OK then.....MPs expensives....

[InsaneApache]

They bleat on about how they have to have the expenses in order to do their job. Hang on, 88p for a bath plug enables you to do your job? Then they start on about how much more they could earn outside Parliament. Good, resign and go and get that job. No one's forcing you to be an MP. I seriously doubt if any of these clowns could run a market stall, never mind get renumerated at over a hundred grand a year.

Well we can do something about it. Come the general election we just don't vote for the emcumbant. If they too start hogging then the next time we do the same until they get the message. It would concentrate minds wonderfully if they thought that they would only get five years at the most.

I'm starting to think that we should also push for recall laws like they have in the states. Then when we catch the buggers with their hand in the till, we can slam it shut. Now there's talk about all this favouring the BNP at the euro elections. Good. As much as I hate the BNP, it would shock the main three parties into actually listening to the electorate. They are to blame for this disconnect in the first instance. They need a bloody good shaking up. Wassocks.

[HopAlongBunny]

Good, resign and go and get that job. No one's forcing you to be an MP. I seriously doubt if any of these clowns could run a market stall, never mind get renumerated at over a hundred grand a year.

We get that same BS here in Canada everytime the MP's vote themselves a raise; I totally agree with your solution => "Go get that job and keep your hands off the public purse"

Here we can add in the fact that (on average) much less than half of those who voted, voted for the gov't in any case.

[Banquo's Ghost]

On the one hand, you have to admire some of the bare-faced cheek shown by the piggies in the trough. Claiming taxpayers money to clear one's moat demands the kind of sang-froid only available to the aristocracy (albeit rather arriviste).

More seriously, it looks as if this is rapidly escalating into a full-blown constitutional crisis for the UK.

The current Speaker is one of the most controversial figures to have occupied that august chair for 300 years. He has been implicated in fiddling expenses (some time before the current maelstrom) and allowing Mr Plod to ride roughshod over House of Commons privilege. Now, in an extraordinary outburst laced with venom directed not at the snouts in the trough, but at the media and MPs who despair at the porcine excess, he has embarrassed his office beyond compare.

For those not aware, the Speaker of the House of Commons is not like the party animal found in the United States, but upholds the highest standards and aspirations of British democracy. To sully the office must be the ugliest stain any person can bring onto himself. Yet Michael Martin has dragged the Speaker's chair into the foulest of mud - and the supine, cowardly Prime Minister has done nothing to change the situation.

Now we have the unedifying prospect of the first vote of no confidence in the Speaker being tabled for 300 years. Latest reports have the Cabinet going to Brown to demand the Speaker resigns.

I cannot think that the United Kingdom has been in greater peril constitutionally since the days of the Protectorate. Another year of this? How can Dishonourable Members live with themselves and not force this damnable parliament to dissolve itself?

[InsaneApache]

Brenda should step in and dissolve parliament.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkvEeKnTb2Q

[KukriKhan]

Brenda should step in and dissolve parliament.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkvEeKnTb2Q

That particular mechanic of UK politics has always fascinated me. A single individual, with the snap of a finger, could implement a "do-over" of an entire government.

How does it work, in practice? PM requests and she assents? Can she just do it of her own volition? Must she formally announce the dissolution?

[InsaneApache]

That particular mechanic of UK politics has always fascinated me. A single individual, with the snap of a finger, could implement a "do-over" of an entire government.

How does it work, in practice? PM requests and she assents? Can she just do it of her own volition? Must she formally announce the dissolution?

Lesson one on the British Constitution.

Right, pay attention at the back. The government is Her Majestys government. As is the treasury, the navy, the police, in fact anything that helps defend/protect/run the country. Except of course in a constitutional monarchy, it's really the voters who decide. Brenda's just a figurehead. She does have some powers though.

She can declare war. She can dissolve parliament. She can give small silver coins out to pensiones as alms. As it's nominally Her government, she can, in theory, dissolve parliament and trigger a general election. However if she were to do so, it would bring about a genuine constitutional crises. How this may pan out is anybodys guess. As the police/army/navy/airforce make an oath of allegience to her, you might think she had all the top cards. She might well have given the buffoons in control at the moment.

However, one of her great-grandads thought the same and got on a bit of a sticky wicket on that one.

It could be interesting if madge did exercise her constitutional right. In the current climate the majority of voters would probably give a sigh of relief. One could argue that it's not democratic but it's often claimed that we live under a elective dictatorship anyway.

Certainly interesting times we live in.

[rory_20_uk]

I would like to see slightly more power in the hands of the Monarchy for times such as these when the elected ministers almost to a person are basically on the same side. Oh, platitudes and apologies are pouring out - but not the hundreds of thousands of pounds they've taken.

Better the monarch can say "oi, you lot - out" and get another lot in.
Would the next lot be any different? Possibly if they thought they too could be removed; if oversight was not via parliment but by the monarchy this again would help reduce the poachers acting as the gamekeepers.

[Banquo's Ghost]

Lesson one on the British Constitution.

Right, pay attention at the back. The government is Her Majestys government. As is the treasury, the navy, the police, in fact anything that helps defend/protect/run the country. Except of course in a constitutional monarchy, it's really the voters who decide. Brenda's just a figurehead. She does have some powers though.

She can declare war. She can dissolve parliament. She can give small silver coins out to pensiones as alms. As it's nominally Her government, she can, in theory, dissolve parliament and trigger a general election. However if she were to do so, it would bring about a genuine constitutional crises. How this may pan out is anybodys guess. As the police/army/navy/airforce make an oath of allegience to her, you might think she had all the top cards. She might well have given the buffoons in control at the moment.

However, one of her great-grandads thought the same and got on a bit of a sticky wicket on that one.

It could be interesting if madge did exercise her constitutional right. In the current climate the majority of voters would probably give a sigh of relief. One could argue that it's not democratic but it's often claimed that we live under a elective dictatorship anyway.

Certainly interesting times we live in.

The joy of an unwritten constitution is that one gets even more leeway to interpret than the wording of an 18th century document.

In fact, you are incorrect in the above analysis. The monarch has (to quote Bagehot) only three rights: the right to be consulted, the right to encourage and the right to warn. In theory, she has the right under the Royal Prerogative to dismiss ministers including the Prime Minister, but dissolution of Parliament can only be done at the request of the Prime Minister (it used to be the whole Cabinet until around 1916).

Unhappily, the Royal Prerogative (which encompasses the powers you ascribe above such as declaring war) is entirely wielded by the Prime Minister.

George V is the ancestor you referred to, and it is commonly believed that he was the last monarch to dissolve Parliament and suffered for it. In fact, he refused to dissolve Parliament in 1923 at Stanley Baldwin's request, instead inviting Ramsay McDonald to form a government after dismissing Baldwin. It is still debated whether this was at all constitutional.

British Prime Ministers effectively have all the monarchial powers deprived from the Crown in 1689.

[rory_20_uk]

I cannot think that the United Kingdom has been in greater peril constitutionally since the days of the Protectorate. Another year of this? How can Dishonourable Members live with themselves and not force this damnable parliament to dissolve itself?

M-O-N-E-Y

Those that are honest will rightly not see the need to resign. The vast majority who are adhering to the letter of the rules - that they made for themselves - are understandable concerned that they'll loose contributions to their generous pension, salary and perks for the coming months. The recession is still here, so best hand on for a further year until the job market is a bit more buoyant.

Doctors have not only severe guidelines but also an ethical code they have to follow. I think that lawyers have something similar (the ethics section must be interesting). Doctors also are independently overseen. Why shouldn't MPs have a similar independent oversight? A bad doctor can only kill a few people, a bad MP can do vastly more damage.

But this sidetracks the main change: Scrap expenses. Flat salary from about £50 to 100k depending on seniority / job. Some flats might be suitable for the time spent in London. Personally I'd like these to be the same standards that Junior Doctors have, but I doubt this would come to pass.

[Fragony]

Good news no, probably new elections if Brown doesn't call out a national state of emergency (I definately see him doing that)

edit; lol they even declarated dog food is there no end to their shamelesness, tars and feathers.

[Scurvy]

M-O-N-E-Y

But this sidetracks the main change: Scrap expenses. Flat salary from about £50 to 100k depending on seniority / job. Some flats might be suitable for the time spent in London. Personally I'd like these to be the same standards that Junior Doctors have, but I doubt this would come to pass.

I see the sense in expenenses - an MP living in Scotland or Northern Ireland will spent much more on work than an MP living in London.

What it needs is proper, independent supervision, MP's voting on their own pay and pay structure is ridiculous.

I am uneasy about ethical contracts, as they are subjective - MP's pay should be as transparent as possible, so why not make all expenses/pay public and attempt to minimize the legal loopholes (very few MP's have actually broken the rules - making it hard to punish them for blatant money-grabbing)

Also Michael Martin should be removed as speaker, it would be a useful scapegoating/symbol of change, and he seems to be hugely unpopular among MP's, not just over this issue, but others aswell.

[Kralizec]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/may/11/simon-hoggart-mps-expenses-michael-martin
Will he be eased out? Probably not. Gordon Brown will stay loyal to a fellow Labour Scot, and the Tories don't want a new Speaker chosen before they have a majority.

I was a bit surprised to read that - aren't speakers supposed to renounce party ties when they're chosen, anyway?

[Louis VI the Fat]

88p for a bath plug

That is ridiculous.

Unbelievable. If a French politician would get caught with his snout in a trough stealing bathplugs, he'd commit suicide in despair and shame. No French politician could stand the disgrace.

I mean, 88p. Who wants to look that amateurish? Our hardened political class doesn't even get up in the morning for less than 100 million. There is no difference between public and private money in France in the first place.

The UK thinks it is on the brink of a constitutional crisis. The people are continually outraged about the gap between the people and the lofty, out-of-touch political elite. Me, I see it all not as a sign of deteriorating political norms in Britian, but as a sign of growing British democratic maturity.

Try Belgium. France. Italy.