Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ

Some advice for our elected officials: Don't shoot the messenger, boys, it's bad form.
I don't understand why Peter Kilfoyle's got his knickers in a twist. According to the 'They Work for You' site he's not at all bothered about 'transparency' in governmentas he's never voted on it, either for or against!

I agree with the EDM Nick I think that journalists spend far too much time looking for trouble that is not there. I think that someone should ask the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ for all their expenses after all you are publicly funded as well!

Kilfoyle needs to realise that people are quickly losing trust in politicians! Whether he likes it or not, we don't trust him or very many others in the House of Commons.

They live within a system open to abuse and the perception is that they abuse it! Everyone from the Speaker to the Prime Minister (and everyone in between) is suspected of being in it for themselves!

He must realise that if he has nothing to hide, then let us see! We are not interested in the expenses of journalists but I would love to know how much money Kilfoyle has spent on things I don't want to pay for!

Kilfoyle and these other MPs have got some nerve. The last time I checked, my TV licence did not account for 1/4 of my salary and owning a TV was optional unlike paying for this government.

I say you should take up their challenge - and then demand that they provide you with their itemised expense account.

Let's see how mouthy Mr. Kilfoyle is when he has to explain away his failure to live up to the same standards of transparency that he demands from others.

Β£250 claims without receipts ? I work for a government body and can't claim anything without a receipt....

Some great analysis there, as ever. Perhaps MPs should look to party politics, the role of the whips and the influence of big business (Ecclestone et al) before suggesting that media critcisms (most of which appear valid to most of us, the public) are eroding democracy ?

I'm glad you've caused a stir. If this means that MPs now have to behave in the same manner as the majority of their constituents then that's no bad thing.

And there was me thinking it was the arrogance and ineptitude (the standards of executive accountability and legislative drafting are often abysmal in the current, and most recent, parliaments) of MPs which sapped confidence in Parliament and democracy.

But, no, I am wrong, and MPs can make it clear that it is our fault for holding them to account. Just like they hold hospital managers, doctors, teachers, civil servants and the like to account and some of them even try to hold workers in the private sector to account for their salary and bonuses.

Seldom has a darker pot taken aim at a blacker kettle...

Perish the thought that the demos is concerned with democracy.

Maybe if MPs actually showed what they do with their time (people in the City often have to log their work every six minutes, might this be a good way for MPs to show they give value for money?) we might believe their protestations. If they could show themselves to be productive (which is not the same as lobby fodder) for the same amount of time as high-earners we might consider increasing MPs' salaries.

I notice you have failed to reply to the main thrust of Mr Kilfoyle's comments:

"Nick Robinson should name his sources for his allegations (anonymous , of course!)that Members are complaining to him about the Speaker.I cannot find one who says either (a) he is a biased chairman ,or(b) that he must go.It is particularly outrageous to imply that the Speaker would not call someone who criticised him.Where is the evidence for that?How does he defend himself against such baseless imputations?"

So, where is the evidence for what you wrote Nick? Did you just make it up?

How's about MPs being paid the national average wage? I think it's a rather good idea and would perhaps encourage members of parliament to see that the average man or woman in this country gets a little more in their pocket.

Of course, there are more than six reasons why this story has been so keenly received by the public, but the over-riding one is a feeling of disconnect, that MPs are only interested in their lives and that the people of this country are an entirely secondary consideration. After all, would there be an outcry if a member of the public was recorded without their knowledge? One rule for Westminster, one for the rest it seems.

Hmmm.......all this really goes to the root of why policitians and journalists are about the least respected occupations.

Its interesting isn't it. When MP's employ husbands or wives its perfectly understandable and reasonable. When small business owners do the same thing its a tax loophole that must be closed. Perhaps the public would be more sympathetic towards our MP's if they weren't perceived to be such hippocrites.

well nick i'm glad i alerted you to the EDM. i bet given your backgound you knew already,

in a way your famous hehe seriuosly the EDM and some of them in gerneral just shows that sometimes mps have nothing else better to do then complain about people like yourself and if it weren't for people like yourself politics would be boring some may say not worth reporting.

Nick, don't even think about beginning to back down. Don't you dare.

What Senior MPs like Peter Kilfoyle and John Spellar forget in their rush to defend Mr. Martin is that it is unlikely that there would be such a furore if Mr. Martin wasn't such an awful Speaker. Please note that after almost 8 years as Speaker the only MPs rushing to protect him are his old colleagues from the Labour back-benches. If he was respected as a truly non-partisan Speaker like Betty Boothroyd or Bernard Weatherill, there would be plenty of MPs from all sides prepared to defend him.

Secondly, Kilfoyle and Spellar would do well to recognise who they are defending - a man who last year claimed approximately Β£25,000 for expenses relating to a house on which the mortage has been paid in full. That's a heck of a lot of money for upkeep, maintainence etc. And he has a grace and favour apartment in the Houses of Parliament!

I used to work in the House of Commons and can safely state that most MPs are, of course, honourable and hard-working. Nevertheless, there is an expenses system that remains open to abuse. Senior MPs would do better to address that problem rather than seek to blame the misfortunes of Parliament on journalists who have done nothing but shine a light on what can only be described as corruption.

I agree broadly with the MPs. Both style & substance of your reporting over the years puts over a sneering contempt for MPs &, especially Ministers, which has contributed to a misleading & worrying public belief about the motives & conduct of everyone in public life. As you are funded by licence-payer, your pay & allowances should be a matter of public record.

Nick Robinson has got it about right.the westminster trough has been large and deep for long enough now. About time it was greatly reduced in size.

The other reason for the anger of Labour MPs, left out by Nick Robinson, is that Mr. Robinson is a life-long Conservative supporter. His party allegiance has sometimes caused him to use his journalistic privilege to make unjustified attacks against the Labour party. This was particularly notable in the attack (or rather, witch-hunt) against Cherie Blair, when he called her "a crook" and then had to apologise later. There is a difference between serving the truth and serving a political party.

By the way: I am not a member of the Labour party nor am I affiliated to it in any way.

With respect to MPs' pay - the two prime motivators are fear and greed. The story _was_ mostly about greed, but the 52 MPs who signed this "Early Day Motion" are now exhibiting fear as well, which can only be a good thing.

With respect to journalists' pay - at least we know more about how the license fee is being spread about. So now can we make journalists afraid as well?

Why a 250 Pound limit on expenses without a reciept? When I last worked in the UK the policy in my firm was no receipt, no expenses. On the couple of occassions when manageers used their discretion to allow an unrecipted expense to go through, you could be sure that whoever was asking for it had had to be pretty convincing about why there wasn't a reciept.

MPs are seen as making rules for others (called laws) that do not seem to apply to them. A senior Naval Officer was fairly recently court martialled, discharged and sent to prison for fiddling his expenses. For an MP a two week suspension (fined two weeks pay?) is the equivalent. They should stop complaining and trying to wriggle out of the responsibilities, duty and scrutiny they think appropriate for us, the people, and remember who ultimately employs them.

So many words but still nothing from Mr Robinson on how much the licence payers ladle into his bank account. Is he too embarrassed at the amount? Or is he worried that it would make the licence payers think less of him?

He's probably on Β£200,000 a year.

I wouldn't worry too much Nick, good on you for using your right to free speech to state your views how you see fit.

Quite frankly, if the MPs don't like their jobs and being in the public eye, then they can move on, just like the rest of us.

It's not as if they are doing a great job.

I think we'll find they're all a bit reluctant to part with their gravy train.

Moving on from that, I think the increasing scrutiny of MPs may well have something to do with the hopeless manner in which our MPs are systematically failing to deal with the key problems in this country.

We still have a transport network that is creaking at the seams. How many of us suffer long traffic jams, intolerable, expensive train journeys, or non-existant buses?

How many people are struggling to make ends meet as the Government puts the needs of corporations above those of the individual?

Why did we waste over Β£20 billion going to war with Iraq when our own country is falling apart?

Prices are rising (despite the Government fiddling the inflation figures by ignoring the impact of housing and mortgages), yet we find it is harder than ever to get a pay rise out of your employer, mainly due to the inflow of cheap labour from Eastern Europe.

Higher education costs now mean you'll be saddled with debt well into your thirties.

The health service is focused on getting people out of the system rather than curing them.

Civil liberties have been continuously eroded, and we edge ever further towards a police state, where the state is suspicious of all of its' citizens.

Even where they have opportunity to shine, such as in leading the world on renewable energy, we find that countries like Portugal are way, way ahead of us.

I really despair of our politicians, who seem more concerned with maintaining their own quality of life, with little regard for those who put them in power.

And yes, the smoking ban is only for normal citizens, not for members of parliament.

I despair.

Nick, you're a good reporter but to be honest this blog is largely disappointing much of the time.

In the past you've said you only have the airtime equivalent of an A4 side of paper on the 10pm news. Instead of using this blog to expand on things from a position of knowledge you seem to often veer into insinuation and inviting the readers to form their own conclusions from half alluded to theories.

The rush to tittle tattle has on more than one occasion led to you having to apologise and correct allegations and accusations (recent apologies/clarifications to Darling and Harman spring to mind).

Some of what you blog wouldn't make the broadcast news or a formal article because it doesn't reach the editorial guidelines.

That's a shame because at times this blog can be a really different beast, factual, in-depth, and enjoyable - the blogging and engaging with readers at election times is one of the best uses of a Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ blog I've seen.

Perhaps whilst you wait for the MPs to respond you will publish your salary and expense claims which are funded by a compulsory tax and hidden by a much lobbied-for exemption from the FOI act.

And to be honest it's sheer hypocrisy for Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ staff to author reports on politicians trying to exempt themselves from FOI requests and to pile on the reports when the expense claims are published then the corporation is exempt from such accountability yet also funded by the public.

Watching the D-G wriggle and refuse to publish even broad bands for the wages of on screen talent makes me wonder what right the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ has to make unproven insinuations against Speaker Martin or any other public figure whose entire cost to the public is openly published?

I'm a keen supporter of the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ but at time like this it looks more than a little disingenuous.

I am all for the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ publishing Nick Robinson's expense accounts in the public interest, but I hope that MP's will do likewise with theirs. If MP's are unhappy with their pay then I have no sympathy - they were aware of their earnings potential when they pursued it as a career. There almost seems to be an inference that they are entitled to maximise their expenses because their wages are poor. My reply to that is that as I, like the rest of the country, notice no appreciable difference in how the country is run when they take their lengthy summer holidays do we need quite so many of them ? Increase their pay but have fewer of them. It's not as if they all attend Commons with any kind of regularity anyway.

Nick Robinson has the wonderful habit of incorrect reporting. This not the first time NR has done this. The Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ News is usually based of FACT, and not what one of their reporters believes this to be. Working on the premise of suggestion, and then seeing who bolts, is a poor way to gain a result. Time to start watching Sky News as everytime I see NR I always reach for the remote. Poor show Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ.

I wish to congratulate Nick for his article. Its high time that these perks were scrutinized closely. These MPs are well paid by any standards and can well afford their taxis and the rest of it from their generous pay. The ordinary citizen has to find the fare to and from work from his or her meagre wages so MPs can be made to do the same.

T L Leeds

n a special report that as "a first step" it had agreed that the Β£250 threshold for MPs submitting expenses claims without a receipt. Nick, this does not make sense i think?

I thought that your blog yesterday was on balance a fair round up of the problem that the speaker faces.

It is clear that the current speaker's time in the chair is limited.

I loathe the weakness of the house to justify a simple flat pay structure for MP's without these numerous allowances - it is time for the parties to display some backbone, propose a simple formula for MP's pay (personally I would expect approx. Β£150K PA) and other than obvious expenses that is it.

I doubt that it will happen, spines are short in the political parties and the civil service never seems to do anything in a simple way.

I enjoy reading your summations, clear, concise and amusing, I am delighted that you will be immortalised in Hansard!

Regards

Julian

Hi Nick,

I think you should annoy MPs a bit more, by telling them just how little respect the public has for them as a breed. The grovelling to the Speaker only reinforces this.

One factor which separates MPs from others is that their job actually requires no formal qualifications at all.
Another is that, in order to qualify for their salary, they are not actually required to do anything. I am sure that the majority work hard, but one cannot help noting that there seem to be some who do virtually nothing - one suspects that they would be earning rather less in the real world.

pigs in the trough - yet again

You are doing a good job, Mr Robinson. Please continue to do it as you do. Try not to be intimidated by Labour MPs' bullying which is just a tactic to keep attention away from their greed in claiming unjustified expenses.

Frankly it's appalling that MPs should even consider allowing unvouched expenses under a Β£250 limit. Most businesses (and the Revenue authorities) would rightly insist on employee expenses being fully vouched except for very minor amounts (like parking charges). It's about time MPs applied generally accepted standards to themselves - until they wake up and do they mustn't be surprised if people assume they're "at it"!

A plague upon them! They want to muzzle those who seek to lift the veil on what is a cosy little club funded by the taxpayer. Many of these characters have been on ego trips since student union or trade union days, while the rest of us actually make society and the economy function.

The public must stand up and tell their supposed representatives that "enough is enough":

- Ostracise the worst offenders. As an example, Derek Conway should be ignored by wider society including his constituents, local media, local organisations etc. No more invitations to local events, prize-givings, ceremonies etc. Make it impossible for him to function as a MP and make the message clear!

- Dispense with the niceties and honorifics. Some of these clowns are reminiscent of the pigs in Animal Farm, revelling in the privileges and trappings they vilified before attaining office. "Honourable" - no way! "Lords" and "Ladies" - no way!

- Make them tell the truth! The lies and spin that comes out of Parliament and Whitehall is nauseating. These pathetic excuses for mendacity - "unintentional misleading", "honest mistakes" etc - would shame a child. And we are supposed to believe them? If a minister or politician will not appear, then put up an empty chair. Hold them to account, don't let them get away with sticking the soundbite in at the last minute!

- Make them accountable! The perks and privileges, unsupervised expenditure and ridiculous allowances are way beyond anything that the public have access to. The notion that MPs are "high flyers" somehow denied a lucrative outside career is ridiculous. Most of them have greased the wheels of party machines to get elected in the first place. Most of them would not survive proper scrutiny and accountability in a so called "high flying" career.

The trust between politicians and the public is at its lowest ebb ever. The entrenchment of the barricades at Westminster is in clear defiance of public opinion - we, after all, are only the electorate and taxpayers! It is a shame, just at the time when the Conway affair appeared to be registering with the snout-troughs. The public pressure and journalistic scrutiny must continue relentlessly!

Time to take the moral high-ground and publish your expenses Nick. Then you can challenge the MPs who signed the motion to do the same.

as a journalist you do not have to justify your expenses to the public, simply to your bosses. As a politician we are the bosses therefore they need to justify their spend and their actions to us. Sadly they have been found sadly lacking at every turn. It is not surprising that the public has no confidence in them.

Bring in compulsory voting and put "none of the above" on the ballot and then see how they become accountable.

The theshold for recepits should be NIL like most other businesses. This is good accounting practice. I could live a high life on their rules!

Why does anyone think Β£250 as a level at which receipts don't have to be produced is acceptable? I work in the public sector and I couldn't have 25p back from petty cash without a legitimate receipt. And quite right too! This is other people's money. I'm not saying that all parliamentarians are sleazy, but they must recognise that the public expects them to be seen to be not sleazy! If they don't demonstrate that they are above criticism, then why are they surprised at the cynical views of those of us who don't inhabit the self-regarding London centre?

The only reason they were all 'appalled' at Conway's misuse of public funds is because he got caught and it's put them ALL in the spotlight as the gravy train bottom feeders they are.

An interesting note:

Of the 52 signitures to the EDM, 51 are from Labour MPs and one from the Lib Dem Lembit Opik!

I wonder what these people have to hide that they don't want their expenses aired?

MPs will never get respect until they are subject to the same rules as everyone else.

I get paid roughly the same as an MP. I work longer hours than an MP. I also live in the north but work in London. I run a department and have to manage operating costs from my team.

I wish I could claim an allowance to buy a second home - I have to use hotels.

I wish I could reclaim Β£250 expenses without receipt. I have to justify everything expense claimed. If I were to fiddle Β£1 I would be sacked.

By all means pay them what they are worth - they are running the country. But take away the allowances and make them accountable for all their expenses

I am self employed and work in two locations, my home office and client site in another country. But as a Freelance (and international) Computer Consultant I have to manage the juggling of a job in two different places and countries. However I have to account for my expenses with the Inland Revenue and their deligate my accountant, and no way would I be allowed anything up to 250 pounds without a receipt, or to employ all my relatives and certainly not pay a housing allowance for my home. I really do think we should all have a level playing field, and have the same rules. What are they complaining about ?

please can you explain the current Β£250 limit to expenses claimed without a receipt? Is this per item; per day/week/month?

i think you are completely right, they only protested becuase thier scared, too much too lose.
thankyou, it needed to be said.
x

The solution is obvious. Why can't MPs simply observe the standards and procedures that are in place for other (unelected) public servants in the Civil Service. Their pay scale could also be linked and de-politicised.

Brilliant work Nick, if you're offending this many people you must be doing something right! and do these politicians not understand that a blog is a more informal discussion and exchange of ideas as opposed to an informative news article??

Re:The Members Estimate Committee, which is chaired by the Speaker, said in a special report that as "a first step" it had agreed that the Β£250 threshold for MPs submitting expenses claims without a receipt.

If, I as a self employed person,I wished to claim against the Customs and Revenue for a business expense even be it for under Β£1.00 I would have to show a receipt so WHY NOT the MP's.

The impudence of you! Fancy asking for a publicly elected representative of the people to be answerable to a member of the public. This is Italy after all. What were you thinking of?

Hang on I've got something wrong...

Nearly an 8% response rate from MP's - you're in the wrong job if you can get that from a survey/blog !
Personally I think you may just have touched a nerve ..

Nick,

I think there are several points that need to be separated.

Over the years many MPs have been "at it" with their allowances. I am sure that Derek Conway was not the first MP to employ a family member on a part time basis. He was caught because of the scale, not because of the practice.

In comparison to the private sector MPs are badly underpaid.

Should not the Commons pay the salaries for each MP secretaries, researchers etc on a fixed scale. In effect be the employer and ensure that prove of work is provided.

There is a fine between representing the interests of their consituents and publicising themselves ahead of their next campaign. Too often MPs are simply looking ahead to the next election and looking for stats and photos ops for that reason

So I think we need to look at the whole structure and not at individual cases.

Spot on!
As a civil servant I must keep ALL receipts for 7 years, including those for a Β£1.99 sandwich. How MP's can get away with no receipts for less than Β£250 is absolutely disgusting.

MP's are civil servants too and should have the same rules applied to them!

I have no doubt that the "private members club" is closing ranks to protect their lavish, taxpayer funded perks.
They have only themselves to blame for the widely held belief of outsiders (aka the taxpayer who pays for them!)that they are a mendacious and self-serving bunch of parasites.

Oh dear Nick ! What a muddy pool you have stirred up. The howls from M.P s are almost audible at my desk in Yorkshire ! But seriously its high time that these overpaid superannuated lickspittles joined the rest of the human race with regards to pay and expenses.EVERY penny of public money should be accounted for by way of receipts- And as for Mrs Gorbals Micks taxi fares, there is no way that should be allowed, and if it is proved that this has actually happened he should not resign-He should be SACKED !

Dont be concerned Nick someone must have reminded them the best form of defence is attack !

Every organisation, from very small to large, uses a petty cash system. This is wholly dependent on the use of receipts. If the rest of us can manage this, our MPs should not be exempt. I am not interested in their displeasure over this issue. We are all sick of their freebies.

No wonder MP's are amongst the least respected in our society. Look at the way Blair and his cronies have all but vanished. Don't hear much of Prescot and co now. Expenses have always been an area of concern - I am surprised the Inland Revenue havn't caught on to the many abuses.

I must admit Nick, when i heard your report on the news I flinched.

Yuo said something like" I could fill this notepad with private comments from MPs about thier concerns"

It was a suggestion that many, perhaps the majority, had concerns but you were not goingto put your money where your mouth was and say who or how many told you.

You mearly suggested it was a book full.

How many pages in your notepad ?

200 ??

Really ? Did you really here concerns from 200 or more MPs yesterday ?

Reporters used to be there to report news, now they try to make it.

bad form

Simple Nick, all you have to say now is "I'll show you mine, if you show me yours". You'll never hear from them again.

MPs raise a good point about journalists, but this intrusion is to all people in the public eye. I personally don't care less about the 'celebs' but the MPs are in public service - so we should be able to know.
I think they fail to realise that it is the taxpayers money that pays their wages, and that they are in the public service, they can't have it all.

"Many MPs are angry that the criticisms on individuals are sapping confidence in Parliament as a whole and, therefore, in democracy."

This is rich from MPs hell-bent on ratifying the Lisbon constitution, sorry, treaty, without the referendum they promised when up for election: pots and kettles...

Β£250 limit on expenses claimed without receipts! The MOD requires the military to keep receipts for all expenditure over Β£5. That's not to say all claims are audited but it prevents people claiming for items or events that are under the threshold and not value for money to the tax payer. Β£250 still seems too high and open to abuse; if I spend Β£250 on anything, I usually keep a receipt.

Well done Nick - shows you are getting closer to the truth when they start naming you in
Motions! Look at today's Times for the unfettered criticism of Mr Speaker el al. All this spin on 'snobs ' - they fail to remember Betty Boothroyd's humble beginnings. Mr Martin is a person regrettably grossly overpromoted for his ability - but not one MP will state it. Is that what we pay them for - to shirk the truth?? And why may my paid civil servant of an MP be allowed extracurricular income - I am not allowed to hold directorships etc - but thereagain, I do not have 'influence'....

With reference to Peter Kilfoyle's request for Nick Robinson to publish his expenses it should be noted that unlike M.P.'s expenses, all claims made by employees in the course of their duties, have to be backed up by receipts for anything over Β£5.00 under Inland Revenue rules and are subject to checking by auditors. Bearing in mind the hugh expenses that MP'S are allowed to claim and are claiming, why is this rule not enforced in The House of Commons?

Kilfoyle and "Hon Friends" resist,obstruct, deny and distract. Any organisation that sets the rules, polices itself and rejects scrutiny (other than by its own Members) as an impertinance simply leads any sane, aware person to believe that there is something to hide... Do they pay tax on the generous housing allowance they recieve? Does anyone else think they should??

The Politicians`s gripe.

OK their exps rules are very relaxed and most operate within them, BUT they are NOT reaaly ethical in comparison to the Private sectot & it is MY MONEY they are spending.

Hi Nick,

Good work, keep it up.

To any MP that's reading this, you are missing the point. What you think is entirely irreleveant - yes, that's right, irrelevant.

You answer to us the people. We give you a lot of money and very generous allowances and we have a right to know exactly what you are spending it on. If you just published it in full, then you wouldn't have to whinge about people using the FoI to get answers.

Most of the people in this country are sick to death of you whining all the time and living the high-life at our expense. You even exempted yourselves from the smoking ban like the wretches that you are.

There is a groundswell in this country that is rapidly 'firming' as anti-professional politicain and it is caused by you yourselves.

When you ignore the whips and put the wishes of the majority of your constituents first and foremost all the time then you will be 'honourable'. Until then you will remain what you are - a collection of seedy snake-oil salesmen, spivs and moral ne'er-do-wells.

I wonder how you would cope if you had to submit to Compulsory Drug Testing as the Armed Forces do, with the results made public along with the names, as the Armed Forces do. But then again, you are nowhere near as worthy as the fattest QM's storeman.

It still beggars belief that MP's can spend batches of Β£250 without presenting a receipt. Wherever I have worked, I have had to produce receipts on EVERY item I am claiming on expenses and then justify them.

If MP's feel this is an intrusion on their private lives, maybe they should try the private sector for once and see how they get on trying to furnish their houses on that type of expense!

The next question is how the hell are they allowed to get away with furnishing their HOUSES on public funds. They are paid a wage and they should use that wage to fund their surroundings. If they can't afford the ten grand Chaise Lounge from Harrods, then they go to Ikea like the rest of us.

The same ethical rules do not apply to journalists as apply to politicians. We do not expect journalists to make decisions on our behalf. When you seek public office surely you must accept the scrutiny that goes with it.

I wish I could put forward expenses for up to Β£250 without receipts. How long did it take the ,ahem, Members Estimate Committee, take to come up with that ground breaking ruling.

Well i suppose Β£250 goes nowhere these days.

Singapore pays their MPs salaries that are competitive with those of private companies in order to guard against corruption and attract talent to an important job. Perhaps we should follow suit and increase confidence in our democratic system by paying our MPs a salary that befits their expertise and effort and stop this ludicrous expense corruption.

That Β£250 of unreceipted expenses should cover a second hand violin off ebay for each of the MPs to play as they sob out their tales of woe.

Why should MPs get pay rises when the police didn't due to inflationary pressures? Seems they are quite happy to nobly sacrifice others for the good of the economy, but not themselves. They're hardly on the bread line are they!

It seems that one rule applies to the electorate and one to the politicians. If I tried to justify Β£2.50, let alone Β£250 on an expences return without a receipt I would be laughed at.

The current shower in the Commons, on both sides of the House, have gradually and steadily eroded trust and belief that politicians serve any but themselves. They only have themselves to blame when we confirm that we no longer trust them or believe that they are capable of running the Country effectively.

I have a massive objection to the amount of parliamentary time being devoted to the running of parliament rather than addressing the fact that our country is crumbling around us.

Good for you Nick. So lobby journalists get paid more? They are paid to observe and report on what is happening in Westminster. If that exposes incompetence then that is money well spent. Cheaper than a day's PAC I bet. If MPs don't like it they can always become hacks. Matthew Parris, Robert Kilroy-Silk (sorry). They went the other way. I look forward to the Kilfoyle show.

I think Peter Kilfoyle is suffering from a logic problem. Even if Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ journalists were abusing their expenses (an issue I have no knowledge about), that doesn't excuse alleged abuse by MPs. If there's an anti-corruption MP standing in my area next election I'm voting for them.

Members of Parliament have only themselves to blame for the disdain of the public. Given that they have less influence over the laws governing this country than ever before, the existence of many of our MPs simply cannot be justified. I see most of them as nothing more than lobby fodder for a government that has lost our trust and confidence. At a time when many of their constituents are trying to cope with endless rises in the cost of living, MPs insulate themselves and their families from such hardship through generous access to tens of thousands of pounds of taxpayers money that is rarely examined for entitlement, or any proof of expenditure. The presumption that MPs are honourable (Michael Martin in particular) is flatly contradicted by their behaviour. Perhaps they could explain why grasping, self-serving, unaccountable and incompetent behaviour is deemed worthy of respect?

Typical political spin at work here: distract the public from the real problem (abuse of tax payers money) by lashing out at those who draw attention to it. I forget who it was who said it but, in essence, politicians should be influencing public opinion, not responding to it. Being caught with their hand in the till only reinforces the public perception that these elected members treat the tax payer with contempt at every available opportunity. They would do well to clean up their own act before criticising anyone else. Influence public opinion by setting a good example. Reject the suggestion of a Β£250 threshold for expenses without a receipt and actually be accountable for everything you spend.

Personally, I am beginning to feel very strongly that we need to move away from having 'professional' politicians... parasitical swathes of people who are content to pontificate and bind the population in laws which dont apply to them and to an economy they have never invested in. Maximum of 3 terms in office for ALL politicians, local or national. Oh, and dont tell me that we need the 'experience' in ministerial posts- I always thought that was what the Senior Civil Servants were for!

no matter how much they protest, their expenses are opaque compareed to the private sector and the lack of movement to remedy this speaks volumes of just how much is hidden.
The argument works for thema as well as for us - if you have nothing to hide then what's the problem?
Well, it is clear what the problem is - when you have an expenses scheme that only wants to know when a threshold is reached, you can bet it is misapplied below this level - that is human nature.
But, it must stop - this is - as Gordo would say - the taxes of "hardworking families".
We are entitled to full (FULL) disclosure from our public servants - and that includes MPs.
Anything short of that is a disgrace and borders on banana republic behaviour.

Good for you Nick. So lobby journalists get paid more? They are paid to observe and report on what is happening in Westminster. If that exposes incompetence then that is money well spent. Cheaper than a day's PAC I bet. If MPs don't like it they can always become hacks. Matthew Parris, Robert Kilroy-Silk (sorry). They went the other way. I look forward to the Kilfoyle show.

Stick with it, Nick, you can take it. As far as I am concerned if only half of the accounts of expense abuse by MPs are true, we are in deep, deep do-da. Is the speaker REALLY claiming Β£17,000 on a house in Glasgow on which he has already paid off the mortgage? Do the several husband and wife MP teams really BOTH claim expense to run the same house? There could be absolutely no objection to a truly independent body, one sanctioned my all parties which might rule on expenses and wages etc. Letting them investigate themselves is like handing Billy Bunter the key to manage the tcuk shop. I truly believe many MPs have lost touch with the lives and circumstances of their constituents.

Β£250 and under and you don't need a receipt! I work for local government and if I have an expense for any amount, even a cup of tea - if I don't have a receipt I can't claim the expense, no matter what value. Even then the amount is capped so if I have to go on training or a conference I often end up supplementing the expenses with my 'own pocket' to pay for meals which are of a decent quality and filling as there are caps on what I can spend -- which actually I agree with as there are genuine expenses and then there is taking the Michael with the hard working tax payer's money.

Keep at it. The public needs probing like this to make sure our MPs are held to account. The example of John Spellar on the Today programme yesterday shows that MPs are clearly incapable of policing themselves.

The media is always very quick to criticise politicans at all levels. I'm an ex councillor, I was 27 when first elected, I'm a woman and I did this for 13yrs before standing down so apparently I'm exactly the sort of person that everyone wants to encourage into politicas.
A number of factors influenced my decision to give up, firstly I was putting in a huge amount of work and hours for very little recompense, this would have been OK but my career was severly restricted by my councillor duties and eventually I had to consider my long term future and pension. Secondly I got sick and tired of the complete hypocrisy of the national and local press who constantly look for the negative in everything that politicians do whilst doing very little positive themselves. Ineviteably the public swallow all of this guff and frankly after a while I got sick of hearing 'politicians are all the same, all in it for the money....'
Whilst it is quite right to expose corruption there is very little balance in today's reporting and eventually we will find that many people with great ability and strong values will just say enough is enough - why should I bother I can have a much nicer life without all of this and earn more money whilst doing it.

Nick

Why haven't HMRC got involved, any fiddling of expenses is a benefit which should be taxed? My company system is VAT receipts only and HMRC have and will inspect our records to check that no PAYE is due on reimbursement of expenses. We wouldn't be allowed a flat Β£250/month tax free!

Having worked for the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ I can assure you that the internal processing of reciepts for expenses is one of the tightly controlled, unremitingly tedious, pointlessly nitpicking aspects of working there. You can't even slip a packet of Wine Gums past MEDAS - let alone champagne lunches or a bung to your kids. Rest assured viewers - every last penny of Nick Robinson's expenditure will have been vigorously combed through by a crack team of analysts.

What a joke ! 52 out of 600 plus MPs, this shows the rest of them support your comments, Nick.

How about instead of wasting time with an Early Day Motion, the MPs actually do some work on combatting child poverty, reducing the countries debt and stop giving away their responsibilities to Europe.

I work for a public sector body and had a Β£2.50 breakfast clain rejected because of "accounting policies". Β£250 without a receipt? Why not just give them a blank cheque signed by the taxpayer. Kilfoyle just proves what the general public already know, they are a greedy bucnh who've been caught with their hands in the till and don't like it.

Keep up the good work Nick!

Nick Robinson is balding, wears glasses and is a highly rated professional journalist working for the most effective and courageous news service in the world.

If I'd done something I didn't want anyone to know about or was about to do it and Nick was on my tail, I'd be throwing up chaff, ducking and weaving as well, although probably not quite as well, as some Members of Parliament their, friends, colleagues, families, secretaries, business partners are doing.
Sorry! Must go.
I just saw some Β£250.00 cheques drop into my garden of opportunity.

It's about time people started commenting on the self-righteous and downright smug author of this blog.

The only pleasant thing about viewing the blog today is in finding other readers who simply cannot abide the ingratiating meanderings of supposition and tease, which are better suited to an episode of Watchdog than to a supposedly professional factual report.

Like all good debates there is much truth within all of the comments so far.

For me the essential issue is one of accountability. I have seen colleagues disciplined for not keeping accurate track / receipts of expenses even at a couple of pounds difference and the auditors have complained (I work in the public sector). Why should MPs be any different?

Nick Robinson is accountable to the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ for his expenses- they are accountable to the Government through licence fee reviews - if the MPs think he is fiddling why haven't they asked the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ to follow up? They could always reduce our licence fee if we are funding excessive expense claims!

Those who are upset that Nick commentates as well as reports are misunderstanding his role. It is his job to read between the lines and tell us what he thinks is going on - not just to limply report what MPs want him to say - he is a journalist not a drone (thankfully)and this isn't Zimbabwe. All other political commentators do the same in different ways. If they don't like what he says they can protest by not reading it - in the same way that we can protest by not voting the MPs back in.

If Nick is being 'biaised' in his comments then criticism of him is fair enough - he should be even handed. Personally, I read his comments to refer to MPs of all parties and not specifically Labour - although they are perhaps most closely examined as the governing party.

The biggest problem here isnt whos right and whos just. Its simple that the public has lost faith in politics. I received the labour local election leaflet through my door and it accused the conservatives of mishandling money and greed. This is ironic coming from their party!

Yet the conservitive leaflet states Labour dont care about the local people and keep shutting public services down and wasting money.

Its a running joke to accuse the other side of exactly what they are doing themselves.

What ever happened to 'by the people FOR the people'?

When scandle breaks dont put a spin on it. Consult public oppinion and deal with it how the public feel it should be handled. When there is no scandle then run this country without spin and do what you were elected too. Nothing more nothing less

Point one is for all MP's - As someone who has worked in the Public Sector and had to account for and have a receipt for every penny spent. What prey tell makes you ant different!!

Point two - Nick I believe I pay your salary where exactly does my licence fee go?

well.done.nick.
power.to.the.people!

MP's have been abusing the system for years and using the expenses to top up their salaries. Derek Conway should have resigned his seat for his families activities. If the house of parliament caters for functions why does the speaker wife have to go shoppping. Also lets reform the whole system and make them provide detail actual receipts for everything like the rest of us have to do. They knew the pay and condidtions when they applied for the post so they should not compalin about the salary. We should also ban MP's from taking on consultancies unless this is offset against the MP's basic salary as they are doing two jobs. many occupations disbar you form taking an out side job as well as your main job why not MP's.

Just read your blog from yesterday Nick. Good work. It's interesting stuff and possibly a bit close to the bone for MP's liking...

Quote: "Many MPs are angry that the criticisms on individuals are sapping confidence in Parliament as a whole and, therefore, in democracy."

No, whats sapping confidence in Parliament and democracy is the blatant contempt and betrayal of the electorate regarding broken manifesto promises.

Where's our referendum on the EU Constitution, oops sorry I meant the EU Reform Treaty, that 638 MPs were elected on.

MPs should shut their whining mouths. If they really don't want us to think they've all got their snouts in the trough, they should show it.

Forget not being allowed to bug MPs even in the course of criminal investigations: I hereby _demand_ that MPs are bugged on a permanent, 24 by 7 by 365 basis and the recordings made fully accessible to the public.

MPs need to realise that the reason no-one trusts them is because they have time and time again _proven_ that they are not to be trusted. Only once the public are allowed to scrutinise in minute detail every second of their lives will they regain any of that trust.

Keep it up Nick, I feel this is a turning point in the way our MPs work. And about time. No doubt it is very hard to get any MPs to give a straight direct answer on any of the recent issues. They're probably all fearful for their futures, once their expenses are exposed. All those top restaurants, gifts, taxis, house refurbishments. Oh dear.

I've always voted in every election, for my whole life. But, I am now finally wondering if by doing this I am propping up this disgraceful bunch with their snouts in the trough. It makes me very angry, they're turning our system into a laughing stock. All these obscene expenses + loopholes must surely now be stopped.

Why are our representatives protesting? Have they forgotten that it is the taxpayer that pays their generous allowances and without the media their scams would continue? I have perused again your blog which has apparently caused offence. Interesting as many of the points raised in the blog have been in the national press for days. (Being retired I read every daily newspaper regardless of their political bias). All published media has rightly held the Speaker to account given that he is the Chair of the Committee looking at issues effecting the taxpayer. Regrettably, his own use of taxpayers money has also come under scrutiny which questions his impartiality in dealing with the public disquiet.

I am going to add my views as a "mature" Labour Party supporter for 45 years. I think Mr Martin is the worst speaker we have had. He has not always been able to formulate his words and I have been on tenderhooks on many occasions in the event of him floundering. He often fails to control the house and rarely holds people to account for not answering questions. I also feel that he has seriously misjudged public opinion over many issues. His calling on Sir Stuart Bell and David Maclean to look at expenses was ludicrous. It was not long ago that Mr Bell was under scrutiny related to the employment of his son. Mr Maclean who does have mobility problems also made the press for purchasing a rather nifty Β£4000 toy to get him around his constituency. I live in a rural community and this is what they are called.

Those MPs who reduce genuine concern about accountability to "class" issues are making a very serious mistake. A reminder that you are in government by appealing to "middle" England. If you do not acknowledge that voters are able to distinguish between the rants of journalists from the Daily Mail and argued comment from the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ political correspondent then you really are not in touch with reality.

When the number of MPs are reduced (Brussels creates much legislation), when they adhere to all the rules of employment that the rest of us have to -(retiring before you are past it, producing receipts for all expenses, less holiday, not holding two jobs etc etc), then public confidence in that profession may be improved.

Nick, you have to continue to hold MPs to account. It is your job to do so. I hope you are not concerned about this schoolboy behaviour by Mr Kilfoyle. You must have touched a raw nerve - well done to you!!!!

i have no problems with journalists and their expenses, public or private. politicians are a different matter. they asked to be trusted when they asked for our vote. SHOULD WE BE GRATEFULE TO HAVE THEM AS AN MP? i have yet to see their pay justified in any way. if ur going to lead be irreproachable. if you cant take the heat - stay out the kitchen.
the word deceit was created for describing politicians.
i say let rip - journalists have a duty to expose the greed that politician all too often display.
JOURNALIM: KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK.
i case ur wondering, i AM NOT in the same profession.

Would John Cole or Andrew Marr seek to be the story? Is your ego running out of control Nick?

Keep up the good work Nick. What dismays me about yesterday's support by Labour MPs for the Speaker is that they clearly see nothing wrong with the present system. It is not a question of him not having broken rules.

Claiming an expense in the real world is reimbursement for money actually paid out. This cannot apply in the case of the Speaker's house in Glasgow.

He is clearly treating the expense as additional income and this is a practice that stinks. The fact that the man cannot see this makes him unfit for office. The same goes for the braying donkeys who still support him. And they wonder why voters are getting disconnected from politics? Depressingly, this just shows that they are stupid as well as bent.

Are Mr Kilfoyle`s comments are typical of politicians, both national and local? They start off in local politics and appear to get a taste for power - `how dare the public challenge us` seems to be the attitude. It was reported by the local South Tyneside press that the Leader of the Council, when faced with angry members of the public demanding answers, e mailed a colleague and suggested that the `lunatics were trying to take over the asylum`. When caught out, he apologised, suggesting it was a mistake. Sadly, I suspect he felt it was a mistake because he was caught showing his true feelings for the electorate and not because his attitude was wrong. If `power tends to corrupt` at local level, then what must they be like by the time they get to a national level. They need to know that they are being watched, this is the only way to keep control of those who might stray. Politicians are very keen on scrutinising everyone else in society to make sure they are doing their jobs, so no double standards please. Keep up the good work Nick, keep watching these people for us `lunatics`.

I'm glad you've provoked a reaction.

But what I can't understand is the ability to submit an expense claim for Β£250 without a receipt. I certainly wouldn't walk into a shop, hand over Β£250 and leave with no proof of purchase, nor would I employ the services of an individual or company without requesting an invoice for payment. I'm sure the receipt is going to be available so what is the excuse on this occasion? Many receipts are used for VAT purposes - does this not count for government? One rule for them, one rule for us. Rinse and repeat.

I take it you've bottled the question regarding your own expenses. As a taxpayer my taxes pay for your expenses as well as my MP's so publish or be dammed.

This whole thing is begining to smell. The fact that MP's allowances are run under different rules to the rest of the population starts it.
When someone is caught out, exploiting it, they all rally round and say try to excuse it. I have to agree with the sentiments of yesterdays article, and also of those who point out that if you don't have a reciept for anything, the tax man is after you. How can MP's be allowed Β£250 without a receipt?
Remember this is the second expenses fiddle uncovered in a very short time.
Finally, MP's may be worried by the visibility of their salaries, but then they do award themselves huge holiday periods, so if you look at their salary over that period, compared to the average man there is no comparison.
They say they want to serve the country, and yes they should get paid for doing so, but only if they show they are serving properly, honestly and openly.
Prehaps they should introduce perfomance related pay, then they can show an improvement and deserve their pay rises !

I laughed then I cried and now, well now I am silently seething.

Infuriated by these so-called public servants, who appear to think they are above scrutiny.

My job requires me to keep receipts for a number of years for anything, ANYTHING I spend money on.

I hope they read these comments and perhaps smell the winds of change coming their way.

We no longer set them above the rest of us.
We no longer trust them..
We no take the dross they spill on a day to day basis…

It is now a matter of urgency that they are FORCED to own up to what they are truly spending from MY (and most of the above) 'customers' of theirs who seem to agree.

If they want trust?
Well frankly it is too late.

Time and time again they prove that they are not worth it.

Recent comments from this bunch of sops tell me they are so out of touch it has gone beyond the point of no return

Personally, my opinion is they are nothing but a bunch of cronies together, and all on the make.
I do however stand to be corrected...

I have often wondered why the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ employed Robinson in the first place. His reporting fitted in well with ITN's Daily Mail style of reporting. It doesn't fit well with the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ's less biased news bulletins.

What other country would elect failed professionals to rule themselves. The incompetent and unemployable become MP's. Perhaps it would be better if each MP's salary and expenses were set by their constituents and not by a committee of themselves. Then, if the constituents were unhappy with their MP's performance, they could vote to reduce the salary accordingly. The MP would have to present a detailed account of all remuneration together with a report on their effectiveness as an MP, for a referendum of their constituents to decide on future payments.

The Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ has to learn to be more careful. Facts and figures are the grounding for good journalism, not the rumour mill. Of course the issue of expenses need to be addressed, but not my political commentators putting words into MPs mouths. The Hutton report might make a good re-read Nick.

If you have quotes, let's see them! & we'd all love to see your expenses!

Like an MP I often work away from home. I spent 4 years travelling between my home in the north west and London. The difference between me and a MP is

1 - I have to earn the money my company pays to me to cover my expenses. It does not get claimed from some endless taxpayers pocket.

2 - All my expenses have to be wholly and exclusively incurred while carrying out my business. I would love to see the reaction at my local tax office if I put in expenses for a big TV or travel tickets for my wife and kids.

The whole expenses thing should be slashed and MP's should only be able to expense those items which relate to being a MP. The current situation is wide open to abuse and stinks!

I suppose I'll have to wait for the flying pigs before that happens.

Of the 49 early day motions currently up on the Parliament website only 2 have more signatories than Mr Kilfoyle’s �rant� against Nick which frankly just gives the impression that MPs are running scared on this whole expenses issue

I imagine if Nick published his expenses many of the 'hard done' by MP's might appear as recipients of generous Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ hospitality. Watching PMQ's I have noticed that there are not many 'thin' MP's despite all the advice they give us about our eating habits. Methinks they do protest too much and it is not doing them any good!

Why do these so-called "public servants" get so prickly, when their honour is impugned? NR is right to question these things. Take a leaf out of Mr Paxman's book Nick! What is always forgotten is that these people have an incredibly priviledged standard of living, that they have voted for THEMSELVES. They can operate in a perfectly legitimate way, and still pocket thousands of taxpayer's dosh without ever straying into fraud. Let's vote to put our "servants" on a wage that befits their standing in society! Keep at them Nick! John Wilkinson.

Nick, spot on as ever.

The truth always hurts.

There is no trust, no respect and there never will be for politicians until they all stop squabbling and work together as a team for the common good.

As a business they would be bust. I invite a selected few to come and work for me for a bit, long hours, hard graft and then after your tax and NI I can assure you they'd watch every penny and make it go as far as possible...

In nature anything that lives off something else is called a parasite.

Well, Nick, I think the Early Day Motion is just par for the course. Sideline the substance of the argument and focus on the person. It reminds me of the old lady who was the subject of a nasty campaign for criticising NHS care. The Early Day Motion comes across as crude intimidation. On the other hand, you might just want to divulge everything you know about our political masters (ie along with your expense claim). I'm fairly sure that'll be very interesting. You never know, there might just be the odd titbit on the MPs who have signed the Motion!

As an accountant I emphasise to all clients to have detailed receipts (not visa receipts) for everything they spend to do with their business whether it be Β£250 or Β£2.50p.
HM Revenue & Customs will disallow any expenses claimed that are not supported with a valid receipt.
Rules for some !!!

this has probably already been said, but there were too many replies to read through, but Expences should be for reasonable and appropriate uitems and charges, incurred by doing his job, and so I'm sure Mr robinson won't mind letting us know those details, not that he should, afterall, what's it go to do with us? I buy Baked beans of a certain brand, and so "I pay their wages" too, but i'm not going to bother asking them. It seems that because it is a public corporation, some people seem to think we have the right to know everything about it.

Finally, it is not appropriate for us to either know or specualte about how much Mr Robinson earns. that is a private contract between him and his employer.

Anyway, stop picking on the good guy! Keep up the good work Nick.

Well Nick, good to see that you are moving back to crisp and robust challenging of the chambers of horrors. Rather than repeating the Andy Marr toadying mistakes of "I am told that...or sources in NO 10 have told me that...

You were going down that road and most of the public are brassed off with it. If someone told you we want to know who, how and why. That is why you work for the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ.

There is enough tabloid speculation from unnamed sources that are totally fictitious and you should not be playing that game.

Having said that congratulations on your piece to camera on last night's news.

It reflected 100% what we were thinking in the often forgotten and disregarded pastures called the electorate.

The Speaker's expenses would not have been tolerated in just about any other walk of commercial or public life.

As for the "hot-air" miles family slurping, why are the miles all not collected and used to fund other flight costs of public duty.

However the most disappointing and telling message of the speakers miserable expenses saga, was to see the PM and other party leaders in unison in refusing to take up the challenge of either criticism or query. Absolutely astonishing and in many ways frightening.

And then they wonder why politicians are as popular and trusted as second hand car dealers and why we need the Nick Robinsons to ask the legitimate albeit embarrassing questions.

Why do these so-called "public servants" get so prickly, when their honour is impugned? NR is right to question these things. Take a leaf out of Mr Paxman's book Nick! What is always forgotten is that these people have an incredibly priviledged standard of living, that they have voted for THEMSELVES. They can operate in a perfectly legitimate way, and still pocket thousands of taxpayer's dosh without ever straying into fraud. Let's vote to put our "servants" on a wage that befits their standing in society! Keep at them Nick! John Wilkinson.

Please, please, please publish your expenses - and that way invite the 52 and climbing MP's to do the same in the interests of transparency and mutuality - what could be fairer and more honest in our open democrasy.

The challenge for our elected representatives - and indeed the Speaker - is to try and restore the confidence of the voters - who have little reason to trust their assurances based on the roll of dishonour that is unravelling on a daily basis.

Shame them into submission - of their expenses that is,

James Middlehurst

I'm looking forward to seeing Mr Robinson's expenses published, even more exciting will be the excuses MPs make as to why they won't do the same. Any guesses what they will come up with?

Some people have suggested that MPs be paid flat rates with no expenses, perhaps Β£150k ~ I find that figure hilarious, why should people who are supposed to be working for the benefit of the public be paid so much! Being an MP isn't a private sector job in which those capable of the task have to be attracted by significant salaries, it should be those who want to use their talents to better their country and represent the people who take up these public roles.
A better plan would be for MPs wages to be tied to national and regional averages with the number of hours worked taken into consideration.
Expenses are a reasonable system when they are fully accountable since the costs vary for each MP, expenses prevent money being wasted on the differential between MPs leaving a surplus from a flat rate with those who have the lowest requirements.

Think I have the solution here. Pay them all Β£200,000 a year. No expenses needed. No second home perks because they can all work from home. Electronic voting [to meet requirements of party leader] from comfy armchairs tucked up in their constituencies to save the trouble of making all those long journeys to London so no travel expenses. Finally sell the palace of Westminster for conversion to affordable housing since it hasn't been used as a debating chamber for at least 10 years so no need to pay researchers.
Far from cutting the number of MPs we could double the number and get twice as much democracy (I think?)

Nick's expenses are irrelevant in the debate. This is a typical politicians attempt to divert attention. The 52 MP's who signed this ludicrous Early Day Motion should be ashamed of themselves (if it were possible)and their names should be displayed in the media. Keep going Nick, MP's need to understand the extent to which many people distrust and despise this group of people - from all parties. Unfortunately, as in most walks of life, the few give the majority a bad name. This cancer seems be at all levels, starting with our ex-PM, The Speaker and downwards.

Clearly if MP's are worried about their low salaries reducing the number of MP's would solve the problem. With devolution I wonder what half of the Scottish and Welsh MP's do apart from meddling in English matters.
As for the rest MP's have a long history of "do what I say not what I do". Its no wonder they are held in such low esteem by the public.
Years ago most MP's had had a career outside politics before becoming MP's now most seem to go straight from university to political reasearcher then MP. A real appreaciation of the world outside Westminster would do them all good.

Perhaps these MPS should spare a minute to consider what it might be that leads the press to make such 'prurient' enquiries into their affairs. It seems to me, in view of the failure of Major, Blair and latterly Brown to revive public trust in the affairs of state and the manifest failure of MPS to hold their leaders to account, that the Press is simply fulfilling a public need.

Well done Nick! If you've upset some MPs then they are actually paying attention.

What they don't seem to understand is that while most people accept that MPs are entitled to expenses, the way many of them appear to abuse the system - without reproach - is totally out of order.

The decision to become an MP should be for one reason only - serve your constituents and your country - not a stepping stone to better things.

If they want to earn more money, then work in the private sector, but not at the same time.

Any MP (or any elected official in public office) who breaches rules should be forced to resign immediately - without benefits - and barred for life from public office.

We need trust in politics, but this is distinctly lacking these days.

I'm looking forward to seeing Mr Robinson's expenses published, even more exciting will be the excuses MPs make as to why they won't do the same. Any guesses what they will come up with?

Some people have suggested that MPs be paid flat rates with no expenses, perhaps Β£150k ~ I find that figure hilarious, why should people who are supposed to be working for the benefit of the public be paid so much! Being an MP isn't a private sector job in which those capable of the task have to be attracted by significant salaries, it should be those who want to use their talents to better their country and represent the people who take up these public roles.
A better plan would be for MPs wages to be tied to national and regional averages with the number of hours worked taken into consideration.
Expenses are a reasonable system when they are fully accountable since the costs vary for each MP, expenses prevent money being wasted on the differential between MPs leaving a surplus from a flat rate with those who have the lowest requirements.

Β£250 without a receipt? My company insists that a Receipt is produced to justify every expense item, and it argues that Her Majesty's Revenue & Customs will treat unproven expenses as taxable allowances. And it is perfectly possible to obtain receipts even for very small amounts, e.g. Β£4 taxi fare, Β£1 cup of tea.
Aa a compromise, I suggest that single line items below Β£5.00 could be accepted without a receipt, limited by 10 such items per month.

I have immense sympathy for our MPs over this issue, clearly the complicated rules and allowances they have to work their way through, and the scrutiny they are given are a huge burden on their other duties. As clearly are the strains of having to keep two houses and the travel between the two. I would therefore like to propose a simplified system so as to allow them to focus at their task in hand.

1) MPs are provided with accommodation by the Westminster Local authority. What used to be referred to as Council Flats. I believe they are now �Social Housing Schemes�. Perhaps there is room in Tower Hamlets.

2) This may raise concerns over security. If it is deemed that the policing provided to the other residents is not sufficient, then perhaps one entire block could be used, and extra security provided. Or, perhaps we could look at utilising accommodation in Army barracks.

3) This would therefore mean that transport to and from the Houses of Parliament would be provided at set times in the morning and evening by environmentally friendly busses.

4) Constituency housing would be of a similar nature, therefore bringing MPs closer to their electorate than their current out of town houses they are forced to purchase.

5) Being closer to the metropolitan centres would again negate the need for ministerial cars, as the public transport infrastructure they have invested in will move them effortlessly to their meetings, etc, and back to London.

6) There would clearly still be a requirement for some additional travel etc. An Oyster card should suffice.

7) If MPs believe that the above would lead to a disincentive for people to run for office, then maybe a hidden benefit would be the recruitment of representatives who run for office due to a sense of duty rather than a way to avoid real work and to line their pockets for a few years

Now I have provided a basic framework for improvement, I am looking forward to seeing an �Early Day Motion� to promote this replacing the Mr Kilfoyle’s clear waste of taxpayer’s money and time condemning a journalist, who, is actually busy doing the job his employers pay him to.

For heaven's sake - don't go into the kitchen if you can't take the heat. MPs are expected to be squeaky clean (I know, I know) whereas journalists are expected to be the lowest of the low!

All the same, I would quite like to see your expenses, Nick!

And as for MPs being annoyed because they are dealing with people who earn more than they do - perhaps that's because they are worth it.

Being an MP isn't such a special job (after all, almost anyone can do it - you just have to be non-bankrupt, not have been convicted of treason and not a lunatic - whoops, one or two seem to have slipped through the net there.

The problem is that MPs are treating expense allowances as income to be collected instead of a ceiling for claiming back real expenses incurred in carrying out their duties.

When the rules are as open to abuse as there are, the fact that an MP stays within the rules (just) is irrelevent. Claiming expenses for costs not really incurred in line of duty is simply dishonest. In the real world people get sacked for doing this.

It would be very interesting to know how Michael Martin treats these "expenses" in his tax return. Does he treat them as income - which is what they really are - or expenses. If the latter, then there might well be a charge of tax evasion to answer.

The reason Peter Kilfoyle "has got his knickers in a twist" is really no more than that Nick Robinson has offered Labour MP's an open goal at long last. Ever since he replaced Andrew Marr (a conspiciously measured and left leaning journalist) as political editor, he has sought to redress the balance, loading all his reports with sneering cynicism in what has looked to impartial outsiders like a barely disguised attempt to keep negative, anti government, headlines in the news. He is perfectly entitled to do this (though it does massively reduce his credibility as a serious journalist). However, once he lines the speaker up in his sights, something not even Tory MP's dare do, he makes his agenda all too plain for everyone to see.
Whether this will actually result in Mr. Robinson being demoted and him subsequently flouncing off to the Daily Mail to join Melanie Phillips where he can properly develop a talent for following the most boring and inconsequential of story lines that fail even to hit the massive target that is the current government, only time will tell. I'm certainly looking forward to seeing those expenses though.

Definitely touched a nerve if they are using an EDM to make a comment.

As an ordinary voter my belief in the system is eroded every time an MP abuses, or appears to abuse the system, without a full explanation.

The weasel words from their mouths saying he’s not broken any rules do not sit easy in my ears, we, the voters, expect our elected representatives to show leadership and have a moral and ethical approach to life and their work. £4,000 for personal taxi use immoral, and is it ethical to claim for household expenses for your personal home when the tax-payer provides a luxurious grace and favour apartment?

What causes the most exasperation though, is this spurious attempt to categorise any questioning of the Speaker’s expenses as an attack on his working class background, this is an insult to all working class people who have achieved more than their forebears, and an insult to the intelligence of voters everywhere!

This all makes me all the more inclined to agree with the earlier comment that �its time these overpaid superannuated lickspittles joined the rest of the human race with regards to pay and expenses�.

Nick I take it as a point of principle you do not attend any of the receptions given to the hacks in the commons by the speaker to the boys of the press pack, people in glass houses should not throw stones.

The problem is that MPs are treating expense allowances as income to be collected instead of a ceiling for claiming back real expenses incurred in carrying out their duties.

When the rules are as open to abuse as there are, the fact that an MP stays within the rules (just) is irrelevent. Claiming expenses for costs not really incurred in line of duty is simply dishonest. In the real world people get sacked for doing this.

It would be very interesting to know how Michael Martin treats these "expenses" in his tax return. Does he treat them as income - which is what they really are - or expenses. If the latter, then there might well be a charge of tax evasion to answer.

Well Nick, good to see that you are moving back to crisp and robust challenging of the chambers of horrors. Rather than repeating the Andy Marr toadying mistakes of "I am told that...or sources in NO 10 have told me that...

You were going down that road and most of the public are brassed off with it. If someone told you we want to know who, how and why. That is why you work for the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ.

There is enough tabloid speculation from unnamed sources that are totally fictitious and you should not be playing that game.

Having said that congratulations on your piece to camera on last night's news.

It reflected 100% what we were thinking in the often forgotten and disregarded pastures called the electorate.

The Speaker's expenses would not have been tolerated in just about any other walk of commercial or public life.

As for the "hot-air" miles family slurping, why are the miles all not collected and used to fund other flight costs of public duty.

However the most disappointing and telling message of the speakers miserable expenses saga, was to see the PM and other party leaders in unison in refusing to take up the challenge of either criticism or query. Absolutely astonishing and in many ways frightening.

And then they wonder why politicians are as popular and trusted as second hand car dealers and why we need the Nick Robinsons to ask the legitimate albeit embarrassing questions.

It's about time MPs stopped whining and started realising we don't accept that they are a special case anymore. For too long these preening divas have considered themselves as being above the rest of us. Enough is enough.

More power to your elbow Nick, it is about time that those in the Palace of Westminster realised they are our employees and, therefore, should be made to account for their financial actions. I have never worked in any job where I did not have to produce receipts for expenses, in some cases, down to the last Β£0.05! A researcher at the House told me recently that as soon as MPs get through security into the hallowed halls they regard themselves as totally untouchable. Do us a favour Nick and please wind them up again and again until we get something done. We will all come and visit you inside if necessary!

MPs should shut their whining mouths. If they really don't want us to think they've all got their snouts in the trough, they should show it.

Forget not being allowed to bug MPs even in the course of criminal investigations: I hereby _demand_ that MPs are bugged on a permanent, 24 by 7 by 365 basis and the recordings made fully accessible to the public.

MPs need to realise that the reason no-one trusts them is because they have time and time again _proven_ that they are not to be trusted. Only once the public are allowed to scrutinise in minute detail every second of their lives will they regain any of that trust.

When will MP's realise the contempt that most members of the public now hold them in. Even now when they have a chance to make sensible reforms, they still can't quite bring themselves to make the easy and quick reforms that would restore at least a little of the confidence that has been lost by the public. Thankfully we still have journalists of the stature of Nick Robinson who will ask difficult questions.

Could someone please clarify the situation for me? As far as I am aware, it seems apparent that there is a problem with MP's claiming expenses that they are not entitled to. This constitutes fraud and also money laundering? Under the proceeds of crime act I am fairly sure the act requires anyone that has the suspicion that money laundering has taken place to report it to the police. Should the police therefore be receiving approximately 60 million (minus minors) reports of crime? If we don't report this are each of us breaking the law?

Oh and Mr Robinson you seem to have backed out of what had previously been excellent reporting. Please be stong and stand up for what is right and just.

What's wrong with angering a number of MPs? They anger us all the time, so well done Nick!

I find it difficult to understand how someone can be in charge of any review whilst his own credentials are suspect. It could not happen in any other walk of life in this country and it is this arrogant attitude that politicians are different to the rest of the general public that is doing the most damage to the public image of politics. Recent history has demonstrated that our political system has had its fair share of bad apples many of whom denied all until proven guilty, so it is no surprise that political denial and attempts to exclude themselves from the very rules they impose on everyone else will be viewed with suspicion and I welcome all forms of investigative reporting that is in the publics interest no matter how uncomfortable it makes our politicians.

Keep up the pressure on MPs Nick. The country is spiralling downhill FAST into moral,spiritual and financially bankruptcy. We are, I think, seeing only the tip of the iceberg with regard to the fraudulent use of taxpayers' money. A mere British citizen would be tried and probably jailed for such offences, but politicians never 'do anything wrong' or 'break the law'. They can only 'break the spirit of the law" - what does this mean? You are either honest or dishonest, you either tell the truth or lie, steal or not steal.........Perhaps there ought to be daily morning lessons in Westminster on 'Morals in daily living'....but then, most politicians wouldn't be able to attend no doubt as they would probably not be there!!

This is all very amusing and one of the reasons why British politics is by far the most fascinating in the world. That aside, I really can't help but think that the key issue in all this, is that still MPs salaries are not set by some independent body. Each time the issue of their wages is raised, we get the riduculous spectacle of front benchers vetoing a raise that they badly want and their backbenchers probably need!

I have to be honest I do believe the money for being an MP is rubbish. I recognise this is a simplistic view as the allowances and subsidisations can be very generous. However this is only visible once you're inside the Westminster village. The sort of transparency I would like to see would have Politics viewed as a superb career that attracts the brighest and bravest thinkers in the country.

Maybe it's me but "if you pay peanuts, you get monkeys!"

If any MPs are reading this, a suggestion regarding housing expenses:
A set allowance should be available to all MPs for purchase of a second home, if required, at public expense. The MP would have the option of contributing part of the purchase price if they either did not want to pay all of it, or their preferred property cost more than the allowance.

On leaving office the choices are:
1) If the property has been entirely funded by the public purse, the MP has to vacate it and it is sold (the MP would of course be free to buy it, but at the market price).
2) If the property is jointly owned, with the MP having paid part of the cost, they can either buy the remaining portion at an independently valued price, or vacate it and receive a share of the sale price in proportion to the amount they put in.

This would allow MPs to run 2 homes, as is necessary for many with constituencies outside London. They would not need any additional accomodation allowance, since there would be no rent to pay. It would prevent them from benefitting hugely from property price inflation by using a (tax free?) housing allowance to buy a London property which they could then sell for their own profit.

This is all very amusing and one of the reasons why British politics is by far the most fascinating in the world. That aside, I really can't help but think that the key issue in all this, is that still MPs salaries are not set by some independent body. Each time the issue of their wages is raised, we get the riduculous spectacle of front benchers vetoing a raise that they badly want and their backbenchers probably need!

I have to be honest I do believe the money for being an MP is rubbish. I recognise this is a simplistic view as the allowances and subsidisations can be very generous. However this is only visible once you're inside the Westminster village. The sort of transparency I would like to see would have Politics viewed as a superb career that attracts the brighest and bravest thinkers in the country.

Maybe it's me but "if you pay peanuts, you get monkeys!"

Good for you, Nick... undoubtedly a case of noses so far in the trough, that they can't hear the outrage of the public.

Good on you Nick.

This country has now lost total faith in politicans including this Government. And the reason why is their behaviour, particular in recent weeks with the questions, that still largely exist over MP's expenses.

And who do we have to ask the most demanding of questions - only the lobby journalists and the lead writers.

From attempting to exclude the FOI from Westminster, contesting other FOI requests, voting their own salaries, I could go on but this MP behaviour has to be stopped once and for all and allow the people to vote on the behaviour of our MPs in the form of a general election.

But of course that will never have as GB wants to have a period in power still doing a terrible job.

In the meantime these MPs with their EDM try to stop the bleed that is just gushing out of Westminister. Funny isn't it but it seems that those that shout the loudest may in the end be hoist with their own petard.

Good on you Nick - keep it up!

I just wish MPs would finally realise who they are accountable to -Us the Public. They - The MPs continually stress they have done nothing wrong, adding the words "according to the rules". Whichever way one looks at it the way MPs can claim for invisible items is totally wrong, and this even though "it may be in the rules". Its time we made every MP declare all, expences, and removed some of these perks which create the image of greed and distrust.

This is my money and the money of every tax payer in this country and I believe it is my right to know what you as Members of Parliament are spending it on.
Your salary is your business, if you want to share this with your family, friends or colleagues, that is fine with me.
Your expenses, on the other hand, are my business and have to be justified to the last penny.
If you are taking a taxi, when other cheaper forms of public transport are available, I want to know why.
If you are on a flight, then I want to know if you have taken the cheapest alternative.
If you are claiming for meals, then I want to know why you have not paid out of your own pocket, like the huge majority of the public have to.
If you are claiming for overnight accommodation, then I want to know where you stayed and why, if there was one available, you did not take a cheaper option.
When is comes to expenses, this is the public's money that you are spending, not a bonus, not an incentive, not an additional payment, the public's money and it is outrageous that you should think otherwise.
But, to be honest, the expenses issue is the flavour of the month just now, the real issue is the amount of money that is wasted in government, local authorities, councils, education, the NHS and the legal aid system on a day to day basis by the wrong design and management of the work, the wrong measures being used to make decisions and too much central interference and red tape getting in the way of the front line staff, who want to do the right thing, being able to deliver the service they want to deliver.

Just to recap, you're not suggesting the Speaker might abuse his position, just that some MPs are worried he might, so they're keeping their mouths shut. Are Kilfoyle and his pals more worried than the others?

52 MP's amazing - remind me just how many MP's are there? Hardly the majority then!

I agree with part of the motion - the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ is a publicly funded body and cannot ask other publicly funded bodies (Parliament) to do something that it would not do itself.

We used to call that hypocrisy and out of honour people would do something about it (sometimes even resign), now it appears that we prefer finger pointing.

I bet that the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ enforces stronger controls than a Β£250 limit - let them show a lead. Come on Nick show us last months expenses with receipts.....

what an enlightening blog yet again nick. congratulations to saying what so many are afraid of - the truth. this is a witch hunt, but one that has been a long time coming. if everybody in every sector of industry had the power to vote their own pay rises/allowances/off springs pay cheques then we would have anarchy. multi-millionaires that haven't earnt a penny of their money themselves. however as so many of us sometimes fail to appreciate, is the fact that yes, not all MP's should be tarred with this brush. yet it is the small few who flout the system, and even sadly work within it, to enrich themselves that we must take a stand against. nick you really are an inspiration to all. you've certainly opened my eyes to some points not raised anywhere else. and the viscious backlash that some MP's are attempting to make? well thats laughable to be honest. just accept with good grace that some of you have been found out, and deal with the consequences.

(sorry about the ranting...now i sound like my old Socialist Government and Politics tutor on Vallium)

Here's a practical solution: we need, and easily could demand, a voting system which ensures that an MP can get elected only if (s)he gets a majority of the votes cast. That would stop dozens, if not hundreds, of MPs being able to regard their safe seats as their own property.

Although this may not be directly related, I am a bit bemused about MP's not having to support expenses claims

How does this fit in with Revenue & Customs regs whereby it would need to be determined what is 'business' and 'private' use such telephone car expenses etc (requiring bonafide back up documentation)

Also, a week or so back I was listening to John or Jim (Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ4) where an MP was supporting the case for the advantages of having his wife respond to calls and queries from his constituents whilst he was away. - Presumably, e-mail/voice messages would be a far more cost effective method of dealing with these matters - we are all being encouraged to seek 'value-for-money' and the same should apply.

Sorry I don't mean to moan - I am quite a cool understanding guy realy but would be interested in you views relating to the first para.

Thanks

William

If any other part of the public sector had a policy of no receipts for expenses under Β£250 the National Audit Office would come down like a tonne of bricks. This afternoon I had to provide tickets as evidence for a Β£2.90 train fare.
In terms of the accommodation for MPs why not provide key worker flats in London for members from outside the capital and then there is no need for anyone to claim expenses for any housing. No London MP should need to maintain two properties at the tax payers exspense.

Sorry Nick - but the politicians have a point. They spend taxpayers money and so do you. They represent views, you report views. You as a Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ journalist have to uphold standards, so do they. You have the power to influence Britain, so do they. You pontificate on some matters you don't really understand, so do they. Time to publish your expenses and be damned (or not!)

Quote: "Many MPs are angry that the criticisms on individuals are sapping confidence in Parliament as a whole and, therefore, in democracy."

No, whats sapping confidence in Parliament and democracy is the blatant contempt and betrayal of the electorate regarding broken manifesto promises.

Where's our referendum on the EU Constitution, oops sorry I meant the EU Reform Treaty, that 638 MPs were elected on.

Good on yer Nick ! That lot needed a good poke with a sharp stick! They seem to think they are in an upper class of their own and its about time us ordinary people took it upon ourselves to fight for a fair system of government and not the current private members club who decide between themselves whats good for the country....look at the EU ! Its just club for control freaks ..bring back democracy ...sharpen ya sticks !!

Stick to your guns Nick .Dont let these greedy snout in the trough politicians grind you down.
PS I dont care how much you get jist get right intae these peepel .GCFord Glasgow Scotland.

I was under the impression that the Labour party was the working mans goverment!
Dont they mean fhe shirkers goverment?
What I have read over the weeks relating to the money they earn as proved they are in the politics game.Fantastic pay outs,First class hotels and travel,fantastic pensions.
This is one mans opinion and I would apreciate the answer to my views
Gordon Reed (Stockport)

I'm amazed that the rules applied by HMRC to expenses - whether one is employed or self-employed - are not applied also to MPs. They should work to the same rules as the rest of us with regard to what can be claimed. I can't see me getting Β£4000 of taxi fares past HMRC! Their expenses should be disclosed in full.

Here's a practical solution: we need, and easily could demand, a voting system which ensures that an MP can get elected only if (s)he gets a majority of the votes cast. That would stop dozens, if not hundreds, of MPs being able to regard their safe seats as their own property.

Quote: "Many MPs are angry that the criticisms on individuals are sapping confidence in Parliament as a whole and, therefore, in democracy."

No, whats sapping confidence in Parliament and democracy is the blatant contempt and betrayal of the electorate regarding broken manifesto promises.

Where's our referendum on the EU Constitution, oops sorry I meant the EU Reform Treaty, that 638 MPs were elected on.

Here's a practical solution: we need, and easily could demand, a voting system which ensures that an MP can get elected only if (s)he gets a majority of the votes cast. That would stop dozens, if not hundreds, of MPs being able to regard their safe seats as their own property.

I dont care how much Nick Robinson gets paid . If he can force M.P,s to lift their snouts from the trough and look over their shoulders to see who is keeping tabs on them he earns every penny.
The welcome they gave the speaker yesterday shows he is just one of the boys ,they are all lining their pockets at our expense!.

The problem is that MPs are treating expense allowances as income to be collected instead of a ceiling for claiming back real expenses incurred in carrying out their duties.

When the rules are as open to abuse as there are, the fact that an MP stays within the rules (just) is irrelevent. Claiming expenses for costs not really incurred in line of duty is simply dishonest. In the real world people get sacked for doing this.

It would be very interesting to know how Michael Martin treats these "expenses" in his tax return. Does he treat them as income - which is what they really are - or expenses. If the latter, then there might well be a charge of tax evasion to answer.

Nick totally go for it print your expenses show them up. However if you dont we are just going to say
POT KETTLE AND BLACK.

Go for it Nick!

Well done for winding up the ever pompmous Peter Kilfoyle.

Get elected once every four years and hope no-one notices your behaviour until the next election; an interesting business model but not one that would work in the private sector.

Methinks he doth protest too much! Maybe he can stand for election next time for the Grand Executioner of Titipu...

Just to recap then, you're not suggesting the Speaker might abuse his position, just that some MPs think he might, so they're keeping their mouths shut. What makes you think they're such a lily-livered bunch?

I have always wondered why so many of our politicians want to give up their hold on power and surrender it, and our sovereignty, to a country called Europe. Now it becomes plainer to see. The EU, with all its scams and inherent corruption(Β£98m of taxpayers money claimed for 'allowances' the details of which are carefully kept out of public view). So much easier to become one of Europe's political elite, freed from the tiresome chore of being subject to scrutiny.
Agree? Join the lobby of parliament tomorrow to campaign to hold this labour government to hold a referendun on the EU constitution, AS IT PRONISED IN ITS ELECTION MANIFESTO.
Be warned, this is your last chance to retain not only our sovereignty but to check those untrustworthy politicians who would dearly like to get their noses in the European trough.

I'm a welfare rights adviser and I think that MP's should be treated in the same way as recipients of tax credits. That would give them something of a taste of the harsh reality of life for ordinary people!

Perhaps then they would appreciate, rather than abuse, their privileged position. It might also contribute to some decent public policy in this country.

I see Peter Kilfoyle has been to the Alastair Campbell School of Spin - i.e. don't address the point at issue, create a wholly different story about something else and do so with as much bluster as possible. It worked for Alastair time and again, why not for Peter?

Nick,

You have the electorate's full support.
Please continue doing a great job.

To MPs, please learn from Nick's blog.

This issue is entirely symptomatic of having professional MPs who are looking for a career at Westminster to pay for their lifestyles and pension rather than respected "village elders" who can rely on their past experience to set wise strategy and to provide leadership that people can respect. A career MP is beholden to the whips who has his or her future in their hands. Hence this government's total disregard of parliament, MPs do as they are told. We have a significant number of misisters, and shadow ministers for that matter, who have never answered to a profit and loss account in their lives, nor met a patient face to face nor faced an enemy, gun in hand. They have spent their time moving from university, through a spell as a political researcher to becoming an MP. From what basis do they provide leadership and counsel? No wonder they make such a hash of it and lost our respect.

New Labour has consistently endeavored to erode civil liberties whilst in power. Time and again the cry has been 'the innocent have nothing to hide'. Acts of Parliament have been passed that curtail freedom and allow deeper intrusion into the lives of others without any proven justification. This has sparked outrage. For MPs to now find themselves under increasing public intrusion/scrutiny into their private affairs and to complain about it is either gross hypocrisy, poetic justice or an example of their isolation from public life. Distrusting any politician is not only natural but healthy and an excellent way of unearthing corruption and sleaze.

The problem is that MPs are treating expense allowances as income to be collected instead of a ceiling for claiming back real expenses incurred in carrying out their duties.

When the rules are as open to abuse as there are, the fact that an MP stays within the rules (just) is irrelevent. Claiming expenses for costs not really incurred in line of duty is simply dishonest. In the real world people get sacked for doing this.

It would be very interesting to know how Michael Martin treats these "expenses" in his tax return. Does he treat them as income - which is what they really are - or expenses. If the latter, then there might well be a charge of tax evasion to answer.

MPs work for us and are paid for by our taxes. What gives them - or indeed a Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ journalist, who is paid on the same basis - the right to with hold any information about how our money is spent.

The main battleground at the next election will be the best use of tax payers’ money to fund public services. If David Cameron is a true conservative (note the small �c’) then his objective should be to ensure politicians concentrate on long-term strategic planning, which is what is currently missing from Government. Gordon Brown’s approach to interest rates was, ironically, the correct one and should be applied across all the spending departments: provide the professionals with clear goals - in the case of the Bank, keeping inflation below 2% - and let them get on with it. Ministers, who are essentially amateurs, should act as non-executive board members, providing strategic guidance and asking the tough questions, as opposed to being involved in day-to-day management. The job of MPs is then to scrutinise the Government’s strategic direction.

It will involve hiring professional business managers to run the spending departments. Because fewer politicians will be required, the funding for this can come from halving the number of Ministers and in a reduction by a third in the number of MPs. It will also have the beneficial effect of removing snouts from the trough, which will help re-build confidence in politics.

I hope Cameron has the necessary courage.

Cant say I am too fussed about the Speaker's expenses row but for some years I have had a certain view of the Press and TV.---
ONE'S HEART GOES OUT TO PARENTS WHEN CHILDREN GO OFF THE RAILS AND BECOME PROSTITUTES OR DRUG-DEALERS BUT TO HAVE A SON OR DAUGHTER BECOME A JOURNALIST MUST BE UNBEARABLE!!!

Dear Nick, your total expenses and that of your Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ
political commentators would be most interesting for
we the lowly licence payer,also what political party or
leaning do you have sympathy with?.
Yours C Coote Mackay.

You stopped reporting the news and started making the news a long time ago

New Labour has consistently endeavored to erode civil liberties whilst in power. Time and again the cry has been 'the innocent have nothing to hide'. Acts of Parliament have been passed that curtail freedom and allow deeper intrusion into the lives of others without any proven justification. This has sparked outrage. For MPs to now find themselves under increasing public intrusion/scrutiny into their private affairs and to complain about it is either gross hypocrisy, poetic justice or an example of their isolation from public life. Distrusting any politician is not only natural but healthy and an excellent way of unearthing corruption and sleaze.

More grist to your mill Nick (or, after such demonization, should that now be Old Nick?).
Is this the first time a blog has been the subject of 'Questions in the House'? The public demand to know...

Well Nick,

Is your middle name Pandora? Beware of what you wish for....

As with all political situations, Yes Prime Minister seems to have tackled this issue before. Was there not an episode whereby a 43% pay rise was reduced to a much more publicly acceptable 6% by increasing allowances such as the London weighting and the �skiing allowance� or something like that... This is how MPs pad what on the outside looks like a very reasonable salary. And was there also not an episode where it turns out that Jim Hacker had lied by saying that a MPs phone had not been bugged by the government!

If most of the governemnt decisions are now made in Europe why do we need all these MPs with their noses in the trough? They have voted themselves out of a job.

I agree. Let's see your expenses. Fairs fair.

So MPs have a Β£60k wage, gold plated pension, payment towards a 2nd house, Β£135,800 expenses with which they can employ family members and need not provide a receipt for items under Β£250, paid directorships, consultancy and advocacy services, after dinner speaking, newspaper coloumns, TV appearances etc... are we supposed to feel sorry for them because we want to know what our money is being spent on.

It's about time that the "Hon Members" moved out of the 19th and into the 21st century.

Obviously Mr Nick robinson is correct, this has got the MP's rattle and rightly so, a lot of them are overpaid obtuse waste of spaces. They get away with daylight murder by employing anyone they can think of in their so called family and claiming for expenses that are clearly incorrect. My local MP thinks of nothing but himself and in my opinion does not justify what he does or with whom. I would like to see ALL MP's checked, and after that is completed i wouldn't like to "bet" on what they find, this is only the begining!

New Labour has consistently endeavored to erode civil liberties whilst in power. Time and again the cry has been 'the innocent have nothing to hide'. Acts of Parliament have been passed that curtail freedom and allow deeper intrusion into the lives of others without any proven justification. This has sparked outrage. For MPs to now find themselves under increasing public intrusion/scrutiny into their private affairs and to complain about it is either gross hypocrisy, poetic justice or an example of their isolation from public life. Distrusting any politician is not only natural but healthy and an excellent way of unearthing corruption and sleaze.

"Singapore pays their MPs salaries that are competitive with those of private companies in order to guard against corruption and attract talent to an important job. Perhaps we should follow suit and increase confidence in our democratic system by paying our MPs a salary that befits their expertise and effort and stop this ludicrous expense corruption."

It's illegal to pay below the minimum wage these days.

Frankly they should be paying us (the taxpayer) if their wage is supposed to befit their "expertise" and "effort".

Well unless it was "expertise" and "effort" into milking the expense trough, in which case they yes they'd be very highly paid.

EDMs are nothing more than parliamentary graffiti. The fact is that public sector benefits are now embarrassingly good due to this government's complete incompetence of stewardship over such things as final salary pension schemes. Shame on them.

I hope Nick hasn't claimed any expenses for haircuts!

Keep at it Nick.

About 10 days ago, there was an article published if I recall, by the Daily Telegraph (perhaps Sunday edition), about MP's claiming travel allowances of 000's of pounds as they did not wish to commute for a hour or so. In particular it referred to a a married couple each an MP in neighbouring constituencies who doubled their claims.

A flagrant abuse of the system if ever there was one. Yet nothing since has been reported as far as I'm aware.

I am used to seeing a certain degree of corruption living abroad as I do, but it rankles me to see it in Britain, and I am cheesed off seeing the speed and enthusiasm in which British MP's continue to point the finger at what they see as corruption elsewhere.

Glasshouses spring to mind.

Mr. Kilfoyle's position is foolish in the extreme.

Shocking though this thought may be for politicans, they actually are supposed to represent the public and we are entitled to know (or should be entitled to know) everything about how they spend public money, including on their salaries and expenses.

I simply don't care that they are paid less than people in the private sector. If they want to earn more, they can give up being a MP and go into the private sector. The whole point of them being a MP is that they are supposed to be providing public service.

It's particularly annoying that someone like Mr. Kilfoyle is complaining when he and his cronies are in the process of ramming the Lisbon Treaty through Parliament without a proper mandate from the electorate and without the promised referendum. This is the most scandalous abuse of power and democratic privilege that I think this country has witnessed since Charles I tried to rule by decree. If Mr. Kilfoyle wants to whinge about his public accountability, he'd better start doing his job first and hold this decaying and incompetent government to account.

Obviously Mr Nick robinson is correct, this has got the MP's rattle and rightly so, a lot of them are overpaid obtuse waste of spaces. They get away with daylight murder by employing anyone they can think of in their so called family and claiming for expenses that are clearly incorrect. My local MP thinks of nothing but himself and in my opinion does not justify what he does or with whom. I would like to see ALL MP's checked, and after that is completed i wouldn't like to "bet" on what they find, this is only the begining!

I work in the private sector and as a manager I have the dubious privilege of authorising expenses for around 70 staff.

I will NOT accept a claim for anything without a receipt.. and why should I? One of the reasons for this is that the HM Government's own Inland Revenue Department might want to know if the payment was justified or was it a taxable benefit. Now excuse me for asking but.. why aren't MPs subject to the same rules which they foist on the rest of us. Perhaps they DO have something to hide after all!

Keep up your propaganda for the Conservative Party, I'm sure there is a gong in it for you if they ever get elected. Ignor the crticism, why should you be neutral in political debate, after all its public money that pays your wages (and all the free meals etc that you get). Come to think of it why don't you publish a list of all the free stuff you have recieved in the last 12 months, or would it not be in the public interest to do so? Let me guess!

I have worked for some 40 years for several commercial firms. The cardinal rule on expenses was "no receipt, no refund" . If this method was used by our MPs then there would be no problem.
Why do we have to put up with our representatives applying different rules to themselves than those that we have to abide by.
This is doubly so for both MEPs and for the greater European Union where practices that would result in prosecution or in Companies being closed down seem to be the rule rather than the exception.

there has clearly been a vendetta against the speaker by the press as he witheld information form them. No wonder people are angry.

And in any case if you are to focus on corruption wouldn't MEP's be better? Or are they exempt?

I think these MPs have forgotten the fact that we the taxpayers and voters put them in Parliament and as such we are their employers and come election time we can vote them out. As their employers we have an absolute right to know their salaries and expenses, after all its our money.
More transparency, less spin please.
Well done Nick.

So Lembit has signed this motion. Dear Lembit, he really is a hypocrite or a fool to ask others for full transparency about their private affairs- the skeletons in the cupboard have not all been forgotten.

So MPs have a Β£60k wage, gold plated pension, payment towards a 2nd house, Β£135,800 expenses with which they can employ family members and need not provide a receipt for items under Β£250, paid directorships, consultancy and advocacy services, after dinner speaking, newspaper coloumns, TV appearances etc... are we supposed to feel sorry for them because we want to know what our money is being spent on.

It's about time that the "Hon Members" moved out of the 19th and into the 21st century.

MP seems to stand for Major Parasite.

I know who Nick Robinson is. I have no idea who my MP is.

Nick Robinson entertains and informs me. My MP, I assume, follows the party whip (whichever party it may be) and otherwise plays the sychophant game. Does that make me badly informed, or does it mean my MP informs badly?

So far as I can tell, the key jobs of an MP are to follow the prewritten script of their party and to nod thoughtfully while sitting or standing behind their much-nosed respective leader (none of whom have faced the electorate as leader; so much for mandates).

I consider my modest contribution to Nick Robinson's salary money well earned. I consider my contribution to my MP's salary an unnecessary evil. Public service, surely, is its own honour, and calls for sacrifice rather than reward. Oh, and lest we forget, to actually serve the public...or is that too quaint an idea?

I don't care what Nick Robinson earns or what his expenses are. I do care what MPs earn and what they claim in expenses. Why? Politicians by their own actions make cynics of the electorate. Perhaps it is easier to point out that a house is not run as it should be than it is to actually clean the house, but is it too much to ask that they do that? That they earn respect rather than contempt for their actions? Who amongst them has that courage? ...Anyone? ...Anyone?

I do not generally sing the praises of the police or firefighters or nurses, but is an MP worth more in any sense? MPs find difficulty nurturing a mind of their own, let alone speaking it. I wonder how many would routinely step into a burning building to save a life? I don't doubt that they went into politics with high ideals, but what happened once they got to Westminster? And is the measure of an elected house's backbone the challenge to a journalist that he disclose his own expenses? That, surely, is the childish act (one might say amusing prank) of followers who lack the courage to lead by example.

Cut their allowances, require a receipt for all expenses, give them a pay rise equal to the aggregate given to the emergency services...and don't backdate it.

In the meantime, Nick Robinson gets my vote. My MP doesn't.

The problem is too many politicians still think of themselves as the archaic honourable member. However we've all known for decades that power corrupts and that only complete transparency can uncover the people who are corrupt or have become corrupt.

As for the class warriors where is their concern for the public money they spend which comes from the taxes of hard working people.

I think these MPs have forgotten the fact that we the taxpayers and voters put them in Parliament and as such we are their employers and come election time we can vote them out. As their employers we have an absolute right to know their salaries and expenses, after all its our money.
More transparency, less spin please.
Well done Nick.

The UK government and especially the bureaucracy is obsessed with keeping secret many things that should be public knowledge.

The corruption in public affairs is as bad as it has always been simply because most of those who should be exposing the problem, the MP's, turn native as soon as they are elected.

That said, the most important job in the UK is that of an MP, so they should be rewarded with top pay and a benefits package to fit the "Guardians of Democracy". When will they formalise a National Constitution and a Bill of Rights so that we 'peasants' may be protected from abuse by the very bureaucracy that is meant to serve us?

I hope that the review of MPs pay and expenses includes the pension entitlements which I understand are also generous, being paid as if a lifetime had been spent in Parliament but earned in full after just one term. Like many others my own pension has been diminished in value by a move away from final salary schemes. As a chartered engineer of more than 30 years experience I wish I earned the Β£60,000 p.a. that Derek Conway said is not enough to live on!

Isn't all this expenses stuff just a red herring when it comes to the speaker? My understanding (thank you Private Eye et al) is that a lot of MPs think Martin is useless... but can't say so because they'll never be called again - so there's a lot of stirring to make his life difficult.... all of which helps to hide a far more serious problem: that most of our MPs are useless or poisonous (and in the case of Caroline Flint...) and governments of all shades have been quietly screwing up the country for the last 50 years... it's the infrastructure stupid!

In simple easy to understand terms MPs should have to comply by the same rules all tax payers do, if I claim expenses I have to have a receipt for every penny, when I claim a mileage allowance I am only allowed to do so at the rate set by the inland revenue not a higher rate as MPs are allowed to do. Most, but I agree not all, have had their snouts in the trough of public money for far too long it is about time they were all put under the microscope, if they are not happy with their salary get a different job!

I am concerned that the requests made by Mr Kilfoyle of Nick Robinson and the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ will put any other journalists off making similar comments and thereby undermine the freedom of the press in this country. It is the duty of the press to investigate and comment on the government. Whilst the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ is publically accountable it is not the duty of Mr Kilfoyle to investigate the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ. Other bodies already exist to do this. Surely Mr Kilfoyle's comments undermine freedom of the press particularly as the govenment ultimately controls the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ's purse strings. What's going on?

To all Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ employees including Nick.
This is my money and the money of every TV licence payer in this country and I believe it is my right to know what you as employees of the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ spend it on.
Your salary is your business (sort of), if you want to share this with your family, friends or colleagues, that is fine with me.
Your expenses, on the other hand, are my business and have to be justified to the last penny.
If you are taking a taxi, when other cheaper forms of public transport are available, I want to know why.
If you are on a flight, then I want to know if you have taken the cheapest alternative.
If you are claiming for meals, then I want to know why you have not paid out of your own pocket, like the huge majority of the public have to.
If you are claiming for overnight accommodation, then I want to know where you stayed and why, if there was one available, you did not take a cheaper option.
When is comes to expenses, this is the public's money that you are spending, not a bonus, not an incentive, not an additional payment, the public's money and it is outrageous that you should think otherwise.
But, to be honest, the expenses issue is the flavour of the month just now, the real issue is the amount of money that is wasted on outside broadcasts, "reality shows", poor management of the work, the wrong measures being used to make decisions and too much central interference and red tape.
MP's and Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ employees are all paid from the public purse, which is filled by means of Taxation or the TV Licence fee - so it doesn't do for you to be too righteous, Nick

New Labour has consistently endeavored to erode civil liberties whilst in power. Time and again the cry has been 'the innocent have nothing to hide'. Acts of Parliament have been passed that curtail freedom and allow deeper intrusion into the lives of others without any proven justification. This has sparked outrage. For MPs to now find themselves under increasing public intrusion/scrutiny into their private affairs and to complain about it is either gross hypocrisy, poetic justice or an example of their isolation from public life. Distrusting any politician is not only natural but healthy and an excellent way of unearthing corruption and sleaze.

What I can't understand is why there isn't a travel office in the House of Commons where MP's or their assistants for that matter can go to pick up tickets for any transportation they require. That office then claims all the air miles and uses it to purchase tickets for MP's.

Same with this Β£250 petty cash account. All stationary is provided, all stamps are paid for, staff are provided, offices all the paaraphenalia. What do MP's need petty cash for?

If they have guests on official business then they can literally get a reciept for the meal drinks etc take it to the office declare it is official business and a central office pays for it.

There are plenty of places to eat in the House of Commons and plenty of places to entertain.

Why do they need expense accounts at all.

Sorry boys, this gravy train is at the end of the line. Confidence in our elected members is at an all time low and you've only yourselves to blame.

I think these MPs have forgotten the fact that we the taxpayers and voters put them in Parliament and as such we are their employers and come election time we can vote them out. As their employers we have an absolute right to know their salaries and expenses, after all its our money.
More transparency, less spin please.
Well done Nick.

This raises an interesting question: presumably MPs file accounts and/or tax returns like the rest of the population.
1) do their accountants require receipts to sign off on expenses below Β£250? If not, how can they honestly sign off these accounts?
2) all expenses claimed by MPs - receipted or not – presumably incur no tax on the grounds that the payments received were cancelled out by the expenditure in the first place. But does HMRC challenge this, especially when 'expenses' can be larger than the MP's salary? Does an MP who claims 'expenses' for a constituency home where there is no mortgage (17k I think for Michael Martin) get the money tax-free? I think we should be told!

Set an example, publish your own. Otherwise your arguement, whilst true, also applies to you.

This raises an interesting question: presumably MPs file accounts and/or tax returns like the rest of the population.
1) do their accountants require receipts to sign off on expenses below Β£250? If not, how can they honestly sign off these accounts?
2) all expenses claimed by MPs - receipted or not – presumably incur no tax on the grounds that the payments received were cancelled out by the expenditure in the first place. But does HMRC challenge this, especially when 'expenses' can be larger than the MP's salary? Does an MP who claims 'expenses' for a constituency home where there is no mortgage (17k I think for Michael Martin) get the money tax-free? I think we should be told!

Well done Nick!! Its about time the politicains woke up and realised just how far they are from us nowadays. I listened to Michael Martin being warmly received by the house yesterday and it truly sickened me. Have they no idea of just what it makes us feels like to have our hard earned tax pounds squandered on their junkets? If its not Β£4000 taxi fares its employing your son at some exhorbitant fee, and those are just the examples we know about! I'm thoroughly hacked off with our politicians who complain grimly of being hard done by whilst earning Β£60k a year plus whatever else they can screw out of the system (Β£20k for a second mortage perhaps?). How do we get some action taken about this? Whom do we go to, our MP? Don't make me laugh. Go for the jugular Nick we need this flushed out and these jokers called to account. Forget the ballot box, no one can be bothered anymore.

New Labour has consistently endeavored to erode civil liberties whilst in power. Time and again the cry has been 'the innocent have nothing to hide'. Acts of Parliament have been passed that curtail freedom and allow deeper intrusion into the lives of others without any proven justification. This has sparked outrage. For MPs to now find themselves under increasing public intrusion/scrutiny into their private affairs and to complain about it is either gross hypocrisy, poetic justice or an example of their isolation from public life. Distrusting any politician is not only natural but healthy and an excellent way of unearthing corruption and sleaze.

Shame on you Peter Kilfoyle!
I normally have a lot of time for your views [I even bought your book], but just using the EDM for this purpose is an abuse of the democratic process.
Politicians are unpopular not just because they commit a financial fraud on the public, but also a political one.
Especially true of Speaker Martin. As a Labour supporter and a a viewer of parliament, I cringe at his bias against opposition parties, especially the smaller ones. Budget debates, when he doesn't chair, are much better.
Having been a local councillor I am shocked at the lassitude over expenses that the MP's have allowed themselves, and this no doubt explains the rise in the cost of Parliament over the last ten years - some six times I am told.
The sooner there is a fairer system the better, with a Chair of the Commons who does it fairly, and also leads a much needed reform of its archaic procedures, the better. Ideally we would have fewer MP's so the rotten Conway's would be rooted out quicker.
83% in a recent poll said they could not trust politicians, and the great majority who do a good job get lambasted like the others. The real winners are the government who will be less accountable to the MP's, when they are not trusted.
Reform is urgent, Mr Kilfoyle.

Upsetting so many MPs, distracting them from lining their own nests and getting them all to sign something on the same day merits huge congratulations.

Feel free to have a pint on me from my License Fee (obviously declared as expenses)...

Some of us are just as fed up with political reporters as we are with politicians!

In fact both animals are part and parcel of the same jungle and have much the same disgusting habits.

We hear references to the "Westminster Village" but it seems more like a Westminster dung heap to me, and maybe quite a few others, too.

Don't the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ publish their annual accounts? I'm pretty sure they do, cos I remember being disgusted at Β£18,000,000 for 5 years of Jonathan Ross. I'm sure the journo's pay (or grades, at least) are in there somewhere.

Some of these posts along the lines of "MPs don't earn much" make me wonder, which of the plethora of jobs many MPs have is the one they don't make much at? I bet they make more than nurses, and you don't ever see MPs cleaning up vomit or wiping someone's backside.

When the chairman of the Parliamentary Standards and Privileges committee resigns saying it's not worth it, hardly any of them answer my questions or give evidence to my committee you don't need journalists to bring politics into disrepute. They do it themselves.

What greatly annoys me is that as soon as there's a labour scandal the labour party throw a tory or a lib to the wolves, and vice-versa. If, as appears to be the case, they all know what the others are doing, but only use it against them when it's politcally expedient to do so, they do an excellent job themselves of lowering our expectations of MPs. As posted above, isn't concealing knowledge of a crime a crime in its' own right?

The biggest problem with MPs is their stinking hypocrisy. Freedom of information act they brought in applies to everyone in the UK but them, likewise, the smoking ban they brought in applies to everyone in the country but them. Wages across the public sector are forced so low coppers and prison officers are contemplating strikes even though they know they're illegal, things like milk replaced in the retail price index (with champagne!) so inflation kept artificially low so the private sector can also offer pittance pay rises yet these lot have three or four jobs and expenses aplenty and tell us we should be grateful? My arse.

Oh, and don't get me started on the "boiling a frog" approach to eroding civil liberties...

MPs should publish and be proud - if they've got nothing to hide, they've got nothing to fear.

I am of the opinion that the MPs signing the Early Day Motion are now also guilty of misusing their privileged position for defending their reputations. They just can't be trusted with anything.

Upsetting so many MPs, distracting them from lining their own nests and getting them all to sign something on the same day merits huge congratulations.

Feel free to have a pint on me from my License Fee (obviously declared as expenses)...

This raises an interesting question: presumably MPs file accounts and/or tax returns like the rest of the population.
1) do their accountants require receipts to sign off on expenses below Β£250? If not, how can they honestly sign off these accounts?
2) all expenses claimed by MPs - receipted or not – presumably incur no tax on the grounds that the payments received were cancelled out by the expenditure in the first place. But does HMRC challenge this, especially when 'expenses' can be larger than the MP's salary? Does an MP who claims 'expenses' for a constituency home where there is no mortgage (17k I think for Michael Martin) get the money tax-free? I think we should be told!

The system of MP's remuneration does need a root and branch reform but NOT by them. I may be a minority but I don't think their basic salary is all that generous. Perhaps that is why their expenses and other cash sundries are to an outsider arcane and liberal in their application. Pay them a market led basic salary oh, and also a pension in line with current commercial/industrial best practice - not the present over the top arrangement - and add to that a table of claimable per diem expenses, against receipts, for overnight stays in London and the travel costs incurred from/to their constituencies.
Irrespective of party political allegiance they are losing the confidence and trust of those they serve.

Well done Nick! The bottom line is if they have nothing to worry about why not be published and end any speculation. These people choose to enter PUBLIC LIFE ,shall I say that again, PUBLIC LIFE. If it to hot in the kitchen then they should get out. All this does is make joe public wonder what the real motivation is for them seeking public office. Service to their fellow people? I think not judging by the way these issues are handled. Conway, if he had any guts or morals would have left the house and resigned his seat right away regardless of the political by-election issue. If he was in the Armed Forces or any other sector of public life he would have faced far worse than he has now.
But no just like the rest he has his one rule for us and one for the rest to rely upon.
Of course not all MP's are like this and many are hard working and decent people. They just need to learn the humility that should come with public appointments and service. Put up or shut up and get on with the important jobs at hand!

Some of us are just as fed up with political reporters as we are with politicians!

In fact both animals are part and parcel of the same jungle and have much the same disgusting habits.

We hear references to the "Westminster Village" but it seems more like a Westminster dung heap to me, and maybe quite a few others, too.

Get in there Nick! Spot on for the reasons MPs resent this intrusion into their lives.

You may also want to ask them how they can justify using unpaid workers in their offices in the form of "interns" who, while being required to do real actual work for them, don't get paid the Minimum Wage which should be due to them.

And I'd be more than happy to give you chapter and verse on that on if you wanted.

Well done Nick! The bottom line is if they have nothing to worry about why not be published and end any speculation. These people choose to enter PUBLIC LIFE ,shall I say that again, PUBLIC LIFE. If it to hot in the kitchen then they should get out. All this does is make joe public wonder what the real motivation is for them seeking public office. Service to their fellow people? I think not judging by the way these issues are handled. Conway, if he had any guts or morals would have left the house and resigned his seat right away regardless of the political by-election issue. If he was in the Armed Forces or any other sector of public life he would have faced far worse than he has now.
But no just like the rest he has his one rule for us and one for the rest to rely upon.
Of course not all MP's are like this and many are hard working and decent people. They just need to learn the humility that should come with public appointments and service. Put up or shut up and get on with the important jobs at hand!

New Labour has consistently endeavored to erode civil liberties whilst in power. Time and again the cry has been 'the innocent have nothing to hide'. Acts of Parliament have been passed that curtail freedom and allow deeper intrusion into the lives of others without any proven justification. This has sparked outrage. For MPs to now find themselves under increasing public intrusion/scrutiny into their private affairs and to complain about it is either gross hypocrisy, poetic justice or an example of their isolation from public life. Distrusting any politician is not only natural but healthy and an excellent way of unearthing corruption and sleaze.

I neither expect nor want politicians to be little angels. I feel far happier with with people who are in it for self interest than I do with moralists who see it as their duty to make the world good. The motives of the former are clear to all and, with vigilance from the press, and pressure from the electorate we can keep the greed to reasonable levels. The latter are dangerous in that, convinced of their own virtue, they create the framework of tyranny.

Well done to the 52 (and counting) MP's who have called you to account for this flagrant abuse of your position. It reeks of desperation in trying to make a mountain out of a molehill!!

I for one would like to see the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ publish their expenses!! So that next time you come cap in hand to me for a TV licence fee I know who is to blame for it being wasted!!

And on another key point how many billable hours did "Mr" Robinson waste writing this trash when he should have been ATTEMPTING to produce quality journalism for the good licence payers of this country!!

If the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ wants to cry transparency they should remember who funds them!!

A plague on both your smug houses. In the world where I live and work, every thing is receipted and signed off. It's Inland Revenue rules.

My only concern with Nick Robinson's reporting of events at Westminister is that he always starts to tell us, the veiwing public, what his thoughts and beliefs are and also makes comments that are not newsworthy, but said to bolster his ego alone

It smacks of USA style reporting and I hate the fact that the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ has allowed this to happen, not just with Mr Robinson, but almost all reporters and news items shown

I recently watched the film 'Cromwell' and was struck by it's contemporary relevance. Following success against the corrupt monarchy Parliament proved itself to be equally corrupt. Self-serving, greedy and manipulative the politicians were more concerned with preserving their self-indulgent sinecures than in genuinely serving the nation. It would appear that so very little has changed over the centuries in the 'Mother of Parliaments'. I echo the words of Mr Cromwell to our modern replacements, "In the name of God go!"
As a nation with a long and illustrious heritage it is interesting to note that our Empire and great wealth was established at a time when MP's paid for the privilege to serve!

To be fair the reporting has been very harsh on the speaker fuelled by his decision not to publish certain information.

But people (like John Dunnion) seem to have forgotten the license payer pays your sallery as well Nick, will you practice what you preach?

Nick

Excellent for your CV to have this piece of your work deplored by 51 Labour MPs and Lembit Opik. Their combination of whining and attempt to intimidate does much more to sully the reputation of MPs then anything you said.

Next they'll be passing another motion deploring Mike Grannatt for resigning as a matter of honour, thereby daring to imply that something dshonourable has gone on.

These guys need to accept that if there is a large grey animal in the room which has a trunk and
trumpets like an elephant, then it's probably an elephant.

By the way, how come they chose to home in on you over the many commentators ?

Simple answer...all MP's expenses should be published on their individual websites starting from the new FY.

I suspect you will then find they are all whiter-than-white and entirely justified and beyond reproach.

And, coincidentally, the total expenses bill will decline in FY08/9 by 40-50 per cent.

If we think Westminster should be more transparent over expenses - - let's have a go at Bruxelles at the same time......

PANDORA ! - Where is your box?

At last more people are seeing through this self opinionated Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ "Reporter". I am forced to pay a license fee to listen to his spin as he interprets events. How much does he earn for this and what are his expenses. What is his background and qualifications which allow him to pontificate to the world "a la Robinson".I bet he stays in top hotels enjoying a lavish lifestyle at our expense. Perhaps he should enter the political arena to show how it should be done.Please report truthfully without bias suiting himself. Very disgruntled with Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ
Edd Cox

If they have nothing to hide, they have nothing to fear.

I imagine we won't be seeing much, then.

Keep up the good work, Nick. Make these grasping, selfish, crooked no-hopers sweat.

Keep up the pressure Nick, we rely on you to keep prodding and investigating on behalf of the great British public who individually can do very little

It is unfortunate that the campaign against the speaker is being orchestrated by newspaper journalists who belong to a trade even more notorious for fiddling expenses than honorable members. I hasten to add that Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ journalists are a breed apart and the only evidence of wrong doing by Nick Robinson is his history of membership of the Young Conservatives.

David

Has anyone explained yet why Derek Conway isn't under arrest for fraud??

NuLab got in 11 years ago because of the perception that Tories were on the take. There is, and always has been, a perception that politicians made up their income with their expense accounts. So what's changed?

Β£250 without a receipt? I suggest they take some advice from their own government departements, especially Revenue and Customs.

Running my own business, if I tried to put through Β£250 of expenses without a receipt then I'd be in deep doodah with HMRC.

I fail to see why an MP should be given dispensation from the rules and regs that the rest of us have to abide by.

I cannot speak for the population but I certainly can represent my views.
I do not trust MP's. I believe Parliament is discredited and what is more has done all the damage itself. To keep spouting that they are trustworthy and challenging the media to prove they have broken the rules is to miss the point entirely as they make the rules, and in any case its about how much they milk the rules to curruptly increase their income.
The gravey train wants looking at but not by any group of politicians or by the Senior Salaries Review Board, but rather by a combination of an independant Auditor and members from other groups who are not on a gravy train of their own.
Somehow we have to get ourselves a group of leaders who are truly honourable.

MPs do a very important job and I sure many work hard, but the growing perception is that some are there to line their pockets rather than act as a public servant. Other public servants in the police, NHS, armed forces, teaching, are almost expected to accept a lower than average salary package in the national interest and to work for the love of the job. Perhaps a good way forward would be to align MP's salary package with NHS staff, or another public service. That would be fair and open, and if it results in base salaries for MPs being a bit higher that's OK, provided it's an open system - that's not open to exploitation.

Great job Nick... destroying the public's faith in our politicians even more with innuendo and smear tatics. The tabloids will hold you dear to their heart when you get sacked, as you should do. I hope you never call yourself a journalist or reporter as real reporters are a thing of the past and you are the future... gossip and slime.

I wonder how many people reading this blog know that the person that they have to thank for the exposure of Mr Martin's outrageous expense claims is certainly not Nick Robinson (who has, like the rest of Fleet Street, merely jumped on the bandwagon) but Michael Barnbrook, a retired police inspector from Dartford, who was also the person responsible for initiating the case against Tory MP Derek Conway. Could this lack of transparency and due gratitude have anything to do with the fact that Mr Barnbrook is a prominent member of the BNP?

NuLab got in 11 years ago because of the perception that Tories were on the take. There is, and always has been, a perception that politicians made up their income with their expense accounts. So what's changed?

New Labour has consistently endeavored to erode civil liberties whilst in power. Time and again the cry has been 'the innocent have nothing to hide'. Acts of Parliament have been passed that curtail freedom and allow deeper intrusion into the lives of others without any proven justification. This has sparked outrage. For MPs to now find themselves under increasing public intrusion/scrutiny into their private affairs and to complain about it is either gross hypocrisy, poetic justice or an example of their isolation from public life. Distrusting any politician is not only natural but healthy and an excellent way of unearthing corruption and sleaze.

While MPs are systematically lining their own pockets, at the same time as telling the rest of us to 'do as they say, not as they do', the country is on the slide.

What a self-serving shower they are.

They should get on with doing the jobs they were elected to do, and if they don't like the scrutiny they are now being put under to deliver value for money (something which the rest of the country's workforce has to deal with every day) they should stand aside and let other, more capable, more trustworthy people take over.

The nation's public has little or no respect for its MPs. And their fawning to The Speaker illustrates why.

I used to work in the House of Commons, for various Lib Dem MPs. I think the ability of MPs and staff to spot what would, and what would not, pass the 'blush test' if made public - from hospitality accepted to what one claims for - should be a natural part of your political skills. If they think the only test, say for a claim for rent on a property the mortgage is paid on, is, 'Is it within the rules?', then they've missed the point. The rules don't given them moral absolution, or mean that they deserve our respect for crass bad judgement.

Get in there Nick! Spot on for the reasons MPs resent this intrusion into their lives.

You may also want to ask them how they can justify using unpaid workers in their offices in the form of "interns" who, while being required to do real actual work for them, don't get paid the Minimum Wage which should be due to them.

And I'd be more than happy to give you chapter and verse on that on if you wanted.

Dear Nick

It is interesting that are angry at you, but well done as clearly you touched a nerve

What gets me is the sheer double standards of these people

MPs hate the intrusion into THEIR private lives, however they themselves have passed laws which permit snooping at whim by any number of state organizations on ordinary people. Therefore they demand for themselves that which they have deprived everyone else of

MPs feel they are underpaid as they are in the public eye. Well they are more highly salaried than 90% of those they are supposed to represent. Furthermore a study by Leeds University found that more than half of ex MPS suffer drop in salary on losing seats, ,and that’s before they have submitted their dodgy expense claims. so it seems to me that based on what they actually command in the real world they are, in fact, vastly overpaid.

Mps resent being lectured by journalists who are often no better. Ok but most Journos work for private companies and aren’t helping themselves to Taxpayers cash. Furthermore if you aren’t happy with what you get then change jobs

MPs Resent the suggestion they are all at it. Apparently the average ACA expense claim is Β£17K per annum, no receipts of course. 180 MPS employ family members some of whom are undoubtedly doing so ala Conway. They only agreed to a 1.9% increase if they kept the Β£250 no receipt perk which is rather like agreeing a low pay rise as long as you can make up for it by embezzlement. Furthermore they fought a 2yr legal battle to prevent their EXps being disclosed then attempted to exempt themselves from FOI. At the same time these same people have passed laws cracking down on XP claims by self employed people. Another instance of 1 rule for them and another rule made by them for everyone else

MPS are angry that faith in Democracy is being Sapped. The fact they voted for the Iraq war in teeth of the wishes of their constituents making it clear that of those they claim to represent, hasn’t really helped either

So Nick please let MPs know that most of their constituents have nothing good to say about them

Whay are our representatives complaining? I have perused your comment again and find nothing offensive. Many of the points raised have been in daily newspapers regardless of their political bias. All published media has rightly held the Speaker to account given that he chairs the committee tasked to look at funding issues effecting the taxpayer. Regrettably, his own use of taxpayers money has also come under scrutiny which questions impartiality in dealing with public disquiet.

Having listened to four(perhaps 5)Speakers over the years, I think Mr Martin's performance in this role has been poor. He often flounders over sentences, allows the rabble to continue in the House and sadly, does not ensure questions to the executive are answered. Neither am I happy at those he has appointed to oversee the scrutiny. His calling on Sir Stuart Bell and David Maclean are insulting. Sir Stuart Bell was in the press regarding the employment terms of his son and Mr Maclean who does have mobility problems, made the press for buying a Β£4000 toy to get around his constituency. I therefore do not think any decisions made will reassure the public that whilst the law is not being broken then many are out to fleece the taxpayer.

Lest I am accused of bias I have supported the Labour Party for all of my adult life. Those MPs who seek to reduce public concern about accountability and performace in terms of"class" issues are making a serious mistake. You insult the electorate by assuming that we are unabale to distinguish between the rants of a few red top newspapers and the comment from the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ political correspondent. A reminder that you relied on the "middle" class to form a government and continual denial of the Speakers performance deficit is wrong.

Nick - continue to hold the MPs to account. It is your job to do so and I hope you are not overly concerned about the schoolboyish and old fashioned behaviour of those who signed the motion. They are certainly not in touch with the electorate. You have obviously touched a raw nerve - well done.

What's the problem? Any employer needs to know the total payroll expense. Without this, how is the employer able to determine value?

It's hard to feel sorry for MP's. Basic remuneration is only part of the lure of Office. Their pension accrual is awesome and many 'retire' into plum positions via contacts made during Office. There is also the lure of being in the public eye. One could go on. To measure the role as a function of basic salary is to misunderstand the picture. & let's face it, if it was that bad they could always resign & take a 'normal' job - funny, not many take that option (voluntarily). One wonders whether the signators shouldn't have more pressing matters to concern them.

Extraordinary behaviour by Mr Kilfoyle - one could be forgiven for thinking he has nothing better to do with his time. Maybe it's time for a pay cut! Where can we find a list of his fellow signatories please? I think they need reminding of the job they're employed to do.

How can the continued poor behaviour of our elected representatives be justified? They seem to have forgotten that they are there to serve us, the electorate, and not themselves.

Still, I'm amazed the 'Honourable Members' managed to get their snouts out of the trough for long enough to notice the growing disquiet and disgust amongst the public who are forced to pay for these spongers who ride the Parliamentary gravy train.

The lid has been lifted, exposing MP's sleazy practices to the cold light of public scrutiny, and they clearly don't like it. I wonder why...

Keep up the good work Nick!

Is it any surprise that todays MPs abuse the allowances system? Most work for their parties before being put forward for their seats by their bosses - other MPs. They get to see how the system works firsthand.

In addition, the majority, certainly Labour, have little or no experience of anything other than politics, and these are the people who tell we who live in the real world what to do and how to act. Amazing.

Personally, I have no respect for politicians whatsoever. They are self-serving, they lie, they never make mistakes, they abuse the system financially. And via parliamentary privilege they can say about one another things I would be prosecuted for. In the real world they would be in jail.

Aged 56, and having followed general elections with interest since 1964, I hereby vow that I shall never ever vote again.

Nick, keep up the good work and continue exposing these good for nothings.

Good on you Nick, lets open this door a little wider.

i find you a refreshing change of perspective and honesty, sorry if the MP's don't like it like someone posted earlier "don't shoot the messenger".

I for one would like to know how many lunches and dinners all these MP's buy each other in the so clled search for the truth all at the tax payers expense, even in Westminster Β£250 still buys a decent Claret. I have never seen a good restaurant go bust in Westminster.

it is a joke that often us "commercial types", cant get bookings for restaurants because they are full of you lot ! and what's more you don't want lunch with voters or interested 3rd parties because we don't print your opinions and cowardly off the record briefings through people like Nick. MP's we vote you in to speak up for us..so if there is something to say then speak up or stop moaning !

When will MPs realise that their posturing over this issue is deeply unattractive, it puts off voters (especially young people) and does nothing for their (fading) credibility. If they want to earn more money then they should forget politics & go into the private sector.

As a licence payer I don't feel I have anyright to demand to see NR's expenses. I do have the right, I believe, to expect someone at the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ to scrutinise them and have them under control. Nothing more. And do you know what - I'm pretty confident that if NR was playing fast and loose with his exes he'd be corrected. I have absolutely no such confidence in our elected representatives. There appears to be no process for controlling or scrutinising MPs' expenses other than the occasional public case when some journalist catches them with their fingers in the honey pot.

MPs should be paid the appropriate salary for the job (doubtless much more than they get today), and they should be allowed reasonable expenses and staff (paid for centrally) to do their jobs. But they should be under contract to do only that job, with no external paid interests, just like the rest of us.

It seems to me that it is high time that MPs were held to the same standards as teachers, doctors etc. We need to identify standards which can be measured and compared, then we can reward good MPs (just as we supposedly reward good teachers) and get rid of the bad ones.
So, what can we measure? Well, not much. MPs appear to keep themselves busy but what do they do? More to the point, what should they be doing?
1. encourage questions (and answer them) from constituents. Maybe - like dentists get paid per filling - MPs should get a small amount of money for each question answered.
2. attend Parliamentary debates and contribute to them. However, in the interest of reducing hot air (and thus global warming), there will be no additional payment for this.
3. sit on committees which frame new legislation. Given the way more than a few recent laws have been abysmally phrased - some sort of Benefit Years for Lawyers? - there should be no additional payments for this either, but fines will be levied if a law is found to be ambiguous.
4. MPs 'surgeries'. To be held where the people are, not in some club where the MP would like them to be (my local MP is actually very good about this), and at hours when people can get to them even if they have a job. Like doctors who can claim extra for holding specialised clinics, MPs should get additional payments for surgeries.
5. Work for other people. Like the Church of England's policy on a vicar's additional income, any additional monies earned must be declared and will be deducted from basic salary.
6. There are always more applicants than posts for MPs, and everyone knows all the real work is done by the civil servants . . . MPs should remember this when whinging. We all *know* we could do the job better than they are - ask anyone at any pub in the country *g*

Finally, MPs must remember that it was one of their number who said we didn't want people lining up to be teachers because of the high rates of pay.

Same thing applies to MPs.

This is all very amusing and one of the reasons why British politics is by far the most fascinating in the world. That aside, I really can't help but think that the key issue in all this, is that still MPs salaries are not set by some independent body. Each time the issue of their wages is raised, we get the riduculous spectacle of front benchers vetoing a raise that they badly want and their backbenchers probably need!

I have to be honest I do believe the money for being an MP is rubbish. I recognise this is a simplistic view as the allowances and subsidisations can be very generous. However this is only visible once you're inside the Westminster village. The sort of transparency I would like to see would have Politics viewed as a superb career that attracts the brighest and bravest thinkers in the country.

Maybe it's me but "if you pay peanuts, you get monkeys!"

Back in the good old days when I wuz a soldier not only did you not get any travel claim paid without receipts in full, but if you lost any of your personal equipment you were invited to get out your cheque book and pay for the replacement. The rule was that if you caused loss to public funds, then you personally reimbursed the public purse.

Good training for life in general as it tended to make you careful with other peoples money in later life.

Those who insist on using the 'Gorbals Mick' term really give the game away. How dare someone from such a humble background expect any respect. Middle England shows it's dark side yet again. Nick,judging from your arrogant and odious performance on 'Have I Got News For You', its about time you were taken to task.

Extraordinary behaviour by Mr Kilfoyle - one could be forgiven for thinking he has nothing better to do with his time. Maybe it's time for a pay cut! Where can we find a list of his fellow signatories please? I think they need reminding of the job they're employed to do.

How can the continued poor behaviour of our elected representatives be justified? They seem to have forgotten that they are there to serve us, the electorate, and not themselves.

Still, I'm amazed the 'Honourable Members' managed to get their snouts out of the trough for long enough to notice the growing disquiet and disgust amongst the public who are forced to pay for these spongers who ride the Parliamentary gravy train.

The lid has been lifted, exposing MP's sleazy practices to the cold light of public scrutiny, and they clearly don't like it. I wonder why...

Keep up the good work Nick!

A slightly different point maybe but can someone tell me why we need so many MPs?

Thirty years ago the government ran the car industry, the steel industry, the mining industry, the telecoms industry, owned the airline, the railways etc. Whole swathes of government departments have been privatised. Public involvement in companies such as BAe have been hived off. Why do we still need the same number of MPs? Surely they must have less to do as government no longer manages as many public services.

It terms of expenses when did the cost of getting to your work become claimable? and by Taxi !!! A second home on the public purse is utterly outrageous. If I apply for a job at the other end of the country I have to pay my accomodation costs, not my employer. MPs are public servants and they should work to the same rules they impose on the rest of the public sector where every penny is counted.

So where do we examine your expense claim?

Mr Robinson is one of the best political reporters that I have ever come across.

Every bit of applause to a man who can tell things as he sees them. Not only some great reporting of events, but also the ability to make politics quite a lot more interesting to many of us.

Thanks Nick.

The issue of how public money is used is always a sore point, especially when people feel they are not getting value for money.

The only reason that people are so curious as to how politicians are spending public money is because they are so disgruntled with the level of service that they are receiving. (Maybe is also relates to the fact that so much public money is wasted and then recouped from inappropriate sources e.g. pension funds, while MPs pensions are protected no matter what happens??) Also, name any other public or private organisation that would routinely allow the claiming of hundreds of thousands of pounds in expenses without proper documentation. Every company in the UK has to declare this level of information when they submit their accounts to the Inland Revenue and Companies House and this information can be easily be viewed through the web.

If people were truly dissatisfied with the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ's service then they would not doubt ask for a breakdown of funding and how the money was being spent. Currently, however, people can turn on the TV, radio or log in to the Internet and they will find a service that is provided by the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ so they can see what their licence fee is being used for (even if they don't agree with all the content).

New Labour has consistently endeavored to erode civil liberties whilst in power. Time and again the cry has been 'the innocent have nothing to hide'. Acts of Parliament have been passed that curtail freedom and allow deeper intrusion into the lives of others without any proven justification. This has sparked outrage. For MPs to now find themselves under increasing public intrusion/scrutiny into their private affairs and to complain about it is either gross hypocrisy, poetic justice or an example of their isolation from public life. Distrusting any politician is not only natural but healthy and an excellent way of unearthing corruption and sleaze.

Don't be put off, Nick.

We, the public, want you...no, we need you to be dogged. These guys work for us and, sadly, too many of them think they are immune from scrutiny.

I live in North Wales. My MP regularly travels by train between Constituency and Westminster. He travels first class, booking last minute. His fare is just short of Β£400 return. Sometimes he takes his lackey with him. For another near-Β£400.

Of my money.

Viva La Revolucion

Thanks to Tony Blair and 'New Labour', getting power and keeping it became the only goal of politics - and that means power for Tony and Gordon and .... whoever. With power goes money. MPs need to get back to holding principles not purses and expenses - and being prepared to loose power when mistakes are made.

There are only 646 MP's and they say it's too much hassle to keep a proper recipting system?
How many businesses with many times more staff seem to manage perfectly well doing it?

Take the running of their offices away from MP's and have it run by a seperate entity with proper oversight then maybe we can see what MP's are actually spending our money on.

MPs have a nerve. In any other walk of life if there were so many people wishing to do a job the pay rate would fall. They are not hard done by by the standards of the majority of the UK workforce. I for one am gld that we have intrusive journalists as with out a free press the abuses would be far worse.

While MPs are systematically lining their own pockets, at the same time as telling the rest of us to 'do as they say, not as they do', the country is on the slide.

What a self-serving shower they are.

They should get on with doing the jobs they were elected to do, and if they don't like the scrutiny they are now being put under to deliver value for money (something which the rest of the country's workforce has to deal with every day) they should stand aside and let other, more capable, more trustworthy people take over.

The nation's public has little or no respect for its MPs. And their fawning to The Speaker illustrates why.

If you've upset them that much, you must be getting close to something they don't want revealed.

Keep digging.

I have no interest whatsoever in what Nick earns, or what his expenses are. I assume that someone somewhere is paid to take an interest in this. However, no-one, other than investigative journalists and reporters, have the means and wherewithal to ask pertinent questions about our MPs, who award their own pay, claim whatever they want by way of allowances, award publicly funded jobs to their kith and kin with no regard whatsoever for equality, buy second houses from the taxes the rest of us pay, etc, etc, etc. Keep on digging, asking the questions, and printing the views Mr Robinson!

Well done Nick - if you can upset one MP a day, you're doing a good job - over 50 and you should get a bonus.

Thank you Nick Robinson for doing a wonderful job and holding these so-called public servants feet to the fire.

Ain't it funny how 'class warriors' all jump to protect the Speaker but they themselves have bottoms up and snouts in the trough. If they care so much about the common man why don't they come clean and at the same time take the wages an average worker is lumped with.

Just a question.
Is the Β£250 expenses allowance with receipt per day, or per month?

If it is per day, as their employer as a member of the voting public, could someone please send me a cheque for Β£7499,70 , as this is the equivalent of an expense of Β£249.99 per day for one month.

Then I can decide whether I keep it to invest, or give it to my MP for his hard work and services.
Anyone else know any jobs with a Β£7,500 per month bonus scheme?

Thought not...

The issue of how public money is used is always a sore point, especially when people feel they are not getting value for money.

The only reason that people are so curious as to how politicians are spending public money is because they are so disgruntled with the level of service that they are receiving. (Maybe is also relates to the fact that so much public money is wasted and then recouped from inappropriate sources e.g. pension funds, while MPs pensions are protected no matter what happens??) Also, name any other public or private organisation that would routinely allow the claiming of hundreds of thousands of pounds in expenses without proper documentation. Every company in the UK has to declare this level of information when they submit their accounts to the Inland Revenue and Companies House and this information can be easily be viewed through the web.

If people were truly dissatisfied with the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ's service then they would not doubt ask for a breakdown of funding and how the money was being spent. Currently, however, people can turn on the TV, radio or log in to the Internet and they will find a service that is provided by the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ so they can see what their licence fee is being used for (even if they don't agree with all the content).

I am outraged to observe that a mere journalist has been implying that some of our elected representatives use public funds carelessly.
What is the world coming to?

Extraordinary behaviour by Mr Kilfoyle - one could be forgiven for thinking he has nothing better to do with his time. Maybe it's time for a pay cut! Where can we find a list of his fellow signatories please? I think they need reminding of the job they're employed to do.

How can the continued poor behaviour of our elected representatives be justified? They seem to have forgotten that they are there to serve us, the electorate, and not themselves.

Still, I'm amazed the 'Honourable Members' managed to get their snouts out of the trough for long enough to notice the growing disquiet and disgust amongst the public who are forced to pay for these spongers who ride the Parliamentary gravy train.

The lid has been lifted, exposing MP's sleazy practices to the cold light of public scrutiny, and they clearly don't like it. I wonder why...

Keep up the good work Nick!

Yet more pantomime I see!

I'm interested to read the criticisms on here of Nick R's supposed support of the conservative party.

I have no idea of his personal politics (we've not YET got a "name and shame" public database of opposition supporters, nor do we need a Licence to Dissent - only Β£10!) but surely, whatever his personal views, the presence of an active and critical opposition is the only thing that stops any democracy from falling into a one-party dictatorship?

What absolute rubbish that MPs feel their pay is being held back.

Not half so much as mine and that of my colleagues in the NHS. This year we had a pay rise of less than half the real rate of inflation (RPI). I didn't notice many MPs sticking up for us then.

I’m going to the polling booth to spoil my vote by writing �No Vote� across it. I suggest everyone else do the same. The MPs have been in the pig’s trough for long enough, everything from your local Councillors with pals in the Building trade, to Euro MPs free jollies for just turning up for 5 minute work. If the elected don’t like being taken to account then they know where the door is.

Well done Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ for speaking on behalf of us.

Let me put the wider view. You are all public servants and you all have a duty to be straight forward and honest in every aspect of your work. Because of the nature of political life you are privy to information and opportunities that most members of the public will never see. We, the public, demand that you act with the integrity invested in your office. if you don't, and are found out, then we expect you to be treated the same as any other fraudster, liar and petty criminal. For too long politicians have exploited their position when they have been caught, with only a small number being made an example. The public mood is to put a stop to this and demand that you are treated no differently to us. No politician will disagree with these sentiments publicly but how many will continue to expect favouritism and gain advantage privately?

Both my employer and the inland revenue take great interest in every penny of my benefits and expense claims. Any benefits or expenses deemed not to be wholely and solely necessary are disallowed or taxable, and any benefit I receive towards housing, entertainment or living expenses are taxable. So, I would think most people have a big problem with MPs receiving the benefits tax free and not being required to justify claims as completely necessary. Speaker Martin may or may not have broken the rules, but he has without any doubt broken the spirit of the rules and thus trust of the electorate.

51 of those 52 who have signed are Labour MPs

Read into this what you will!!!

With their pay, expenses and money from extra House of Commons work, I very much doubt MP's make less than journalists.

Leave Nick out of it. I don't care about his salary and expenses. Let's stick with the MPs and not get drawn off the subject.

Why should MPs have ever been allowed to claim Β£250 without a receipt; that would be unthinkable in the private sector and would probably be disallowed for tax offset purposes. It smacks of the (now changed) huge car mileage allowances that MPs granted themselves.

I think that there should be a major INDEPENDENT investigation into MPs' expenses, and where appropriate, sums recovered from MPs'
future salaries.

But it is not just the money: the principle stinks!

Where abuses have taken place, let the names be published and let the voters show their disgust!

I dont trust any MPs, if they have nothing to hide they shouldnt worry. I suspect all MPs think of their expenses are another way to top up their wages.
As for media, nothing is reported "as is" anymore, every story has to have excitment and attract consumers, so they hype all stories until they bear no resemblance to the actual facts.

I dont bother withthe news anymore, just pick an odd story, but read it with the hype filter on max.

The UK seems destined to become as bad as the US, facts dont matter, its all just spin.

I suspect the difference between Nick Robinson's expenses and MP's expenses is that Nick's expenses, as no doubt are all Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ employees, only paid aginst receipts for justifiable items whereas MP's seem to be able to claim vast sums with no receipts whatsoever.

Time the Inland Revenue treated MPs allowances and expenses the same as the rest of us mere mortals. MPs are not the only ones who spend several nights away from home every week.

Given the salaries etc paid to "Captains of Industry", M.P.'s salaries for running Great Britain Plc are appallingly LOW!
Despite the sneers and innuendo of the likes of messrs Paxman, Humphrys, Robinson, Hoggart et al, most M.P's are honest, work crazy hours and deserve better than they get. Yes, many are prima donnas and love the status etc, but it's an insecure job, has to be re-applied for every 4-5 years and for most M.P.'s, once out, there's no sinecure waiting. we have a good democracy- don't trash it for cheap reputation polishing.
Gordon Thompson (not an M.P, don't know any, not related to any either) I

Like politicians, the desire to become a journalist should automatically debar you from ever becoming one. Nick Robinson clearly knows a thing or two about having ones snout stuck in the trough. For that very reason he will never publish his true exepense claims - expense claims paid for by practically every citizen in this country through a mandatory tax - because then we would all see he gets more money from the British tax payer than any elected politician. Nick Robinson is a dyed in the wool "Thatcherite", who has been looking for every opportunity to spread innuendo about any politician other than Tories. I thought the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ were supposed to be the great unbiased, fountain of truth - not a soapbox for right wing "wannabe" journo/politicians who clearly have their own agenda rather than reporting the news. I hold politicians and journalists in equal contempt because "nothing is ever their fault". A poor show all round.

Hmmm... lets be fair about this the EDM is just a way of deflecting the issue, the issue being the country's lack of confidence in the MP's that congregate in the House of Commons and their Β£100,000 + yearly expenses.
Any light shone in that direction will do nothing but good, and as for Mr Robinson's political leanings, surely when Andrew Marr has also been employed as a political correspondant that should not come into it.

all of us would like a job where you only had to stand up and say sorry to be forgiven for almost anything - our MPs need dragging kicking and screaming into the present day real world

I believe that the media does make a rod for its own back by often publishing stories that have little merit. However MPs have been tainted imorally ever since they voted to exempt themselves from FOI. On a slightly different note, I cannot understand why there was such a furore a few weeks ago about the MP who was bugged when speaking to a constituent. MPs are not security checked when elected and should face the same level of scrutiny as the rest of us. It is the country who elects/employs them after all.

Just an anecdote from me about expenses. The accountant's assistant in the firm I used to work for asked me once, at what time did I cross the border from Germany back into the Netherlands. I was puzzled until she told me: before 20.00 hours I had no right to a dinner on the train, only a sandwich.
J. P. WARD

I suspect the difference between Nick Robinson's expenses and MP's expenses is that Nick's expenses, as no doubt are all Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ employees, only paid aginst receipts for justifiable items whereas MP's seem to be able to claim vast sums with no receipts or justification whatsoever.

Time the Inland Revenue treated MPs allowances and expenses the same as the rest of us mere mortals. MPs should also remember that they are not the only ones who spend several nights away from home each week.

Perception is everything.

It doesnt mater whether its one or 100 that are 'bucking the system' the fact is some have been caught out and now the spot light is on them all, like it or not!

They are ( supposed to be ) public servants, therefore we have the absolute right, as do the journalists, to ensure we get to the bottom of this and if this means asking some difficult questions,tough!

Nick

I think the real reason for the Kilfoyle tactics lies in the desire of MPs not to be accountable to anybody for their actions. Peter Hain and his other colleagues believe that "error" is a defence against a strict liability offence.

Public and other money seems to be something that they wish to hide and the best form of defence they now believe is a concerted attack on those who seek to expose their hypocracies. Keep up the pressure we need to bring all of the Westminster elite to account for their use of other peoples money. Just think they want us to publicly fund their political party ambitions as well!

Beyond any doubt if you criticise the expenses of other you must be willing to divulge your own. By your own sword failure to disclose must lead us to think you have something to hide and you should resign. He who lives by the sword dies by the sword.

hmm.... another misquote from Nick.

The article above states that MPs will not need receipts for expenses under Β£250.

The Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ News website states that they will.

Which is it Mr Robinson?

Looking at this and also the Darling misquote non-story, you are now becoming the story.

all of us would like a job where you only had to stand up and say sorry to be forgiven for almost anything - our MPs need dragging kicking and screaming into the present day real world

Why should Nick Robinson have to make his expenses public? He's hardly likely to have 2 houses in tow (etc etc) so that he can do his job (paid for by the tax payer I hasten to add). Additionally I very much doubt he racks up Β£4k in taxi fares....

Yes, his salary is paid for by the license fee payer (but he's hardly likely to abuse that position like most MPs).

Whilst we're at it...Nick - do you employ any of your family to do your research?

Nick

I think the real reason for the Kilfoyle tactics lies in the desire of MPs not to be accountable to anybody for their actions. Peter Hain and his other colleagues believe that "error" is a defence against a strict liability offence.

Public and other money seems to be something that they wish to hide and the best form of defence they now believe is a concerted attack on those who seek to expose their hypocracies. Keep up the pressure we need to bring all of the Westminster elite to account for their use of other peoples money. Just think they want us to publicly fund their political party ambitions as well!

Nick's expenses are not relevant or the focus of the original issue here. We did not elect Nick; we did elect those Members of Parliament. As such they should be accountable for the public money they spend.

In any event, as a tax (and licence fee) payer, I think it would be for the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ to account for its spending - and not the private individuals that it employs.

On the issue of the Β£250 threshhold, I agree that all expenses should be receipted. Public trust and confidence will only be restored once we have transaprency and accountability...for MPs, that means adopting standards which are already followed by their public sector colleagues and private sector electorate. Get on with it please!

Nick

I think the real reason for the Kilfoyle tactics lies in the desire of MPs not to be accountable to anybody for their actions. Peter Hain and his other colleagues believe that "error" is a defence against a strict liability offence.

Public and other money seems to be something that they wish to hide and the best form of defence they now believe is a concerted attack on those who seek to expose their hypocracies. Keep up the pressure we need to bring all of the Westminster elite to account for their use of other peoples money. Just think they want us to publicly fund their political party ambitions as well!

After reading Nick's blog I wonder what his agenda is?
Is he really trying to get some hidden story out into the public consience, as is the job of every good journalist - Or is he driven by a hatred of left of centre politicians and will use his position to spread innuendo and half truths to sully an elected representative's reputation. Hmm I wonder ??????
And I thought the BBc was supposed to be impartial. Hmmm (again)
The one thing that is crystal clear is that every penny Michael Martin claimed has been open to public scrutiny - can we really say the same about Nick's salary and expenses which will dwarf those of Mr Martin - which coincidetally are paid from a mandatory tax on British citizens but which surprise surprise are NOT open to public scrutiny. i think we should be told.

There is a very easy way to sort this all out -

Cut the total number of MPs by half.

This will increase productivity greatly - something Gordon Brown has wanted from "his" private sector tax slaves, he can now acheive on his doorstep.

If all you do as an MP is spend time signing early day motions to gang up on a journalist then you are not doing the job you were elected to do.

And as for the MP who put forward the motion - where do you get the time to organise such a thing ? The rest of us are too busy working for the tax grabbing government to indulge in such self-obsessed buffoonery.

As for Mr Robinson and the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ - it is time to grow your horns again; the Iraq dossier was a long time ago - stop cowering behind crass stories such as this one - get back to serious and independent journalism about real issues before it is too late. By the way .. what happened to the Lisbon Treay, did it just evaporate ?

I cannot speak for the people of this country but I believe that many people rely upon the media to report the facts and only the facts this then allows people to make an informed decision on their MPs and indeed the Government of the day.

Far too much time is taken up by MPs and the Government pandering to every whim that the Media throws at them.

Whose in charge of this country "The Media"!

Nick you are a highly educated and respected journalist just report the facts do not try to be a celebrity on the back of other peoples misfortunes if they get things wrong.

It would be nice if MP's pay was linked to productivity, i.e let's have fewer of them every time they get a pay rise above inflation. After all they do less work than ever before with their paid helpers now handling most of the case work and background research. This was never the case 30 years ago.

Hmmm... lets be fair about this the EDM is just a way of deflecting the issue, the issue being the country's lack of confidence in the MP's that congregate in the House of Commons and their Β£100,000 + yearly expenses.
Any light shone in that direction will do nothing but good, and as for Mr Robinson's political leanings, surely when Andrew Marr has also been employed as a political correspondant that should not come into it.

Let me put the wider view. You are all public servants and you all have a duty to be straight forward and honest in every aspect of your work. Because of the nature of political life you are privy to information and opportunities that most members of the public will never see. We, the public, demand that you act with the integrity invested in your office. if you don't, and are found out, then we expect you to be treated the same as any other fraudster, liar and petty criminal. For too long politicians have exploited their position when they have been caught, with only a small number being made an example. The public mood is to put a stop to this and demand that you are treated no differently to us. No politician will disagree with these sentiments publicly but how many will continue to expect favouritism and gain advantage privately?

Nothing changes!

Elections are decided by the votes of the uneducated many for the corrupt few."

George Bernard Shaw.

I tried to be a local councillor in the town of Berkhamsted, in the county of Hertfordshire in the south east of England. I hoped to represent the interests of the people who elected me; instead I became an insignificant part of a bloated system designed to serve the personal interests of its employees and their cronies, especially the rich men who run big companies. Satisfactory local services are not being delivered. People who complain are usually lied to.
The government tries to pretend that there is not much wrong with the system. Meanwhile, local taxes go up by more than the rate of inflation every year. I expect this extortion will continue until civil disobedience persuades those complacent politicians to do something about it.

It is going to be an impossible task to self regulate expenses and allowances when the regulater and the recipient are of the same source.i.e. M.P.s.

The current system sounds as if it is a hotch -potch of allowances and expenses built up over time. What is needed is a clean sheet of paper with the question " How should MP's be remunerated?" I suggest that we can guarantee the solution would not be anything like the current structure - but would also create a salary structure which is commensurate with what a private sector employer would have to pay and that is certainly significantly greater than the present MP's basis salary. It is just plain wrong to compensate for salary inadequacy with "soft" expenses.

I feel public trust in politicians may never have been at a lower ebb than the present - irrespective of which Party one is talking about.

Why dont the younger and therefore perhaps less intransigent Members lobby for a massive overhaul - not just a review of expenses!

Misappropriating public funds used to be theft. Even if the law allows what the Speaker appears to think is legal , it is totally immoral and if he had an ounce of integrity, he would resign.Sadly we are saddled with a Prime Minister who himself (in spite of his oft' claimed "son of the manse" character) is inherently dishonest, and this seems to have been transmitted to the rest of our honouable M.P's who appear to have only one interest in life, keeping their snouts in the Westminster trough, happy in the knowledge that there is no authority to which they are accountable.

MPs receive FAR FAR higher pay than most ordinary people in this country. Cast numbers of these ordinary people are expected to live on less that Β£20,000 a year, and they are DISGUSTED as house prices are hyprf up by the Vested Interests, and the MPs buy flats to let using "expenses" to take out "Buy to Let" Mortgages. Thus, ordinary people are being forever squeezed out from ever being able to buy their own houses and set up a happy home for their families. The anger is fully justified. MPs salaries and expenses appear to ordinary people as absolutely enormous.

Beyond any doubt if you criticise the expenses of other you must be willing to divulge your own. By your own sword failure to disclose must lead us to think you have something to hide and you should resign. He who lives by innuendo dies by innuendo.

It is going to be an impossible task to self regulate expenses and allowances when the regulater and the recipient are of the same source.i.e. M.P.s.

The current system sounds as if it is a hotch -potch of allowances and expenses built up over time. What is needed is a clean sheet of paper with the question " How should MP's be remunerated?" I suggest that we can guarantee the solution would not be anything like the current structure - but would also create a salary structure which is commensurate with what a private sector employer would have to pay and that is certainly significantly greater than the present MP's basis salary. It is just plain wrong to compensate for salary inadequacy with "soft" expenses.

I feel public trust in politicians may never have been at a lower ebb than the present - irrespective of which Party one is talking about.

Why dont the younger and therefore perhaps less intransigent Members lobby for a massive overhaul - not just a review of expenses!

It’s fascinating to read the letters about Nick’s expenses - a blatantly obviously attempt at diverting attention. I would sincerely hope that he and other top reporters are paid higher wages and expenses than that lot considering the amount of blood sweat and tears they put into their job and an extra bonus – they want us to know the real truth – not the Cloud Cuckoo version. If we could only have a team of journalists as back bench hecklers.

Bernie, Slough

We can complain as much as we want but we know the commons will side with each other and hunker down until something happens to replace this in the headlines.
As other people have noted, the nearest anology really is the " snouts in the trough " one but I fear the only thing that would make these MP's take notice would be some form of public demonstration - a march or similar.
They need to realise how fed-up their wage-payers are at the continuing revelations of greed an self-interest.

Well done Nick.
Surely if our so called elected Represenatatives choose to go into public life they should do it for the good of their fellow countrymen and for the good of the country and they should perhaps be prepared to do it on a part time basis and to represent us for nothing. Perhaps they could claim an allowance of Β£5000.00per annum.No pension entitlement or any other benefit.An independent voluntary body then agrees to the salaries of staff at the House Of Commons and at the House Of Lords and any expenses involved in running parliament.Furthermore ex primeministers ought to fund their own security as they are earning huge amounts of cash on the speaking circuitand with other appointments.
If MPs need accommodation in London why does'nt the State buy a Warden attended block of apartments that are for the sole use of MP'S and Ministers whilst they have the privelege of representing us.By doing this perhaps we will get rid of the alleged sleaze and corruption that goes on.Oh I know i am being naieve.

Both my employer and the inland revenue take great interest in every penny of my benefits and expense claims. Any benefits or expenses deemed not to be wholely and solely necessary are disallowed or taxable, and any benefit I receive towards housing, entertainment or living expenses are taxable. So, I would think most people have a big problem with MPs receiving the benefits tax free and not being required to justify claims as completely necessary. Speaker Martin may or may not have broken the rules, but he has without any doubt broken the spirit of the rules and thus trust of the electorate.

MPs receive FAR FAR higher pay than most ordinary people in this country. Vast numbers of these ordinary people are expected to live on less that Β£20,000 a year, and they are DISGUSTED as house prices are hyprf up by the Vested Interests, and the MPs buy flats to let using "expenses" to take out "Buy to Let" Mortgages. Thus, ordinary people are being forever squeezed out from ever being able to buy their own houses and set up a happy home for their families. The anger is fully justified. MPs salaries and expenses appear to ordinary people as absolutely enormous.

Re comment 10:

The issue with MPs expenses is manifestly a cross-party issue. So how do Nick Robinson's claimed Conservative leanings affect it? (Surely all Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ reporters have political prejudices which they try and control- but clearly, it's only acceptable if those biases are pro-Labour, rather than pro-Tory.) I have seen no evidence of bias in his reporting: and that's the important thing. I have, however, seen lots of healthy scepticism. And I think that's a mindset whose necessity is becoming more obvious with every detached and self-righteous bleating from the "Honourable Members".

Keep up the good work Nick! The 'honourable members' clearly feel their exclusive and privileged lifestyle is under threat!

Well done Nick.
Surely if our so called elected Represenatatives choose to go into public life they should do it for the good of their fellow countrymen and for the good of the country and they should perhaps be prepared to do it on a part time basis and to represent us for nothing. Perhaps they could claim an allowance of Β£5000.00per annum.No pension entitlement or any other benefit.An independent voluntary body then agrees to the salaries of staff at the House Of Commons and at the House Of Lords and any expenses involved in running parliament.Furthermore ex primeministers ought to fund their own security as they are earning huge amounts of cash on the speaking circuitand with other appointments.
If MPs need accommodation in London why does'nt the State buy a Warden attended block of apartments that are for the sole use of MP'S and Ministers whilst they have the privelege of representing us.By doing this perhaps we will get rid of the alleged sleaze and corruption that goes on.Oh I know i am being naieve.

Can it really be true that he can claim Β£17,000 for his own house and then Β£7,500 on top of that for using it as an office. We the working class are sleep walking into stupididy. Of course we are led to believe they do it all for us. I ask you how can this go on in this day and age. Sack them all and start again with people that will do an honest days work for an honest days pay.

I think Nick Robinson is a slick, intelligent, and capable political correspondent, and he's not afraid to hand it out to the politicians when necessary (which is pretty often).
However I don't like the way the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ has started to use him in what I'd call 'real time commentary', where he sits listening to an interview in a news programme and then provides on-the-hoof comment. First of all it's not fair on the interviewee to know that his/her words are going to get an immediate comment from someone sitting in a back room, possibly with researchers (though not a lot of time for that). Secondly it short changes the many people listening who don't want instant commentary, but would rather hear the analysis perhaps an hour or two later, when the final article would benefit considerably from being thought-over. But as all media coverage seems to be sliding into the principle of 'never mind the quality, feel the width' I suppose that's a vain plea. (And I think if I had to choose, I'd rather have instant Nick than the adverts for the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ we now get exactly on the half hour, regardless whether the Today programme's over or not).

The more these labour MPs complain, the more I reckon Nick is on the right track !!

What is it the police, etc are always lecturing us: "If you're innocent, what have you got to hide ? ".

Get your snouts out of the trough, all you parliamentary piggies !!

Expenses with no receipt? Oops, out of pocket sorry. thats always been enough on the claim form hasn't it. Put all the oops on a consolidated web site for 'the public' scrutiny.

Nick, the trouble is whether justified or not there is a feeling amongst an increasing number of people that you are not as objective as you might be. Indeed, it might surprise you to know, some even perceive you as being anti-Labour and thus would share Peter Kilfoyle's viewpoint. As for transparency yes I think I'd like to see your expenses as my licence fund contributes to your wages.

The funniest thing about this discussion is that both the media and the politicians look equally silly. Do any of you realise how pretentious, insular and arrogant you ALL sound to ordinary people outside the Westminster Village?

I can't wait to see Nick's expenses - surely it must be done if the journos are to regain the moral high ground (OK foot hills, OK sewers). Then perhaps we can have a feeding frenzy to get the expenses of EVERY lobby journalist! What fun!

Seriously its not often I agree with the journalists but the "holier than thou, how dare you ask me that" attitude of MPs is waring a bit thin. It is public money after all and this is 2008 not 1760! Imagine the outcry in government if local authorities allowed councillors to appoint their own staff (let alone members of their family)and charge expenses upto Β£250 without so much as a receipt! In fact government has outlawed this behaviour by equally democratically elected representatives. It cannot be right that this cosy privilege for MPs continues in the 21st century. I supsect the culture of the place is far worse from the point of view of reinvigorating or damaging our democracy than any offences actually committed. That's what needs to change.

I think Libby Purves got it right in the Times this morning:

Has John Major died of laughter yet? Has anyone checked on him?

So, the finest Club in Westminster rallies to one of its own. No surprises there then. I would not have been surprised, but rather amazed were it otherwise. After all, the best form of defence remains attack. Free Speech is one of the first victims of a control culture, ours is well advanced. Were 50 plus MPs to display similar concern for citizens welfare, rather than their own, now that would make a change. Perhaps we can anticipate initiatives to succour Farepak victims? How about some evidence of concern for Post Office closures? No? What ever happened to trust?

The more these labour MPs complain, the more I reckon Nick is on the right track !!

What is it the police, etc are always lecturing us: "If you're innocent, what have you got to hide ? ".

Get your snouts out of the trough, all you parliamentary piggies !!

Spot on Nick. As far as I'm concerned they are all a bunch of dishonourable thieves only out to look after number 1 and have 'power'.
The fact that they close ranks (52 publicly and the other 600 or so by their deafening silence) shows that not one of them is prepared to stand up for their principles.
As for Michael Martin, does he really think it boosts the public's confidence in MP's that the man investigating their expenses is being exposed for dubious practices himself. And yes he may escape on a 'technicality' but that just underlines the sleaze and 'I couldn't give a toss' attitude of these so called honourable gentlemen.
To all you MP's, IF YOU WANT YOUR HONOUR BACK, STAND UP AND BE COUNTED AND EXPOSE THOSE THAT ABUSE THIS MOST TRUSTED POSITION. Until that time, you are no better than them and deserve all the contempt you get.

PS Michael Martin shouldn't be speaker anyway. It was not the traditional turn of a Labour MP. But the 'honourable' Labour MP's went against this honourable tradition because it didn't suit their selfish needs.

Well done , Nick - I knew those bloggers who accused you of going over to the 'dark side' and being too supportive of the Government were wrong - you ARE a professional and unbiased commentator after all...

I strongly support any drive for transparancy and control over expenses. MP's are elected public servants, the public should decide what they should be entitled to. If you don't like the deal then change job. I am sure thousands of other public servants would love to even have one property paid for by expenses. I have yet to meet an MP that seems to struggle to survive on the salary they receive!
***Please Nick can you also show more transparancy with your manipulation of stories to favour a certain political party. As your wage is paid by licence fees unbiased reporting is preferred. Your coverage of nepotist/inventive job creationist Derek Conway was weak, it often seemed to excuse him and defend him. Nick if he is proved to be a fraudster using tax payers money to pay his family for doing no work you may want to let a real journalist create some more suitable stories. Maybe a switch to royal correspondance would be best.

Nick,
That 52 MPs have complained about your jouralism can only serve as a credit to your journalism.

I found the applause Mr Speaker Martin recieved from our ellected representatives for taking Β£24,500.00 a year from the public purse for a house without a mortgage, disgusting beyond words.

The air must be so thin at the top of their ivory tower, I think they've all gone bananas.

And as for those rather dubious comments trying to compare the moral obligation of our ellected lawmakers with bbc journalists, give it up. You merely take your weak argument to the realms of the rediculous.

"Singapore pays their MPs salaries that are competitive with those of private companies in order to guard against corruption and attract talent to an important job. Perhaps we should follow suit and increase confidence in our democratic system by paying our MPs a salary that befits their expertise and effort and stop this ludicrous expense corruption."

It's illegal to pay below the minimum wage these days.

Frankly they should be paying us (the taxpayer) if their wage is supposed to befit their "expertise" and "effort".

Well unless it was "expertise" and "effort" into milking the expense trough, in which case they yes they'd be very highly paid.

The reality is that just about everyone other than those who inhabit the Houses of Parliament has to account at a detailed level for all money and payment in kind that they receive from their employers over and above their salaries. Thye difference between right and wrong is learned quickly as the claims are presented to the boss for approval and thereby reimbursement. We all know what happens to people who are inveterate fiddlers of their expenses,

However, when it comes to MPs they decided to put themselves above reproach on the basis that they were all 110% houourable and that their expenses didn't need to be supported with appropriate documentation because they were beyond reproach.

Now we know that this is not true and that many MPs, to use the venacular, are 'fiddling' their expenses to the extent that the whole topic has been sent for 'review' in the hope that the subject will be overtaken by some other crisis arising from government incompetence and duly forgotten.

If any of the naughty boys and girls in Westminster ever find themselves having to really work for a living in the real world, they will be in for a very rude awakening. That may happen to quite a number of them a bit sooner than they think. There will be little sympathy for them when it does.

By any normal standards, MP's expenses and their accounting for them are totally and utterly indefensible.

Claiming for expenditures not made (eg housing) is in any other walk of life - fraud.

Refusal to be transparent proves they feel guilty and have something to hide.

Personally I think Nick is too soft on MPs: there is NO reason I can think of that their behaviour is acceptable.

Thank you Nick.
When will MPs accept that they should claim expenses just as most employees do - with receipts and explanation. And there are a few who don't appear to earn their salary either - in private Companies they would be demoted or fired after the legal warnings.

Rather than hold an enquiry about M.P.'s expenses, the solutuion is simple. Have them comply with exactly the same conditions for claiming expenses as the civil service do and local Government and at the same rates.

I would be satisfied the same level of scrutiny would be in place and it may allow M.P.'s to get in touch with reality, 23.8 P per mmile for car expenses for example.

Extraordinary behaviour by Mr Kilfoyle - one could be forgiven for thinking he has nothing better to do with his time. Maybe it's time for a pay cut! Where can we find a list of his fellow signatories please? I think they need reminding of the job they're employed to do.

How can the continued poor behaviour of our elected representatives be justified? They seem to have forgotten that they are there to serve us, the electorate, and not themselves.

Still, I'm amazed the 'Honourable Members' managed to get their snouts out of the trough for long enough to notice the growing disquiet and disgust amongst the public who are forced to pay for these spongers who ride the Parliamentary gravy train.

The lid has been lifted, exposing MP's sleazy practices to the cold light of public scrutiny, and they clearly don't like it. I wonder why...

Keep up the good work Nick!

Beckett hit the nail on the head, but she neglected to look at why we, the nasty little public, love it so much. These may well be nasty little stories, but they have the nasty little whiff of truth and are about a nasty little man, who seems to me to be an inflated, bullying, egotistical hypocrite.

Politicians wonder why we hate them so much. Well, I'll tell you why. Those nastly little people in Westminster have made our lives an expensive misery. The country is FLOODED with immigrants, we are spied on like no other people on earth, Brown et al lie to us daily and for the past 10 years have piled stealth tax on stealth tax for no return whatsoever in any aspect of life or infrastructure in this country (expect, possibly, in Labour voting areas). Almost everyone I talk to hates living here and many ordinary people (past Labour voters) would vote BNP if given a chance. And make no mistake, that vote would not be a vote for racism - it would be a mass protest vote AGAINST the increasing loss of democracy in this nasty little country, and a call to our elected politicians to LISTEN TO US before it really is too late.

The only way to stop this mess is that we do the following

give MPs a flat rate of pay where they have to fund everything they do out of that amount.

bring state funded parties

bring in PR as the voting norm

this will stop the rot

I too believe that we should see Nick Robinsons expenses.

If there is a suggestion that an MP is a hypocrite, then the media converge on him/her.

Yet for some reason journalists have the ability to say something, (infact wreck peoples careers! not to mention confidence in our whole parliament)
- whilst beleiving and acting in completely the opposite manner.

If Nick is to have any real credibility he should publish his expenses and demonstrate how worthy he is to receive this public money.

I can't quite understand all the ad hominem atacks on Nick that have been submitted as comments. So he was once a Conservative party member; So what? I've never seen any indication in his reporting that he's anything but scrupulously neutral and even-handed to all parties. The same could be said of Andrew Marr, who as I recall was a member of the Labour party but didn't allow any bias to creep in.

I think what's happened is that NR has displayed a general garment and a few rather sensitive Labour supporters have claimed that it's cut to their fit....
They should remember that this whole business started with Conway, and I don't recall Nick holding fire on that one out of party loyalty.

Keep up the good work, Nick, and keep trying to get those spineless MPs to go on record about our hopeless speaker. I personally would love to hear them say in public to us what they've been saying to you in private.

I am often critical of the media, are recently the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ, but I think Nick is spot on in his two entries. I am glad that he suggests possibilities which we wouldn't necessarily have thought of (he did after all describe them as 'theories'). Keep it up Mr Robinson.

I too believe that we should see Nick Robinsons expenses.

If there is a suggestion that an MP is a hypocrite, then the media converge on him/her.

Yet for some reason journalists have the ability to say something, (infact wreck peoples careers! not to mention confidence in our whole parliament)
- whilst beleiving and acting in completely the opposite manner.

If Nick is to have any real credibility he should publish his expenses and demonstrate how worthy he is to receive this public money.

Nick, please publish the 52 (and counting names).

I'd like to see the membership of this porcine list - on the basis that it is good to know one's enemy.

There seems to be a larger than normal response to this particular issue?
Any lessons to be learned from this MP's?!

Politicians will say or do anything to gain power and when they have won it they will say or do anything to hang onto it. Too many of them are characterised by deceitfulness, arrogance, and venality. What man would wish his daughter to marry a politician?

Contrats Nick for putting the proverbial cat amongst the pigeons.

I salute you for attempting to bring to our attention the attempts by a bunch of corrupt MP's to hide their expenses and stay on the gravy train for as long as they are in Parliament. There must be standards in public life and if an MP objects to people nosing in his/her private affairs, then they must think long and hard about the erosion of civil liberties which they have allowed in this to fester in this country, or they must leave politics.

For too long, we have been run by a bunch of egotisitical 'old farts' who have no respect for their constituents who voted them in. I would go so far as to say that every expense over Β£5 needs to be accounted for with MPs refusing to acceed to this demand having the wip withdrawn and being forced to stand down at the next election.

How about agreeing to publish your expenses, but only items over Β£250?

One thing is for certain. Government bodies, should not set their own salaries.

That is occurring in the U.S., and it is a joke that highly paid politicians are getting raises, while state and federal rank and file employees, are not.

Like all employees and self-employed persons, a journalist's expenses are subject to HM Revenue and Customs rules and if not eligible, are taxable. An MP's expenses are tax free and subject to no such scrutiny.

I would suggest that it is high time that MPs were brought into line with the rest of us.

you're a cruel man, Nick.

Have pity on our impoverished MPs who have to survive on a mere Β£400 per month food allowance with just the odd unreceipted Β£250 to help. Also, the poor sods are allowed two homes but the taxpayer only picks up the tab for one of them; there must be some danger that they might have to use some of their salary to pay for everyday costs, like those of us in the real world. Luckily, they have nice little earners like quangos. directorships and the odd bung to keep the wolf from the door - and provide an exotic holiday or two, or three to relieve the stress they suffer while working out new and ingenious ways to pamper themselves from the public purse.

It's about time that MP's realised that they work for us and not the other way around.

If we want to know what their expenses are, then we demand to know.

Many in the private sector have had to account for every single expense and receipt for quite some time. Why shouldn't MP's?

Is it because the IRC might start raising eyebrows about what is being claimed and stop it? Oh - just like it has applied its rules to the rest of us peasants!

Whenever there are rises for people in the public sector there have to be cuts in numbers or restrictions in allowances. MP just vote themselves more money but their numbers are never cut. Moreover, it is not like there is a shortage of people to do the job, they line up in vast numbers. If it is so popular then we can afford to pay them less. After all Β£60k plus extraordinarily generous allowances would be welcomed by most of the population.

In addition most of them do not have a job apart from whining about their opponents and Peter Kilfoil is a prime example of this.

What's astonishing is the degree of vitriol Nick has been receiving from a small minority who ridiculously put his reporting down to bias when MPs of all parties are tarnished by association. Are they New Labour policy advisers? Nick's own expenses are neither here nor there. I'm sure they're impeccably honest, just as I have no doubt that others at the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ abuse the system. This is because such systems will *always* be abused. For heaven's sake, I know of a fundraiser at a major national charity who put in - and had accepted - an expense claim for a coffee and flapjack on her way to work! But at least the necessity of providing a receipt meant that a framework for scrutiny existed. The problem with our sorry MPs is that they seem unable to recognise that having a threshold below which receipts are *not* required institutionalises abuse and makes the electorate doubt even the ones who retain a shred of honour.

Whenever there are rises for people in the public sector there have to be cuts in numbers or restrictions in allowances. MP just vote themselves more money but their numbers are never cut. Moreover, it is not like there is a shortage of people to do the job, they line up in vast numbers. If it is so popular then we can afford to pay them less. After all Β£60k plus extraordinarily generous allowances would be welcomed by most of the population.

In addition most of them do not have a job apart from whining about their opponents and Peter Kilfoil is a prime example of this.

I have thought for a long time that Nick and several other journalists have moved from being the reporters of news and gossip in the village of Westminster to being the winders up of gossip.

Even if it is true, aren't there more important things going on in the village? It reminds me of something that happened early on in my teaching career. Parents got worked up about a teacher occasionally picking his nose, when they should have been complaining about work never being marked.

Nick's analyis is used to be excellent, but now he only seems to get excited at the potential of a poltician's personal embarrassment.

Report on politics not on politicians!

I stopped reading at "MPs work hard". They should try having a REAL job where there are MEASURABLE RESULTS. A job where you are HELD ACCOUNTABLE for hitting ridiculously difficult TARGETS. Not targets you choose but targets that are foisted upon you. Try a job where you have NO SAY in what your pay rise will be. A job where you count yourself lucky if you get a pay rise at all, even when you have achieved the near-impossible targets! None of these self-serving parasite MPs would last five minutes in such a job. But that is the lot of the other 99.9% of the working people these parasites are only too happy to tax.

The number of MPs should be reduced to 240, then they could be paid Β£200,000 pa including expenses.

A certain late night talk show presenter on national radio has recently been running a campaign to get his listeners to vote every single existing MP out of office at the next General Election.Whether t his idea is remotely feasible or not is doubtful,but he does have a point.Too many MPs take the great HONOUR of being elected to parliament for granted.They don't even sem to realise they are there to represent their constituents,not their party whips.No wonder that politicians are held at an all tim elow in public esteem.I personally am increasingly contemptible of the vast majority of them.The rare exceptions,like George Galloway,are few and far between.

Well done Nick!

Our government seems to still be labouring under the illusion that journalists simply exist to parrot the garbage produced daily by their taxpayer-funded press officers and personal advisers.

If you have irritated this hypocritical, third-rate bunch I would take it as confirmation that you are doing your job effectively - thank you and keep at it.

Well done Nick!

Our government seems to still be labouring under the illusion that journalists simply exist to parrot the garbage produced daily by their taxpayer-funded press officers and personal advisers.

If you have irritated this hypocritical, third-rate bunch I would take it as confirmation that you are doing your job effectively - thank you and keep at it.

We are the most intrusive of all surveylance societies. We have CCTV cameras everywhere and endless databases instigated at the hand of civil servants and politicians. The Government seems to have had no problem in empowering 600 or more agencies to open our mail, tap our telephones, read our emails and all even without even letting us know it's happening. This is all so as to prevent misbehaviour in us. Perhaps they should not see it so unreasonable that we should do the same thing to them.
Their howls of protest regarding their own privacy seem to be hypocrytical in this light.

Thank you Nick Robinson for doing a wonderful job and holding these so-called public servants feet to the fire.

Ain't it funny how 'class warriors' all jump to protect the Speaker but they themselves have bottoms up and snouts in the trough. If they care so much about the common man why don't they come clean and at the same time take the wages an average worker is lumped with.

Nick
While I often do not agree with your analysis I always agree with the issues that you pick to cover. As a political journalist you have to pose challenging questions to those we have elected. I find the reaction of our Parliamentary Representatives to your reporting depressing. They seem to have forgotten that while the institution might be 'sovereign', they are not. They are representatives and as such accountable to the public, not themselves. Part of this means being asked questions, challenged and made to account for their actions by the press on our behalf.
Keep up the good work

Nick - well done - and to those creeps complaining about you journos - who on earth is going to keep the cheating MP's in line. - They wont do it themselves.

I've yet to see an uncontested parliamentary seat - so if they don't like the conditions, MPs should step aside for someone who does (ie join the real world of jobs). When they make comparisons to the industry salaries, it's a joke - if they want an industry salary, go get an industry job! BTW, I would apply the same rule to the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ - it's a public service and a priviledge to work at the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ - the public should not fund Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ salaries to compete with industry - if Nick Robinson or Jonathon Ross want big salaries, go work for a commerical company, not a publically funded one!

What is the average income including expenses,allowances, directorships etc, for an MP. Knowing this would allow us to compare them with a GP whose publicised income includes all of their expenses,allowances and non core income.

THE TROUBLE WITH THE PIGS WHO HAVE THEIR SNOUTS IN THE TROUGH IS THAT THEIR PAST LEADER IS NOT THERE TO GUIDE THEM, HE'S TROTTING AROUND BIGGER TROUGH'S AND GETTING FATTER ON THE PROCEEDS.

I'm just a housewife from North Hampshire and really know very little about a few subjects and virtually nothing about everything else. But I know this, my partner earns a good wage, until the tax man gets it and gives it away to benefit scrounging scum, hopelessly run Northern financial institutions and now MP's wives for their taxis on shopping trips.

With a council tax at nearly Β£200 a month because Hampshire has to cover 70% of its running costs and is bottom on the list of Government subsidy, and fuel costs so high to cover the massive profits of the gas and electricity companies, we simply can't afford to live a moderately comfortable life.

We are in debt, have no savings and haven't been on holiday for more than four years. We are both university educated and contribute greatly to our Country, my partner by being employed, me by bringing up two bright children, running community groups like play schools WI, helping at the village school, running a village magazine etc, and yet we are constantly fleeced at every possible opportunity, and we just keep on handing over the money.

Please, someone make it stop!

Nick,
Mr Kilfoyle's Early Day Motion is nothing but a smokescreen to deflect public interest away from the continuing, but now largely un-reported, investigations into the various political donations scandals. The expenses scandal is just the latest detail in the culture of casual corruption to emerge from the UK political system.

So long as MP's tolerate the behaviour of individuals such as Peter Hain, Harriet Harmon, Jack Dromey, Tessa Jowell and David Mills, who claim to be completely unaware of the source of thousands of pounds (or even hundreds of thousands of pounds) that they are directly responsible for, then all MP's deserve to be "tarred with the same brush".

Public confidence in Parliament will increase only when the law is seen to apply not only to the general public but also to the lawmakers. I still wait for someone inside the "system" to find the courage to promote the prosecution of corrupt law-breakers, whoever they may be.

MP's should not table motions in the commons regarding the expenses of Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ journalists. To do so undermines the independance of the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ and makes them accountable to parliament - even MP's seem to not want this accountability!

Here's an idea. How about we limit MP's pay to about 20,000, after all they are supposed to be looking after our interests not their own. We, the tax payer through a carefuly monitored system will employ all of those the MP's deem important. This will include all the travel and living expenses claimed.
How many MP's would we have left?

Well done Nick, you hit the nail on the head, thats why they are so flustered. The taxpayer is grossed out and the spending of the likes of speaker martin. The insult to injury is that instead of accepting the shame and saying sorry they wheel out professional bloodsuckers like Blunket to justify the unforgivable. Shame on them all

My local MP apparently claimed Β£148060 in expenses and allowances last year (and yes, he employs his wife as his secretary). Amazingly, he is 119th in a list of MPs expenses. This means 118 of them spent more than that.

It gets worse - while the lowest (so 645th) claim for expenses last year was Β£44551 (Philip Hollobone, Kettering), the 600th in the list was Β£112,215.

As far as I can see Mr Hollobone was the only MP to claim less than his salary in expenses.

Personally, I don't care about Nick Robinson's expenses. The analogy between the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ and Parliament in this context is misplaced - I do not vote for Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ employees, I do not have to have a TV, the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ, unlike my MP, does not purport to speak for my interests. And in fact I am fairly sure the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ has the same kind of expenses system that pretty much every other employer operates - receipts for expenses, signed off by somebody more senior than you and awkward questions asked if there seems to be a pattern of unusual or unjustified spending.

Quite how 500 MPs managed to spend over Β£126522 on expenses is, however, both a mystery and a huge concern to me.

What a waste of Order Paper to put down an EDM like this! I know Kilfoyle must be at a bit of a loose end with no prospect of returning to a high profile role anytime soon, but this is pretty silly.

I never fail to be amazed at the underhand tactics of our elected officials. I am a serving officer in the RAF. I consider myself fortunate to be able to serve my country, as, I am sure, do some MPs. But, I suspect there the similarity ends. After 27 years' service, my salary is close to that of a backbench MP. However, my allowances are subject to the whims of the treasury. The military's allowances package was slashed two years ago. We have an automated 'system' for pay and allowances which is demonstrably failing (I am currently owed over Β£1000, going back almost one year because 'the system' cannot deal with my particular situation). I am not allowed to use air miles I gain from job-related trips for private use; I certainly cannot employ my wife - she has had to give up her career because of my overseas posting; if I falsify any allowances claims I get court-martialled: I would lose my job and my pension. Oh, and every now and then I can go somewhere where folks will shoot at me. Perhaps I should stand for Parliament?

I regret to say that MPs have brought this upon themselves and most certainty they do in fact all seem to be at it.

HM revenue comes down fairly hard on tax dodgers.

Therefore I am suggesting that they would have a field day if all MPs were subject to the highest level of HM tax inspectors' scrutiny.

And why not there are accountable to the people they serve are they not?

It disgusts me that such high-handed comments emenate from within Parliament. The members, it needs to be recalled are there, in the High Court of Parliament by vote of the people, but they forget that after election day, plus 1. Were that many members might be worthy of that high office in demeanour and attitude.
Such a motion does not encourage confidence in the electoral process, of politics in general, or the level of integrity of the incumbents.
A serious rethink is needed on what and why ALL MPs are doing and why they are doing it, but please do not plead poverty to me and that journalist are paid more than they.
When a more sensible, equitable pension provison is in place for M.Ps, I might show an interest.
The present pension arrangemenst are obscene in the extreme; they know that, like it and are as 'pigs around the trough'.
But then I am told that our MPs are as little angels in comparison with other EU countries. Mon Dieu! Long live Nick Robinson and his reporting!

Of the 49 EDMs on the Parliament website only 2 have more signatoires than Mr Kilfoyles "rant" again Nick Robinson which merely leads you to think they're terrifed of the public having any inkling as to how they use/abuse their expenses system.

People nothing will change the odd one gets thrown to the wolfs but all these people are dishonest by default. which serviceman gets Β£23,000 for being away from home. People are homeless and hungry on our own streets and they can claim Β£7,500 just for working from home oh that will be another Β£17,00 per year to pay for there own house. We are sleepwalking into Stupidity. Get rid of the lot of them because if you think they do it to serve the country get rid of all the perks and watch them run.

If I comitted benefit fraud - claiming payment's from the State when I had no need for such payments - I'd rightly be arrested and prosecuted. But when MP's do it it's not fraud. I can't understand this.

Martin comitted a fraud by claiming for his house which he ALREADY owned. I can't see how anyone can defend this.

It's no wonder MP's and politicians are held in such contempt by the public, when such fraud is allowed to go unpunished.

Good on David Winnick for asking impertinent questions yesterday, instead of mooing and gloating in support of the Speaker like his useless colleagues.

Kilfoyle's outburst will reassure us taxpayers NOT!

Like a modern day Luther ,Nick Robinson posts his daily theses on the state of parliament today.Yet there is no " compelling or overlapping theory " on why MPs get upset over the anti-Speaker campaign.There is simply the fact that there are double standards at play.Now that the Information Commissioner has reported and the Speaker's Committee has accelerated its timetable ,will the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ do the same for its publicly - funded employees as it demands of MPs,and publish their expenses?

This government has imposed rules and regulations on both the civil service and the military on how to account for claims and expenses. Instead of inventing a new system, I propose that they follow the one that they impose on others!

Come on Nick, you've seen the responses,publish details of your expenses and perks/freebies or be damned as a smug, sanctimonious hypocrite!

Is not the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ scrutinised by an independent board?
MPs are scrutinised by....MPs.
The Chair of which does not have the confidence of the public.
Oh, but it is all the press's fault. Obviously.

Nick,
don't let anybody bully you. If you find yourself without a job for having carried out a democratic duty in a democratic (?) Country we will start a generous collection for you.
While you are at it I wonder if you can help me unfolding a mistery. One would expect a new MP to take some time to fully understand how the expenses system works. How come the top claimant (to the tune of well over 100k) is one of these fabricated "Labour icons" elected for the first time only a couple of years ago? I am sure that those MPs who have been in Parliament for a lifetime must be "slightly envious!"

Im amazed this shower of rogues has the bare faced cheek to feel agrieved at the great unwashed questioning their income and expenses

then again perhaps its the only emotion they have left - since it appears that duty, responsibility and burning shame have all long since been surgically removed from each and every one of them.

Nick,
don't let anybody bully you. If you find yourself without a job for having carried out a democratic duty in a democratic (?) Country we will start a generous collection for you.
While you are at it I wonder if you can help me unfolding a mistery. One would expect a new MP to take some time to fully understand how the expenses system works. How come the top claimant (to the tune of well over 100k) is one of these fabricated "Labour icons" elected for the first time only a couple of years ago? I am sure that those MPs who have been in Parliament for a lifetime must be "slightly envious!"

Nick,

you are spot on, you have hit a nerve and got a reaction. In any other walk of life the expenses system of M.P.'s would not be allowed, full stop.

As for the comments that the speaker is already looking at reducing the Β£250 that can be claimed without submitting a receipt, it is a further indiciation of jus how far he is out of touch relaity. They, as all other public employees do, should have to submit a reciept for all claim, down to and including a penny.

Instead of this expensive enquiry why don't they just lift whole sale the system public employees have when claiming expenses. Also they should be allowed to claim for the same amount, e.g. 23.8 per mile travel. This may open their eyes to what the rest of the public have to accept. Unfortunately I do not think they will do this, they will give a little bit but the system will still allow those who want, to abuse it.

I think Nick Robinson and others are scaremongering to keep the masses entertained. If you pay peanuts you will get only monkeys. It is pathetic to compare MP's with unelected members who did not have the nerve to stand in election. Come on guys they are not doing Marcos, so don't twist their arms.

NR should publise his expences and salary before he speaks a word about others.

You've got enough comments to read already - but if I were you I'd take the moral high ground when it comes to expenses as a late Duke of Wellington once said

"Publish and be Damned!"

I would like to point to those that accuse Nick Robinson of 'witch hunts' and using 'innuendo' that it is extremely difficult to report the truth when that truth is systematically concealed. Yes Minister frequently espoused the view that when someone exposed an unwelcome truth then the best thing was to 'play the man and not the ball'. Attacking Nick Robinson over his expenses does not alter the basic fact that MPs expenses are a national disgrace.

Like many others who have commented here, i have worked in both the public and private sectors and it has always (always) been the case that if i want to claim expenses, not only do i need receipts, but a damn good justification for that activity in the first place.

We have seen a few examples of MPs expenses which would warrant prosecution and dismissal for the remainder of us and yet nothing seems to have happened to those miscreants

Do they not understand that their Animal Farm attitude of some being more equal than others is the main reason why the population of this country detest and distrust politicians with a vengeance and this is reflected in the turn out at the polls ?

Others like me who choose not to vote do so in the full and certain knowledge that the system and culture is flawed beyond repair and that substituting one party indoctrinated individual for another is simply swapping the snout at the trough.

Do they not understand that their Animal Farm attitude of some being more equal than others is the main reason why the population of this country detest and distrust politicians with a vengeance and this is reflected in the turn out at the polls ?

Others like me who choose not to vote do so in the full and certain knowledge that the system and culture is flawed beyond repair and that substituting one party indoctrinated individual for another is simply swapping the snout at the trough.

Nick - keep up the good work. Someone has to shine some light on MPs' disdian for us voters.

Β£250 without receipt - I need a receipt for all claims where I work.

Accommodation expenses that pay a mortgage on a house they own - flabbergasting.

If they need any help writing new rules for expenses, there are approx 50 million volunteers who have a better idea what to do than this shower.

All the MPs have managed to do is show us that they live in a bubble isolated from the real world we live in outside Westminster. And they don't even belive that doing something to mend their relationship with the public is needed. Words fail me..

Is it just me or is anyone else getting sick of people like Mr Robinson trying to create news rather than reporting on it.

Can Mr Robinson please provide us with a complete breakdown of his expenses (I'm assuming this won't include consumption of wine and beer as this would be a total waste of licence payers money).

I can sum this whole Parliamentary episode up in two words...

'Gravy Train'

MP's are funded by the taxpayer - me and you - and they had better get their brains around that fact. They are public servants - nothing more and nothing less. I do not intend being a shareholder in Westminster PLC.

As for the early day motion against Nick Robinson this might be because:

a)MP's are worried

b)they have nothing better to do (hard to believe though looking at the absence of bottoms on the green benches during business - especially major debates e.g. Euro Treaty)

c)a nasty defence mechanism which only affects MP's

and if any MP's reading this don't like it - tough. At this present moment in time I would welcome a full Restoration....an interim Commonwealth in reverse where HM has full powers. Then all the MP's can become Civil Servants (if they can get through the fair and open competion procedures) to carry out the The Monarchs orders. Then they will have to produce recipts for everything - even a Starbucks coffee.

Heather Brookes has been trying for years to get this kind of information, and against strong opposition she has a tribunal agree, like most of us, that the present allowances system is archaic and to some extent unaccountable. I work in NHS, I can't claim one penny without a receipt AND I need to get the expense approved before I use it too! I also find I cannot employ family members and friends in any vacant posts I have available unless they go through the same interview process as everyone else and earn it on merit ( nepotism is really quite ugly, bit like incest without the sex)... need I go on?
Pay the poor ( no qualifications necessary) wretches a decent wage and ditch most of the other (dis) honourable allowances.
Our politicians are, if the polls are correct, despised and mistrusted and this would be a good step to changing that awful perception of our porcine dis-honourable representatives : sorry, big mistake there, some don't represent us only themselves.
The honest, selfless MPs will welcome this without having to watch their backs against those with a vested interest in keeping the status quo.
Dammit! I offered to pay for a cup of coffee for one of my patients yesterday for free without a thought of claiming it back for Β£249 for hospitality. I'm in the wrong job eh?
Keep bugging the parasites and watch the ones who squeal the loudest ( too many piggy analogies, sorry)
Stephen

"All professions are conspiracies against the laity".

And that is precisely what we are witnessing here, the closing of ranks by these MP's as they come under attack over their expenses.

The same would appear to also apply to the EU Parliament, which is probably an even worse case, given that the EU accounts have not been successfully audited for years, if ever.

So we might conclude that "democracy is the worse system ever invented, except for all the others".

However, we live in an age of unparalleled 'connectedness' and so the time is ripe for migrating away from the current democratic governing systems.

Towards some new systems which leverage technology to bring into reality some desparately needed 'direct democracy'.

It just needs a touch of English genius to spark it into life and then we will never look back.

Pay MPs zero. All parties would still receive many applications to stand for Parliament.

If MPs had to work in the same environment as their constituents then they would better reflect that environment than they currently do.

Their working expertise would be useful in particular areas and would also be current rather than "second hand" advice. Additionally if MPs worked to support themselves they would have less time to legislate and therefore would only legislate on areas of particular interest or expertise thus improving the quality of legislation and reducing the frequency of legislation which is ultimately to the benefit of the average elector.

Questions of salary would be fairly easily resolved. The best ones would be the most supported ie the most popular with the electorate would receive the most funding for campaigning and salary. MPs would be forced to integrate into different cultural and economic areas of their constituencies and make them more representive, accountable and available. They would also have to balance the relationship between employer and employee as skewing the wrong way might mean more money from business but less votes from workers or vice versa.

If one were worried about a business bias or a union then a cap could be placed on the amount allowed to be received from those sources. This would force parties out of their areas of traditional support and make them listen more to the elector improving the representative nature of our democracy.

Any political commentator or reporter that does not cause a stir or rock the boat from time to time is not doing their job.

Nick,

Why not publish your expenses and call their bluff(s).

Really though, I just think the MPs fear the (mis)quote if they are forced to release their expenses in full: "Publish, and be damned!"

Our forefathers laboured for us, ... its a crying shame that the current system is using all possible ways to protect the paper-shufflers.
Hmmm, I think someone is threatened here!! Ok,"Order, Order" before he attempts to justify what those expenses are?

I am the only person that believes MPs should be paid more? A lot more in fact. No-one seems particularly exercised that the new top man at the cRock (a Mr Sandler, who will deserve every penny he earns if he saves the country the multi-billion pound write off it currently faces) will be earning more a month than an MP does in a year. Surely a bizarre state of affairs given the relative importance of their roles. Surely we don't believe MPs are just in it for the money? Most MPs could earn far more in the private sector and not be subject to the continual vitriol of the red tops and the papers that do know better, but are of course also chasing readership figures. If we want quality perhaps we need to pay for it. And please do not forget that we the electorate hold the power. We voted them in and we can vote them out. Well when the Brown one finds the courage that is...

Think I have the solution here. Pay them all Β£200,000 a year. No expenses needed. No second home perks because they can all work from home. Electronic voting [to meet requirements of party leader] from comfy armchairs tucked up in their constituencies to save the trouble of making all those long journeys to London so no travel expenses. Finally sell the palace of Westminster for conversion to affordable housing since it hasn't been used as a debating chamber for at least 10 years so no need to pay researchers.

Far from cutting the number of MPs we could double the number and get twice as much democracy (I think?)

If MP's are up in arms, it proves they must be on the fiddle, if there wasn't a problem they would be more than happy to let their expences be published. people who have something to hide always get on their 'high horse' hoping it will deter investigation.

I thought the original blog was spot on - and I think the reaction of MPs shows that it was. Methinks the MPs doth protest too much...

The taxpayer is not idly accusing MPs of inappropriate behaviour. The taxpayer is surely saying "you legislators preach and enforce accountability, transparency and regulation for the taxpayer so why don't you behave to the same standards?"
On this principle, in view of the protected financial status of the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ (Government set licence fee rather than commercial value,)I feel some enthusiasm for Nick's expenses being fully transparent.

I own my own company and like many MPs I have to work away from home. I spent 4 years travelling between my home in the North West to London on a weekly basis. The difference between my expenses and those claimed by our MPs are

1 - My company had to earn the money which it paid to me as expenses. It didn't come from some never ending money pit.

2 - All the expenses I claim have to be incurred wholly and exclusively as part of my business. There is no way the inland revenue would let me claim for a TV for the accommodation I rented on the outskirts of London.

3 - All my expenses have to have a receipt.

The expenses policy in use at the House of Commons is simply disgusting. There should be NO expenses paid without a receipt. There should be no expenses paid which are not part and parcel with being an MP. When I worked away I did not expect the taxpayer to give me all the nice things I had at home for my temporary accommodation in London.

Nothing will change though as turkeys don’t vote for Christmas

Spot on Nick. As far as I'm concerned they are all a bunch of dishonourable thieves only out to look after number 1 and have 'power'.
The fact that they close ranks (52 publicly and the other 600 or so by their deafening silence) shows that not one of them is prepared to stand up for their principles.
As for Michael Martin, does he really think it boosts the public's confidence in MP's that the man investigating their expenses is being exposed for dubious practices himself. And yes he may escape on a 'technicality' but that just underlines the sleaze and 'I couldn't give a toss' attitude of these so called honourable gentlemen.
To all you MP's, IF YOU WANT YOUR HONOUR BACK, STAND UP AND BE COUNTED AND EXPOSE THOSE THAT ABUSE THIS MOST TRUSTED POSITION. Until that time, you are no better than them and deserve all the contempt you get.

PS Michael Martin shouldn't be speaker anyway. It was not the traditional turn of a Labour MP. But the 'honourable' Labour MP's went against this honourable tradition because it didn't suit their selfish needs.

Nick
Reading these responses it would be too easy to conclude that the public's perception oF MPs amount to little more than a bunch of incompetent self-serving
drones. In the interest of balance, however. Sorry,I can't remember the rest of this argument.

Oh dear Nick. You know what has to happen when the servants of our Parliamentary system stop manipulating the news agenda and become the news ...

Nick Robinson asks whether MPs should declare the cost of furnishing their homes at Ikea or Harrods. The answer must lie in who is paying for it. If the MP is paying out of his/her pocket then like anyone else it is their own private affair. If however they shopping at Harrods at the taxpayers expense then we have every right to know. As for the long list of other expenses, they should be rigorously vetted and in many cases curtailed.

See post 274 - an excellent viewpoint.
I find it objectionable that the people who legislate against us to ensure that we (I am a teacher and small business owner) are more accountable kick up such a cry when we expect the same from them? It is shameful that they can try to defend their own rights when requiring others to work to different and more exacting standards.
Politicians should be the torch bearers that we follow not the pall bearers who bury us.

I'll tell you what, for everyone who has criticised Nick, let's see their tax returns and expenses claims to see if they have any justification in making their criticisms. Pot, kettle and black? Glass houses? I reckon so. Also, We're not in the playground: I'll show you mine if you show me yours. We're talking about the credibility of our elected representatives to exercise proper, effective and acceptable governance over financial affairs. The Speaker has considered it serious enough an issue to set up a committee to consider it and at some point we'll hear its deliberations. The hounding of a journalist is pretty pathetic.

The license fee is only compulsory for those who use the products of Broadcasting - no TV, no license. Indeed, it is not required to listen to the radio, use the iplayer or even access this site.

Asking to see Nick's expenses is no more valid than asking to see Richard Branson's for Virgin Media.