Op-Ed: When Staying Within the Rules is not Enough

This week, another British Government Minister is in trouble over expenses. Work and Pensions Minister Tony McNulty is facing an enquiry over housing expense claims.

The facts are not in dispute. As reported by The Mail on Sunday newspaper, Mr McNulty has claimed over £60,000 (US$87,000) since 2002 of “second home allowance” on a house in which his parents live. This allowance of up to £24,000 ($35,000) a year goes to MPs who live outside of inner London. It should cover the cost of staying away from their main home when carrying out parliamentary duties. Mr McNulty has been claiming for the house in his constituency of Harrow East, which is about 11 miles from The Houses of Parliament in Westminster, hardly an arduous commute. Mr McNulty actually lives in Hammersmith with his wife, only eight miles from his “second home.” Hammersmith is even nearer to Westminster than Harrow. Mr McNulty told Sky News that he had been claiming money for the home when he had been working a couple of days a week. He said that he still used the house regularly, especially on weekends. "I think I can do my job more effectively having my base in the constituency," he said. However, the house is just minutes away from his constituency office. He also said he had stopped claiming the allowance in January because interest rates had fallen so much that he could afford to pay the mortgage from his MP's salary. Opposition Conservative MP Greg Hands has lodged an official complaint with Parliament's standards commissioner. Mr McNulty claims correctly to be within the rules regarding MP’s expenses. He also claims to be within the spirit of the rules. Not many people outsider of the House of Commons would agree with him here. The allowance is clearly meant for those MPs who could not easily travel home to their constituencies at night, not for some one who could cycle the distance. This is yet another example of the UK’s elite playing fast with other people’s money. As long as it within the rules, it is OK. But, guess who makes the rules. There used to be little tolerance for such behaviour in British public life. The logic being, that tolerance of petty corruption produces a culture in which major corruption can thrive. How else would you describe the recent pillaging of shareholders assets by bank CEO’s And how else do you explain why no one charged with oversight could see anything wrong with massive termination payouts and bonuses to the idiots responsible for the destruction of their charges. The public perception is that the UK’s elite have become degenerate and are only interested in lining their own pockets. The gaming of expenses by senior MPs is yet another example. It does not help this perception that MP’s recently tried to get there expense claims exempted from Freedom of Information Act, much to the disgust of just about everyone, apart from MPs. The elite, typically, blame such public cynicism on the press. The next general election in the UK will likely be in 2010. The present Labour government stands very little chance of returning.