Although today’s revelations in the Telegraph have been less than earth-shattering, what they have perhaps highlighted more than anything else is that, at a time when many people are struggling to pay their mortgages or rent, MPs are perceived to be “on the make” – milking the expenses and allowances system to line their own pockets.
I suspect that most, if not all, of the reported excesses will be found to be within the rules, but what the public finds hard to stomach is, in some cases, the pettiness of the claims (such as 5p for a carrier bag), in other cases extravagent wastefulness (changing a boiler because the hot water it produced was too hot), and, in a substantial number of cases, home improvement and renovation projects that up the value if MPs’ properties at the public expense.
Perhaps the most scandalous “abuse” of all is the practice of MPs nominating their London property as their second residence, thus making it eligible for work to it to be carried out at the public expense. But worse is the ability of MPs (and it’s much taken advantage of) to then redesignate their constituency home as their second home and then have work carried out to that with public money. Embattled Chancellor, Alastair Darling, has done this not less than four times in as many years. Outrageous.
So, what to do about the vexed question of the cost of living in London? Well, why not adopt the siluipn favoured by universities – halls of residence. If course, I don’t suggest literally that all MPs should reside in one place – it would be a huge security risk for one thing – but perhaps it’s time that the state owned a portfolio of resudential properties in London for allocation to MPs.
