Having read and listened to Sir Nicholas Winterton’s comments on Rail travel tickets for MPs I can see where the uproar has come from, but I am saddened to say the least that so many Tories are joining the crusade against him. CCHQ has released a statement condemning his comments saying they are “out of touch views from a soon to be retiring MP whose views do not represent that of the Conservative Party”. Well there’s a surprise, the same CCHQ that has been trying to oust the Wintertons ever since Cameron came to power has now distanced itself from his public comments. Couldn’t really see that one coming could we?

Now, there will no doubt be many of you reading this thinking is he actually going to defend Sir Nicholas? Yes. I am. If you listen to what he actually says he is making a very reasonable argument as to why MPs should be allowed to go  in first class. By talking about people who have a “totally different outlook on life”, he is talking about people just on their way to work and who are reading a book or people travelling to see friends, etc. He is not talking people down in the pompous and snobbish fashion that it is made out to be.

I am disgusted that the Tories have condemned his words. Sir Nicholas has represented the people of Macclesfield for many a decade and if they had a problem with him travelling by first class, then they would not have consistently voted for him. I personally prefer to travel first class because I find it quieter and you generally don’t get distracted by children or other noise. If I have work to be concentrating on I would rather be in first class where I know I can get on with it. Yes, there will be times when standard class suffices, but this is no guarantee. Does that make me a snob? IN CCHQ’s eyes, probably, yes it does. In the real world. No, it doesn’t. I don’t know about anyone else, but I would much rather my MP turned up to a debate having had the opportunity to study his papers fully rather than turning up to a debate not fully prepared because he couldn’t get a seat in standard class and there were children making noise and a variety of other general conversations taking place.

I’m happy for MPs to claim for first class tickets. Of course, if they claim for a first class ticket and then travel standard class (as happens with MEPs all the time) then that is wrong and is another matter. However, in this case  it does not seem unreasonable to provide members of parliament with first class travel. It is not saying they are above the general public for they are not. It is merely saying that they need a place where they can guarantee they can get on with the work they have to do.

If you read previous articles on this blog you will quite easily find that I have consistently rallied against excessive expenses where necessary, but I will defend MPs when what they are saying has merit and this is one of those situations. There will no doubt be many other MPs who have the same feelings as Sir Nicholas, but are not in a position to push their head above the parapet.

It’s a dark day for politics when it gets lowered to lambasting members of parliament for simply wanting a quiet place to do what is important work which can and often does have widespread implications not only for their constituents, but for the country as a whole.

Iain Dale reckons the interview on 5Live was car crash esq, ConHome has come out against his words and practically every other media outlet is rallying against him. Yes, he might have come across better had he worded his answers slightly differently, however the point still stands. Sir Nicholas has been a fantastic MP standing up for this country and protecting traditions when others have insisted modernisation is the way forward. He will be missed from the Commons. He’s right, it’s not ‘troughing’ as Guido suggests and I’m proud to defend his comments.

Incidentally, if you don’t believe me about Sir Nicholas being right on this issue, then you can listen to his interview for yourself. Listen to what he actually says and listen to the disgraceful way Stephen Nolan tries to get him to retract his comments.

UPDATE: I’ve had a browse around the twitter and blogging world and evidently there is suspiciously nothing on this subject from Tom Harris, not even anything on his Twitter feed. Interesting, given that he uses first class to travel between Glasgow and London.

Went to bed early last night and woke up late today so lots of catching up to do with several big stories today.

First is this ongoing nonsense of MPs expenses. I simply cannot believe the attitude of certain Members of Parliament such as Anne Widdecombe who are complaining that the rule shave been changed retrospectively. How long will it take for them to understand that the public is not so much angry as to whether or not rules were broken, more that they claimed for massage chairs and swimming pool cleaning bills in the first place.

Yes, the system is clearly at fault. A system that allowed MPs to claim for what they did is a deeply flawed one, however that  is completely separate from the issue of what people choose to claim. Theft is illegal. Sometimes people commit such a crime with the justification “they wont miss it”, but that doesn’t make it legal. In the same way MPs had the choice whether to claim for the things they did. Some chose not to and they are rightly upset that they are being grouped in the same category as those who were so out of touch with their constituents that they though the job of an MP was to build up a property portfolio.

It’s time these MPs realised that whilst not breaking the rules, they claimed for things which really shouldn’t have been claimed for. Widdecombe thinks there should be an employer’s tribunal as she says the rules have been changed retrospectively. Shut Up Widdy! Accept that it the message behind what was claimed for rather than the rules being broken and get that cheque book out.

I don’t often agree with the Independent, indeed I never read the paper, but this article to day hits the nail on the head – MPs can decide Parliament’s destiny.

I couldn’t agree more with today’s Times leader:

“Yesterday Britain’s MPs showed their contempt for the public. In publishing heavily edited allowances claims, smothered in black ink and excuses, there was obfuscation where there should have been clarity, mendacity where there should have been honesty.

More than one million documents were published. Many of them were censored, the essential details scored out. Whole invoices were coated in black, only the odd word or name peeping out, pointlessly. The word of the day was to redact, a term that means to edit for publication.

Did your MP flip his designated second home for maximum gain? Did your MP pay capital gains tax on a property paid for by your taxes? Do not expect the published expenses to tell you the answers to these and other questions – they have been redacted. Our parliamentarians have always been slippery when their expenses were questioned; in yesterday’s exercise in supposed transparency they surpassed themselves. Letters back from the trenches were not so heavily censored.

Nuggets of new information managed to escape the heavy black pen. Kitty Ussher, who resigned earlier this week over her failure to pay capital gains tax, paid a company to ensure her name topped Google searches. Lembit Öpik, the Liberal Democrat MP, claimed £19 for the “mother of all wigs”. Ed Balls, the Education Secretary, claimed £141 to be the sponsor of Ossett Town FC’s match against Whitby Town

If these claims sound trivial, it is because they are. The MPs’ allowances, redacted and expunged of all information of note, are full of useless and distracting trivia. Among the hundreds of thousands of documents are endless claims for staplers and biscuits, for flowers and vacuum cleaners. No one disputes an MP’s right to claim for small matters of stationery and transport. Mr Öpik’s wig is justified, perhaps, when looked at from some angles. Less so, when on closer inspection it emerges that he bought it for a charity event.

The problem with this mountain of trivia is that the venal claims have been expunged. We cannot see what speculative invoices the fees office has rejected. We cannot see any information about second homes, and flipping. We can see no tax information. We cannot see the phantom mortgages. The family members living and working at taxpayers’ expense slip unseen through the gaps.

But we can see that Bob Blizzard, Labour MP, claimed 39p for a paperclip. It would be laughable if it were not so utterly disgraceful.

The decision to redact swaths of information was taken by a committee of MPs headed by Michael Martin, the former Speaker. His legacy, a sham pretence at transparency, is a fitting reflection of his handling of the crisis. But the MPs then had the chance to redact still further, to edit the editing. We do not know how much more black pen the MPs insisted on wielding. Another unanswered question on a dispiriting day.

All MPs should, today, republish their expenses with the redactions removed. Otherwise we will consider each of them to be signatories to this brazen betrayal of trust. Each of the party leaders should set an example to his party. Hiding behind data protection issues or security threats is pathetic, and not an excuse. Anyone determined to find out where an MP lives can do so. The Prime Minister’s residence is hardly a secret. If bank account details would be shown in an unredacted claim, change accounts.

Gordon Brown, David Cameron and Nick Clegg should lead the way, publishing their claims, unedited, unredacted, untarnished by black ink. The Palace of Westminster made a mockery of free speech and the freedom of information yesterday. Instead, it gave a master class in censorship that might make the mullahs of Tehran blush.”

Today is without question an historic day. Not for 300 years has a speaker of the House of Commons been forced to stand down. The next hour is going to be unprecedented. Scenes such as we are seeing today have never been seen before.

The Metropolitan Police have just announced they will not be investigating the leak of the documents that led to the Telegraph publishing details of MPs expenses. They apparently met with CPS lawyers yesterday and it was decided there was not enough of a case to investigate. This however does not mean that there will not be criminal investigations into the expense claims of the MPs themselves.

This article will be updated throughout the next hour. Stay here for live coverage of the Speaker’s statement coming up at 14:30.

BBC2 has a special programme covering the statement – it seems a bit over the top, but does reflect the historic nature  of today’s events

The details of the statement:

• Sunday 21st June resigning
• Monday 22nd June – election of new speaker

So there we have it the shortest resignation statement ever. The Speaker is resigning in 5 weeks time. New speaker has 3 weeks to settle in before summer recess followed by a

Douglas Carswell: “very wise, we need few weeks for candidates to set out stall. Secret ballot will help in cleaning up Westminster. It had to happen, hasn’t been a nice busiiness. I regret having to do this, but it had to be done.” “We have to realise this is the beginning of a cleaning up process, not the end of it.”

It is unclear as to whether there will be a by-election in the summer. The rites will have to be passed and Labour will not want a by-election in the current climate. It will probably come in the autumn, but we’ll have to wait and see.

I am at a loss as to what to say about the speaker. His statement was a disgrace and only adds to the lack of cinfidence the British public has in parliament. I’m out campaigning for the Euro elections this evening but I’ll have more on the speaker later.

Gordon Brown has said he wants all expense claims recipts independently scrutinised. that all sounds well and good but he is only saying it as a result of Cameron taking the by demanding Tory MPs pay back wrongfull claims.
This is just yet more reactionary measures from the PM who has had years to sort this mess out. Cameron comes out quite well in this case as he shows leadership where it is needed most. You know the game is up when the leader of the opposition gets more praise and attention than the PM.

David Cameron has announced some measures he is taking in light of the revelations about Tory MPs claiming unbelievable amounts of items on expenses such as dog food and moat clearance. I wish to draw attention to one of his decisions in particular, that of the second homes. He has said that from now on MPs who sell their second homes will have to pay capital gains tax on it. This is a start but does not go far enough. It simply will not do. As I said before, the second home allowance is not a bad idea in principle. What is bad is the way in which it is used. The main problem is that MPs can benefit personally from selling their second homes and as a result being an MP seems to be more about building up a property bureau than representing constituents. For this reason it is high time that the allowance is scrapped altogether an MPs that live a reasonable distance from Westminster can rent a Parliament owned flat at taxpayer’s expense which is pre-furnished. There is no need to have luxury items as it is a second home, one where the MP will not spend most their time. This will solve the problem of what can and can’t be claimed for. It will also stop the process of ‘flipping’ where MPs change what they determine as their second home so as to profit most.

The revelations in the Daily Telegraph have not been good for either Labour or the Conservatives and will presumably read similarly to the Lib Dems. It is good that the public is told about what has been going on as it needs to be cleared up. It was always going to be painful for those involved, but if they wanted to avoid it then they could do what other MPs such as Philip Holobone and David Burrowes have done and just claim the minimum allowed and not submit silly cases of light bulb installation charges.

The other problem is the attitude that members seem to be taking on the issue. Tory shadow cabinet members have agreed to pay back money, but it’s the principle that matters. They wouldn’t be paying back the money if they hadn’t of been found out. What they should do is pay back the illegitimate claims in full and make a matching donation to charity in order to try and go a certain distance to mending ties with their constituents.

All this chapter in British politics will do is confirm the feeling a number of people already had that our politicians are elitists and they don’t care about the man on the street. It’s time politics was cleaned up and it’s time these people were thrown out of parliament and replaced by those who actually care more about improving the country rather than getting a swimming pool fixed.

I wrote  the other day that something needed to be done about the expenses system for MPs. Well, no sooner had I written the article, David Burrowes MP, a Shadow Minister for Justice published the following article on his website:

David Burrowes MP has this week repeated his call for an end to London MPs having a second home at taxpayers’ expense.

He said, “There is no good reason for London MPs to have a second home paid for by the taxpayer. It is a shame that Parliament did not take the opportunity last year, which I supported, to scrap the second home allowance for outer London MPs. Many of my constituents are commuters who work long hours and find it hard to accept that MPs should have a taxpayers’ perk of a London flat. I use the tube and bus to get from my home in Southgate to and from Parliament within an hour. If it is too late for public transport then I get a taxi home. I have not taken up the option of a second home allowance because it can’t be justified as a reasonable taxpayers’ expense and I prefer to go home to my family. Parliament must get its house in order and take immediate steps to Abolish Outer London MPs’ second home allowance.”

He added, “We also need full transparency of all our accounts. If anyone wishes to inspect my receipted accounts they are welcome to do so. Because of some MPs abusing the system we are all being accused of being caught with our hands in the taxpayers till. The response to the corrosion of mistrust about MPs expenses is full transparency. I have previously disclosed details of my accounts on my website and annual report, and invited inspection of my accounts and will continue to do so.”

It’s good to see that some of our representatives are prepared to stand up and demand changes to what is a completely corrupt system at the moment. As I said in my article the other day, I was not opposed to the second homes allowance as such, but I, Like Mr Burrowes fail to see why any London MP needs the allowance.

It’s also good to see that he agrees with me that there needs to be proper auditing of expense claims. I for one am looking forward to this July when all recipts for expense claims will be availbale to view. It will be interesting to see what items MPs have been claiming at taxpayer’s expense.