My hair shirt is rougher than yours

Really, this hair shirt campaign to talk down the salaries and expenses of MPs is becoming rather ridiculous and we are in danger of throwing the baby out with the bath water.

The disgraceful antics of some, not all, MPs to manipulate a deliberately lax and imprecise set of "rules" for their own enrichment should not mask the need to reward MPs appropriately.

In this day and age it is unreasonable to expect to attract high calibre candidates from a broad cross section of society and all parties unless the rewards are proportionate to the responsibility.

The whole system needs transforming. We have far too many MPs and far too many ministers and others on the Government payroll. The power of the whips is too great. Back bench MPs have little authority or purpose other than to hang around parliament waiting to be told when and how to vote. For too many, perhaps most, an MP's success is measured by gaining ministerial office, and all their efforts are geared in that direction.

We need much smaller Government. Rather than a headline grabbing suggestion that Cameron would cut the pay of his cabinet ministers he would be much better to promise to cut the size of his Government by 50%. The argument, often aired, that there is too much work for ministers to do is nonsense. Ministers should create clear policies and priorities and oversee the results - not try to micromanage delivery.

Ministers should be more accountable to Parliament and backbench MPs more free to speak and vote independently.

Their remuneration package should be transparent and reflect the rewards that might be expected of a reasonably successful professional.

The final throes of a corrupt system

So now Parliament's own publication of MPs expenses has shown once and for all how tawdry and corrupt the system has become. Worse still, it demonstrates graphically the reason for the desperate attempts by a majority of MPs to prevent the public from ever finding out.

The redacted (in this case a euphemism for a process equivalent to an accused deciding the evidence to be presented by the prosecution) claims released yesterday would never have revealed "flipping" or that claims had been made for moats and ducks. MPs claims that redaction was necessary to ensure their security have been laid bare as the fraud they always were. Redaction was intended to prevent the public discovering the truth. And thanks to the Daily Telegraph we have. And not before time.

Let there be no doubt. Without the Daily Telegraph revelations the system would not have been changed.

Tinkering with the Constitution

Now, God help us, Brown tells us he wants to reform the Constitution.

He is apparently looking at the voting system, the Lords, and the balance between the elected members and the executive.

Our system with its unwritten constitution is certainly not perfect but it would be foolhardy to only tinker with aspects of it. The time is probably right for a root and branch review and surely the answer is a Royal Commission.

A system similar to the US, with a Bill of Rights and careful balancing of power between the executive, legislature and supreme court, may be the best solution. It, too, has its faults but it is better than the elected (or unelected in the case of Brown) dictatorship model that we have slipped in to.

The House of Commons has forfeited its long asserted right to primacy. It is too supine, lazy and corrupt - ruled by the Whips, dominated by a huge payroll vote and a mass of wannabe Ministers too scared to step out of line lest they be overlooked. The few really able back bench MPs - and there are some on all sides - struggle to get their voices heard and the select committees have never had the influence of their US counterparts. Power needs to be more equally divided between what is now the Commons and an elected upper chamber.

The greatest risk in embarking on reform is that the Government of the day will cherry pick elements of reform which look most advantageous to themselves, whereas the very essence of an effective constitution is that it comes as a complete package.

Above all, Brown is no Maddison so he must pass the task to someone fit for the role.

And still the excuses pour forth

After a fortnight out of the UK I return to find that the MPs expenses revelations are still dominating the political agenda.

What I cannot fathom is why MPs still do not understand what it is that they have done wrong. If they did they would act premptively to review past expenses and repay excessive or dubious claims before the Daily Telegraph outs them. But, no, they are sitting like rabbits in the headlights waiting for the inevitable.

Polls showing how little trust there is for politicians and the political system come as no surprise. MPs have for years lived in a parallel universe believing that they are playing an important role in British life whereas in fact they have allowed the whole process to become corrupted. The huge payroll vote, coupled with those members desperate to curry favour, means that Governments are virtually undefeatable. The Commons has allowed itself to lose all capability to act as a check on the executive.

As a result it is the Lords (now a body whose composition defies any coherent explanation) that provides the only serious debate on issues of significance and effective review of legislation.

Politicians have nobody to blame for this situation - it is entirely of their making.

Hipocrisy and MPs expenses

The latest revelations regarding MPs expenses are dreadful.

It has been a badly kept secret for years that some MPs were milking a system designed by them for their own benefit, policed by them, and protected by them from all previous attempts to reform it.

However, I doubt that many were aware of the practice of "flipping". Or, worse, the ability to claim allowances for a designated second home yet when selling it claim to the Inland Revenue it was the primary residence thus avoiding capital gains tax (described as "near fraudulent" by former standards committee chief Sir Alistair Graham).

But the real sickener is the hipocrisy of minister after minister saying "we know the system is wrong and we must change it". The system hasn't suddenly become wrong - it has been wrong and corrupting for years during which time they and it seems many other MPs have been happy to benefit from it.

Incidentally, there has been no mention of the MPs who have never ripped the public off in this way. Dennis Skinner comes to mind. I have never agreed with his politics but I have always admired his honesty and integrity. You can check his expense claims (and those of other MPs) at http://www.theyworkforyou.com/

OK. But not this half-baked scheme?

When I said that Gordon Brown should act to deal with the scandal of MPs allowances I didn't mean he should plump for the half-baked scheme he announced today. God knows who dreamt it up but whoever it was is completely out of touch with public opinion.

Why should MPs get a daily attendance allowance on top of their pay? Who else in employment gets an additional allowance for turning up to work? This has nothing to do with need to stay overnight in London if an MP's (genuine) home is too far away. It has nothing to do with actual expenses incurred. It is just one gravy train being substituted for another.

Hopefully MPs will ignore this hopeless attempt to gain the high ground (pause for laughter) and await the outcome of the independent review.

Geoff Hoon insists he broke no rules ......

Geoff Hoon insists he broke no rules in claiming second home allowances while living in a taxpayer-funded apartment. Another Government Minister who may be following the rules but whom every decent law abiding voter thinks has his snout in the trough.

How much longer is this charade going to continue before they get a grip? The Prime Minister has said he is not interested. The Opposition is unable to say anything because they are terrified it will be proved their people are milking the system too.

Gordon should take a lead and clear up this mess once and for all.

South Downs National Park given go-ahead

This is great news for all those who have campaigned for so long to achieve national recognition for this unique and vulnerable area.

Unfortunately, local Tories (particularly West Sussex County Council) who have opposed it at every stage still do not get it. Their opposition, and that of coalition partners including landowners, was based on retaining power and control. They are still saying they want "democratic" control over planning applications. What they mean is that they want to retain control. Sorry, but they have missed the point.

A new National Park Authority will be different from what has gone before. It must put long-term protection before anything else. That doesn't mean trying to preserve the area in aspic, but changes must on balance always be for the better.

Great news! Local leaders need to wake up and smell the coffee as they say.

Channel 4 tries to stuff Boris

I have just been watching an attempted stitch-up of Boris Johnson by C4 Dispatches.

The reporter, previously unknown to me, was a snide cove called Antony Barnett. Never heard of him but he could sneer for England. His interviewees consisted of a variety of political has-beens and never-heard-ofs.

Boris is certainly not your average on-message politician but at least he tells it as it is, is clever, and has an original take on the problems facing our capital. So he got rid of Sir Ian Blair. Bravo. That's more than any other politician managed when it was abundantly clear Sir Ian had lost the confidence of Londoners. He wants to replace bendy-buses with new routemasters. Why not? Routemasters were an iconic symbol of London.

Boris will grow into the job just as Red Ken did. (Ken's big problem - he is a man who really cares about London - was not realising he had had his turn and no-one can go on forever).

C4 has done its reputation no good by this cheap, one-sided, apology for a programme.

Nanny State

It looks as though the Government is for once going to avoid a knee jerk reaction to the barking suggestion from Sir Liam Donaldson that no drinks could be sold for less than 50 pence per unit of alcohol they contain.

That's the good news. But unfortunately the reasons seem to be rather more about avoiding upsetting the voters in difficult economic times than a realisation that it is no business of the Government to interfere in people's lives like this.

Such attempts to manipulate behaviour penalise the sensible majority and usually fail to solve the perceived problem. If the Government wants to impact on binge drinking or over consumption of alcohol it should educate rather than legislate. It might also ponder why after more than a decade of Labour Government we have a society that feels it needs to blot out their lives with alcohol!

So Marxism isn't dead after all

When I did my OU degree in the 1980s it was obligatory in every essay to examine the Marxist explanation for the issues under analysis. I always found it provided interesting insights and it was also pretty easy to get good marks as the Marxist perspective was always the same.

Then, with the rise of the neo cons Marxism appears to have almost vanished. It seems that the only Marxist left in the UK is Prof Eric Hobsbawm. Once demonised by the right, he is now a Companion of Honour and almost as venerated as the Honourable Anthony Wedgwood Benn.

Anyhow, browsing the internet I was interested to see a video (now widely available) of one Professor Rick Wolff, Department of Economics at the University of Massachusetts. Prof Wolff is an American Marxist who has finally found his voice and audiences prepared to listen to him.

His lecture in Amherst on October 7, 2008 is available here

http://www.vimeo.com/1962208

I found it riveting. It is still in part the familiar glib Marxist line but it does put the present economic crisis in a new perspective.

Ryanair to abolish check-in desks

Ryanair is a canny company which understands its customers needs.

I see no problem in principle with abolishing check-in desks but they also say they are working towards a situation where only one in five customers check in luggage. This sounds extraordinary to me. I know I do not understand the meaning of travelling light but surely for a 14 day holiday one needs more luggage than can be fitted in a normal carry on case. Or have I missed something?

Nuclear subs collide in the Atlantic

Is it just me that refuses to take this story at face value?

In all the seas, in all the world how can two such relatively small vessels collide?

Unless of course they were playing silly buggers stalking each other, or something similar?

Search for a NEWSpaper

I am going through a phase of trying to find a daily newspaper that I can stomach for more than a couple of days on the trot. For years I read the Daily Telegraph but nowadays it is little more than a joke. Virtually devoid of news (except of course the latest doings of the Barclay Brothers) it can be read from cover to cover in less time than The Sun, and with less humour.

The Times format is maddening. Far too many pages, far too small. Too many sections, most I suspect never read by anyone. Never mind the (fading) quality, feel the width. Very unsatisfying apart from the obits (and sometimes the letters).

So, I am now trying the Guardian. Good format, not patronising, and not bad on news. Shame about the politics which after a week is already beginning to grate somewhat. But at least it is trying to be an adult newspaper, so I intend to persevere a little longer.