Wednesday, January 21, 2009



Blinding the public

One of the big differences between the UK's Freedom of Information Act and our own Official Information Act is that the UK law covers Parliamentary expenses. This has been used to great effect to reveal exactly what MPs are spending their various allowances on, and in some cases uncovered dubious behaviour which in some cases verges on fraud. Faced with this level of public oversight, UK MPs essentially have two choices: they can change their behaviour and cease abusing the public purse, or they can remove their spending from the spotlight by exempting themselves from the FOIA. Guess which one they chose?

Ministers are poised to exempt all MPs and peers from having to publish details of their expenses, only weeks before MPs were due to be forced to disclose more than 1.2 million receipts covering claims for the last three years.

The move next week will allow parliament to nullify all the long-fought victories by campaigners and journalists to force MPs to publish details of all their individual receipts for their second homes, including details of what they spent on furnishings, maintenance, rent, mortgage payments, staffing, travel, office staffing and equipment.

The changes will be retrospective and all pending requests for more information under the Freedom of Information Act will be blocked.

What really stinks is that this is being done by a Parliamentary order, essentially backdoor regulation, rather than openly through legislation. And naturally, it was buried in the hope the public wouldn't notice. So, they know its wrong and that the public will disapprove, but they're going to do it anyway. And then they have the gall to complain about the public's cynicism and lack of faith in politicians? Perhaps if they weren't so transparently self-serving, people would have a higher opinion of them. But as it stands, any MP who votes for this squalid act of self-interest (or rather, doesn't vote against it) is little better than dogshit.