Should politicians have their assets frozen on entering public office?

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by IndependentBoffin, Apr 7, 2011.

  1. Yes, freeze their assets and put it in trust.

    9 vote(s)
  2. No. My solution instead is...

    5 vote(s)

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. What do you all think of the idea that politicians and key civil servants should be legally required to have all their assets frozen and put into trust when they enter public office? They would take home no salary but have all their expenses met, and won't be allowed to carry over any of the perks/benefits from the time in public service to their personal assets when they leave.

    MPs' expenses: former minister Elliot Morley pleads guilty to dishonestly claiming £32,000 - Telegraph

    E.g. this fellow:

    How do we know we can trust MPs who have cheated the country with inflated or non-existent expenses to do the honest thing if they are offered money in exchange for "other services"?

    We are deluded if we think the current bunch of MPs are less vulnerable to the same greed that afflicted the previous bunch. The previous mechanisms to cheat the country are just now more exposed and hazardous for career.
  2. I_B, curious as to what you mena by 'key civil servants'?

    Would you include CDS in the same bag as 1PUS, for example?

    Edited as I mistook I_B's fit chick avatar for someone else's fit chick avatar!
  3. It would not be a requirement for CS if Labour had not shoehorned their mates into top CS jobs. [Think Falconer and the spin doctors]. If someone has come up thru the ranks so to speak and made it to the top there should be nowhere else for them to go but retirement.
    As for local government jobsworthys in high positions who FUBAR and then take a bung only to appear in the next county in the same sort of role should no happen.
  4. My answer to thread title's question is: No. Why should they?

    If we did freeze assets, we would end up with a parliament full of the brain-dead, the useless, and the half-witted - just like the last government headed by Brown!
  5. Better idea...

    Everytime we find a dishonest politician (ie those who have royally ripped the arrse out of it, claiming on non-existant mortgages for example) we get Roman on their ass.

    Sack, snakes, politician, tied up at the top and thrown in the nearest river... the Thames would be spot on.
  6. "Key civil servants" being those who could abuse their position for financial gain. I realise that list can get quite long so let's start first with MPs and see what happens ;)
  7. I can't help but feel the quality would be better improved by removing the 'assets' of anyone found abusing their position for personal gain after the fact rather than attempting preventative measures beforehand. People will always look to circumvent the rules and interpret them to their own advantage regardless of how tightly-written those rules are. If we focus on the intent and not the letter, there'd be less scope for abuse. If we punish harshly, there'd be less willingness.

    Castration/mastectomy and branding for a first offence, death for a second - that way, there won't be a third in the event anyone didn't get the message first time round. Yes, I am feeling a bit liverish today but, 'sensible policies for a happier Britain'!
  8. All Folk Running UK should make a full Legally Binding declaration on their assets when they enter Politics or a certain level in the Civil Service.
    A Check must be done when they leave Office and they should be able to explain any increase.
    Where I live the occasional politician does get done for being "Unusually Rich", as do Civil servants and the Military.

  9. Closely followed by stopping senior public servants retiring into well paid "Directorships" from the companies they awarded contracts to. At least take your bribes in cold hard cash you bastards!