Morning:
11°c
An awesome and ridiculous film that leaves you thrilled beyond the point of your natural endurance
London faces a wave of bus and Tube strikes that could cause chaos for millions of passengers as unions walkout over pay and conditions
More...
Speaker's bid to keep MPs expenses secret 'deals a hammer blow to Parliament's name'
Last updated at 02:37am on 28.03.08
Speaker turns censor: Michael Martin wants expenses to be kept secret
He insisted the move was merely "delaying the inevitable" and called for the details of the second homes allowance to be released immediately.
His comments will increase pressure on Commons Speaker Michael Martin, whose management committee is already under fire from MPs for not consulting the House before deciding to appeal against publication of their expenses.
Commons authorities said on Tuesday they would contest a Freedom of Information order to publish details of expenses claims by 14 MPs, including Gordon Brown and David Cameron.
The House of Commons Commission - chaired by Mr Martin - claimed that any release of home addresses posed a security risk.
But Mr Clegg said today there was no reason why the expenses claims could not be released without the addresses, suggesting this had been the original plan.
"My understanding has been, when I was first told about this about a week ago, that the appeal on the very particular point about the confidentiality of addresses ... can be separated from the publication of details of the expenses," he told BBC Radio 4's Today programme.
Campaigners and some MPs suspect that the issue of addresses has been used as a "smokescreen" to prevent any publication of how MPs use their £23,000-a-year second homes allowance.
Mr Clegg added today: "The reason why this feels like a needless, additional hammer blow to public confidence in the House of Commons and what MPs do is - I think we all now accept - that there should be full declaration of all MPs' expenses.
Battle: Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg wants the expenses claims made public
"That will happen in the coming months once the arrangements are put in place, in any event.
"So it's not as though it's doing anything other than delaying the inevitable."
Campaigners have expressed anger that a legal challenge could cost the taxpayer more than £100,000 - on top of the £52,000 the Commons has already spent opposing freedom of information rulings.
Heather Brooke, a right-to-know campaigner, said: "The Speaker does not seem to realise the damage he is blatantly doing to the reputations of hard-working MPs.
"He is shamefully bringing politics into disrepute with his desperation to shroud the use of public money in secrecy."
Former minister Stephen Ladyman also warned that the Commons was being brought into "disrepute" and MPs needed to demonstrate they had nothing to hide.
Writing on his website, the Labour backbencher said: "MPs need to restore public confidence by being more open about their expenses and how they spend public money.
"I can understand that some MPs will want their addresses kept secret on security grounds but the fact is that some of the 'nonsense' being published in the media is bringing the House of Commons into disrepute and we need to act to demonstrate openness and show that we have nothing to hide."
Scroll down for more...
Row: Gordon Brown and David Cameron are among 14 MPs whose expenses claims have been requested by freedom of information campaigners
Dr Ladyman has provided links on his website to the published total amounts of expenses he has claimed under each subject heading, and has offered some explanation as to what the money is spent on.
The additional costs allowance, which is used by MPs to run a home near Westminster, costs taxpayers £11.7million a year.
MPs can furnish the property with top-of-the-range goods from the so-called "John Lewis" list, including spending £10,000 on a kitchen, £6,000 on a bathroom and £750 on stereos and televisions.
But Dr Ladyman said: "I have never claimed for kitchens, furniture, electrical goods or alterations for either property."
Liberal Democrat Mark Oaten, who is among the 14 MPs covered by last month's disclosure ruling by the Information Tribunal, said: "There was no consultation with me at all about deciding to appeal now to a higher court and I'm slightly confused about what's taking place.
"It does appear that the MPs involved, the 14 MPs involved, weren't consulted about this decision but we are getting all the flak this morning, as if we are trying to hide something. It's a very strange decision to take."
Scroll down for more...
Mr Martin yesterday refused to listen to MPs' concerns about the appeal against the decision in the chamber.
When Labour MP David Winnick raised concerns about the High Court move in the Commons he was silenced by the Speaker, who claimed any debate was sub judice.
Mr Winnick said later: "We are being gagged by the House of Commons. The concerns about the addresses is a smokescreen.
"Some people want to block any publication at all.
"What is being done in many MPs' names is being done without their consent. The danger is unfortunately that people get the impression that we have something to hide."
Last week the Commons Commission had indicated it was preparing to publish the expenses having run out of legal options.
But that appeared to have changed over Easter, leading to Tuesday's last-ditch High Court move.
Papers filed with the court challenged the tribunal's ruling in its entirety. WE'LL LET COURTS DECIDE
Thirteen current and former MPs were asked by the Daily Mail why they had not freely published details of their second homes allowance between 2001 and 2006.
Gordon Brown's spokesman was asked the same question by political reporters yesterday.
He said the premier was "completely relaxed" about revealing his expenses but that the High Court action made it a matter for the Commons authorities.
David Cameron offered a "general" breakdown of his £21,359 expenses.
Tony Blair insisted it was a matter for the Commons as did Peter Mandelsonand Mark Oaten.
Sir Menzies Campbell was "thinking about" publishing while George Osborne said he would publish new expenses from next month.
William Hague said he would publish and was angry with the stance taken by the Commons authorities.
Labour's John Prescott, Margaret Beckett, Barbara Follett, Alan Keen and wife Ann Keen did not respond to calls. Ex-Tory MP John Wilkinson could not be contacted.
All the the politicians, including Mr Brown, were the target of the Freedom of Information campaign.
Reader views (57)
When they want our particulars for their ID card data bases and the rest, MPs always tell us that "you've nothing to fear if you've nothing to hide".
So: what are the Speaker and the others all hiding?
They should pay the costs of these appeals out of their own pockets - and not claim it on expenses!
- Eric, London, England
The Speaker is responsible for the conduct and standards in the Commons and his predecessors (regardless of their party) have all been held in high esteem and genuine affection by the public at large.
- Martin Fielding, London, England
I personally feel that the average MP in parliament is more dishonest now than any other time in my life and I am 65 years of age.
- Stan White, Leeds England
Just why do we need over 600 of these shameless parasites on the payroll anyway? What they do, could easily be done by half as many properly trained officials. None of this lot have any qualifications to govern, and certainly couldn't get a job anywhere else.
- Lezl, London
In fairness to the Speaker, I don't think he can be accused of bringing politics into disrepute - they're already IN disrepute; he is merely worsening the situation. It's about time these people understood that they are employed by the electorate and it is good practice for employers to keep an eye on their employees' expenditure.
- Suzanne, London
Is it possible that the politicians could list their entire income and expenses packages, so that we may judge whether or not they are worth employing in the first place. This is our money that they are wasting on a daily basis. I don't remember Gorbals Mick asking me if it is okay to waste £100,000 on a pointless exercise. He should pay for the costs of the appeal himself. Its only five years of your expense claims Mick!
- Alan, London
Who the hell do these greedy idiots think they are. I know for a fact that the husband and wife mentioned as living in West London, live about 6 miles or so from their "second" home in Covent Garden! It would be cheaper to get them a taxi. How the hell have they got the effrontery to sleep at night? Their "expenses" are more than many families of four have to live on for a year. Pure arrogance and greed. End of conversation.
- Alan, London, UK
We cannot have a democratic process at the same time as our MPs want secrecy how they are personally spending taxpayers' money. We need transparency on every aspect of public spending. Now can we also have an audit on what happened to the money received from the sale of Council housing stock and the wages of every "executive" in Councils and in the NHS. If people are being paid from public funds, their salaries should be posted on the internet so everyone can see what they are costing us.
- Patricia, London, UK
MPs and babies nappies share characteristics...they should both be changed regularly.....and for the same reason.
How can we have confidence in the Speaker?
- Angry, London, UK
Risking reputation and possible legal strictures to try to avoid accountability shows that these people really do have something to hide. They must be bought to justice.
- Sean, Coventry UK
So much for "open government" and "democracy". Secrets like this only serve to protect those who have something to hide. And they wonder why politicians are not respected. Bring back the old boys who would resign rather than compromise their integrity.
- Den B,, Leicestershire, England
The time is near when the people of this country will take back our Parliament and evict these scam artists.
- Sir Les, North London
Is the speaker still holding onto his job? must be the job satisfaction!
I cannot believe these cronies including the disgraced Lord Goldsmith who stopped the probe into the cash for peerage scandal because he was a cash of peerage lord himself, now Mr Martin is doing a cover up again for the sake of self-interest. I'd hate to imagine the scandals that will be uncovered if Nu Labour's plans for a US style congress are put through.
Bring back hereditary peers they seem to have done more to defend democracy in the last few years than our elected representatives.
This government has done more to damage our political system than Guy Fawkes and gun powder plot conspirators could have ever imagined.
- W Joseph, London, UK
So after inflicting damage on your country and fellow citizens for 58 years with your voting predilections you are now going to opt out by wasting your vote on a bunch of losers. Sorry, people like you get the government you deserve!
- Dave, Cornwall
I agree. MPs who object to the disclosure of their expenses should be named and shamed so that their constituents may vote them out at the next election.
These corrupt, untrustworthy and greedy thieves have definitely converted this country into a banana state that I thought I would never live to see.
Pensioners and others who have to survive on a shoestring income are compelled to disclose all their income and assets if they wish to claim benefits whereas these worthless MPs can shamelessly claim approximately three hundred times the ordinary person's weekly pension.
Those MPs involved and in particular Michael Martin should have their heads held down in shame.
- Curtis. L, Woodford Green
Must we really continue to tolerate the sleaze of a minority of MPs? It is really sinful how the respect towards these people has diminished over the past 2 decades. They are getting to be really greedy and disrespected by the majority of people who are realising what the really mean.
- D. Davies, Blackpool. U.K.
There is possibly a case for not disclosing MPs' addresses and I can understand reticence on that issue. However I have little doubt that a suitable accommodation could be made on that limited point with the Information Commissioner without recourse to expensive court action. The Commons authorities are behaving abominably and those MPs who are speaking up against this delaying tactic are to be commended.
- James Elliott, Eastbourne UK
The old saying from my grandfather is coming true, never trust a politician. The only thing possible is to send them all overseas, maybe China. They are all working for us or for themselves? I think more for their bank balance.
- Dave, Germany
Time for a vote of no confidence in the Speaker...
- Ian, London
Pullman gravy train with the Brown velvet, silk lined curtains drawn against draughts?
- Graeme L-W, Switzerland
I wonder if there is an honest MP Left in England.
- Dennis, Staffordshire, UK
There used to be a time when an MP was looked upon with respect. No more, the system is obviously abused and those that are abusing the system would be locked up if they were in the armed forces.
- Paul, Scarborough, UK
I m sick of hearing about this, they rise taxes to fund their lifestyle while the rest of us accumulate debits. Scrap the expense account they get paid too much for doing too little away. If they want a second home let them fund it themselves. all they need it a room in London not a house.
- Cassandra, London
It's not easy being a buffoon and a despot at the same time, but Speaker Martin manages to pull it off. How dare he spend our money to try to keep secret from us how our money is spent. Talk about chutzpah.
- R M, London, UK
Mr Martin is behaving like a dictator. First he wants to be legally allowed to hide his no doubt dubious spending habits and now he bans other MPs from talking about it! He should be sacked ASAP.
- Isabel, Woking, England
I hope Nobby Clark realises that this is £23K per annum.
Which is not far short of £100K per average 4 year Parliament (tax free)!
- Peter Hooper, Windsor. Berkshire. UK
The more Mr Martin tries to hide, the more disrespect HE brings to the House. He has lost the confidence of many MPs and the people and should go (hint to his local labour party - deselect?) We should be proud of the Parliamentary system, but the attempt to hide possible corruption makes the whole situation worse. The icing on the cake was the comment form the Met Police - the system is so loose that they were unable to bring charges against David Conway. All MPs should hang their head in shame.
A second thought - how much of these expenses are passed on to fund their political parties?
- Jeremy E, London UK
Would the collective noun for a group of MPs be "a stench of MPs" or "a trough of MPs" or even "a Martin of MPs"
- Paul, Lincoln, England
I think the thing that angers me the most is these self same politicians are the ones who have brought in the surveillance state which has made life so oppressive for the ordinary person working just to get by. The "If you have nothing to hide then nothing to fear" mantra has been peddled out whenever anyone questions the continual attacks on our privacy, and the ever growing element of threat used by government bodies to make sure we pay up and toe the line. So why should these greedy unscrupulous ministers have to retire because of their "embarrassment", surely if it was any of us little people we would be prosecuted?
- Sick Of It All, Essex
How much longer will it take for this bunch of social autistic to realise that one rule for them and another, far more stringent, rule for everyone else is no longer acceptable?
Blair's true legacy was the total erosion of trust in, and respect for, MPs and this is simply the latest and most extreme example of why this has happened.
- Warren Hertzberg, London
What's the difference between an MP and a thief.
Absolutely NOTHING.
- Malc, London, England
ALL MPs should reveal ALL expenses
They are paid from public funds and vote on their own salaries and pensions
They vote for pay freezes on others but not for themselves, although they have well over £200,000 pa to play with.
They vote for legislation which they do not believe in, lest they might damage their prospects for promotion.
They claim to be underpaid and to be able to command higher salaries etc in the private sector but few of them enter that sector until forced from Parliament, when they trade on their insider knowledge / contacts which have been funded by the public purse to take up positions which frequently conflict with the policies they propounded when in office.
They claim that publication of their expenses may put their security at risk, but this does not preclude publishing their expenses and keeping their addresses secret.
They vote for the Freedom of Information Act for others but try to exclude themselves from it.
There are 623 MPs, yet only 14 object to publication.
Their names and constituencies of these 14 should be publicised as widely as possible so that their constituents can know them at the next election and vote accordingly
MPs know that as a group they are widely regarded by the public as corrupt, out of touch and self serving, yet wonder why !
I have voted Labour for 58 years - next time I vote green
- A M Arsden, UK
I'm sorry, I don't usually stand up for MPs, but on this occasion I believe that they should be allowed to keep their £23k John Lewis allowance...on the understanding that anyone else who moves house gets a £23k grant towards furnishing and decorating their new home.
- Nobby Clark, Perth, UK
What’s the usual argument – If you have nothing to hide!
- Ian Bryan, Reading
Why is this fat-cat Martin still in the job? this disgraceful bandit has creamed off enough and now wants to do in private. I see the UK is turning into a banana republic.
- Tom, St. Albans
Another example of one rule for us and another for you. At least David C is saying what the general public want.
- Jk, London
They don't won,t us to see how far they have there snouts in the trough
while the rest of us are fighting a mountain of rising prices and debt.
- John, Staffordshire
Mr Martin what has he got to hide? We the tax payer have to by law tell them what our income,is so why not Mr Martin?
- Peter Nash, weston-super-mare
Another reason why we should indeed vote Conservative at the next election.
David has the right idea about this and is pressing ahead with the best honest approach to running things in my view.
- P Gillard, Hatherleigh, Devon
When you have been dipping into the cookie jar for so long, your hand becomes too fat to pull it out.
Once your hand is stuck in the cookie jar you then have to try and hide it behind your back.
Slightly childish analogy, but then when you have a corrupt big brother system, patronising is the only way to describe these thieves.
- Frank, Home Counties, England.
Perhaps Speaker Michael Martin's income should be put on HOLD until he "pays back" the "£100,000 plus" of "taxpayer's money" that he has wasted so far!
Speaker Michael Martin really is New Labour's "extra man"!
- Fraser, Telford Park
These MPs are a disgrace to democracy.
- Keith Barrow, Huddersfield
If we announce a collective moratorium on income tax we CAN destroy the entire political system and prevent this mickey-taking of us by the polity.
- Neil, London, UK
The MP are elected by the public and paid by the public - the public is entitled to know how the money is spent. If there is any illegal/inappropriate use of the funds then as with any other public servant they should be sacked
Are these the same MPs who voted for the national identity card? They cannot argue that the information would endanger security on the one hand and then demand all other citizens have to provide large quantities of personal information in the interest of security [ignoring of course the fact that civil servants have a nasty habit of losing important information]
- Andy, London
Our money, but we're not entitled to know how these people are spending it? How does that work?
- Anon, London
People who vote for politicians, knowing how venal they are, deserve everything they get. Those who have the courage, should stop voting and get rid of this bogus system once and for all. Let us free ourselves of this rotten system and sack every politician, banker and media owner!
- Neil, london, UK
Mr Martin has been dogged by controversy since becoming Speaker. He's already allegedly spent £20,000 of taxpayers' money on lawyers to keep his name out of the papers, and been embroiled in rows about his wife's taxi expenses and Air Miles for his family.
Isn't it about time Mr Martin either put up or shut up, and allowed full scrutiny of his expenses? The more he procrastinates, the more suspicious and sneaky he looks.
- Mark, London
It seems that those that have got most to lose are shouting the loudest.
I wonder what they are hiding?
- Bazzer, West Country, England.
The 'security' issue is just smoke and mirrors. Anyone who is interested in an MP knows where he or she works. Westminster is reasonably secure, but their constituencies are public knowledge, with their surgeries being held there.
The Police used to live in Section Houses. What is wrong with an MP being allocated an apartment in a block close to the Houses of Parliament? When their time as an MP comes to an end, they vacate the apartment. Minimal costs to the public and no allegations of misuse of funds.
- Paul Bradford, Monflanquin, France
Well at least there's one guaranteed winner here - the lawyer they eventually found who said they have a case! The usual law firms didn't want to touch it.
- Paul, London
Regrettably even if some MPs are eventually named and shamed for frivolous or even fraudulent spending, there is little hope of anything remotely resembling a refund.
- Marianne, SW France
Why would we bother to vote for a bunch of thieves? Sack the lot and let the Civil Servants run the country. Oops, sorry! They already do. So why do we need these scrounging layabouts in Parliament or is it charity as none of them could ever hold down a real job.
- Lezl, London, UK
"The bitter three year battle to keep secret MPs' expenses for their second homes.. has already cost at least £52,000."
Which I'm sure is a darn site less than has been squandered by MP's over the last 10 years.
- Pa Liarment, Westminster
So the enquiry has cost £52,000 so far. Seeing as this is about 25% of what many MP's claim p.a., let's spend another £52,000 and get this mess out in the open and stopped. It's our money with which the MP's are being profligate.
- Robin, Brentford, UK
Well, what a surprise !
The members of the House of Commons Commission are the same people who are sitting as the Members Estimates Committee carrying out a supposed "Root & Branch" open and transparent review of MP's allowances.
And lets not forget it was this same bunch who last year were responsible for the Freedom of Information (Amendment) Act which was intended to prevent the release of MPs non confidential correspondence.
- Peter Hooper, Windsor. Berkshire. UK
So they want to maintain secrecy on their expense claims - judging by what has been uncovered so far - I bet they do!
- Alan Eaves, Buckhurst Hill Essex
This just goes to show they have something to hide. We pay their bills, why shouldn't we see where our money goes?
In any case, it baffles me why they get extra money to buy these things, as everyone else has to buy these out of our own salaries. And if they do get expenses, shouldn't they be buying cheap stuff and not shopping at John Lewis where most of us can't afford to go?
- Emma, Nunhead, London
