007, Sir Alistair Graham said ‘My greatest regret has been the apparent failure to persuade the government to place high ethical standards at the heart of its thinking, and more importantly, its behaviour’.
How apt that these words should occur so long before the scandal broke. Sir Alistair was replaced by Elizabeth Filkin and she exercised a zeal and passion in attempting to hold Members to account over lax accounting, misuse of parliamentary allowances and seemingly wanton embezzlement of the public purse. Formerly the Adjudicator of the Inland Revenue, she was not prepared for the hostility and ill will of the ‘Order of the expense account’ at Westminster. Repeated attempts were made to investigate senior members of the Cabinet but at every juncture she was stonewalled and cut off. Accusations of the Speakers’ involvement feature and it Bell as good as admits he has no time for the man and his cadre of cronies. Filkin was ousted by forces unknown after attempting to uphold a complaint against John Reid, and Bell lamented this and clearly believes he should have followed her out of Westminster there and then. He clearly has a fondness for her and believed she was a victim of Parliaments’ desire not to change its practice of taking what it believes is its due. Harry Cohen M.P. is described as taking over £300,000 for housing expenses over his years as an M.P. He referred to it as salary in all but name, claiming Margaret Thatcher positively encouraged M.P.’s to go out and spend, spend, spend! The rationale for this being that as the public would abhor M.P.’s repeated calls for salary rises (something they do year in, year out anyway, making the point moot) and so by claiming expenses they would make up any perceived deficit.
Bell describes a shadowy cabal of Senior M.P.’s who are merely acting out historical precedence by passing on their “claim for everything, reveal nothing” knowledge to newly elected Members. He reveals that he was presented a thick green folder upon his own election which contained untold things he thought were extravagant purchases and which he would never have dreamed of passing the cost on to the taxpayer for. He describes the Fee’s office - responsible for authorising all bills, mostly at the ‘Honourable Member’s’ word and without receipts – as being like a rubber – stamping factory where the staff are more scared of their political masters complaining too loudly than the veracity of the claim they had submitted. One was quoted as saying they knew what they were agreeing to was too extravagant and expensive, but the system was seemingly there to facilitate such blatant ‘theft’. Quite how the system got so out of hand and the abuse got so far is astounding, and as a reader, my blood pressure was rising as I read on.
Once the ground is set, Bell moves in for the kill in earnest. M.P.’s are sitting ducks in the long grass and there is a palpable relish as he describes claims for bath plugs, Moat cleaning, spring cleaning, mole removal, tree surgery, roof tiles, food bills totalling the maximum of £400 each month, loans that had been paid off long before, Duck ponds and water features, rugs and plasma screen TV’s, hanging baskets for Margaret Beckett, a £200 pouffe cushion and a black glitter toilet seat for Dr. John Reid, porn films and bath plugs for Jacqui Smith and most gallingly - wreaths for remembrance day (which particularly angered ARRSE members and the public at large).
The phenomenon of flipping is a subject most people are familiar with now, especially as the concept of alternating between properties designated as primary and secondary in order to avoid paying Capital Gains tax when selling a property on for maximum profit or taking the highest amount of public subsistence possible is alien to most of us. Bell asks why M.P.'s are claiming every single bill possible back from the taxpayer, and why in most cases where an amount was claimable, it always was. On a similar note, he wonders why the system of 'no checks and balances' by the Fee's Officer ever allowed Elliot Morley (Labour, Hull) to continue to claim £16,800 on a mortgage that had been repaid a year before.
It is interesting that all three of the leaders of the Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat parties all had to pay back expenses that were ‘claimed in error’. It was as if nobody was left untouched or untainted by events surrounding this scandal. Interestingly, Gordon Brown epitomised his reputation as a dithering and indecisive bluffer by initially underplaying the expenses issue and suggesting it was only a few bad apples and not parliament as a whole, whereas Cameron (media savvy Tony Blair – follower that he is) promised that he would sort this out and deselect those in his party found to be morally wrong in their actions. Nick Clegg attempted to capitalise on the issue by proposing a 'third way' not of red or blue and thus increasing the number of Lib Dem seats in Westminster, and Bell admits that he had been Secretary of the Eastern Counties Young Liberals Federation in his youth. He admits that he was approached by Clegg to stand again under a yellow banner, but after much consideration he declined the offer
Chapter 13 hits particularly close to the bone with those of us with a Military leaning. Bell talks about the War in Afghanistan during 2009, ever rising casualty rates and cries for re-enforcements, more helicopters and more money from Whitehall by Military Commanders. These events coincided with the scandal breaking and unravelling during this period and Bell laments the increasing number of flag draped coffins passing through Brize Norton and Wootton Bassett, made ever more tragic when juxtaposed against the gluttony , largesse and sheer lack of repentance from our elected parliamentarians. There is a quote from ARRSE on page 178;
'What can be done to purge parliament of these dishonest people'
From Rum Ration on page 179;
“While you were all fiddling your expenses, our men were dying for want of helicopters”
And then revelations of Bob Ainsworth – at the time, Secretary of State for Defence – on page 180; Bob Ainsworth claimed nearly £6,000 for the redecoration of his second home. His claims included £2,225 for a corner sofa, which the Fee's Office rejected. He wrote: 'If you feel this is excessive, can I say that due to the size and the layout of the room, a normal three piece suite will not fit. This “corner group “fits perfectly and maximises the space.
There is another quote just a couple of pages further on where a Senior Minister (unnamed) is visiting Afghanistan and a cheeky chappie from a Scottish Regiment asked him “Excuse me Sir, but how much do you know about soldiering?” “Not very much”, said the Minister, “but how much do you know about politics?” “Not very much either”, replied the squaddie, “but my friends tell me that I am a very good liar!”
With that quote, I think this unnamed soldier encapsulated a lot of the public at home's bitter feeling and resentment towards politicians that this entire sorry saga generated. They spent their free time poring over the John Lewis catalogue (page 23) and submitting endless claims, whereas our troops were fighting a War without end in harsh conditions and whilst poorly equipped. Alan Duncan (Conservative, Rutland and Melton) claimed (page 2) that the M.P.'s salary was not enough and that they were 'forced to live on rations'. I think this highlights the breathtaking arrogance of these people that they cannot understand our anger at their ignorance, greed and in Duncan's case how out of touch he was with the electorate. How dare he compare his generous salary with people who really did have to live on rations on continuing Operations. Mr. Duncan was removed from the then Shadow Cabinet after this gaffe. He had claimed £600 for a sit-on lawnmower to be repaired. A protester cut a fittingly appropriate pound sign into his expensively maintained (at public expense) garden, and I doubt anyone cared about Mr. Duncan's inappropriate and ill-timed carping.
Bell refers to a speech by the former Adjutant General, Gen. Sir Michael Rose to the Kelly committee (on M.P.'s expenses) on page 208, and he stated that the Armed Forces made dramatic changes to pay and expenses 25 years previously to prevent such wide scale fraud as seen during this scandal. He stated “no one should be allowed to benefit financially from an allowance. The system worked well, and has lasted to this day”. Most will agree that this is not a universally accurate statement, but in essence it is correct. And if such gluttony and greed was conducted by members of the Armed Forces on the scale of this scandal, it would be assured that criminal charges and dismissal would follow.
It is interesting that I heard only a short while ago on LBC radio that politicians occupy the unenviable title of ‘least trusted occupation in the United Kingdom’. The presenter remarked that they fell behind even Estate Agents in the public’s perception of dishonest persons. This comes hot on the heels of a local M.P. to me – John Randall (Deputy Chief Whip, Conservative, Uxbridge) - being accused of repeatedly pushing ‘trivial’ parliamentary debates late into the night so as to claim extra expenses and recompense for supposed hotel stays. The penny – pinching continued. This, coupled with the again resurgent calls for M.P.’s to be paid more for the job they do leads me to conclude that they haven’t really learned for the lessons’ of last year. We are now seeing claims of abuse of newly granted M.P. Expense's credit cards, and noises that things are beginning to return to how it all was before the scandal broke. Bell warns of this in the book, and pleads that it not be allowed to happen. He calls for the 'clearing of the House', lest these painful (for us, if not the wrong doers in their ivory towers) times return sooner rather than later.
Bell is highly scornful of the heavily watered down Westminster internally generated reporting into the entire scandal. He cannot see why the report was so often redacted in regard to a lot of claims, and also why M.P.'s home addresses were blacked out on the report. The counter claim to this is that it would lead to potential terrorist attacks against politicians, but Bell rightly points out that most of these addresses are easily obtainable anyway. Without the addresses, it would be impossible to see exactly who was 'flipping' what house, claiming the most in rent but not paying Capital Gains tax. It would kill future investigations before they ever got under way. Harriet Harman M.P. (Labour, Camberwell & Peckham) was key in trying to fudge the report, leading votes in its suppression and preventing key data from being included.
All in all, Martin Bell has done a very good job with this book. It is well researched, has pages of references to individual M.P.'s expenses, and it is impossible for the reader to not relive what happened last year and feel the bitter resentment and anger at how badly the taxpayer was cheated by our 'political betters'. The sad thing is that already we are seeing signs of the whole affair being swept under the carpet. Only a few days ago I read in the Telegraph that there are still persistent attempts to sabotage the Parliamentary Standards committee over expense issues, and this all seems to me to be pointing to yet another demand for M.P.'s to receive a pay rise. Where times are hard and the current Administration 'leading by example' in austerity drives, this is precisely NOT what is needed now.
Martin Bell calls for an overhaul of the way M.P.'s are elected, moving away from the Traditional 'Labour/Tory machines' selecting their candidates and ensuring they are on – message automatons, forever spewing the party line. He calls for more independents to challenge the old ways, but in reality this will most likely never happen. There is too much money, too many agenda's and too many cosy lifestyles to protect by keeping the system that has (mostly) remained unchanged for hundreds of years. I would never call Martin Bell naive, but his call for a 'new way' is incredibly unrealistic where you have a Political system that strives to keep on doing things the way they always have been done.
I would urge anyone to get hold of a copy of this book. If you leave out the idealism, the 'man in the white suit' attitude that occasional comes across like a 'holier than thou' vicar and at times (I'm sure unintentionally) too smug, then you have a great read. If enough people got hold of the book and kept the lessons learned here to the forefront, then the likelihood of it happening again would be remote. We shall see.
Command_doh
4/5 Arrse avatars.
Recent Comments
Ratings Explained