The sheer chutzpah with which senior politicians dip their grubby paws into the public trough never ceases to amaze. It was only a few weeks ago that we learned that Home Secretary Jacqui Smith was claiming as her principal residence a house in London in which her sister just happened to live. Since Ms Smith represents a constituency in the Midlands, she has a good case for needing a second home closer to Parliament, but the fact that a close relative was living there didn't pass the smell test, and there were doubts raised about whether the Minister actually spent much time at the house in question.
Employment Minister Tony McNulty has now admitted that he has also been claiming a second home allowance. His principal home is a flat in Hammersmith, in West London. His constituency is in Harrow, in north-west London, and he claims an allowance for a home there, in which he allows his parents to live. Even if McNulty ever used the Harrow home -- and it appears he doesn't -- there is no possible justification for the allowance. Harrow and Hammersmith are not just within easy commuting distance of Westminster -- they're both on the Tube, for heaven's sake. McNulty is declining requests to repay the £60,000 he received in allowances on the Harrow home. Although he has now stopped claiming the money, he may still be hauled up before the parliamentary sleaze watchdog, a body whose scariness is perhaps best judged from the frequency with which politicians of all stripes are prepared to flout the rules.
McNulty, of course, claims that he hasn't flouted any rules. He does, however, admit that the situation may look strange "to outsiders". Just to remind you, Tony (and Jacqui and the rest of you): a synonym for "outsiders" in this particular context is "voters".
A footnote to this. After I wrote it I came across a list of second-home allowances claimed by London-area MPs. Several MPs with easy access to the Tube have claimed well over £100,000 over the past few years. Jacqui Smith and Tony McNulty are among the most high-profile abusers of the system, but the rot is widespread. The inquiry into all of this may not get going until October, which will probably mean that it doesn't get completed before next year's general election. How convenient. The will to do anything about this scandal, on all sides of the House, seems strangely lacking.
No comments:
Post a Comment