Who is responsible for approving MPs abusive expenses claims?

Amidst all this MPs abuse of privileges and expenses fiasco... one thing I cannot understand is... how did they get away with these abuses?

Over the last few days the Daily Telegraph has, quite rightly, exposed an amazing plethora of systemic abuse of expenses by many MPs. This has understandably caused a great deal of anger up and down the country, delivered a massive blow to voters' confidence in our political system and brought our Houses of Parliament into disrepute, all unprecedented, certainly in my lifetime.

The Telegraph and the media's focus, has up to now, largely been on individual MPs and the political parties reactions and handling of these events. However, what I cannot understand, and what I believe is a far more important question is... why were these MPs allowed to transgress the system in this way?

If, as we are led to believe (and the facts seem pretty clear) that many MPs have indeed broken the rules, (some even possibly having committed fraud) as stated in The Green Book (A Guide to Members Allowances), why were they allowed to do so?

The majority of MPs that have been 'fingered' by the Telegraph's exposes, have consistently said they believe their expense claim was 'within the rules'. Many are even alleging that they sought guidance before or during the process of their expense claim. If MPs put expenses claims in for approval, and these expenses have subsequently been seen to have broken the rules or been an abuse of privilege of the expenses system... who approved this? Who is ultimately responsible for this fiasco?

Whilst I think all MPs who have been shown to have abused the expenses system should take personal responsibility... and many are doing so... I think by far more important is for the system that allowed this to happen to also take responsibility. I am amazed that, as far as I can see, no one in the media is focusing on this much more important point... in any significant manner. All the peripheral debate surrounding this fiasco talks about how the system was developed, how we got to be here... how reform of the system has been too slow (no doubt about that) and how to put the system right as a matter of urgency... and of course, this is absolutely right that this should be done.

But... WHO is responsible for having approved the expenses of these MPs who are now having to apologise, resign... and even (rightly) facing the possibility of criminal charges brought against them... WHO approved these expenses??

As far as I can see, the Members Estimate Committee, which has the same membership as the House of Commons Commission considers matters relating to MPs’ pay and allowances on behalf of the House of Commons.

More directly concerned in this instance however, is The Committee on Members' Allowances. The role of the Committee on Members' Allowances is to advise the Members Estimate Committee on the exercise of its functions (which relate to charges on the Members Estimate).

The Committee advises the Speaker, the Members Estimate Committee and the Leader of the House on the potential development of the arrangements for Members’ allowances.

The Committee was nominated on 9 February 2009, and has eight members. Rt Hon Don Touhig MP was elected Chairman on 10 February 2009.

General information and the rules governing Members’ Salaries, Allowances and Pensions is published on the Parliament website. This includes the ‘Green Book’, which is the guide to Members' allowances, and 'Practice Notes', which provide more detailed information.

The work of actually approving and supervising MPs claims and expenses is carried out by The Department of Resources, which I believe is more commonly known as the 'Fees Office', is responsible to the Committee on Members' Allowances.

In my opinion, everyone involved in these committees and in the Department of Resources, the 'Fees Office', should seriously be considering their position. I also have to go back to my contention the other day, when I said the Speaker of the House of Commons should resign.

The Speaker of the House of Commons, Michael Martin, is ultimately responsible for these House Committees and for the department that has been supervising and approving these expenses claims and has been guiding (in may cases allegedly misguiding) MPs on their expenses claims.

In the light of the fiasco the abuse by MPs over their expenses has caused and for the gross inefficiency shown by the departments under his responsibility, I have to reiterate, to my mind, Speaker Martin has NO recourse... he too should take personal responsibilty for these shortcomngs... and has to go... he has to resign forthwith!

Do you agree?

House of Commons Speaker Michael Martin: Should he resign?
	Yes
	No
	Don't know
pollcode.com free polls