'What do we expect from MPs?', asks Simon Sweetman

Kudos to Simon for displaying the ethical contortions required to continue to support this Government. Your article has made me appreciate what a comparatively inflexible material rubber really is.

I have always been under the impression that MPs were elected to serve the country and the electorate. Does this happen today?

The qualifications of an MP should not necessarily be loads of money, union sponsorship, a law degree or a landed estate. It is high time that honesty, integrity and uprightness returned to the House of Commons and House of Lords.

'Old Jim' is quite right about a political bias in the majority of articles by SS.

One has great respect for the 'old school' labour with beliefs & roots firmly fixed in supporting the 'working class' but not for those whose only goal is power & lining their own pockets rather than a sense of duty towards their constituents.

Quite frankly 10+ years ago old labour were unelectable until they moved into the middle ground and stole the robes of the competition (thereby displacing them) - thus arose new labour; conservatism badged under a labour guise. Not built on any fundamental wish to abide by their labour beliefs or to serve anyone except themselves and with this this goal in mind so much seems to have been manipulated to achieve their ends.

The other parties were just as bad by not challenging the status quo and going along for the ride because they also personally benefitted; but essentially the current labour party was built on a lie (sacrificing their roots for power) and anyone who voted for their policies was broadly speaking voting conservative; a lie from the outset

On this basis how on earth could anyone expect matters to get any better and as events have proved the whole thing just degenerated to a point where we are today; even the Speaker has brought his office into disprepute by his conduct. Even the language has changed from 'lies' to 'spin' in order to sanitise the rather unsavoury fact that telling the truth is an anathma to most of them

We also have the disgraceful culture of penalising the 'whistleblower' and not the perpetrator - once again grown up & encouraged under the labour stewardship

As for the press - yes they can be sensational but there is an argument to say they have done the job of the politicians by highlighting this farce and bringing it to an end

It is very simple - no-one should be above the law and there should be one set of rules for all

Another left leaning sermon from SS. He's in a tiny minority of those who don't think these rapacious Westminster clowns have their snouts so deeeply in the trough it's surprising they havn't drowned; maybe some now have. Fleet Street was nicknamed "Street of Shame" for a reason. Naively, I didn't expect such naked greed from so many of those elected to govern us; SS seems to think it acceptable. And doesn't he realise that the richest MP is a Government minister?

I agree with your sentiments Simon. If someone told me that it was perfectly legal for me to claim for a new kitchen for my house and that there would be no tax implications I would think it unlikely that I would say oh no I can't do that it isn't morally right.

It is the system itself that needs looking at. Regardless of the fact that it is within the rules I still don't really want to be paying for mp's dog food or trouser press!

Being a bit cheeky, I would say, let them claim it, but also extend the exemption to anyone who needs to travel more than 30 miles to work ! (i.e. second home allowance/expenses
becomes tax deductible, train fares/petrl tax deductible). If so, I am happy.