Scam shows MPs have lost touch with ethical bearings

Under John Major, it was cash for questions as backbenchers took money for asking questions in Parliament.

Under Tony Blair, it was cash for coronets, as big party donors were rewarded with seats in the House of Lords.

Under Gordon Brown, we reach the suitably pathetic nadir of cash for cleaners.

And cash for lavatories. And cash for carpets. And cash for saunas. And cash for swimming pools. And cash for gardeners. And cash for barbecues. And cash for dog food. And cash for cushions. Silk ones, naturally, 17 of them in all to ease the repose of Keith Vaz.

In the case of a Conservative MP with a constituency in the shires, it is cash for horse manure. One MP wants cash for Kit Kats. A Scottish Labour MP confirms the stereotype of his race by claiming 5p for a carrier bag. Well, he probably needed somewhere to stuff all his receipts. A Liberal Democrat takes cash for cosmetics.

One male MP claims cash for tampons. I would truly like to hear how buying tampons is an expense wholly, necessarily and exclusively related to the parliamentary duties of a male MP. The explanation must be fiendishly ingenious.

Over 26 months, the taxpayer parted with £6577 ($16,594) to pay for the char who cleaned up after Prime Minister Gordon Brown. I guess the Prime Minister must generate a lot of dirty laundry.

John Prescott, former deputy to Blair, scourge of the bankers' bonuses, champion of the workin' man, sticks his hand into the public purse for three faux Tudor beams for his castle in Hull. He also claimed for two broken lavatory seats.

Shaun Woodward, who is probably wealthier than the rest of the Cabinet put together, husband of a Sainsbury heiress, owner of seven properties, a man so loaded that he employs a butler, takes the taxpayer for almost £100,000 in mortgage interest.

Hazel Blears, the minister responsible for housing, certainly knows her way around the property expenses game. Hazel is a little whizz at Commons Monopoly. She sped round the board, claiming on three different properties in a single year and each time passing Go. We bought Hazel two new TVs and two new beds in the space of just 12 months. Harriet Harman has been shoved before the cameras to try to defend the indefensible. She bleats that it was "all within the rules" as if the rules were not of Parliament's own invention, but had been handed down by God to Moses on Mount Sinai.

All her exposed colleagues have likewise protested that everything they did was "within the rules" as if they were powerless to resist an invisible hand that forced them to sign the claim forms.

Not every MP felt compelled to scoff at the trough. Hilary Benn (Environment), Ed Miliband (Energy) and Alan Johnson (Health) emerge as acmes of frugality who make modest and entirely reasonable claims for performing their duties. The unblemished MPs should be furious with the avarice of their grasping colleagues who have tarred the whole political class with a reputation for being seedy and greedy.

The rules were generous in their elasticity and even then MPs stretched them so far that they snapped. It is against the rules to claim money that you haven't actually spent. The prime minister accidentally submitted a £150 plumbing bill twice. Jack Straw claimed for council tax he had never paid, luckily discovering his mistake and repaying the £1500 after the High Court ruled that all expenses claims had to be published.

One of the least edifying traits of Blair's years was his toleration of sleaze and wilful refusal to see how it was poisoning the relationship between government and governed. I hoped for better under Brown. Despite sleaze eruptions, I have clung to the increasingly unfashionable view that most MPs are not venal graspers motivated entirely by the pursuit of their own interests. It is becoming harder to sustain that faith.

If politicians do not arrive at the Commons corrupt, there is clearly a culture in Parliament that is corrupting.

MPs have long nursed a resentment about the monetary compensation for being in a high stress occupation with low job security. MPs look enviously at consultants, lawyers, company executives, those they consider to be their peer group. They feel underpaid in comparison.

They exploited the slackly constructed and sloppily-policed expenses regime and used it as a clandestine scheme for giving themselves tax-free top-ups to their salaries.

The allowances have been manipulated to the point where you need a very powerful microscope to distinguish some of the scams from fraud.

Politicians are further stripped of any moral authority to guide the country. How can they now talk about the disgraceful behaviour of bankers or demand sacrifices from voters to cope with the recession?

It will be in character if Brown tries to reassure his colleagues that the expenses furore is a passing froth, an essentially trivial story in the grand sweep of things. Yet sometimes it is the superficially trivial that conveys a significant truth about political decay. The expenses racket illustrates the alarming extent to which so many politicians have lost touch with any ethical bearings, with any feel for what is tolerable to the public, and even with any sense of self-preservation.

The scams are bad enough. Worse is the total absence of any repentance. What was required was a display of contrition. Yet the collective response has been to try to brazen it out. Caught in flagrante, they do not bow their heads in shame. Their answer to public disgust is to thrust two fingers at the voters. Everyone hates them; they don't care.

The MP who claimed for horse manure? Why not when so many other MPs simply don't give a shit.

- OBSERVER