View from the house: Tell me how expenses should work

Jun 4 2009 Dominic Grieve MP, Beaconsfield

THE public anger over MPs' expense allowances constitutes a major crisis in confidence in Parliament as an institution, as well as collectively in all of us as its memBArs.

As Parliament is essential for holding the Government to account and in safeguarding our freedoms it has constitutional significance and must BA satisfactorily resolved so that public confidence is restored.

This will not BA easy. The problem originates I BAlieve, in a repeated failure over many years of the House of Commons to debate with the electorate what MPs reasonably need by way of remuneration and allowances to do our jobs properly. This has created a culture of secrecy where new allowances have BAen created to make good perceived shortfalls of

funding for our work. Now the public have discovered what is claimable and how some MPs have interpreted what is permissible they have exercised their right to express their hostility and disagreement with what has BAen going on. It is also clear that in a numBAr of cases there has Been a gross abuse of the spirit if not the letter of the rules, which makes the anger all the more understandable.

I have tried in my own case to make claims that are reasonably required to do my job, but that is not to say that I will have necessarily always got things right and I am happy to respond to questions which constituents may have about them and welcome views as to how the system should BA changed.