• The post you are reporting:
   
  Dave1 - Anne misses the point. The rules were so lax and the House authorities so complicit in encouraging the use of these lax rules it just is not enough to claim that you were within the rules.
  
  DC said it, he said if it smells wrong then it is wrong. He is setting a bar for Conservative MPs much higher than the rules and he is applying it retrospectively, if the scrutiny committee finds a claim that does not meet the standard then the money is paid back. Seems right to me.
  
  There have been too many MPs claiming that they kept within the rules despite morally questionable claims on taxpayer money.
  
  Where an MP is guilty of an abuse that is against even these slack rules then tougher action needs to be taken.
  
  Incidentally - DC has also said that local Parties should consider whether to re-select an MP who cannot satisfy them with a reasonable explanation for what they have done. Even paying the money back may not save some from de-selection.
  
  Howard - your comparison with criminals is wrong as they will have broken the law. That is not necessarily the case for the vast majority of excessive and inappropriate claims by MPs even though the rules should not have allowed it.

Report Post

Your Name

Reason