The Wardman Wire

The Telegraph continues to publish more and more details of MPs expense claims and, alongside public anger, forcing MPs into humiliating apologies and resignations. But Rowan WIlliams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, is saying “enough’s enough” and that it is “damaging democracy” – oh, and giving the BNP support (like people become racist when their MPs exploit their expenses!).

Sorry, but it isn’t. Democracy was damaged by these MPs claiming excessive amounts, on inappropriate items, or by otherwise pretty much committing fraud by flipping their second home around or cliaming for an already paid-off mortgage. And then they voted to keep it secret, which was always going to end badly – bad news always gets out. If they’d published the details themselves, they could at least have had some control over it.

I think the important point to make here is that confidence in democracy is not reliant on confidence in those who have been elected. That is why we have general elections – so that we can change our minds every few years. We have have plenty of confidence in the principle of democracy and in our politicial system whilst not having confidence in our MPs. So long as we can vote them out – and are given the opportunity – democracy is not damaged. It is only when we are refused the general election we want because the government fears it will lose that our faith in our democracy – which is, after all, based on the principle of rule by the people – begins to be damaged.

MPs are not the embodiment of democracy, no matter what they might like to think. They are merely our current representatives; they have their job at our whim. They are no more than the embodiment of our past will, and that mandate has now quite obviously expired. This is why the humiliation of MPs certainly is not damaging to democracy, just to individual MPs and political parties. In many ways, democracy is strengthened by this as we the people can actively see how their anger is affecting politics and will be able to express that at the ballot box and vote out their sitting MP when a general election is finally called.

I can see a couple of problems arising after a general election if, as expected, at least half of the House of Commons is made up of brand new MPs:

As many as 30 will be forced to resign directly because of the expenses scandal, while whips expect more than 200 to quit because they are unable to cope with continued public anger. Up to 90 MPs will be voted out in the election. (The Times)

Firstly, forming a government will be awkward if so many MPs are brand new – at least some experience of the Commons is essential before ministerial office can be conferred – and a load of green MPs could confuse parliamentary procedure.

However, the biggest benefit would be that it would be crop of new MPs for a brand new era of a transparent Parliament. We could then start afresh, with confidence in our elected representatives – and the knowledge that they have all made a pledge of transparency and frugality with our money.

The humiliation of MPs now sets us up for renewed and complete confidence in their replacements. Without this humiliation, many would simply not go and the new broom would not be able to sweep through the Commons. Whatever damage this may cause now will be more than offset when we have a crop of new, untainted, elected representatives.