Comment: MPs' expenses threatens public trust again

The public are still angry about the last expenses scandal. Trust in Westminster can only be further damaged by what appears to be a cover up of a loophole which allows MPs to pocket extra expenses cash by renting out their homes to one another.

Given how damaging the expenses crisis was in 2009, many will be shocked to learn that MPs are attempting to block the publication of information that could reveal abuse of the system. Before the last crisis hit the headlines the Speaker at the time blocked publication of addresses of MPs who were involved in claims. This made it impossible to identify those who were 'flipping' their second homes. Thankfully, someone leaked the unsavoury details to the Telegraph and the rest, as they say, is history.

Fast forward to today and the current Speaker, John Bercow, has written to the expenses regulator asking for documents revealing the names of MPs landlords to be kept secret. Mr Bercow has done so under the guise of protecting parliamentarians' security. He has reacted to pressure from MPs like Home Office minister James Brokenshire, who is quoted in the Evening Standard as saying that a balance must be struck between security and transparency. But many disillusioned voters will wonder whether such reticence amounts to an admission of bad behaviour.

Taxpayers will wonder why MPs are taking advantage of the loophole not to cover legitimate expenses but to profit at their expense. Though technically within parliamentary rules, MPs have to know what a dim view their constituents will take of profiteering from such a blatant ruse.

In order to build on the residual trust that the public may still have in parliament, it is absolutely necessary that we have total transparency on MPs taxpayer funded expenses and allowances. While security is of course a concern, the work that has been done since 2009 to rebuild parliament's reputation is at serious risk of being undone.

There are glimmers of hope, however, as some members of parliament are fully committed to transparency. John Mann stated frankly that "if MPs are renting from past or current MPs it is right and proper that the public should know that". Jacqui Smith, who knows about public anger over expenses all too well, condemned the Speaker's move, saying it is "wrong and it won't last". Let's hope that spirit of openness will be embraced by lots more politicians so taxpayers' hard earned money is not wasted on any more fiddles.

Expenses are still a major issue for the public. So-called flipping, bogus main homes and memories of duck houses may have faded but they haven't gone away. MPs who have done nothing wrong must not be tarnished by the actions of those involved in this latest scandal of abuse and cover up.

TaxPayers' Alliance chief executive Matthew Sinclair has made it clear how important this issue is: "The public's faith was left in tatters in 2009 and the latest allegations could endanger much of the work that has been done since then to restore public confidence in our politicians. It is vital that there is total transparency in all matters relating to MPs' taxpayer-funded expenses and allowances."


Source: http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2012/10/18/comment-mps-expenses-threatens-public-trust-again

UK signs deal on Scotland independence referendum

LONDON -- British Prime Minister David Cameron and Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond signed a deal Monday agreeing the date and wording of a referendum that will ask Scottish voters whether they want to remain in the 305-year-old union with England.

The agreement -- which stipulates that Scotland will decide on the matter no later than fall 2014 -- comes after months of delicate negotiations between the British government in London and the Scottish Parliament in Edinburgh.

Under the terms of the agreement, the referendum should “deliver a fair test and a decisive expression of the views of people in Scotland and a result that everyone will respect.”

"This marks the beginning of an important chapter in Scotland's story and allows the real debate to begin," Cameron said in comments prepared for delivery and released by his office in advance.

'Biggest opportunity'
Scottish Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon, who was closely involved in the backroom negotiations that led to the referendum agreement, called it “the biggest opportunity the people of Scotland have had for 300 years to determine the kind of nation we all wish to live in.”

The timing of the referendum appears to be a victory for Salmond, whose Scottish National Party (SNP) has campaigned for decades for the right of Scots to determine the country’s destiny for themselves.

With recent opinion polls showing only around 30 percent of Scots supporting independence, Cameron is believed to have favored an earlier vote.

The prime minister has publicly opposed a break-up of the union, arguing that countries are "stronger together".

But Cameron has been under increasing pressure to bring forward legislation after the SNP made significant gains in Scottish Parliament elections in May 2011, taking full control of Scotland's devolved government after gaining power through a coalition in 2007.

A remarkable, and rapid, transformation has shifted Scotland’s political terrain since the first devolved parliament was established in 1999.

The SNP, frequently campaigning on a ticket of an independent Scotland, has seen its fortunes improve at the expense of mainstream parties affiliated to London's Westminster parliament.

Complete Europe coverage on NBCNews.com

Behind the SNP’s rhetoric is the belief that independence will make Scotland more successful.

The SNP points to successful countries like Sweden and Norway, which function well as smaller states.

In its publicity material, the SNP claims: “We will be able to address the priorities of people in Scotland, from better state pensions to universal free childcare. Scotland could do even more to lead the world in areas like renewable energy and tackling climate change, and play our part in creating a more peaceful and stable world.”

Funding the plan
But these bold aspirations require the financial capacity to deliver them.

London argues that an independent Scotland, which has a huge government sector, would struggle to balance the books. The bulk of Scotland's current funding comes from an annual $48 billion grant from the U.K. government.

The most contentious issue -- one likely to dominate debate in the run-up to the referendum -- is the ownership of an estimated 20 billion barrels of oil and gas reserves that lie beneath the British part of the North Sea.

Complete World news coverage on NBCNews.com

Scotland has long laid claim to the tax revenues of the fossil fuels that flow ashore and many analysts believe the pro-independence campaign will need to deliver the money in order to deliver its policies.

For now, the next step will be for the Scottish Parliament to bring legislation to allow the referendum to take place. In that, there will be a world of detail for both sides to chew over, including the wording of the referendum question, the right of younger people to vote and how the campaign will be financed.

Source: http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/10/15/14452943-uk-signs-deal-on-scotland-independence-referendum

Georgians cast ballots in pivotal parliamentary vote

(Reuters) - President Mikheil Saakashvili faced his biggest test in a decade in power on Monday as Georgians voted in a parliamentary election overshadowed by a prison abuse scandal that has fuelled accusations of government repression.

Saakashvili, who swept to the presidency after the Rose Revolution of 2003 and led the country into a brief, disastrous war with Russia in 2008, says his main challenger Bidzina Ivanishvili would move the former Soviet republic away from West and bring it closer to Moscow once again.

Ivanishvili, a tycoon with a fortune nearly half the size of Georgia's economy, hopes the prison scandal will convince undecided voters that Saakashvili has become an undemocratic leader who tramples on rights and freedoms.

Video of torture, beatings and sexual of prison inmates led to street protests after it was aired on two television channels opposed to Saakashvili. They undermined the president's image as a reformer who had imposed the rule of law and rooted out post-Soviet corruption.

"I'm voting against violence and abuse - how can I do otherwise after what we have all seen on TV?" Natela Zhorzholia, 68, said outside a polling station at a school in the capital, Tbilisi.

She said she would vote for Ivanishvili's six-party Georgian Dream movement.

The election also heralds constitutional changes which will affect any future leadership.

Saakashvili, 44, must step down after a presidential vote next year, when reforms will weaken the role of head of state giving more power to parliament and the prime minister.

But if his United National Movement retains its dominance of parliament, that may give him a way to remain in charge of the country of 4.5 million, an important gas and oil transit route to the West,

"Besides being a contest for parliament, it is also a shadow leadership election," said Thomas de Waal, a Caucasus expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington.

EUROPEAN DREAM

Saakashvili highlighted the importance of the vote after casting his ballot with his Dutch wife and their young son, and said: "The fate of our country's statehood is being decided today".

The vote will affect "not only this nation but what happens to the European dream...what happens to the idea of democracy... what happens to the idea of reforms in this part of the world," he said.

Many Georgians just want political and economic stability. The economy, hit by the 2008 war and the global financial crisis, has been growing again since 2010 but inflation is likely to hit 6-7 percent this year.

"I voted for peace and stability," Georgy Ugrekhelidze, 76. "I want this government to carry out what it has started."

Saakashvili's supporters say the election could determine whether Georgia moves closer to Russia or remains a U.S. ally. They accuse Ivanishvili, who made much of his money in Russia, of being a Kremlin stooge, a charge he denies.

During the war, Russia strengthened its control of the breakaway regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, which make up about one-fifth of the Caucasus nation's territory.

The West wants a stable Georgia because of its role as a conduit for Caspian Sea energy supplies to Europe and its pivotal location between Russia, Iran, Turkey and Central Asia.

"The most important thing is that those who are dissatisfied should not create disorder," said voter Yelena Kvlividze, 45.

Ivanishvili told a rally on Saturday: "This regime's hours are numbered."

But has also said Georgian Dream will accept any outcome deemed legitimate by international observers.

A poll by the U.S. National Democratic Institute in August gave UNM 37 percent support against 12 percent for Georgian Dream but showed 43 percent of respondents could vote either way. There have been no major polls since the abuse scandal.

Elected in 2004 after the Rose Revolution protests toppled President Eduard Shevardnadze, a former Soviet foreign minister, Saakashvili cultivated close ties with Europe and the United States and sought to bring Georgia into NATO.

He curbed police bribe-taking, made frequent power outages a thing of the past and presided over an economic resurgence.

But opponents say he has curtailed democracy, persecuted the opposition, pressured courts and controlled the media. He also faces criticism for leading Georgia into the war with Moscow in which Russian forces routed the army.

(Reporting by Margarita Antidze; Editing by Steve Gutterman and Angus MacSwan)

Source: http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/10/01/uk-georgia-election-idUKBRE89007U20121001