Daily View: MPs' expenses and Parliamentary privilege
Commentators discuss the possibility that Labour MPs Elliot Morley, David Chaytor and Jim Devine might avoid theft charges by claiming their expenses are covered by Parliamentary privilege, which traditionally protects members from being sued for what they say in the Commons.
The disgust:
"Parliament has long been in disrepute over the expenses scandal.
Yet still our politicians find new ways of dragging its reputation even further into the gutter."
Politics blogger the three MPs charged shouldn't get their pensions:
"Given that they are unlikely to have their day in Court before election day, the House of Commons should pass a resolution that any member facing criminal charges for financial impropriety should have payment of resettlement grants and pensions suspended until the result of the charges are known. If found guilty they should lose all their pension rights."
Labour MP no reasonable person can support immunity from prosecution:
"Whatever happens, parliament must look again at privilege to ensure that it cannot be abused."
Politics blogger legal costs:
"Why is the Labour Party's official solicitor, Gerald Shamash, providing the three disgraced Labour MPs (Messers Chaytor, Devine and Morley) with legal advice? Is the Labour Party paying for it?"
Labour David Cameron of "flipping" his policy on Parliamentary privilege. He reminds us of a time when the Tories wanted to protect privilege:
"Listening to the howls of outrage about the attack on Parliamentary privilege from Conservatives when an investigation into alleged breaches of the Official Secrets Act - an investigation that the Police had little choice about having to conduct - led to Damian Green MP, you would have thought that the Conservative Party wanted to adopt the Russian mode of Parliamentary privilege where members of the Russian mafia get themselves elected to the Russian Duma to avoid criminal charges."
criticism of the attempted avoidance of prosecution reflects how politics has become more transparent:
"Scrutiny of politics is being changed for ever by public anger over the expenses row, and before that by freedom of information law and websites as a way of scrutinising an MP's voting and speaking record."
The the effect of the expenses scandal on the election and beyond:
"Disgust at the corruptibility of politicians will colour an election that should be about which party is fit to lead Britain out of its economic and social mess. As a result, we may see maverick independents elected, and new MPs may be unusually frightened of their constituents."
Links in full
