Morning:
8°c
Spouses ban will mean policing bedrooms, claims Flint's husband
Paul Waugh, Deputy Political Editor4 Nov 2009
"Bedroom police" will be needed to check up on MPs if the ban on them employing spouses goes ahead, the husband of a former minister said today.
More than three dozen wives and husbands employed by MPs are facing the sack under the Kelly Report.
Phil Cole, who runs the constituency office of his wife, former Europe minister Caroline Flint, pointed out that the couple lived together for 10 years before they married in 2001. Mr Cole said their belated decision to marry is now likely to cost him his job.
"What if an MP begins a sexual relationship with a staff [member]?" he asked. "At what point does it become a formal relationship under the Kelly rules? Are we going to have bedroom policing?
"We are going to have a dual set of rules, one for single MPs, or gay MPs who have not been through a civil ceremony, and one for those who are married or have been through a civil ceremony. Would my position be different if Caroline and I were still living together but were not married?"
Reader views (11)
I don't see how it can be legal to sack people based on who they are related to. Some MPs may have broken rules but not many of the people affected by the Kelly report. If I said all people under 30 would be sacked because some of that group have stolen would that be justice? These are people who have done a good job, not criminals - we need to stick to censuring the people who did something wrong. Or are the British people incapable of making that distinction now?
- Louise, North Yorkshire, 05/11/2009 16:07
Report abuse
Umm this is the Women who would not go out on a shopping trip without provided bodyguards.
Oh and the CCTV on the home....
Get real.
- William, Southend, 04/11/2009 18:40
Report abuse
If they are employed in a given role then that role should be subject to scrutiny as in any other job. And by the way - official work is NOT supposed to be going on in the bedroom, so emotive 'nothing' comments like that bedroom policing thing are just a little silly (ok - I over-simplified it, but the point remains).
- Rogan, Irving, 04/11/2009 18:33
Report abuse
They just do not get it, do they? Whatever they might claim, MPs have had a very cushy life funded by us. It seems the only ones moaning are the ones who have played the system and have been found out. Diddums! Get in the real world, where we do not get a second home funded, where we work late and then commute, where our food is not paid for and where we cannot employ our spouses on a whim. I did not see Mr Flint's job advertised openly, did you?
- Anthony, Woking, 04/11/2009 18:25
Report abuse
Mr Cole - I and many of the electotate, trust you, your wife, collouges, MPs and Peers alot less than we can throw you.
- Very Very Angry At Paying Tax For Mp'S Expeses, Home Counties, 04/11/2009 17:00
Report abuse
The problem, Mr Cole, is that we don't trust you and if you don't mind me saying so it seems a bit short-sighted to have both your incomes reliant on the electorate, because they are in a bad mood.
- Alex C, London, 04/11/2009 13:04
Report abuse
The husband of Ms Flint MP might like to go further and explain why the MPs expenses shown as Legal Fees around 14,000 includes Stamp Duty of about £12,500. Does this mean he shares the benefit by being married to the MP.
Apart from being flabergasted by the receipts on the internet showing it is us that paid the Stamp Duty (the Tax payable by whoever purchased the property) can the husband come clean and tell us what other MP benefits an MP's spouse enjoys at our expense.
May this be one good reason why Sir Christopher Kelly is calling time on MPs expenses and spouse jobs. My view is all MPs that employ spouses should be stricken off and denied being allowed to stand for 10 years. If they refuse to pay back the amounts Sir Christopher say are due back to us then the MPs should be refused any candidature for 20 years. Otherwise, our society will be seen to be going too soft.
I really would like an answer about if the Stamp Duty claimed by MPs on the purchase of a property in London (or elsewhere) is legitimate.
If it is I will eat my words if it is not can we ask Mr and Mrs Flint to pay us back the £12,500 Stamp Duty they have shown on their MP expenses form, of course I presume the "best for the job" MPs office manager has checked it in the first place.
- Mr Bear, Yorkshire, 04/11/2009 12:41
Report abuse
Let's do the same to MP's as what is happening in the "real" world. Now the rules have changed we need to ensure that we have the best person for the job so let's make all current family employees reapply for their jobs along with other applicants, with an independent interview panel. Let's see then how many of them are deemed fit for the post!
- Derek, Esher, Surrey, 04/11/2009 10:59
Report abuse
"What if an MP begins a sexual relationship with a staff [member]?" he asked. - Well we all know the answer to that, the staff member in question is pilloried by the press and hounded out of their position - or is that a special fate reserved for those who have affairs with John Prescott?
On a serious note those employed by an MP should be bound by a similar code of conduct/practice as any other government employee. They are not paid out of the MP's own pocket but from a separate allowance and it is therefore our taxes directly that pay them.
- Jim, London, 04/11/2009 10:57
Report abuse
This is similar to majority of private organisations. If the manager marries/dates one of his/her subordinates, they are not allowed to work for the same company. Why should it be any different for MPs.
- Jk, Kent, 04/11/2009 10:37
Report abuse
MP's are now spouting about "bedroom police".
Now MP's know how Joe Public feels, with every second of their lives being scrutinised, recorded and digested by countless official databases and local council freaks.
- Reuben Camara, Plot 1, Morecambe Compound, EUSSR, 04/11/2009 10:22
Report abuse
