back to article Online campaign urges MPs to block secret expenses

MPs are being pressed to vote against a controversial amendment to the Freedom of Information Act later this week that will exempt them from having to publish detailed expenses. The digital democracy charity mySociety.org is leading a letter-writing campaign to stop parliamentarians changing the law to keep their use of public …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
Flame

There is no honour in that house

Typical. No sooner do they pass one law, that they seek to pass a second so they are exempt from the first. People, you are pissing in the wind.

Next you'll be expecting the EU to open its debates, expenses etc to public scrutiny and getting its account signed off.

Snowball, hell, chance therein.

Politicians, without exception, are dishonourable scum (and I include the "New Messiah"(tm); his scandals will surface soon enough, just you watch).

0
0
Anonymous Coward

They all want to hide their expenses`

Just proving that no matter who you vote for they all want their face in the trough.

Viva La Revolution

0
0

Nothing to hide, nothing to fear.

Or so they keep telling us.

Super-keen to spend billions on ID cards (success rate on large IT projects 0% to date) to keep all of US honest.

Not so keen when it comes to their own accountability.

Come on El Reg, stick it in and snap it off!

0
0

Hmm, lets see

Ask the MPs to vote on whether they can keep the details of all the tax payers money that they've spent on themselves? Can't imagine many of them voting No on this one.

0
0
Unhappy

A well named MP?

here's what good old dougy e-mailed me earlier, he is firmly on the fence;

I have not seen the detail of what is proposed so cannot express a final view

As it happens I am committed to being in Yorks next week and will probably not be in London at the time of the vote

I agree that transparency is desirable. Last year Cameron suggested that Tory MPs published their full expenses claim for a relevant quarter, I saw merit in that and did so and if he repeats that suggestion I am likely to do so again

I should be surprised if the present motion does not provide for pretty full disclosure so it is necessary to look at the detail with some care.

I do have reservations about publishing the details of all post 2OO5 to date claims. The cost and burearocracy seems to be disproportionate to any benefit

0
0
Thumb Up

Done - letter sent.

So, after months of argument and having the proposals comprehensively rejected, our Dear Leaders just decide to change the rules anyway. With a few days notice, of course - gotta have some time for "consultation"!

What *is* it with these people?? Can you imagine the rest of us submitting a huge expenses claim with just the final figure and a note saying "I'm sorry, I can't tell you what I spent the money on. It's a secret."

Thanks for alerting readers to this.

0
0

Selling England By The Pound

With the economy effectively in tatters you would think there were more pressing worries than making up silly rules that only serve to make the Government even more opaque. But no, instead we have a group of people who really do think this should happen, that as elected representatives we approve of them spending the time on this for no purpose of value other than to avoid embarrassing revelations which we, as the population and the provider of the funds, should be informed.

I think I will monitor what my MP does. Rob Marris, I will be watching out for your name.

0
0

Ridiculous....

I do think that it is somewhat ridiculous that they are even allowed to vote on a change in law which affects their own accountability directly. They might as well do it electronically and ask the question "Do you wish to abuse your power? Yes/No".

0
0
Thumb Up

Another idea...

We have 'they work for you . com' and that site is great.

So hall we need is 'cash they claimed from you . com'?

0
0
Anonymous Coward

When working in the Civil Service

You have to fill in EACH AND EVERY line item. You MUST produce the ORIGINAL receipts.

Or you don't get paid.

Unless you're an MP, apparently.

0
0
Unhappy

@AC

>People, you are pissing in the wind.

There speaks a wise man.

0
0
Flame

I find this amazing.

Why, when every single company is required to do this by law, does the Government seen to have a problem with it?

Surely there's existing oversight for the MPs expenses? I don't imagine the get reimbursed unless somebody has been through all the expenses and signed off on them.

Will whoever provides oversight still have the records? or will the "secret" be between the MP and his dealer?

Economy in tatters, and we're busy legislating cartoons and trying to protect liars. Something's seriously wrong.

Viva la Revolution

0
0

If you have nothing to hide...

...then you have nothing to fear. I'm sure we've all heard that from somewhere before.

0
0
Thumb Down

@EdwardP

There is no oversight.

There is no checking of receipts.

They are on their "honour".

And seeing as how an MP ha no honour....

0
0
Silver badge

They have a counter site...

www.onelawforusoneforyouscumbags.com

0
0

@TMS9900

">People, you are pissing in the wind.

There speaks a wise man."

We just figure to stand upwind of the MP's.

0
0

Too easy?

I've never understood why MPs aren't just subject to the same rules as civil servants -- and that includes what to do if your job requires you regularly to stay overnight away from home. I'm sure there are procedures for that.

But then I remember: MPs think they're better than the rest of us.

0
0
Bronze badge

They should jsut do what we over here do...

Instead of passing a law making them exempt, just make the government so inefficient that by the time they expense reports are actually available, they have already been re-elected and can pull the same crap until next re-election. Or claim that the project they are working on is for "national Security" and have it classified....

Of the people, by the people, for the people. My ass.

0
0
jon

Standing the problem on it's head

Can almost smell the press headlines now.. "shop an MP win fabulous prizes".

0
0
Thumb Down

The Cheeky Blighters

Hmm, not impressed with this rubbish. Letter has been sent, however I'll not hold my breath on it being acted on.

0
0
IT Angle

BTW

Maybe one failing with mysociety et al .. is that it seems to focus singularly on the House of Commons?

There is after all, another house: the House of Lords.

Where one may expect and anticipate that its members are likely to be very very highly motivated, highly ambitious and with strong networking and associated danger of being self-centric the other (generally) tends towards wisdom, influence, experience and expertise with a tendency to dangers of being self-centric.

These, in the UK, are structured to balance out. Where the self-centric dangers of one synergise or confront the self-centric dangers of the other.

If someone might motivate or prod mysociety et al ... into requesting that the Lords rejects decision of the Commons under a principle that all incomes (however diverse) and all expediture (however diverse) should be accountable to the pubic might it be a gooder thing?

But how does a mere commoner ask a Lord to take issue?

0
0

Contacted my MP...

...not holding out much hope. Silly bugger's a Labour party whip and hasn't voted against the Government since he became one.

0
0
Thumb Up

No reportable income... too much money let the local police know......

A police campaign targeting people living lavish lifestyles on the proceeds of crime and money laundering has begun in Sussex.

Crimestoppers and Sussex Police joined forces for the campaign called "Too Much Bling, Give Us a Ring".

People are urged to report their suspicions about apparently wealthy people with no legitimate income.

http://www.2muchbling.co.uk/

No reportable income... too much money let the local police know

0
0

Correct me if im wrong...

But dont all laws in the UK, once passed by the house of commons and the lords, go to the Queen for signature? At least in Aus once the law is passed through both houses it goes to the queens representative (the Governor General) for signature. And whilst this is usually a rubber stamp, occasionally, VERY occasionally, the Governor General says no. This would seem like a good case for that. Maybe you should all write to old Lizzie and see if she cant put a stop to this nonsense! Make the old bat earn her keep for once! :P

0
0
Paris Hilton

I don't think Lizzie can do it

The GG is really a rep of old Blighty anyway?

BTW: no reply, acknowledgement or owt from my MP.

I tend towards thinking that an MP is not merely an elected representative but also a person prepared to enter into a partnership arrangement of sorts with the public. And it is influencing how I consider UK publicly owned stuff to avoid inflationary proxy tax, sgt bilko type models.

0
0
Happy

MP replied

MP replied with details of the new approach taken.

0
0
This topic is closed for new posts.

Forums