isn't it about time

[Bobbisox]

a list of MPs who HAVE NOT claimed for silly things such a light bulbs or a duckhouse, were published in the DT, then we could sort the wheat from the chaffe, or is anyone in the Commons "clean"???

[ludwig]

jno - 'no British prime ministers are ever elected by the people. People vote for constituency MPs etc etc...'

Technically correct, but in reality people elect a Prime Minister. When people go to vote they're probably unaware of whose name is going to be on the voting slip, but they'll be aware that they're choosing between Brown or Cameron to lead the country.
Brown's never been very popular with the electorate as a whole. If he'd have been the Labour leader at the last election, Labour may not have won.

[sqad617]

Joy... an election of another non elected Prime Minister would never be tolerated by the electorate and that would mean a GE and that would mean curtains for the Labour M'P's.......Turkeys voting for Christmas.

[jno]

people are given a list of names to vote for. If they are mentally voting for someone not on the list, they can hardly complain if that person gives way to someone else also not on the list. My own guess is that if Brown had called an election after he took his current job, he would have won; but he bottled it. he will not win the next election. Bobbisox, you are right that he has not led his party into an election yet, as Major also didn't until a vote was due. We'll have to wait, as we had to wait for Major. Major got back in. Brown won't.

It isn't just expenses (on which Labour are no worse than anyone else), it's 10p income tax, banks looting the country, lack of personal charisma and many other things. One or two of those mightn't make a difference; put them all together and they do. I just wish the people who will replace Labour were somehow better, but I don't believe they are.

[Bobbisox]

I didn't know thta sqad, that if they called for a new leader, then a GE would have to be?
if the MPs were to have a majority vote on NC in Brown and wanted to elect a new leader, would that mean a certain GE?

[sqad617]

Joy

No legislation for that, but taking a pragmatic view, it would certainly mean a GE.

The media, the electorate etc would never stand for two non-elected PM's in one parliamentary session.

[jake-the-peg]

The Telegraph have already posted a list of the "saints"

3 Actually

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps -expenses/5342811/MPs-expenses-The-saints-Part -i.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps -expenses/5342657/MPs-expenses-The-saints-Part -ii.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps -expenses/5350793/MPs-expenses-The-saints-Part -iii.html

Nice to know there are nearly 50 that meets the Telegraphs exacting standards.

Funny how this list doesn't seem to have made headline news.

I wonder why

[jno]

the Telegraph's idea of a saint seems to be someone who claims little or nothing for a second home. This tends to mean they live in London or are rich. The whole point of the system, however, is to let people who aren't Londoners or rich get into parliament. I don't suppose this much concerns the Tories, or the Telegraph. It should concern voters, though.

[Bobbisox]

I don't somehow see a GE being good for us at this time, does anyone else?
the markets would react, maybe favourably, maybe not, no one knows who to trust anymore, I don't think anyone of the main parties have a clear manifesto to work with

[sqad617]

Joy, by "us" do you mean the "Country?"

The "Country" is secondary to Political expedience.

GE now would be good for the Tories, bad for Labour and would not make a "jot" of difference to the "Country"

[VHG]

>isn't it about timea list of MPs who HAVE NOT claimed
>for silly things such

If you had bothered to read the Telegraph during their exposee they regularly printed details of MPs who had NOT claimed anything, or very little.

It just got lost in all the row about people claiming for moats to be cleaned and duck houses.

[Bobbisox]

yes I meant for the country sqad, not us as in any particular band of people...apart from the MPs, I personally would be confused at this time who would be the better of the parties to lead a Goverment with such failings on all sides of the house, perhaps I'm being somewhat selfish, wanting a breathing space till I hear some good spouting from some leader instead of scoring points from one another

[Bobbisox]

whoooa, lol VHG, hands up here, I did not read the Telegraph but then I don't buy the paper anyway, well ok, put them online under a Parliementary heading "The Ones That Didn't"
I try hard to keep up with political issues and sometimes get lost along the way, but I am afraid I don't read the Broadsheets but I do try to express my opinion as best I can

[jake-the-peg]

A GE now would concentrate on the wrong things.

MPs expenses really are not important in comparison with selecting the right financial approach in the biggest financial upset in living memory.

That is the debate that needs to happen in a general election

Besides which hasn't Cameron been going about calling for fixed term parliaments

Is that fixed term (apart from this one)?

[paraffin]

Bobbisox:
On the face of it a great suggestion, but sadly it would prove totally impracticable, for the simple reason that we would end up with no more than a handful of untainted MPs. So what then do we do with the guilty 600 odd? Could Parliament still function?
Unfortunately, we'll probably have to wait until the GE, try to make informed guesses about who has any credibility left, hope that they are standing in your constituency, and vote for them.

It's a pig's ear of a situation where we, the great British voters, have been hamstrung by the avaricious "honourable" members meant to be representing our best interests (or should that be: "their own best interests"?).

Besides, the fact that they still had the audacity to publish their expenses in blacked-out form just goes to show the contempt with which the "honourable" members hold the electorate. Thank God for the Telegraph.

I strongly suspect that they are desperately praying that the public's anger will gradually abate and that this will all be shovelled under the carpet.

On the other hand, I'm praying just as fervently that some of them will actually have criminal charges brought against them, instead of so many of them simply being allowed to "stand down" at the next GE.

[Bobbisox]

that was very informative paraffin and I see things a lot clearer too, can I ask you, Why isn't the IR pursuing the likes of Blears and those who have "flipped" their homes? I understand it would be difficult to get the police involved, as the MPs kept quoting again and again "I haven't done anything wrong" but they have against the IR, will any prosecutions be made do you think?

[sqad617]

Joy...too bl00dy right they will.

[Bobbisox]

what happens in the unlikely event of "Witch-hazel" getting elected sqad, can she still serve with a tax evasion medal round her neck?, just curious