The arrogance of the political classes

Michael Martin, the former speaker of the Commons, perhaps the least impressive holder of the office in living memory, assumed his place in the Lords yesterday.

Certainly the partisan way he handled the revelations of MPs' abuses of the expenses system seemed symptomatic of the bad old ways of doing things.

Jacqui Smith, who was required to apologise to the Commons this week for her behaviour in respect of second homes, also seems representative of the cavalier arrogance of the political class: is it too much to ask the Prime Minister to refrain from sending her, in the way that now seems routine, to the Lords?

He should not allow his own reputation to be undermined by sending someone so discredited to the upper house.

Nick Clegg has raised the game by suggesting that Sir Thomas Legg, the civil servant investigating MPs' expenses, should actually widen his remit to include MPs who changed the designation of their second homes to avoid capital gains tax or to get public funding for their home improvements.

However, Sir Thomas has gone even further, by scrutinising some MPs' mortgage interest claims, which appeared, in some cases, not to have been backed with receipts.

He is also reopening the question of accommodation costs that benefited MPs' families.

MPs are incandescent with Sir Thomas because he is imposing retrospective limits on their claims on public money and the way in which they obtained it; but what he has also done is remind us of the extent to which many of them abused the system of self-regulation, given the chance.

The moral is that it may be necessary to pay MPs more - however much we may balk at the idea - in salary, and then leave it to them to decide how much to spend on accommodation, office costs and the rest.

Then, if they really want to spend £1,000 a year on gardening, it will be their affair - not ours.

Heathrow expansion

Heathrow's owner BAA has launched a savage attack on the Tories for their refusal to countenance a third runway at the airport if they win power.

Mike Forster, the executive in charge of the project, says Heathrow is in danger of becoming a "branch line" rather than a mainline station if the runway is not approved, with devastating consequences for business.

Of course London business needs Heathrow to function effectively: this is the gateway to the capital. But it would appear to be BAA itself that does not get one of the chief points of the argument.

More than 30 per cent of passengers at the airport are transferring to other flights; what benefits BAA does not necessarily benefit the economy.

The Tories have suggested high-speed links to other cities from London to replace some domestic flights. BAA's plans seem premised on an old model of transport policy based on ever greater expansion in aviation.

That is no longer the case. London needs Heathrow but does Heathrow need to be significantly larger to accommodate its needs? That is the real question.

Green power

The Mayor has unveiled plans for dozens of local power stations in the capital, which would be far more efficient than existing large stations.

It is a case where small is not just beautiful but also green.