MPs' expenses: things for policywonk to say if she gets the chance

I DO NOT fancy Stormin Norman. But I would put my nice new Monsoon coat over a puddle for him to walk over. I'm sure he would demur though.

ILove... 'Who is defending the action?' The Commons Commission and the Speaker's Office, I think.

'Who is funding it?' We are, sweetheart! Thousands of pounds of taxpayers' money on the best lawyers in the land.

'Who has been consulted?' Basically, the Commons Commission decides, presumably after taking soundings from party leaderships. There's no open debate among MPs, but as you'll see from the long list of MPs who voted in favour of FOI exemption, this sort of anti-transparency action had huge support among MPs.

'Is Elvis alive?' If Elvis were alive, he'd be dead by now.

Helena was furious about that case Len, and she reckons there's a lot of it going on in the Lords - that's why she wants all appointments stopped until this whole crisis has been resolved.

Re. your question about discipline: that's what my first question (below) referred to. Basically, Parliament is the highest court in the land; nobody can kick out a member of Parliament (Commons or Lords) except their peers. The Standards and Privileges Committees (one for HoC, one for Lords) are the ones who dole out sanctions where necessary. Lots of people might think, especially now, that this is a function that ought to be farmed out to an independent body. BUT then you've destroyed parliamentary sovereignty, and left Parliament vulnerable in the case of swivel-eyed maniacs taking over the independent disciplinary body (as opposed to swivel-eyed maniacs taking over Parliament - we're used to that).

Joshua Rozenburg was in the audience and asked a question about sovereignty. He reckons that farming out decisions about MPs' pay to an independent body is unconstitutional 'cos of the sovereignty issue.

It's interesting I think. Don't know what the answer is. (Better MPs and more transparency, I suppose.)

Steen, that was it.

Good question Len, I dunno the answer. I guess they carry on getting paid until they actually resign their seats.

Jonathan Isaby of ConservativeHome wants: a recall mechanism (such as that which resulted in Arnie being elected Governor of California - think this is an interesting idea); more power to local councils; open primaries so that public has a greater say in choosing candidates (I guess this would require US-style registering of voters as party supporters?); abolition of the communications allowance (politics geeks will know this is a contested one because of 'Ashcroft money'); in the future, when dust has settled, higher salaries for MPs - comparable to, for example, GPs (who earn about £150,000 apparently!!) and headteachers (how much do they earn?)

They did say someone was about to resign Len but the name didn't ring any bells.

I remember reading John Stalker's book back in the 80s about his thwarted inquiry into the shoot-to-kill policy and thinking he was the bee's knees. Now he sells patio awnings with his dog. What's that about?

ILove... the answer 'the Speaker's office' doesn't do it for you, I suppose?

Oh tish ILove, now you ask...

Shall I try emailing the Normster to ask?

(artichokes, I'm going to come in to Westminster in the next session to start watching Select Committees for my blog so maybe we'll get the chance then?)

BGD, Helena Kennedy agrees with you re. Labour bottling constitutional reform agenda. To be fair, the Tories have not been helpful either - but let's face it, Labour could have got it through if it had wanted to.

She also agrees (as did the Tory on the panel) about reducing the number of MPs - but there's a big BUT with this one. One of the few things that the electorate like about our system is the availability of their MP through regular constituency surgeries. If you reduce the MPs and make each constituency correspondingly larger, it's going to be much more difficult for MPs to perform this role. Kennedy and the Tory (Jonathan Isaby from ConservativeHome.net) both pointed out that to compensate for this, you'd need to give a lot more power - and, crucially, MONEY - to local councils.

I think independent assessment is what's going to be happening from now on - can't see anyone accepting anything else at the moment.