Monday 25 May 2009

Is it really all within the rules?

I keep hearing these phrases about the Westminster meltdown which is getting in the way of politics, very similar, and all amounting to an exculpation of the MP involved on the grounds that what they did was within the rules. What surprises me is why no journalist has challenged that assertion. There has been the odd one saying "hang on there, chappie, what about this bit that says that your claims should neither be nor appear excessive and that you should only claim for things that you need in order to do your job?" - most notably David Dimbleby on Question Time, but none have sandpapered it a bit to see how it looks.

Elliot Morley, Labour MP, said:
"In 1997 when I was appointed minister I was obliged under the rules at that time to class my London home as my main home. That meant I had to make my additional costs allowance claims on my constituency home."

But Gordon Brown, during all his time as Chancellor, declared North Queensferry as his main home and made his additional costs allowance claims on his London flat.

Who to believe, who to believe?

Mind how you go!


subrosa said...

None of them Calum.

I see Ian's going to publish MEP expenses in the next couple of days. Great stuff.

Dark Lochnagar said...

Calum, what I don't understand and no-one seems to have picked up on it, is why does Gordon Brown need a flat in London? He has lived in Downing street for the last 12 years. Can you imagine Obama having a flat in downtown Washington? The whole thing is ridiculous. Who lives in it, is it rented out? I think we should know.