The Wardman Wire

Introduction

As the Wardman Wire contribution to efforts to move forward the current debate about MPs and their expenses, terms and conditions, and the transparency and reputation of politics in general, we are running an article series from a wide range of viewpoints on the whole topic.

If there is a single aim, it is to bring some light in alongside the heat. We want to generate a lot of ideas for ways ahead from a lot of different viewpoints and political positions. You can find the introduction to the series, and brief for the authors, here. I’m happy to keep it running while there are people wanting to express a substantive view.

Gavin Whenman: Keep the status quo

This contribution is from Liberal Democrat activist Gavin Whenman of GavinWhenman.com, who argues that the present system contains no inherent faults, but rather that the Derek Conway scandal proved how well the current system is coping with dishonest MPs, by providing an essentially political, rather than legal, oversight of MPs expenses. Should this Parliamentary system itself fail, the public acts as the final arbiter of an MPs conduct through elections.

The system didn’t fail

The scandalous conduct of Derek Conway, MP for Old Bexley and Sidcup, who employed his two sons, gave them £60,000 of taxpayers’ money and yet, when questioned by the Committee on Standards and Privileges, could produce no evidence either of the privileged pair ever actually did any work, has led to understandable calls for reform of the way in which MPs employ staff.

And yet, this whole affair has been a demonstration of how well the current system works. The matter was reported to the Committee, who looked into it, were unsatisfied with the answers received from Mr Conway, and reprimanded him accordingly. After having the whip withdrawn by Tory leader David Cameron, Derek Conway rightly decided not to stand for re-election, because if he had done he would have been voted out.

This is the perfect example of self-regulation by Parliament overseen, ultimately, by the public. As is proper in a democratic society, the best form of regulation for publicly elected officials is in the end the ballot box.

As Dave Cole points out in a previous article in this series the current debate is really about perception, as MPs themselves are, on the whole, fairly honest people seeking to do their best for their constituents. Their good name has been sullied by the likes of Derek Conway, but a bad apple is no reason to fell the tree, especially when said bad apple has been discovered and effectively thrown away. Dave Cole is right to argue that this poor public perception does need to be addressed, but this needs to be through a media offensive, rather than an expensive and bureaucratic change to the rulebook.

A Public Service

In one sense, Derek Conway, or at least those who reported him and the Committee that investigated him, have provided a public service, by showing how vigilant we must be to ensure the probity of this system. In the wake of the Derek Conway scandal, there have been revelations relating to the misuse of public funds by a variety of MPs demonstrating that it is possible to discover all abuse of Parliamentary expenses under the current system as long as we don’t become complacent, as we have been up until now.

Perhaps it might be apt to point the finger not in the direction of MPs, but of the public and press, who have until now been too lazy to do their proper job of keeping publicly elected officials honest.

Some more about Gavin Whenman...

Gavin Whenman is a law student and Liberal Democrat, and fancies himself as a bit of a writer. He lives in Borehamwood, Hertfordshire and is currently studying at King’s College London. He blogs, far too much these days, at www.GavinWhenman.com and hosts a weekly political podcast with Conservative blogger Richard Holloway at Realpolitik.

Tags: mps, house rules for parliament, ethics, house of commons[tags]mps, house rules for parliament, ethics, house of commons[/tags]