The expenses scandal

[wellinghall]

[Poll #1401674]
And while we're at it, I'll point you towards today's Matt:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/matt/

Comments

[bunn.livejournal.com]

My expectations of politicians were pretty low anyway, I don't think the scandals have affected my voting preferences particularly.

[miss-next.livejournal.com]

I'm a member of the Green Party, so I would have voted for them anyway.

[mirabehn.livejournal.com]

I shall be either voting LibDem or Green anyway, and feel that the LibDems have come off better than the other two main parties, although not perfectly.

(It always makes me wince a lot when the Greens are put with the BNP as an option, btw! Even if I'd given up on the LibDems as a result of the scandal, which would have made ticking that box accurate, I don't think I *could* with the BNP there. I mean I disagree with UKIP on pretty much everything, but the BNP are something else...)

[nineveh-uk.livejournal.com]

These are council and European elections. It is possible that if I had had an ill-behaved local Labour MP who was re-selected, that I would have reconsidered my vote in a general election even though I am a member of the party. However I don't think that it is in the long-term interest of the local electorate to use council elections as a means of expressing general dissatisfaction with Westminster - I've seen what can happen as a result.

[hmmm-tea.livejournal.com]

My voting will be unchanged by the scandal.

[inamac.livejournal.com]

I tend to vote Green for EU elections (am I the only one who finds it ironic that the upcoming election is for a body that has a long 'tradition' of gravy-training?), Lib-Dem for local elections, and take General Elections as they come (we'll see what the situation is when the GE is finally called, though on current showings Cameron is the only leader showing any leadership qualities).

[tovaglia.livejournal.com]

I am pretty shocked by the scandal (naive maybe) and think the individuals concerned have behaved very badly. But it will not change my voting.

[segh.livejournal.com]

I shall still vote, becasue I was brought up to believe it was my civic duty. I shall probably hold my nose while doing so.

[emperor]

I don't think it will change my voting patterns.

[lil-shepherd.livejournal.com]

It would depend on what my local MP had been up to. As it happens, I didn't vote for her - she is Tory - but she seems to be pretty much in the clear. I am certainly not going to condemn all members of a party simply because other members have their noses in the trough. Nor do I think for a moment that any of the smaller parties wouldn't behave in exactly the same way given half a chance.

This has happened because the party leaders - and this is on Labour's watch, which makes it more their fault - have been reluctant to raise MPs pay to what would be the going rate for the job, They have therefore brought in a series of nudge-nudge wink-wink expense allowances.

Most people fiddle expenses at some stage of their lives, even if it is only a couple of quid. I, for one, am perfectly willing to forgive small and silly errors, whether they were actually errors (or can be blamed on an accountant or the scrutineers, or not.) What I cannot forgive is the 'switching'.

[alitalf.livejournal.com]

I am not so sure about the going rate for the job. Some of them, I suspect, have the skills of a professional politician, but could not do a real world job very well.

[lil-shepherd.livejournal.com]

The problem is that if you pay peanuts, you get monkeys.

[alitalf.livejournal.com]

They may claim to be paid peanuts, but the vast majority of UK citizens have to get by on a fraction of their income. It does make sense to pay them enough so that they should have less incentive for corruption, but I also feel uncomfortabel that they have little real understanding of how normal peoplelive.

Some MPs could do a real-world job that paid as much or perhaps considerably more than they get as MPs, but I suspect that many would not manage to do any other job nearly as well paid as their present one. In that sense, pay lots more than peanuts, and still get monkeys.

[lil-shepherd.livejournal.com]

Well, we could move the whole shebang out of London - probably to the Midlands - and save a whole lot of money.

On the other hand, there has been strong feeling against anyone holding another job outside parliament. You pays your money, you takes your choice.

I am really, really scared that we will go down the anti-intellectual American route.

[wellinghall.livejournal.com]

I wholly agree.

[philmophlegm.livejournal.com]

At my old firm (which paid very poorly for an accountancy firm), we made this point to one of the partners once. He replied "And if you pay truffles, you get pigs".

[bookwormsarah.livejournal.com]

It has greatly disappointed me, but because I see it as an individual making the choice to abuse the system (and I have no doubt that this has been going on for years), I wouldn't make decisions along party lines. I am sure that there are people in all three parties who have behaved without reproach too...

That being said, if my MP was in my party-of-choice and had claimed for something ridiculous, I would seriously consider voting against them. In that case I would probably lean towards a minor party, although I would consider all the candidates very carefully. I do try to vote for the candidate rather than the one with the right colour rosette.

[malaheed.livejournal.com]

I thought that I would check out my local MP and see how he did. However despite being a junior minister, he appears to have a public profile slightly lower than a very low thing. So low, that most hits turn up another MP with a very similar name. He's not even managed to turn up in any of the expenses list as either good or bad. I think we elected the invisible man.

[helflaed.livejournal.com]

I'd vote against my MP if he had been involved. Frankly I find it a bit rich that the parties are all trying to be holier than thou and trying to score political points against each other over this. Let's be honest, MPs of all persuasions are being caught with their hands in the till and my own personal belief is that the individual should be punished, rather than the party.

[lalwendeboggart.livejournal.com]

I will check what our local MP has claimed before voting for her again - she is a good MP, and if she hasn't made outrageous claims then I would be *more* likely to vote for her, as those who have acted responsibly should be recognised for that.

Hopefully she has not claimed for groceries. The thing which disgusts me most of all in this affair is that MPs can claim £400 a month for food while pensioners etc have to manage on a fraction of that.

[arda-unmarred.livejournal.com]

I am somewhat perplexed by all this hoohah: seriously, is anyone _really_ surprised? People in power buttering up themselves: I mean come on, tell us something new...

[wellinghall.livejournal.com]

My take is that it is a combination of three things:
- the sheer scale of some of it, with some MPs claiming in "expenses" more than their salary (and this is before taking travel costs, staff costs etc into account)
- their efforts to hide this from the public, and lies about why they want to hide it - saying it's for security, while really it is to hide their "flipping" of second homes etc
- their affrontery in thinking that by paying some of it back, everything will be okay; whereas someone over-claiming benefits or under-paying tax simply doesn't have that option

Not that I'm arguing with your basic premise, though!

[clarienne.livejournal.com]

I'm with Bunn - I'm not really shocked by any of this. It would be good if it's tightened up, but doubt it's a party political issue, more an issue with political culture across the board.

As for my voting, I'm really struggling to work out where I stand politically at the moment, and plan to give some time to looking at the issues that are important to me before the upcoming elections, but this isn't really one of them.

[alitalf.livejournal.com]

It seems that our MP has not been implicated in any expenses scandal, at least so far, but I am slightly biased towards a protest vote because the professional politicians have set up for themselves a system that is designed to be abused.

Instead, I would like to see them paid a figure related to the average income, after tax, of UK citizens over (say) the age of 18. They make us all poorer, on average, they get less. They improve the lot of average people, they get rewarded. Might need refinement, but I think that would give some sort of incentive for right behaviour, not purely actions that are self-serving at the expense of everyone else.

[wellinghall.livejournal.com]

There would seem to be merits to this idea. Even if they got a multiple of average pay, there would still be a link.

Getting take-home pay that was related to average take-home pay might be a nice refinement.*

*ETA: Although there would then be the question of which home, of course ... ;-)

[gramarye1971]

If I were to be in a position to vote for an MP, I'd certainly be influenced by whether he or she was implicated in the scandal -- amongst other reasons by the fact that he or she was stupid enough to fiddle the figures and get caught. But I'm with nineveh_uk in that I hate the practise of 'punishing' Westminster through local or European elections -- and hate the fact that both the media and the parties themselves look to those elections as thumbs-up or -down for the party in power. (By-elections are a slightly different matter, though I think too much can be made out of those as well depending on the circumstances.)

[thecatsamuel.livejournal.com]

We are very lucky in that we have a dedicated and hard working constituency mp whom I will vote for, not on party lines. Am absolutely appalled - there is no possible justification for using public money for tvs, moat cleaning, food etc. Most people have a VERY clear idea where that money comes from! As well as a very fair salary being an MP opens directorships, speaking opportunities etc. PS It is another inditement of current mainstream politics that you include "BNP" as a "minor party" - the scandal plays straight into their hands and is another very worrying aspect.

[muninnhuginn]

Unchanged: I'll be floating strategically, but NEVER voting Labour. (Gah! my grandfather and mother are spinning in their graves.)

[rustica.livejournal.com]

Arg! What to say? I wasn't going to vote Labour anyway, and there's pretty much nothing they can do at this stage to get me back. Even if they abolished id cards and gave all the ELQ funding back, I wouldn't trust them an inch to keep their word after the election.

But who else is there to vote for? Seriously?

I have a lovely vote Against, going spare, if only there were anyone to use it For. :(

Expenses scandal... well, colour me totally unsurprised, but no, it hasn't changed anything, except perhaps my level of disillusionment, very slightly.

[wellinghall.livejournal.com]

Bob Heinlen has, in both stories and essays, put forward several alternative voting systems, including one where the candidate with the least votes Against gets in, instead of the candidate with the most votes For.

[didiusjulianus.livejournal.com]

I nearly always vote, I will do this time, I may change my preference this time but not largely due to the voting whatsit, and I very rarely divulge my voting habits. Would be my answer.

[chris-maslen.livejournal.com]

I have been, for a while, considering standing as an independent on a platform of actually representing my constituency rather than just towing the party line.

The expenses scandal nay just make this sort ot thing possible rather than just a complete pipe dream.

[wellinghall.livejournal.com]

I suspect you wouldn't be the only one to do so.

I've no idea whether we live in the same constituency (although I guess not), but if we did I'd vote for you.